Loading...
Resolution 320PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 320 A RESOLUTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS RECOMMENDING THE DENIAL OF A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY.TO REZONE FROM SINGLE RESIDENTIAL 20,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-20) TO`SINGLE RESIDENTIAL 129000 SQUARE FEET (RS-12) THAT PRO- PERTY DESCRIBED IN PLANNING COMMISSION FILE NO. R-7-69 WHEREAS the Planning Commission of the City of Edmonds, pursuant to proper notice and publication, held a public hearing on a proposed amendment to the Official Zoning Map of said City to rede- signate the real property described in Planning Commission File No. R-7-69 from Single Residential 20,000 square feet (RS-20) to Single Residential 12,000 square feet (RS-12); and WHEREAS, having made the findings set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, the Planning Commission determined that the real property described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto should not be redesignated; be it RESOLVED, that recommendation be and the same hereby is made to the City Council of the City of Edmonds that the proposed amendment be denied. DATED as of the.20th day of November, 1969. Chairman, Edmonds Planning Commission Edmonds City Planner File No.: R-7-69 Initiated by: Romero Yumul Proposed Amendment: From RS-20 to RS-12 Date of Hearing: November 19, 1969 Date of Expiration of Appeal Period: December 19, 1969 R-7-69 Resolution No. 320 EXHIBIT '.'A" The topography of the property is relatively steep, containing a slope of about 25%. The.property also lies on the edge or within a serious landslide area. On preceding zoning requests covering property with relatively steep slopes, the Planning Commission has followed the policy of retaining the.larger lot zoning for the following reasons: 1. Larger lots are necessary to provide latitude in establishing driveways which meet the slope standards of the city. 2. Larger lots create fewer erosion and storm water runoff when urbanization occurs on the hillside. Because the request calls for an increased density on the property with the above characteristic, it would be undesir- able to approve the request. Such approval would only com- pound the solutions of the topographic and soil situation. EXHIBIT r'B" That parcel of land described as follows: That portion of tract 90, Meadowdale Beach, according to plat thereof recorded in volume 5 of plats, page 38, records of Snohomish County, Washington, lying westerly and northwesterly of the county road and South of North line of Lot 2 in Block 97 projected easterly to county road and North of South line of the North half of Lot 3, Block 97, projected easterly to County Road. Together with vacated road lying adjacent to west line and between the.westerly projection of the North and South lines thereof.