Loading...
PLN198200002-2973'A July 23, 1982 MEMO TO: Jim Adams City Engineer FROM: Duane V. Bowman Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: 75% PETITION FOR 181ST PLACE S.W. ANNEXATION Attached is a copy of the Certificate of Sufficiency for the 181st Place S.W. annexation. The City Council accepted the 10% petition on May 18, 1982. On July 20, 1982, the Council concurred with the Planning Advisory Board's recommendation to zone the area RS-12 (Single Family Residential - 12,000 square feet) upon annexation to the City. Could you prepare the 75% petition containing the above zoning, so I may have Dr. Perkl begin to circulate it in the neighborhood. Also, please let me know when this will be sent up to the Boundary Review Board. Thanks. DVB/mt attachment f ,ilL:l.Ct,V�� [{PR 2 6 N82 CERTIFICATE OF SUFFICIENCY Can! OF EDrr�nNDS' OF LETTER OF INTENT FOR ANNEXATION I, IRENE VARNEY MORAN, City Clerk of the City of Edmonds, do hereby certify that I received on THURSDAY the 25 day of MARCH 19 82 , a Letter of Intent for Annexation of an area known as 181st Place S.W. area. Within three days after filing of said Letter of Intent, I proceeded to make a determination with reasonable promptness of said Letter in the form of a petition. The assessed valuation of the entire area. within the proposed annexation boundaries is $ 1,260,570 The assessed.valuation of signatures on the Letter of Intent petition represents $ 9109770 The signatures constituted the ownerships of more than the ten percent in value of the.property within the area.. Actual percentage of the signatures is 72 SIGNED AND SEALED this 26 day of APRLL , 19-. IRENE VARNEY MORAN, ('Mr EDMONDS CITY CLERK N Mayor Harrison advised that the City Engineer had received a telephone call from Mr. Moos' office at the DOE indicating they have changed their minds and are in agreement in principle with Edmonds' grant request but they have not determined a dollar value. A letter should be forthcoming shortly. HEARING ON SIMULTANEOUS ZONING FOR McDONALD'S/WESTGATE/WOODWAY AREA ANNEXATION On May 18, 1982 the City Council accepted a petition to annex the subject area, and one of the conditions of acceptance was simultaneous zoning. The PAB conducted a hearing on the zoning on May 26, 1982. Their recommendations were furnished to the Council along with minutes of their hearing. Planning Director Mary Lou Block stated that if the Council concurs with the recommendation of the PAB the 75% annexation petition will contain zoning of BN for the commercial areas, RS-8 for the residential areas, and Open Space for the school site. She located the various zones on a vicinity map. Councilmember Gould asked if there was any weakness in zoning the school area OS to give maximum protection to the neighborhood. Ms. Block responded that for any change there would have to be public hearings on either type of zoning, and if the use were to change or the area subdivided hearings would be held. Councilmember Kasper thought this to be misuse of OS and said it could take the School District years to overcome OS zoning. He thought it should be RS-8 as is the adjoining property. Councilmember Nordquist asked what would happen if the School District wanted to build another building there, possibly a vocational building, and Ms. Block responded that a Conditional Use Permit would be required if it were RS or OS, and under OS no use could change the character or use of OS. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka interjected that the school would become a nonconforming use so it could not expand. Under RS it would be an allowed use. The hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the hearing was closed. Mr. Tanaka advised that there will be a second hearing held in conjunction with the actual annexation ordinance on which the Council will take final action on the zoning and the annexation. HEARING ON SIMULTANEOUS ZONING FOR 181ST PL. S.W. AREA ANNEXATION On May 18, 1982 the Council accepted a petition to annex the subject area, and as part of the acceptance of the proposed annexation simultaneous zoning was required. The PAB conducted a hearing on the zoning on June 9, 1982. Their recommendations were furnished to the Council along with the minutes of their hearing. Planning Director Mary Lou Block advised that if the Council concurs with the recommendation of the PAB the 75% annexation petition will contain zoning of RS-12. She located the property on a vicinity map. The hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the hearing was closed. A second hearing will be held in conjunction with the annexation ordinance on which the Council will take final action on the zoning and the annexation. HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL --LID 208, SPRAGUE ST. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka advised that any protest must be submitted in writing before the end of the hearing. Mayor Harrison read aloud the names of those who had submitted written protests. They were: Gunnard and Adrienne Swanson, Jay S. McGinness, Peggy Harris, and Sproule McGinness. City Engineer Jim Adams then described the LID: the water line was replaced from 7th to 8th Ave., a fire hydrant was relocated and another installed, and a cul-de-sac was installed. The costs ran over the estimate by 46%. Mr. Adams said part of the reason was that the new accounting system involves keeping track of in-house costs, and another part of the reason was because of interest payments for money to pay the contractor. There were also many delays and changes because of neighborhood problems. Mr. Adams said whenever the