Loading...
01713r R-4-80 to the City to maintain. She also asked about sewers, and Mr. Saterlie said there is adequate sewer treatment capacity for this at the site in that area, and he referred to Item 9 of the preliminary engineering requirements submitted for this hearing, which states that any plans for future development of this site must be cleared through the Department of Ecology since such development necesssarily depends upon available sewage treatment capacity. Mr. Forsander said Mr. Bilder had been paying on a sewer LID for many years and they will apply for future usage. Commissioner Hall asked whether there would be sidewalks bordering the development, and Mr. Forsander said Mr. Bilder will work with the City and the neighborhood on this, but it would be a proportionate share. Commissioner Hall expressed concern about detached garages so as to keep as much green space as possible, and Mr. Forsander said that where possible the garages will be below the buildings, but otherwise they will be detached. They had not started to design the units yet, but he said they will try to minimize the impact on the neighbor- hood. Mr. Hodgin observed that by the applicant's meeting all of the City's requirements the surrounding people should benefit from the develop- ment. Chairman LaBelle suggested that the units not be clustered so closely that they appear to be apartments. Mr. Forsander said there would be about 40' between the units, and Chairman LaBelle said he would like them to aim for more if possible. He said this development appeared apppropriate according to the.Code and probably was one of the best overall developments . that could be done for the property. He noted that the road access should be considered to minimize the impact on existing residents. No formal action was taken by the Commission. A short recess was announced. WILLIAM JOHNSON - Rezone from RS-20 to OS at approximately 7301 Meadowdale Beach Rd., legally described as Parcel 03, Lot 118, Plat of Meadowdale Beach_ Rd., N.W. 1/4 of Section 8, Township 27 North, Range 4 East, W.M.. This property is owned by the City of Edmonds and is undeveloped. Large alders, evergreens, and brush cover the property. The rear one-third of the property is steeply sloped, while the front two-thirds slopes gently down to Meadowdale Beach Rd. There are springs on the property but no standing water.. The Comprehensive Policy Plan Map designates the area as single-family, residential. Zoning on adjacent properties in the City of Edmonds is RS-20, and property to the east in the.City of Lynnwood is zoned P-1 (Public Use). The proposed OS zoning would limit the development of the property to the types of uses outlined in Section 12.13.310 of the. Edmonds Land Use Guidelines. Mr. Bowman read a letter from the Parks and Recreation Director stating that this property has little value as a parks and recreation site, that "mini -parks" in residential areas are expensive to maintain, and small, wooded sites often become a nuisance to the neighborhood as they attract inappropriate youth activities. He further stated that this site is close to the Meadowdale Junior High site which soon will be developed into a major parks and recreation facility to serve this area. Mr. Bowman reviewed the rezone criteria, as follows. As to the proposed zoning changes conforming with the Comprehensive Plan, the property is designated single-family, residential. As to the relationship of the proposed zoning change to existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property, all of the surrounding property in the City of Edmonds is RS-20. Generally, the properties to the south, west, and east are undeveloped. Single-family dwellings are located to the north. The adjacent property in Lynnwood is undeveloped and zoned P-1. An 87-lot subdivision is proposed on it. There have been no changes in the character, conditions or surrounding neighborhood that would justify the rezone. Regarding relative gain to the public as compared with hardship imposed on the individual owner, the rezone would create an additional parcel of open space in the City of Edmonds park system. The hardship imposed would be that, should the City decide to sell the land as surplus, its value may be decreased due to the limited uses permitted in the Open Space zoning. Should the property be rezoned to Open Space, the primary use would be a park, and such use is not supported by the Parks & Recreation Department. As to the suitability of the subject property for the purpose for which it has been zoned and is proposed to be zoned, and the length of time the property has remained unimproved, considered in the context of land development in the surrounding area, there are other properties in the vicinity that have similar develop- mental constraints but which have been developed recently. This is a good EDMONDS PLANNING CJ5MIJJ6�N Page 6 - Lovem er ,