Laserfiche WebLink
34 <br />. January 25,1904 <br /> PUBLIC HEARING-BOLSER REZONE <br /> Gerry Erin,,of the Planning Department,briefly reviewed the <br /> background'of this proposed rezone to date. The ProPerties in- <br /> t- I volved are 3 single-family lots abutting Fleming behind the <br /> Bolser Tire operation at ssm Evergreen Nay. The rear portion <br /> of these lots will be used for tire storage and movement of <br /> materials and the rentals fronting Fleming will be left to <br /> retain the single family character of the neighborhood. He <br /> explained this would be a contract rezone with 22 conditions <br /> I which the Bolser's had signed,but had stricken off conditions <br /> 12 and f3 which pertain to street improvements on Evergreen <br /> Way and performance guarantee required by the City. Removal <br />, , of these conditions are not acceptable to staff unless Council <br /> waives them. <br /> Councilman Gipson asked about the Wagner property at 5425 FlemIng <br /> and Mr.Ervine replied it had been inoluded in the rezone au it <br /> is located directly adjacent to the car lot and it was probably <br /> just a matter of time before it would be converted to 00120use. <br />/ 1 Councilman Langus suggested that a greenbelt be planted next to <br /> the fence to hide the tire operation from the view of neighbors <br /> and Mx.Ervine said this might be Roaaible. <br /> 20 0102100,Mr.Ervine explained that this rezone issue had been <br /> to court several times and the Superior Court has now decreed that <br /> the City grant the rezone subject to reasonable conditions. <br /> Walt Sellers,Assistant City Attorney,spoke on the background <br /> leading up to 002 0200001 judgment. He said at this 00000 018 <br /> issue under discussion was the conditions themselves and whether <br /> they were"reasonable and necessary conditions as are required <br /> by law,or required to mitigate any actual nuisance which will <br /> result 2022 206 plaintiff's use of the subject proerty in the <br /> manner proposed in plaintiff's said application for rezone,after <br />, considering the hearing examiner's record". <br /> 1 1 <br /> President Stephenson asked if there could be a problem if <br /> Councilman Morrow participated in this process and Mr.Sellers <br /> replied there could be as he had not taken part in the original <br /> public hearings. <br /> pot.Ferguson,attorney for the proponent,said he did not see <br /> any problem with this,especially if Councilman Morrow had read <br /> and reviewed the material. <br /> Councilman Morrow then stated he had done so and would like to <br /> participate. <br /> Celia Strong,of the Public Works Department,spoke cn the <br /> conditions in question,referring to the Evergreen Way Study <br /> and Ordinance 555 as it has been applied to Evergreen WaY. <br /> She then pointed out various properties that had been required to <br /> install street improvements on Evergreen Way,such as Humphrey <br /> Volkswagen,the Curran PrePertY,Wren WeYer, Lane and <br /> Phase II of the Cascade Shopping Center. The rationale for <br /> requiring the street improvements in this case was the Bolser <br /> property consisted of a single economic unit. She also <br /> pointed out this condition for rezone already existed before <br /> going to court in the Hearing Examiner's recommendations to <br /> Council. <br />