Staff went to the site to answer inquiries of the neighborhood the time was charged to the project. The City Attorney had prepared an ordinance confirming the final assessment role, and the method of payment was provided in the Council packets. The hearing was opened. Howard W. Lawson, 710 Sprague St., said his is the first house on the south side and often he cannot get out of his driveway because of parked cars. He said they had been told there would be no on -street parking with a 24' wide street so he thought there should be some signs erected stating no parking is allowed. No one else wished to speak, and the hearing was closed. Councilmember Naughten thought there should be some way to relieve the people in light of the huge overrun in costs. COUNCILMEMBER EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 - July 20, 1982 MEMO TO FROM: SUBJECT: July 14, 1982 Harve H. Harrison Mayor Mary Lou Block Planning Director HEARING ON SIMULTANEOUS ZONING FOR 181ST PLACE S.W. ANNEXATION The City Council, on.May 18, 1982, accepted a petition to annex an area -into the City of Edmonds in the vicinity of 181st Place S.W. As part of the acceptance of the proposed annexation, simultaneous zoning was required. On June 9, 1982, the Planning Advisory Board (PAB) conducted a public hearing on the subject of simultaneous zoning for the proposed annexation. Attached are a copy of the minutes from the June 9th meeting, Resolution #673 and a map showing the recommended zoning. If the Council concurs with the recommendation of the PAB, the 75% petition will contain the zoning that is shown on the attached map, which is RS-12. DVB/mt attachment In', City Clerk date J PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD June 9, 1982 The regular meeting of the Planning Advisory Board was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Ken Mattson in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Ken Mattson Ray Sittauer Duane Bowman, Assistant City Planner Fred Ross John McGibbon Mark Eames, City Attorney Valina Walker J. Ward Phillips Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk John Hodgin Dave Larson Mr. McGibbon's and Mr. Phillips' absences were excused as they were business related. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the May 26, 1982 meeting were distributed just prior to this meeting and the Board did not have time to review them. THEREFORE, MRS. WALKER MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. HODGIN, TO DEFER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. STAFF AND PAB COMMENTS Mr. Bowman advised that the City Council will discuss the PAB recommendation regarding downtown parking on July 6, 1982. AGENDA R-2-82 CITY OF EDMONDS - Preannexation zoning request for RS-12 zoning in the vic— nity of 81st P1. S.W. (Lots 9-24 and Lots 74-78, Plat of Homeview Addition #2) The area is comprised of approximately 9 acres and has 15 single-family residences and 4 lots available for development. Surrounding development to the north, south, and east is single-family residential, and the area to the west is undeveloped. The property is zoned RR-12,500 in Snohomish County. The proposed City zoning is RS-12. Surrounding zoning is RS-8 to the north, RR-12,500 to the south, RR-8,400 to the east, and RS-12 to the west. Mr. Bowman reviewed the rezone criteria: The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the area as low density residential, and the proposed zoning is consistent with that. The proposed RS-12 zoning is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the RS-12 zone. As to relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property, for the most part the area is developed to a density consistent with the proposed zoning, with the areas to the north and east developed to a higher density. As to change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in City policy to justify the rezone, it is City policy to zone annexed property to a classification comparable to its former County designation. The uses allowed under the RR-12,500 zone are comparable to those allowed under the RS-12 zone. There should be no significant impact on the property values in the annexation area as the proposed zone change will zone the subject area to an appropriate City classification which is comparable to the existing County designation. There should be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of this annexation and zoning action. A declaration of nonsignificance has been issued. The staff recommended approval. Mr. Bowman identified the property on a vicinity map and said the area is on septic tanks and there have been problems with septic tank failures, so eventually there will have to be sewers installed and that is the driving point for the annexation. The hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the hearing was closed. MR. ROSS MOVED, SECONDED BY MRS. WALKER, TO APPROVE R-2-82, ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT THE FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT TO THE STAFF REPORT. MOTION CARRIED. y,. t �. Y \ aft t- - r• .�ti• `c "`� ,•� `. ': •�': sC,• � � : � .e r _h c ;j It `= •i. , ��• •�\.' Lon S, �-� y }± It;l` �i r i _��.. .. •.t,. �•.'.\'• \•�. ..... _,.�-��r� ^''�[_-••T--- � ti'' ram!-: - ^-r I PROPOSED ! 81st PI. S.W. ANNEXATION r Subject-- i:�' Area North O,�i 0,� 7 ,.i 0 '4�. t 9: •0.^ 0 (0 r .. . `. 2': i �, t, ..'� 1 I ti t .�, . I .•%U..76 if.)yCj AJ.x$.OY C [ ,� . _C �r. t C .i C 1 0 i1 , . (� d ) W, r \, 1 I . 1.;_ 777 • 1 �yy r,A . ? y. C J G l , � n r 't•;^, ,y 1 f � , �` J�,, .i 'a.`iu( ,`.`11'\, .nyJytS.r;'.` !'�C^et;`1` .:. u>`,.,\ .;p+.;i+r I ♦.