AUDIO & SUMMARY: Sultan Hearing Examiner John Galt's Monday, May 8, 2006, 2 PM hearing for AJ's PLACE, a 39-unit condominium Conditional Use (binding site plan)
All files in MP3 format, playable on Windows Mediaplayer or other MP3-compatible digital device.
For more info on meetings and hearings, visit our TRANSCRIPTION page
Also visit our COUNCIL QUICKIES page
File A (1.0 mb, 9 min.): Hearing open, rules of procedures, list of exhibits
File B (1.2 mb, 24 min.) Applicant's Presentation (Don Miller)
File C - Attorney Dennis Jordan re concurrency issues (in two parts: Part #1, 1.3 mb, 11:06 min; Part #2, 1.6 mb, 13:33 min.) (Cites city's burden under RCW 82.02.020 and "benchmark" decision as Battleground at 146 WA2nd 695 relative to timing of 82.02.020 (1990) and city's SMC 16.108.060 (1995).
File D (522 kb., 24 min.) City staff presentation, represented by Rick Cisar
File E (1.0 mb., 8:08 min.) Public Testimony, Ron Kraut (re driveway, onsite access definitions and consistency with Sultan's design code.)
File F (1.3 mb, 11:28 min) Public Testimony, Josie Fallgatter (re LOS/traffic impacts; comments re landscaping, lighting, DRB questioning additional review after Galt's decision has been published; confusion over staff report/buffers/BAS; problems with LOS not due to SMC's ordinance but failure of city to reassess their land use plan (ref. CP, Pg 59)
File G (1.0 mb, 8:47 min.) Public Testimony by L. Storm (clarif. re sidewalk improvements) and Mary Jackson re 16-foot easement
File H - Galt questions/request for clarification on testimony, in three parts:
- Part #1 (470 kb, 4:00 min.) Date application deemed complete; frontage improvements, request to clarify size of planter, etc.
- Part #2 (655 kb, 5:35 min.) Parks concurrency issues
- Part #3 (600 kb., 5:10 min.) Police concurrent/LOS
Galt questions re Recommendations of Approval:
File I (702 kb, 6:00 min.) Clarification Cond. #4 re HOA compliance as a plat; it's a BSP, not a plat; Cond. #8, dedication of 1.7 ac parks to city, given City's new "surplus" of parkland, still valid? (RC-yes); does city view 16.018 as concurrency requirement (RC, yes, 16.108.72); Cond. #9, wetland mitigation should be five years, not three.
File J (653 kb, 5:34 min.) Re stopping versus design speeds by Gibson Traffic Engineers
File K (1.7 mb, 14:17 min.) Discussion re Internal Driveway standards (states without 60-foot entrance, developer could add another unit to development)
File L (1.2 mb, 9:50 min.) DRB recommendations; re conflict/flaw in review process, as pointed out by J. Fallgatter; Why didn't Gibson include anlaysis for High/1st St. impacts; questions re lighting.
File M (412 kb, 3:30 min.) Re wetland buffers; standards have no weight now since "innovative design" codes eliminated by council.
(HEARING ADJOURNED FOR A 10-MIN. BREAK)
File N (636 kb., 5:25 min.) Miller statements re serwer/water lines, possible rev. of units to 3-br; Cisar's rebuttal re water line; comments re speed limit, bud. amend re new Police staff; prededence re BSP revisions after council approval.
File O (695 kb, 5:55 min.) Rebuttal by L. Storm/Josie Fallgatter
File P (669 kb, 5:42) Galt statements re council's authority and his interpretation of legislative action, i.e., re council's action in essesntially eliminating the "innovative design" in PUD code. Cites Court of Appeals case he was involved in: Balser Investments re Snohomish County.
File Q (284 kb, 2:25) Public rebuttal, Ron Kraut and Attroney Jackson re police and park concurrency.
Hearing adjourned at 4:58 PM