00934•1;
�rF
2
4
3
4
5
6
I
7
i
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1
28
!
- a
29
30
i
31
32
!omplied with the procedures established in the City Code Chapter
L2.14.060. It appears that the City Council failed both to make
i proper design review following the required review of the
Amenities Design Board, and.finally, a separal-e final approval of
the project. i
2.7 Furthermore, the defendant City has failed to
adequately ascertain what adverse environmental impact would occur
as a result of this project. Severe traffic problems already
exist along 68th Street and this project would continue to
aggravate this situation.
III._ CLAIMS ALLEGATIONS
3.1 Petitioner hereby realleges paragraphs 2.1 through
2.7 herein.
3.2 The defendant City failed to comply with the State
Environmental Policy Act guidelines for circulating a proposed
Declaration of Non -Significance. The defendant City further
failed to provide the necessary 15 day comment period on the pro-
posed•Declaration of Non -Significance, and otherwise failed to
comply with Chapter 43.21C R.C.W.
3.3 The defendant'City failed to comply with the require-
ments of R.C.W. 42.30, .the Open Public Meetings Act.
3.4 The defendant City failed to follow lawful procedures
enacted by said City for the purpose of evaluaving and approving
P.R.D. 2-78. Final approval of P.R.D. 2-78 by the City Council
on August 1; 1978, is invalid for failure to follow procedures es-
tablished in Chapter 12.14.060 of t:he.Edmonds City Code, and for
failure to otherwise follow the Edmonds City Code.
3.5 Approval of P.R.D. 2-78 constitutes illegal spot
zoning.
3.6 The defendant City has violated the Appearance of
Petition and Affidavit for Writ of EVANS,OUIMBY&HALL, INC.,P.S.
Certiorari And/Or Declara+-ory Relief — 4 COLLEGE CENTER BLDG.
4556 University Way N.E.
Seattle, Washington 98105
12061 633.3900
I,
j
� r
i
t
,
'
I
k
T