+ �:-__ )), 7 �}. , Iif'! •� ', \'iwry . � .. Y.::.: �Rio • ' _ - .}. / ,�.' ;,: 1, ;.(. it 1. 1 �i °' ,1 - — lon •000 771 AN MUM •r`; %rr+,iC;� ..�..�_�. \r,♦ /l�^': :i�r u{C.i .. - I - 'i'�,—'--'-- SNOHOMISH _COU �'o :�• :C;: �'"� . CITY OF LYNNWOOD T�, I �' �:° :'r„�-,�- •.. :';, f fir' T - « ..1.. I - . ; I•L;•; yO.�G) 4 iN F`w'PFMi �iJ �. «� I, '' Q ` 1•'• 4Y.i{, r� 1 �;.�, i !. X ( Uy y N '`` lv«no.l[ '� \• f •I t 1 I 17. ��:y,,�•1 `' N 1 1,= It, 4 .1 1 ; r �; (�.. :i__ -_ '�' •11•I'• r n - :�• ,r, r 20 is to .• r I. RESOLUTION NO. 673 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF EDMONDS PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD ON PROPOSED REZONE After notice had been duly posted and published pursuant to Section 20.40.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, the Edmonds Planning Advisory Board held a public hearing on June 9, 1982, to consider Planning Division File No. R-2-82, a requested zone classification of a parcel of property currently being considered for annexation to the City of Edmonds. The City staff made a presentation and submitted documents for the Planning Advisory Board review. Members of the public were given an opportunity to speak. After all persons who desired to speak had done so, the public portion of the hearing was closed. Following discussion by the Planning Advisory Board, a motion was made that the Planning Advisory Board recommend approval of R-2-82.. The motion was duly seconded and passed. From the evidence presented to the Planning Advisory Board, the majority of the Planning Advisory Board hereby makes the following findings of fact, conclusions and recommendations. FINDINGS OF FACT I The subject property is located outside the Edmonds city limits and is currently being considered for annexation to the City of Edmonds. The subject property is approxi- mately 9 acres in size and is located in the vicinity of a 181st Place Southwest, east of Homeview Drive. A legal description of the subject property appears in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference and set forth herein in full. II The subject property is currently zoned by the Snohomish County Zoning Ordinance as RR-12,500. The proposed zoning classification if this property is annexed to the City of Edmonds is RS-12. The property surrounding the subject area is zoned RS-8 to the north, RR-12,500 to the south, RR- 8400 to the east, and RS-12 to the west. The subject area is currently developed with 15 single family residences in an area that is generally developed as single family residential to the north, south, and east with the area to the west presently undeveloped. There are currently four undeveloped lots in the subject area. III The subject property is currently designated low density residential by the comprehensive plan for the subject area. -2- IV There will be no significant adverse environmental impacts from this zone classification and the City's responsible official has issued a declaration of nonsig- nificance pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act. CONCLUSIONS I All procedural requirements of the Edmonds City Code and state law have been fully complied with. The proposed zoning classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with the purposes of the zoning ordinances. III The adoption of the proposed zone classification will not have a significant impact on the property values of the area to be annexed because the proposed zoning is substantially similar to the current zoning under county zoning and the majority of the subject property has already been developed as single family residential. IV The proposed zoning classification will be in the best interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare. The Planning Advisory Board concurs that the proposed zoning classification will not significantly effect 'k. -3- the quality of the environment and therefore will not require an environmental impact statement pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act. V There is no potential increase or decrease in the value of the subject property as a result of this zoning reclassification. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Advisory Board recommends to the City Council that the subject property be given a zoning classification of RS-12. RESOLVED THIS 2� y of 1982. CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD —4- EXHIBIT "A" Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 17, Township 27 North, Range 4 East, W.M.; Snohomish County, Washington; Thence Southerly along the Westerly line of said Section 17 to the Northwest corner of Lot 15, Plat of Homeview Addition No. 2, as recorded in Volume 16 of Plats, Page 3, Records of Snohomish County, Washington; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of Lots 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 and 9 of said plat to the Westerly margin of Homeview Drive; thence continuing Easterly along the projection of said Northerly line to the Easterly boundary of Homeview Drive; thence Northerly along the Easterly boundary of said Homeview Drive to the Northwest corner of Lot 78 of said plat; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of said Lot 78 to the Northeast corner of said Lot 78; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of Lots 78,77, 76, 75 and 74 of said plat to the Northerly boundary of 182nd Street S.W.; thence continuing Southerly along the projection of said Easterly line to the Southerly boundary of 1,82nd Street S.W.; thence Westerly along said Southerly boundary of 182nd Street S.W. to the Easterly boundary of Homeview Drive; thence Northwesterly to the most Southerly corner of Lot 22 of said plat; thence Southwesterly along the Southerly lines of Lots 22, 21, 20, 19, and 18 of said plat to the West line of said Section 17; thence Northerly along said West line to the Point of Beginning. 