01270Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block showed slides of the site, noting that it is
densely wooded. .Under this proposal 68% of the total site would be maintained in
open space, which is well over the required amount. The zoning is RS-8, but development
into standard RS-8 lots would result in more cutting and filling, more impervious
surfaces, more tree removal, and less open space. Pioneer Way to the east will
provide access, and a proposed extension of Hillcrest Pl. could provide future access.
There was a finding of no significant adverse environmental impact and a negative
declaration had been issued. Ms. Block recommended approval of the proposal because
the design layout will preserve 68% of the site in passive common area; the amounts
of cutting and filling, tree removal, and impervious surfaces would be minimized; the
design layout was in harmony with the PRO clustering concept previously used in Shell
Valley; this use was in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan; and a finding had been
made of no significant adverse environmental impact. She added that there is a 51
pedestrian walkway included in the plan along Shell Valley Rd. and she stated that
this is an environmentally sensitive area. Councilman Carns was concerned because he
did not believe this property could be developed into RS-8 single family homes because
of the steep topography so he felt nine units were not justified and that the PRO
concept was being used to increase density. Community Development Director John
LaTourelle assured him that it would be possible to develop the site into nine single
family homes and he said detached single units cause more damage in environmentally
sensitive areas than clustered buildings. Drainage was discussed, and then the
public portion of the hearing was opened.
Muryl Medina, the developer, said they had arrived at this townhouse design in order
to minimize the ground square footage that would be utilized for construction'. She
said they were paying a lot of attention to the greenbelt area to minimize runoff and
to have as little pavement as possible, and to develop this into single family lots
would not be feasible because all the trees in the area would be destroyed. She
added that when they have a difficult site they are encouraged to do PRDs for those
reasons. She believed they had done the best they could with the site and she noted
that the storm water system was arrived at after discussions with and advice from the
Engineering Division. She noted that only 13% of the site will have buildings, 1%
will be in paving, and the rest will be open space, and the units were designed for
the topography. She submitted an album of photographs (Exhibit A) to demonstrate
other developments she had done in this area and to assure the Council that these
would be quality homes. No one else in the audience wished to speak, and the public
MOTION: portion of the hearing was closed. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
CARNS, TO UPHOLD THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD, AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PRD-1-79 FOR DESIGN REVIEW. The
question arose as to maintenance of the storm water retention system and who should
be responsible for it. Councilman Kasper cautioned that if the Council placed that
responsibility on the Homeowners' Association at this time it would be restricting
MOTION: the possibilities of financing. After some discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN
Amendment GOULD, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE HOMEOWNERS -
ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE UTILITIES, COMMON AREAS,.AND STORM
Failed WATER RETENTION SYSTEM ON THE PROPERTY. The public hearing was then reopened to give
the developer an opportunity to address this. Mrs. Medina said that her discussions
with the Engineering Division regarding the drainage system there had been talk about
a possible City program whereby developers would pay into a fund and with that fund
the City would accomplish the maintenance. She said for the Council to make this
requirement at this time would be tying her hands and she would like to have the
opportunity to pay into the in -lieu fund if such a program materializes. She suggested
that the Council hold this restriction in abeyance until the final approval of the
development. Councilman Carns felt that would be proper, but Councilman Gould was
concerned that it may be overlooked at that time so he felt the restriction should be
made now. Mr. LaTourelle said his department would assure that the responsibility
for this maintenance is assigned, either through the articles of the Homeowners'
Association or by acceptance of the Engineering Division of the responsibility.
Councilman Herb did not think it was clear that this was an Engineering requirement
and he was concerned also that it would go through at the final review without the
responsibility assigned. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION TO AMEND, WITH
COUNCIL MEMBERS GOULD AND HERB•VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS KASPER, ALLEN,
CARNS, AND NAUGHTEN VOTING NO. THE MOTION TO AMEND FAILED. THE MAIN"MOTION THEN
CARRIED. Councilman Carns requested that the Staff not place this item on the Consent
Agenda for final review.
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 3 - June 26, 1979