Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-1990-D5777 MISSING DOCUMENT (Tancara Public Utility Easement) This Resolution is Missing • 7/17/90 -2- restrictive parking ordinance- dated 12 /13/83 which limits downtown parking to two hours'of free,use in the commercial district. Richard Andring, 203 South 8th Avenue, spoke to the Council regarding a memorandum which he found objectionable, recently sent to the Council by the Planning Department. He stated the • third paragraph was completely false, and he felt that he was being used. Planning Manager Skone advised the Council that all applications have been withdrawn for this project, and the URS Club will not locate on the property. Susan Andring, 1202 Pleasant, questioned the Council's decision to hire a public relations firm when low income citizens cannot any more tax increases on necessary services. She felt the money would be better spent on the War on Drugs, and then the local citizens could carry a positive message as public relations representatives for the City. Mrs. Andring also felt the City should not cut youth programs to provide funding for the 'Capitol Theatre. She feels the Allied ArtsVan provides a positive program for youth which keeps them off the streets and away from drugs. Helen Williams, • 4303 West " Chestnut, agreed with Mrs. Andring's comments and suggested that volunteer neighborhood information representatives be used rather than hiring a publicrelations firm. Mayor' Berndt observed that the Visioning process will give everyone in the community an opportunity to become involved. City • Manager Zais suggested that interested parties contact the Drug Coalition if they would like to be involved with anti -drug activities and efforts. 8. PUBLIC MEETING TO CONSIDER APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL AT 2401 W. NOB HILL Attorney.Robert Inouye requested postponement of this item due to the illness.of Craig Smith, the applicant's attorney. Mr. Inouye requested continuance of both the appeal of the Hearing Examiner's May 18th decision, and the May 25th petition to revoke the permit. It was MOVED BY BUCHANAN, SECONDED BY SIMS, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC MEETING 7O AUGUST 7, 1990. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote. Barnett absent.' • 6. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING VACATION OF-PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT IN TANCARA DEVELOPMENT - This being the date set for public hearing, Director of Engineering and Utilities Dennis Covell'stated that RCW 58.17.212 requires a public hearing for consideration of vacation of a public utility easement. He stated that the easement is not used, nor deemed to be necessary, by the City.. None of the public'or private utilities have indicated a need for the utility easement. Staff has made a recommendation for vacation of the utility easement.' Mayor Berndt opened the public hearing and asked if there was anyone present to speak in favor of the vacation. Dennis Kelly, 530 Hennessey Road, stated the utility easement is not being used and he has letters • from all. utilities stating they have no need for the easement at this time or in the future. Mayor Berndt asked if there was anyone present to speak in opposition to the vacation. There being no AAD /2 7/17/90 -3- 5 7 further comment, the Mayor closed the public hearing. Resolution No. D -5777, having been read by title, it was MOVED BY BUCHANAN, SECONDED BY PECHTEL, THAT THE.RESOLUTION BE PASSED. The motion . carried by unanimous roll call vote. Barnett absent.. • RESOLUTION NO. 5777, A RESOLUTION vacating a _public utility • easement upon petition of James R. Baldwin.; 7. PUBLIC MEETING REGARDING APPEAL OF CLASS III DECISION BY HEARING EXAMINER FOR DEVELOPMENT IN VICINITY OF 2309 W. NOB HILL This being the date set for public meeting, Supervising Associate Planner Joan '.Davenport explained that this is an appeal of a final decision made by the Hearing Examiner at a public hearing on April 18, 1990. The development was a Class II action in the B -2 zoning district, but was referred - for public hearing due to the technical issues as welLas known neighborhood concerns. The final Hearing Examiner decision issued on May 8th included 11 specific .conditions of. approval, incorporating the,. staff .report and recommendations. Ms. Davenport stated that the site plan was revised., five times during review process, a large number of public comments were made, and a mitigated DNS issued by the City • included a number of mitigation measures. Ms. Davenport stated that this is a very .complicated file which took a long time to process. The challenge to staff and the Hearing Examiner was to be responsive to all the interests. The appeal that was filed raised 26 specific issues, and staff identified at least 17 that were addressed in the final decision. Staff recommendation is for the Council to uphold. the Hearing Examiner's decision. - • Mayor Berndt opened the public meeting and asked if there was • anyone present to speak in favor of the appeal. Linda Garcia, 1014 South 24th Avenue,.stated that the-appeal- was filed because the . North. Nob Hill Neighborhood Coalition felt that the Hearing Examiner did not consider the specific items they feel need to be , addressed. She asked the Council to address these areas and to • make a decision to mitigate these_concerns since they were ignored in •the.Hearing Examiner's decision. She felt the'Hearing Examiner • .adequately addressed only five of their.26 concerns. Laura Blank, 1018 South 24th.Avenue, wants to be sure that commercial business in the area is compatible with the 'residential neighborhood. She feels the. City should listen.to_the people who live in the area and have •. deal with the. lighting,' signs, dumpsters and • inconenient hours of operation. She,was also concerned with the • ,problems the neighbor's will experience. during construction such as dust, -noise and.power. outages. Rosemary Small;. 1006 South 25th Avenue, felt that(she knows the needs of the neighborhood better than the Planning Department, the developer or,the City Council. She is concerned,that.the quality,of life in the neig hborhood will suffer if the Coalition's concerns are not mitigated. She stated that extensive written comment had been submitted on the SEPA • checklist for this project, but she.was told the.staff report was prepared two days prior to _the end of the SEPA comment period when most .of the Coalition's written 'comments had yet to be . delivered to City. Hall. .Mrs. Small stated that the Hearing Examiner's decision resolved only two of. the 26 concerns. The ,Coalition has offered _ a'.solution for each problem they have AAD /3