1\ CITY OF E D M O N ®S HARVE H. HARRISON CIVIC CENTER • EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 • (206) 775.2525 MAYOR CITY ATTORNEY ` Vf G R June 14, 1982 Duane Bowman Assistant City Planner Edmonds Civic Center Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: R-1-82 and R-2-82 Dear Duane: Enclosed are the original resolutions of the Planning Advisory Board in the two preannexation zoning requests referenced above. Please carefully review the contents of these resolutions and be sure that these resolutions contain an accurate representation of the substance of the Board's recommendation. Please present R-1-82 to Ray Sittauer and R-2-82 to Ken Matson for their signatures. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these resolutions. Very truly yours, OFFICE OF T E CITY ATTORNEY Mark A. Eames MAE/mjr Enclosure(s) PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD June 9, 1982 The regular meeting of the Planning Advisory Board was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Ken Mattson in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Ken Mattson Ray Sittauer Duane Bowman, Assistant City Planner Fred Ross John McGibbon Mark Eames, City Attorney Valina Walker J. Ward Phillips Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk John Hodgin Dave Larson Mr. McGibbon's and Mr. Phillips' absences were excused as they were business related. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of the May 26, 1982 meeting were distributed just,prior to this meeting and the Board did not have time to review them. THEREFORE, MRS. WALKER MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. HODGIN, TO DEFER APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. STAFF AND PAB COMMENTS Mr. Bowman advised that the City Council will discuss the PAB recommendation regarding downtown parking on July 6, 1982. AGENDA R-2-82 CITY OF EDMONDS - Preannexation zoning request for RS-12 zoning in the �M� vicinity of 181st Pl. S.W. (Lots 9-24 and Lots 74-78, Plat of Homeview Addition #2) The area is comprised of approximately 9 acres and has 15 single-family residences and 4 lots available for development. Surrounding development to the north, south, and east is single-family residential, and the area to the west is undeveloped. The property is zoned RR-12,500 in Snohomish County. The proposed City zoning is RS-12. Surrounding zoning is RS-8 to the north, RR-12,500 to the south, RR-8,400 to the east, and RS-12 to the west. Mr. Bowman reviewed the rezone criteria: The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the area as low density residential, and the proposed zoning is consistent with that. The proposed RS-12 zoning is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the RS-12 zone. As to relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property, for the most part the area is developed to a density consistent with the proposed zoning, with the areas to the north and east developed to a higher density. As to change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in City policy to justify the rezone, it is City policy to zone annexed property to a classification comparable to its former County designation. The uses allowed under the RR-12,500 zone are comparable to those allowed under the RS-12 zone. There should be no significant impact on the property values in the annexation area as the proposed zone change will zone the subject area to an appropriate City classification which is comparable to the existing County designation. There should be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of this annexation and zoning action. A declaration of nonsignificance has been issued. The staff recommended approval. Mr. Bowman identified the property on a vicinity map and said the area is on septic tanks and there have been problems with septic tank failures, so eventually there will have to be sewers installed and that is the driving point for the annexation. The hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the hearing was cl ed. R. ROSS MOVED, SECONDED BY MRS. WALKER, TO APPROVE R-2-82, ADOPTING TffM RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT TH FINDINGS OF FACT PURSUANT TO THE STAFF REPORT. MOTION CARRIED. June 3, 1982 MEMO TO: Planning Advisory Board FROM: Duane V. Bowman Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: JUNE 9, 1982 PAB AGENDA ITEMS The follwing are the staff comments on the June 9, 1982 PAB agenda items: CDC-8-82 Amendment to Chapters 16.30.030 and 16.50.020 of the Community Development Code to allow building heights of thirty feet in the BC and RM zones. Staff is proposing to amend the Community Development Code to allow outright building heights of thirty feet in the BC (Community Business) and RM (Multiple Family) zones. The code presently allows buildings to be built to a heighth of thirty feet provided that all portions of the roof above twenty five feet have a pitch of 4" in 12" or greater. The problem we've found in dealing with the code comes when someone proposes a mansard style roof. The code effectively requires a reverse pitch at the roofline. This adds,.nothi'ng to the bui'ldi;ng but additional costs. A more reasonable approach is to set a specific height limit and allow for design within the limit. Attached are copies of Chapters 16.30.030 and 16.50.020 showing the proposed amendments, a drawing of code impacts on a mansard style roof and elevations of a structure with a mansard roof. R-2-82 CITY OF EDMONDS Preannexation zoning request for RS-12 zoning in the vicinity of 181st Place S.W. (Lots 9 through 24, and Lots 7.4 through 78, Plat of Homeview Addition #2). (See attached report). DUB/mt attachment STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FILE #R-2-82 HEARING DATE: JUNE 9, 1982 I. REQUESTED ACTION: Preannexation zoning request from RR-12,500 to RS-12 for the area in the vicinity of 181st Place S.W., east of Homeview Drive. (Lots 9 - 24 and Lots 74 - 78). II. APPLICANT: City of Edmonds 505 Bell Street Edmonds, WA 98020 III. