01619i
Edmonds Planning Commission Meeting - 6/19/68 (Page 4)
Mr. Hamilton inquired if hospitals would come under the multi -purpose classification as
pertains to parking space. He was advised by Mr. Logan that hospital parking requirements
are one space per bed.
Mr. Dickson asked if the application as worded would give blanket effect to the entire
city. Mr. Murphy replied that to make the wording a little more precise, it might be
well to indicate "Hospitals, acute general, licensed by the State of Washington", as
against "General Hospitals, approved by the State Board of Health". He indicated that
the Board of Adjustment could do the same thing as a practical matter because of its
control through Conditional Use Permits.
Mr. Peterson wanted to know what the height regulations would be if a private developer
wished to build a nursing home in conjunction with these facilities. Mr. Smiley answered
that extended care facilities adjacent to the hospital is possible, but the facilities
would not have the same classification. He added that a private operator is not likely
to build a facility like the proposed structure.
Mr. Logan remarked that under a Conditional Use Permit these structures were permitted
in RML,,RMH, BN, and CG zones, and could be constructed in downtown Edmonds. However,
Mr. Murphy explained that the Board of Adjustment's permission would still be required
and that they could state conditions and set height, parking spaces, etc. to increase
standards. The proposed amendment was then read to the audience. Mr. Logan stated that
any maximum height request over the 35' limitation in the Code would be subject to Board
of Adjustment ruling.
i After a general discussion on the form of a motion, Mr. Dailey moved, seconded by Mr.
+ Peterson, that the Commission recommend by resolution to the City Council that Section
12.13.130.of the City Code be amended to allow hospitals to exceed the 35' height limi-
4
tation, subject to a Conditional Use Permit, provided that the maximum hospital building
height shall not exceed 111 feet. Motion carried with all voting in favor except Mr.
i Brooks, who opposed the motion.
E
At this point in the proceedings, Planning Commissioner Gustayson arrived at the meeting.
Plats
Mrs. Shippen announced that in all plat and subdivision hearings the Planning Commission
would have found that the factors recited in RCW 58.16.060 and all other facts deemed
relevant had been or would be fully satisfied, and the public use and interest would be
served by the decisions made.
P-2-68, Preliminary Plat of "Sound Vista", Guy W. Tooker, located at 76th W. 6 172nd SW
(cont'd from 5/15/68)
Mr. Logan displayed the plat map and commented that this hearing had been continued so a
study could be made of street needs in the general area. Mr. Tooker told of the•problem
with water bearing sand on portions of the property and indicated that he does not want
to develop a street across the property to serve acreage to the north. Mr. Logan stated
that there are only about 7 or 8 houses in the immediate area of this proposed plat with
land area for about 30 homesites; that the whole area is prime for development, but with
no adequate street system. This subject area is a tough section in which to design and
develop a street system; however, the property developers should be obligated to provide
access to other adjacent properties.
Mr. Neil Staebler, 7521 - 172nd St., was not opposed to the development but was concerned
with better access. He noted that it is 100' to the nearest fire hydrant and without
adequate access, emergency equipment would be delayed coming in. Mr. Brooks asked if the
suggested street would give Mr. Tooker the same number of lots as the cul-de-sac arrange-
ment and was advised that it probably would.
Mr. Dickson noted the property was rather small in the northeast corner and asked how
people on the corner and other side would be able to get onto the street. Lot 7 could
only be reached by placing the driveway diagonally to the contours.
Mr. Tooker said he would not attempt to put the suggested street in if it was approved
because it would cost too much. He indicated he would dedicate the property if the City
would build a road. Mr. Logan commented that the soil and slope were a problem and agreed
that a 32' street pavement would probably be impossible. Mr. Larson; City Engineer,