Laserfiche WebLink
309 <br /> April 30,1980 <br /> 5. he.density of <br /> • <br /> s in the units indicated as 2 <br /> onplex the ted on October 24,.197,and storystructures <br /> the <br /> duplexYstructuress e increased vl he limy g 5 e. The <br /> Cocome <br /> back uncilman a askater and ed if were • <br /> rezone <br /> open space <br /> approved i someone <br /> the <br /> to the Council forapproval.Seid e d tinthe <br /> nom back <br /> sheekeyrepresenting the the <br /> supports <br /> rez <br /> onean . wnex agreedto conditions set <br /> theite honsing <br /> . Said type of p en theylagvo direct access Blvd.a.will <br /> down <br /> through bor eoa and there are identified effects onpublic service or schools. <br /> • <br /> In <br /> out the <br /> pointing <br /> change conditions, s was <br /> adopted i rezonedirectlynproperty.to <br /> The has been <br /> according this e s <br /> e north <br /> south <br /> owhe „ adjacent wood py, titnew wlhretEdateat time the question w asked Vi <br /> • <br /> Pla <br /> om <br /> o Wood Place and the <br /> that the R-3 could sYcseoubeleobenr49[hththrough 1 n d for this. t4r.5hockey felt this w indicationbexpanded to this plat adjacent to49th where it was R-1 single fam y density, <br /> He salt,there i r...sing in the a.the <br /> economics <br /> of <br /> t " wage <br /> feao <br /> occ <br /> The d h d mein wwners <br /> upied d e price range i50 ehrhitabhousingpeople whowouldbe unable to purchase homes in a single family a a. <br /> I In <br /> health miniums are more energYwelfare and safer of citizens issue, - •'•meeting the <br /> • <br /> The <br /> ct is located where <br /> public <br /> ortation is available. He <br /> id <br /> would be no <br /> • <br /> strain.napublic servicesschool an traffic would lso enot be. ted. I. <br /> He in wine Meda saying h this schools <br /> justified r ice fits I <br /> opponents f t comprehensive planta any impacts a �' <br /> nen s o project are cont can be identified and corrected. <br /> waoke vn fa 41t a rez ne d owner of so p p rty in the area, • <br /> arePesttthP <br /> because fcitizens who°r . e theseP deededtogh they w g e developments played thisin of <br /> of the <br /> Planning <br /> broughtCommission, the Planning Commission <br /> hearing March 5thtlmember Commissiond been placed,and again they rejected the rezone. <br /> ,when <br /> of <br /> He referred to the Halprin Plan which designates one to five units <br /> Per acre as opposedsto 10 units per.acre as proposed by <br /> '. <br /> h this <br /> multiple family <br /> dwellings should be b <br /> corridor <br /> • <br /> and Mukilteo Blvd.was not listed as a major transportation corridor. <br />