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT AREA NAD SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT: The subject area comprises approximately nine acres. There are fifteen single family residences located within the area with four lots available for development. Surrounding development to the north, south and east is single family residential. The area to the west is undeveloped. IV. ZONING: The subject property is zoned RR-12,500 in Snohomish County. The proposed zoning is RS-12. Surrounding Zoning - North RS-8 V. OFFICIAL STREET MAP 181st Place S.W. Homevi.ew Drive 182nd Street S.W. VI. REZONE CRITERIA South East West RR-12,500 RR-8,400 RS-12 Proposed R/W 60' 60' 60' Existing R/W 60' 60' 60' 1. Is the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Policy Plan map designates the subject area as low density residential. The proposed zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING ORDINANCE 2. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the proposed zone district? Staff Report to Planning Advisory -Board Page 2 - File #R-2-82 The proposed RS-12 zone is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the RS-12 zone. 3. Surrounding Area What is the relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property? For the most part, the subject area is developed to a density consistent with the proposed zoning. The areas to the north and east are developed to a higher density. 4. Changes Has there been sufficient change in the character of the immediate or surrounding area or in city policy to justify the rezone? Upon annexation, the subject area will need to be zoned to an appropriate classification. It is City policy to zone annexed property to a classification comparable to its former County designation. 5. Suitability Is the property both economically and physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning? The uses already allowed under the RR-12,500 zone are comparable to those allowed under the RS-12 zone. 6. Value What is the relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare as compared to the potential increase or decrease in value to the property owners? The proposed zone change will zone the subject area to an appropriate city classification which is comparable to the existing county designati.on. There should.be no significant impact on the property values in the annexation area. VII. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: There should be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of this annexation and zoning action. A declaration of non -significance has been issued. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the staff that R-2-82 be approved. 4 0: �'..m i"; +• o . �.� � ,' Ys. * +r : ;� 1� �t_ y .0 ..,�• ' �` '�"are � � j ,yt 'k7,g rn y:� '�r,�_.. v •�:�y� i w'.�''p«r°xf }� .:k # THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9 19 82 -,ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO.. R-2-82 PREANNEXATION ZONING REQUEST FOR Rs-12 ZONING, PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION I, N THE VICINITY OF 181ST PLACE S.W. (LOTS 9 THROUGH 24, AND LOTS 74 THROUGH 78, PLAT OF HOMEVIEW ADDITION #2) THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7:00 P .M. , IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE EDMONDS CIVIC CENTER, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 505 BELL STREET, EDMONDS (PHONE 775-2525, EXT. 227). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE r4 QF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE WARNI BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. THIS NOTICE MAY RE REMOVED AFTER 6-9-82 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF SNOHO:ViISH, N TicE O PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING ADVISORY .BOARD `Ajl interested persons are fierebv notified that Wednes- day, the"9th day of June, 1982 fibs been set as the date for hearing by the City of Ed-„ monds Planning Advisory i Board on proposed Preanaex-I Otian zoning request for RS-12 zoning of the property located in the vicinity of 181st Place S.W. legally described asfol- lows:. Lots 9 through 24, and .Lots 74 through 78, Plat Of Homeview Addition No. 2. Said hearing will be at 7:00 0In- in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, and all interested'' persons are invited t0 appear. -' IREN.E,. VARNEY MORAN° City Clerk, City of Edmonds FILE NO: R-2-82. Published; May 31, 1982. Affidavit of Publication The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says that she is Principal Clerk of the EVERETT HERALD, a daily news- paper printed and published in the City of Everett, County of Snoho- mish, and State of Washington; that said newspaper is a newspaper of general circulation in said County and State; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County, and that the notice ........................... NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ------------------------------•------.......... -•----------------...............