3116 COLBY AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

j,. f . ,� � ' � � • 595 . . % ` � � . . . December 19� 1979 . � ' Roll was called on the main motion to grant the Permit, with Councilmen . . �Langus, Overstreet, Gipson and Aldcroft voting .yes, and Councilmen Pope, � NJichelson' and Baker voting rio. . . . . � . : . Moti�7n Carried . . � I ORDINkNCE _555 APPEAL�- �(CB '7912=536)•--� ' , ' • - � • • � i ' Fivgh Warren reported an appeal had been received from the William Hulbert .- Mill Company who proposes to construct a parking lot at 3116 Colby. � He = �sai3 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 ' to match the 'existing im- � provement instaYled by Washington Mutual. The alley improvement was - required to lessen the impact of zdditional traffic. Extensive cracks in � the sidewalk are showing signs of failure which will result in further , heaved ledqes and imme3iate replacement is necessary for safety. The• ' curbs have completely failed and rec�uire replacement. The applicant be- _ � lieves the .parking facility will be replaced by a residential structure � in the near future and that the heavy equigment used to build the structur.e � will destroy the required improvements and requested the requirement he , waived. If a parking facility is constructed, there is no assurance that I • it will be replaced in the foreseen future. He said alternatives available include: . 1) Waive requirements of the P4C 13.08.O10 and Ordinance 555-78 • without any change to existing public improvements as requested . by the applicant. ' 2) (a) Require replacement of hazardous sidewalk and Power of . - : Attorney for remaining improqements. ', � •, �� " "" (b) Replacement of sidewalk and curb and P.O.A. for remain•ing . •, • � improvements. (In that intregal pour• of sidewalY. and curb ' will reduce the cost of separate replacement) • � - . 3) Require an L.I.D. Power of Attorney for replacement of. all im-� ' provements. 4) . Require' standard application of public improvemenis including � • alley, sidewalk and curb as required by Declaration of Non- ' Significance and Ordinance 555-78. , 5) Require alley ir�?rovements no�v and Po�ver of Attorney ior. . sidewalk improved. • He said their reco�r,mendation i� that Council• accegt A1L•ernate $�, to• . require compliance witi� applicable City codes and regulations. Councilman Pope asked if this was contrary to what �the Committee�was working on at the present, and the answ^.r w,:s that they were not ad- dressing this issue at all. � . � �. Councilman Overstreet asked if the retaining wall wouJ.d be ].ef:t, and � Mr. Warren replied yes that the parking lot would be aL- Ll�e tan ].evel ' of the .property. -. , Vennie Boushaw, of Keta Construction, representing the developer, said this had been proposed for construction of an apartment hause ]>ut• 1�e- � � cause of financing this was not beinq constructed at ihis t:i.me. Iie f:elt that if 'the sidewalk o:ere required, at such time as l:he apar.tmet�t house were constructed, sewer and water lines would have to go across the sicle- wal,k and the r.ew sidewllk riould be destroyed. He also felt' a good pozt•ion of the alley was in good condition and did not need impr.ovemeni:, lie di.d - ' agree that the curb ne�ded repairing and agreed to do ihi.s, • '�'��_.�_•"�.l"��'�.`�Ty�'? -��-�"-�s�..t��_.r� v.�,Mr� �� ra.�.�+r!�:4.y. ; ^"�.'-(:S�w�ss.�a . . - . . . ��$.r..'^v'..�`y!�� ...-�._� . n. , i"ti..c....F. .:.Y. r -t+'f�-�'.a Y� ti_:;./-`,ti�a. - __`-� `___-_- -