3116 COLBY AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

. ,. � � • . . � • 595 �� . , ' . � ` ` � • ' / ' . . . • - � • � . December 19, 1979 . , ' Roll was called on the main motion to grant the Permit, with Councilmen .� �Langus, 9verstreet, Gipson and Aldcrof.c voting yes, and Councilmen Pooe, �lichelson' and Baker voting rio. _ . ! � � " , , . Motion Carried . _ . • ' • '' • i ORDINANCE�555 APPEAL�- (CB-7912=536)--� ' . • . - � ' Hugh t�arren reported an appeal had been received from the William Hulbert .' Mill Company who proposes to construct a parking lot at 3116 Colby. He .= . _ �said the Declaration of Non-Significance and Ordinance 555-78 require the applicant to replace the oil shot alley adjacent to the site with a ' standard asphalt alley and extended north 50 ' fco match the existinq im- � provement installed by Washington Mutual. The alley improvement was � zequired to lessen the impact of additional traffic. Extensive cracks in the sidewalk are showing signs of failure which will result• in further heaved ledges and imme3iate replacement is necessazy for safety. The• • � curbs have completely failed and require replacement. The applicant be- , lieves the .parking facility will be replaced by a residential structure in the near future and that the heavy equipment used to build the structur.e will destroy the required improvements and requested the r.equirement be waived. If a parking facility is constructed, there is �no assurance that • it will be replaced in the foreseen future. He said alternatives available ' include: � 1) Waive requirements of the MC 13.08 .O10 and ordinance 555-78 � � � without any change to existing public improvements as requested . by the applicant. � . •. � i ' 2) (a) Require replacement of hazardous sidewalk and Power of . . ' ; • : Attorney for remaining inprovements. . .. � �"'' ~ (b) Replacement of sidewalk and curb and P.O.A. for remaining . •. - � li improvements. (In that intregal pour� of sidewa].Y, and curb � � will reduce the cost of separate replacemenl:) " � . 3) Require an L.I.D. Power of Attorney for replacement of. aJ.l im-' ' provements. . . 4) . Require' standard applicatior� of public improvec�ents including � � � alley, sideivalk and curb as required by Declaration of Non- � Significance and Ordinance 555-78. , , 5) Require alley it�arovements now and Power of Attort�ey Eor. ' . sidewalk improved. ' . - He said their recommendation is that Council• accept Alternate $4 , to• . • i xequire compliance witlt applicable City codes and regulations. _ . Councilman Pope asked if this was contrary to what �the CommitL•ee� was ` ; working on at the present, and the answer was that they were not ad- dressing this issue at all. , ' ' " r. Councilman Overstreet asked if the retaining wall caould I>e 7.ef.t, and ' Mr. Warren replied yes that the pa:king lot would be aL• L•l�e toP 3.eveJ. ' of the .property„ , ' • Vennie B�iusha�o, of Keta Construction, representing the developer, said : tllis had been proposed for construction of an apartment house but I�e- cause of financing this was not being constructed at ihis i:i.me. Iie f:e].t that if 'the sidewalk o:ere required, at such ti:ne as the apar.tment hause were constructed, sewes and water lines would have to qo across the side- walk and the new sidew-xlk would be destroyed. He also fe1L-' a good por.tion of the alley was in good condition and did not need imnr.ovemenL•. Iie di.d • ' agree that the curb ne�ded repairing and agreed to do 1:h3.s. - - - - — � - �` - -