---------------------•--•--------...................-- a printed copy of which is hereunto attached, was published in said newspaper proper and not in supplement form, in the regular and entire edition of said paper on the following days and times, namely: MAY 31, 1982 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said perio . ------------- --- ----------------------------- Principal Clerk 1st subscribed and swurti I.o belore me this ................ JL1rE 82 daof -•-•-----•----•••-••-- ----•--------------------------- ---- - 19.-------- ------. •-- -- -- --------------- --------- -- --- - `!1� Notary P b is in and for the State of Washington, residint verett, Snohomish County. B-2-1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING,ADVISORY BOARD All interested persons are hereby notified that Wednesday, the 9th day of June , 1982 has been set as.the date for hearing by the City of Edmonds Planning Advisory Board on proposed Preannexation zoning request for RS-12 zoning. of the property located in the vicinity of 181st Place S.W. legally described as follows: Lots 9 through 24, and Lots 74 through 78, Plat of Homeview Addition No. 2. Said hearing will be at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, and all interested persons are invited to appear. IRENE VARNEY MORAN City Clerk, City of Edmonds FILE NO. R-2-82 PUBLISH: 5-31-82 N, !• :fi �^�1l,�4. i[ 7 t t� t v / + t ,lrj• tr :�`:`� Y,�'r:,;,h ��;';.'''` • ) r�� is 7i?, ')' •rs).,�.ri.r. ;; {.i: :%, iy, ,'LL,i'�, t' �., ` P".: '.t.{'�;"-. � )• A a ]An 4 •• •Y .L �v t r h K. at• •.\.%.;t ;.• •'t: '�(` .,,ter,` r{':•'.;••'• ,t :L' �•• Jf' :•M ^� .t n'. 'r. ,} v •r .T jt,•I. n r. e i •� Y ;;fin;,/.;`;ti7?'>r<;� � �a .c _ ' ,:._..; �/•;. _ �. PROPOSU 18 t st p{ S.W. ANtVEXA .13Hlul ,,`y'`%`; ;; ,. > • i` ; :�,. '•,r �• �'f ;! :et..^ i"/y. �`:Ii •;t JS::;'1:;:,••:"i svbJei�fi 1.9 �,•`��",f. Area :>; ,rl ,�q'%; M �. R• it•! •` .•�.a - .�. .}.. ,( i�. '1• ird;'�jf.2n�A•) ':fl'.j -.4ii: ,r C�:Y •ccJ,'' ail:%): i'I�%':l".:ii� :l'. .i•.) i•�fi i i �. f _ _ •k, •aa%�n•5:�� '.r• `2`;x '. �d'�: ..r,:: 3Ji.;!',,. :;5:� :d ..tu\t' - :.�f•. ...�. :� - -� S:iC•N4ii?'•.'i2iio .,6•+ c?:Gi'r ail, i:', •t E'.i': as ;:2:f� �:'. • a 'J t .yyQQ�� •i�r: ,ia': r: •e }irk?'v,;}ir'.CiE::e`>! .d.,,1 . M' .2.J':; ,�+..;).p}:y :7• 9:.:f); i(�l,l ..i}'; •; 1Y n?•'• � •I, .:1. __ .: .: , li :•t :: j?�. ,a , ..t;....'.: ,.: R..:: i � ;iA� . ••2 ....... ,a ?$.,. !`aY�,,) .t�....S,P'L ...1 , :yC: : •n: 4' ..tii; r ..1. . a: ,; • , .i.. ....C-:• � ; i + -- f .,.tY� :i • .vzz' .�`., ., Se): ;l;;;ii':.1;;1' `�,:•f• �:w: .`iar': Y.): ,<'ir: � ni?::'. 'rr`� •qx 1 k. A. ' :l,'').11,,cr'r: .,a;, [ tiii•>. �., );�1c,. • ,t.9: ..v}S'.:y...,Yi$:..u•':.•,,. .. • •. ... „�- �- , , :t•t•� � l .j:.: .i:j:i !r'i0:.: pnr�y ': Q�$R� it.. ..Cta;':: �.le:.iv�:: J.;:;:.:r):::ii:i-. :;:.::;:?'' d d . 1,' d �'�il �• 12, ,�.>. •)r rC 15 ".L`'k,. {.r$i2iihhL•':�.. -:! > 't, t).l k ( ,•I. •r�' �ti•�'i$i•• ;!'•' n!'l'itir tit;i:=�i;cta•�r';�;]:aA(.'�f�i!a:.it!.;••a :+�7::a:,;4:?a;::::i:�i':1. ��,, . T r f .•:�.;.t � t • "� - "t iF.h.;i '�"' ':jt?.'•r•,2ic1t ..!' �2' :c �:?":'. `?e>:: i'•,'•irt?fii$::iii�;:�•� .. •�.�40 '�aw•'ia G.' •.i,'.! t � O �%/t?•,'•�rY.' ;2r t�:i•r ,.:izx, . n ;:<..r.; "a/' ,n F `alRi • i 1 1 ! t, •,vi)V rfZ�ftA � `t,. t, � �i:, ,:,)ai !'. •: ,. ., Ldi• f fj j` f1, ab�V E! 1,/;,.[.1+,lr`: (y'Qp' eM ,`` I +r``t _ l •.t � f-._...___l.__-.._ 1 �, :2p:, '4�1' •�!:t•rE t 'tGfrl�lAtifr r AC t4 _ +, �'�_" ' ,.' .6�•A+': �%':%'' •,�'¢f �i � �� :, �,/ '�� ,try: i` ft '':�. i !E, .•1:•:•:h. `l�Zi .�!.���� 'f"%'t'%J�L•�% '�`,>�v�<! t, Y ,��=••I. "� NN K :.,et• t•.t.: /r jtf3 is 'i� ' ::t.; i., is �,'' ` ,.,i` . i!`'+'" :.r' • �' o .; ,y.•. 'f�k, / •\,. ,,, ,`,•� ' I•. `I� �I�f1 ._... _ 1N •� ,IAA-. L. n r, ,.,•`Tf;• Y.i.. ..2,.,:k:..t". ,A.` wow .,, � n •'i t ,• g,,�• '� Fib ��"• r~.� • .� _ s,, •: " •------.....-- • l f` � /I �•�).t�� i1 �'tt' :�1'Ir �i.-:, `v .. ' M N(`�M $-n w�; - ♦11.ti•i':• .( _ '' L . teYr r•t• i 7sti - :_•a:� i- RNu000 • ou 1itY�J�i ., . ' ��j j ,'i.'^�., ,"�), t r4 , +/r� A'r,. .: ... ._»___... _ V�Y�.q►�� t � b :�,s.4�z�a i ��' ��\ �;4�q: ••�� y..a, t°•• r'! �� _ �� � its 11110� 'Ire�t*+prr F, •' — - . xwn • ; .a :i '.'„' gip.: ..• ,,tr. rnt¢: � E'.-. (.t ). -R""'+ f f , _ '_•---•...•••-w�-. .•.r� •-}�....��. I• •�`� `f '" % `I IV t2 ! n1A � ► ^. / 1�. f •!• t•aadit+ • R"'J. , • ♦• "I �� I' b'�;`', ..�= f'•'.il: `;�, p ,� PAY.,, ✓�, .. S .1'r. tl. f + �.�• [t gta••ft • •� • • .• w .... \�"` ;`i :`' rA'iTi'C.l'= ,1r�iv• iN:..•.f f11. � •• � •' tt+♦pa • • fw ORta •t• .•- ��.•�n *' �-j..' ,PS�J • t 4 Ylil • • .Y.i, �e';� t - * iI. . +:,• •• .^• -- +A..i�i•" S ; E /'t'"�, l' •1(v t. ae P • Y wt I t I . • . . t "d' 6 It. F � 4 t� '7f{ C: � .. + t ,,� ` f•I�A�g] y;) )r F 1+1F ( ' - lir L •U—'S,—_ —.t 4,r�1 fl} -)��ne 7,1„y.•L.+ tom_-.p^,za.]u..Y.