Laserfiche WebLink
Im- <br />7 <br />Luther Child Center <br />Special Property Use Permit 7-84 <br />Page -7- <br />24. The witness (Dahl) testified that Condition #3 was not a <br />proper condition of approval. According to the witness, <br />if the City desires an easement, they should have to <br />negotiate with the Applicant rather than making it a <br />condition of approval of a Special Property Use Permit. <br />25. A witness (Gould) testified to be on the Board of <br />Directors of the Luther Child Center. The witness <br />submitted that there is a need for the requested use and <br />he supported the Special Property Use Permit. The <br />witness was in opposition to the conditions of approval <br />because there was, according to the witness, no <br />justification for them being required. <br />26. A witness (idorgan) testified to be in supportof <br />the <br />will <br />project. According to the witness, the project <br />serve the community needs. However, the dedication of <br />right-of-way on the southeast and northeast corners of <br />the Applicant's property is not rational because the <br />subject building is over one -fifth of a mile from the <br />right-of-way. <br />27. A witness (Stahl) testified to be in opposition to the <br />condition for dedication of right-of-way. He objected <br />to the widening of the road as proposed by the City. <br />28. Witnesses were allowed an additional week to submit <br />written remarks to the Everett Hearing Examiner with <br />regard to the proposal. on July 24, 1984, Virgil Morgan <br />submitted a letter of comment in support of the <br />Applicant's proposal. According to the witness, the <br />proposal will utilize an existing facility with no <br />impact to the neighborhood and will fill an important <br />need. The witness also submitted that there were no <br />objections to the staff recommendation and Conditions #3 <br />and #4. However, the witness objected to recommended <br />Condition #2 as not being a proper condition of <br />approval, but a method for straightening and widening an <br />existing "S" turn located at the northeast corner of <br />Luther Child Center's property. According to the <br />witness, the improvement of the "S" turn would have a <br />negative impact on the neighborhood because of the <br />additional traffic that would result from the action. <br />29. Witness (Morgan) also submitted that it was improper to <br />require the Applicant to go through the Special Property <br />Use he <br />ull <br />agreementlwithothesrequ rewhen quest there oisoa is in f <br />need for the <br />diagnostic clinic. <br />