00538f
property would provide approximately 25 units, but only 16 are proposed.
She displayed the site layout and 'noted that the houses will be on two
The houses will be attached to each
flat knolls separated by a ravine.
other; six unites will be on one cul-de-sac and 10 on the other. The
roadway will be a 30' right-of-way. They were requesting a modification
from 40' due to the severe topography of the area. There would be 20' of
The site contains a little
I paving with 5' of utilities on either side.
over 11 acres. The required perimeter setback is 25 The Fire Department
had recommended a fire hydrant at the entrance to each cul-de-sac. All
units will be required to connect to the sanitary sewer. Assistant City
{ Engineer Dick Allen said the sewer system will be arranged by an agree-
l4Y'
ment with the City of Lynnwood for use of the joint sewer system available
i He said drainage will be contained within the site. He saw
in the area.
no major problems that could not be taken care of during the engineering x:
t
phase. Ms. Charleson said most of the trees and slopes will be preserved 4.
be
thereby reducing runoff, and the increase in traffic would not signifi- ._
cant. She did not believe there would be any significant adverse environ-
'$
mental impact if the engineering requirements for drainage were met, and she
hearing opened,
recommended approval. The public portion of the was
a
David Kinderfather, architect for the proposal, said the PRD is ideal for
this kind of topography. He said these will be 16 attached single family r,
dwellings, rather than being.a condominium, and that the major amount of z
He they had tried to site the buildings
the acreage will be kept open. said
1 to retain as many of the trees as possible and make the buildings 'comply
I with the land, rather than cutting and filling. He said each dwelling .
will be valued at $60,000 - $80,000, and that a water retention system
had been designed to take care of the runoff from the paved areas. The
water will be infiltrated into the ground at its own natural rate.
Commissioner Goodhope commented that he thought this was a very good;
that they
plan, and he was not opposed to common walls. His concern was
might change the plan. Ms. Charleson responded that these buildings were.
}
JJ actually designed for the site, that they were indicating where the
buildings would go and approximately what the design of the buildings 3i.
of approval, �a
f
would be. She said the Commission could make, as a provision
the
the requirement that they adhere to the plan presented. Tom Archey, 4t
developer, stated that the PRD ordinance indicates that they have to:
follow a plan rather exactly all the way through, and that was what they
were trying to do. He said they wanted the liberty, when they actually
pour the concrete, to move the foundation several feet in terms of saving
He they understood that
i trees or providing less filling or cutting. said
they were committed to this plan and this building design. Cherie Prias,,
who had written the letter read by Chairman McGibbon at the beginning,
of this hearing, and John Schoen of 16409 68th Ave. 1-1. asked questions
regarding access to the development. Mrs. Prias also asked about her
1 request for a traffic control.' Mr. Allen said this was the only access r.�
1 in and out of the area. lie said there is a percentage of drivers who
always disregard the speed limit. He said the walkway was being required ,
to provide some protection for pedestrians, but a second stop sign would
not be warranted there. lie said that unless you stop the traffic at every
block you cannot control the speeders, and that it is not practical to
stop at every block in that area. P1s. Charleson explained that this
complaint frequently is made and the City really has a problem with it.
She said speed bumps are not permitted, and if a stop sign were put to d
there would be other people who would complain about it. She suggeste
that a petition be circulated among the residents of 68th Ave. W.,
requesting the traffic control, and that it be presented to the City f
Council, and that they may be able to get some assistance in that way.
The public portion of the hearing was then closed. Commissioner Hall
said she agreed with a suggestion made during the discussion about the
EDMONDS PLANNING COMMISSION
Page 5 - December 14, 1977
i