±��... EXHIBIT "B" Commencing at the Northwest corner of Section 17, Township 27 North, Range 4 East, W.M.; Snohomish County, Washington; Thence Southerly along the Westerly line of said Section 17 to the Northwest corner of Lot 15, Plat of Homeview Addition No. 2, as recorded in Volume 16, of Plats, Page 3, Records of Snohomish County, Washington; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of Lots 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 and 9 of said plat to the Westerly margin of Homeview Drive; thence continuing Easterly along the projection of said Northerly line to the Easterly boundary of Homeview Drive; thence Northerly along the Easterly boundary of said Homeview Drive to the Northwest corner of Lot 78 of said plat; thence Easterly along the Northerly line of said Lot 78 to the Northeast corner of said Lot 78; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of Lots 78,77, 76, 75 and 74 of said plat to the Northerly boundary of 182nd Street S.W.; thence continuing Southerly along the projection of said Easterly line to the Southerly boundary of 182nd Street S.W.; thence Westerly along said Southerly boundary of 182nd Street S.W. to the Easterly boundary of Homeview Drive; thence Northwesterly to the most Southerly corner of Lot 22 of said plat; thence Southwesterly along the Southerly lines of Lots 22, 21, 20, 19, and 18 of said plat to the West line of said Section 17; thence Northerly along said West line to the Point of Beginning. survey but that was not accepted. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCILMEMBERS NAUGHTEN, GOULD, JAECH, AND ALLEN VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCILMEMBERS HALL, KASPER, AND NORDQUIST VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED. The motion being reconsidered was read aloud by the City Attorney, and Councilmember Gould said the intent of that motion (which was his motion) was to have the City Attorney draft the wording and the Council would look at it and approve it and it would go to the Auditor's office where the actual wording to go on the ballot will be written. He said his point this evening was that there be an explanation on the four points which he made this evening. Councilmember Kasper said he had stated last week that they were passing the buck. He said they have all the facts and are closer to this than the public and have to live with it day-to-day. His only question was what the salary would be. He was against the ballot because of the cost and he said if it comes in against them they have not solved a thing because they have to have a person on board full-time to run the City. He felt they were asking for trouble to go on a ballot, and he said they will not know the reason if the public votes against it. He felt the Council had a problem and they had to resolve it. Councilmember Gould responded that it will cost the City 25t each for the people to vote, and that he would be surprised if the people said not to spend 25Q for them to vote. Councilmember Nordquist said he would vote against the motion as he felt the Council to be capable and to have the feeling of the community. Councilmember Naughten said he had heard people criticize boards and commissions who thought they had a better sense of what the public needed than the public. Student Representative Engle said he understood the advisory ballot to be just for an opinion of the people, and he asked why not just have the people decide it rather than have it go back to the Council to decide. Mr. Tanaka explained that there are only two choices the voters can make --whether the City has a Mayor/Council or Council/Manager form of government, and they cannot vote on what the Mayor's salary will be. The Clerk then read aloud the motion from the previous meeting which MOTION: was being considered as follows: "COUNCILMEMBER GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER U� JAECH, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DRAFT AN ADVISORY BALLOT ITEM TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT f -d IN NOVEMBER REGARDING THE FULL-TIME MAYOR POSITION IN 19842 AND FUNDING OF THAT TO BE COMMENSURATE WITH THE POSITION." A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN, WITH COUNCILMEMBERS GOULD, JAECH, ALLEN, AND NAUGHTEN VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCILMEMBERS HALL, KASPER, AND NORDQUIST VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED. An advisory ballot will be funded. HEARING ON PETITION TO VACATE PORTION OF 164TH ST. S.W., LYING BETWEEN 68TH AVE. W. AND NORTH MEADOWDALE RD. (ST-1-82) Planning Director Mary Lou Block stated that this proposed street vacation was heard by the Hearing Examiner March 4, 1982, and his recommendation is that the subdivision be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in his report. The Council had been furnished copies of his report. Ms. Block displayed a map showing the area to be vacated, noting that it is doubtful that a road would ever be built in this area because of the topography. She read aloud the Hearing Examiner's findings of fact and the conditions of his recommendation for approval. The conditions of the site were briefly discussed. The hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the MOTION: hearing was closed. COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO APPROVE ST-1-82, WITH ATTENTION TO THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE COSTS OF THE APPRAISAL TO DETERMINE THE COMPENSATIONS TO THE CITY SHOULD BE BORNE BY THE APPLICANT AND THIS AMOUNT SHOULD BE SUBTRACTED FROM THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION REQUIRED TO BE MADE TO THE CITY. Councilmember Kasper stated that all of the Hearing Examiner's report should go to the appraiser as in this case it is a question of what is the value of the benefit to the property owner. THE MOTION CARRIED. MEETING -WITH PETITIONERS FOR PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF 181ST PL. S:W. Planning Director Mary Lou Block identified the area requested to be annexed. Copies of the 10% petition and the certificate of sufficiency had been provided to the Council. She noted that there is a problem regarding sanitary sewer service for this area. The closest City sewer is in 180th St. S.W. and to transport the sewage to the system would require the construction of a lift station. A more practical solution would be to construct a gravity line south and west across the County roads to 76th Ave. W. and Olympic View Dr. This would require agreements with the County unless the remaining area south of this proposed annexation to Olympic View Dr. were included in this annexation. The City Engingeer was also concerned that the sewage from this area would flow into the Lynnwood sewage treatment plant, and until their plant is upgraded the DOE will not allow any further connections. Although Edmonds is not now using its share of the capacity of the Lynnwood plant, if the north Meadowdale area EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 - May 18. 