00654k`.
T7
` 14. Testimony was received from a witness stating that there i
t "-! should be no exception to the rule requiring a PRD to be r
completed within 2 years of the date of approval of ordinance
and that the project as contemplated by the Applicant has not:
been completed, and, therefore it should be considered as an
abandoned project and the extension should not be granted.'
15'. Testimony was received from witnesses testifying that the PRD
will create difficulty for parking in the area and will create '
extensive traffic problems.
16. Testimony was received from individuals in the area stating r
that there would be environmental consequences if the project. J#'
were allowed to be constructed as proposed.`'
CONCLUSIONS
1. The application is for the approval of a 2 year extension of a
PRD that was originally approved by the City Council of the
City of Edmonds. The PRD is located at 68th Ave. West, 3x
Y q Edmonds, WA, and more particularly described as set forth;
:1 above.
2.
The PRD was originally approved by the City Council with an
effective ordinance date of July 31, 1979.
3.
Section 20.35.120 B of the Edmonds Community Development
'
Code requires that all PRD development be completed within 2,
years or the project will be considered abandoned. However
`
Section 20.35.120 B of the Edmonds Community Development Code
allows for construction to begin after an extension of time
for completion has been approved by the City Council.
4.
There appears to be no changes to the original PRD approval;.
and the Applicant is only seeking an extension of the time ins,
which to complete the project.
5.
The Applicant has been hampered by delays caused through
w,
litigation and these delays have caused him not to be able toy.
complete the project as projected. The Planning Department of
z'
the City of Edmonds has recommended approval of the extention
of the PRD.
G,35
MGr-
YY
1
P, ,X
tYtt
GORDON-WASHINGTON, INC. EXTENSION-4
;W