2016-044-resolution - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

15.5 15.6 15.7 15 .8 15.9 15.10 15.11 15.12 15.13 15.14 15.15 15.16 15.17 15.18 15.19 15.20 15.21 15.22 15.23 15.24 15.25 15.26 15.27 15.28 15.29 15.30 15.31 15.32 15.33 15.34 15.35 15.36 15.37 Exhibit 5. Exhibit 6. Exhibit 7. Exhibit 8. Exhibit 9. Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11. Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13. Exhibit 14. Exhibit 15. Exhibit 16. Exhibit 17. Exhibit 18. Exhibit 19. Exhibit 20. Exhibit 21. Exhibit 22. Exhibit 23. Exhibit 24. Exhibit 25. Exhibit 26. Exhibit 27. Exhibit 28. Exhibit 29. Exhibit 30. Exhibit 31. Exhibit 32. Exhibit 33. Exhibit 34. Exhibit 35. Exhibit 36. Exhibit 37. Deem Incomplete Email Staff Review (CA Checklist and GIS Maps) Additional Info -landowner info and signature Deem Complete letter Deem Complete email Affidavit of posting_unsigned Affidavit of posting_signed Email request of notification - J Matthews Notice of Application -memo Notice of Application -legal Affidavit of mailing & publication -Notice of Application DOH Comment Letter KC CDS Building Comment Letter KC DPW Concurrency Determination KC DPW Comment Memo J. Matthews Comment Letter DOE Comment Letter Transmitta l of Comments -Letter Transmittal of Comments -email Notice of Applicatioll -Returned mail (Gibson) DR copy of publication -Notice of Applicatiotl Transportation Concur."ncy Management Application Email ,correspondence between CDS & Applicant-1.8 .16 SEPA DNS DR copy of publication -Notice of SEPA Action Notice of SEPA Action and Public Hearing -memo & legal Affidavit of Mailing & Publication -Notice of SEPA Action & Public Hearing DOH & KC EH LATE comments -1.14.16 -- Email correspondence between J. Sharar & CDS -1.22.16 Hearing Examiner Agenda Hearing Examiner Staff Report Staff Power Poirtt Presentation January 29, 2016 ema-iI from Lindsay Ozbolt to Ole applicant. 16. Appearing and testifYing on behalf of the applicant was Ninon W heatley. Ms. Wheatley testified that she's not the property owner but is the applicant fol' this project. She testified that she has the property owner's written permission to make thi s application and to conduct the activities on the property. Ms. \¥heatley testified that weddings are not contemplated as part of this project. She testified that all of the proposed Conditions of Approval were acceptable. 17 . Appearing and testirying from the public were the following individuals: 17.1 Sheryl Grunden. Ms. Grunden testified that she was in favor of this project and saw it as a positive addition to the community of Thorp. 17.2 John Matthews. Mr. Matthews spoke generally in opposition to the project. Mr. Matthews testified that his handwritten letter, Exhib it 20, was written on behalf of the Water District. He had concerns as to the amount of impervious surface that will be on the project and whether stormwater would be treated or contained on site. His CU-15·00003 Wheatley Page 3 of 13