1982 is sewered there would not be the capacity to sewer this area. Possibly some of the sewage could be diverted to the Edmonds treatment plant or additional capacity purchased from Lynnwood. The Lynnwood City Engineer had indicated that they do not wish to sell Edmonds any additional capacity. The problem of the sewage treatment plant is one which will exist whether or not this area is annexed, the annexation and sewering of this area only causing the problem to occur sooner. Mr. Adams recommended trying to get the area to the south of this annexation also to annex, to include it all in the sewers. He proposed that the future boundary for the City be Olympic View Dr. He believed the reason the petitioners wanted to be annexed was to get sewers. Edward Perkle, 18103 Homeview Dr., said he had moved there approximately four years ago, right after they put in the sewer on 180th. He said he had spent money every year getting his septic tank pumped and cleaning out his basement. His home is on a hill and he does not have room to put in a drainfield. He said he is aware that it will take a while to get sewers but annexing at least would get them one step closer. He said all of the petitioners are having problems. No one else wished to speak. MOTION: COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH,--TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION; THAT ALL PROPERTY WITHIN THE TERRITORY HEREBY SOUGtIT TO BE ANNEXED SHALL BE ASSESSED AND TAXED AT THE SAME RATE AND ON THE SAME BASIS -AS PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS FOR ANY NOW OUTSTANDING%INDEBTEDNESS OF SAID CITY, INCLUDING ASSESS- MENTS OR TAXES IN PAYMENT OF ANY BONDS`ISSUED OR DEBTS CONTRACTED; PRIOR TO OR EXISTING AT THE DATE OF ANNEXATION; AND THAT SIMULTANEOUS ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ZONING -REGULATIONS BE. REQUIRED. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING WITH PETITIONERS FOR PROPOSED ANNEXATION_ OF WOODWAY/WESTGATE/McDONALD'S AREA Planning Director Mary Lou Block identified the area requested to be annexed. Copies of the 10% petition and the certificate of sufficiency had been provided to the Council. Ms. Block called attention to two letters received on the subject from Norman Blatter and from Bill and Enid Sagvold. This area has adequate utilities and streets. The Staff recommended approval. Norman Blatter, 22933 102nd P1. W., said they had been approached by McDonald's and Woodway High School on this annexation, mainly for improved police protection. He said the main concern of the residents is a gate that separates 102nd from Woodway High School, and prior to the installation of the locked gate they had terrible traffic problems on the street because of the high school. Now, he said, the school wishes to open the gate during specific hours because of some complaints from parents who drop their children off there, but the residents want the gate kept closed. Brent Olsen, 22915 102nd P1. W., said he was instrumental in getting the gate installed two years ago, and the overwhelming majority of the people on the street want to keep the gate closed because it has made a world of difference on the street since the gate has been closed. Councilmember Hall said she had taught there and she was aware that the gate not only slows down the traffic but it improves safety on a road that can be very treacherous. Assistant Fire Chief Ron Schirman said the Fire Department has no problem with the closed gate as they carry the necessary tool to cut through it if necessary. Police Chief Marlo Foster said if the gate were open it would be an intolerable situation. He also thought there were things that could be done on 100th to ease the situation there. Councilmember Gould said he would support keeping it as it is and possibly adding signs to indicate local access only. Phil Howard, 22919 102nd P1. W., said he had seen two accidents there --one in his front yard. He said there are elderly persons on the street who walk to the store MOTION: and it is dangerous for them as well as for children. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN, TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION; THAT ALL PROPERTY WITHIN THE TERRITORY HEREBY SOUGHT TO BE ANNEXED SHALL BE ASSESSED AND TAXED AT THE SAME RATE AND ON THE SAME BASIS AS PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS FOR ANY NOW OUTSTANDING INDEBTEDNESS OF SAID CITY, INCLUDING ASSESSMENTS OR TAXES IN PAYMENT OF ANY BONDS ISSUED OR DEBTS CONTRACTED, PRIOR TO OR EXISTING AT THE DATE OF ANNEXATION; THAT SIMULTANEOUS ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ZONING REGULATIONS BE REQUIRED; AND THAT THE GATE REMAIN CLOSED AS PREARRANGED WITH SNOHOMISH COUNTY. Councilmember Kasper asked if the school district is aware of the intent to keep the gate closed, and an unidenti- fied lady in the audience said they are. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 - May 18, 1982 h.