HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-02-11 OPH Email Re Walgreens Procedural IssuesMark and Scott:
The Mayor would like to add the Walgreen's application to the City Council meeting of 2112102.
As you are aware, Semper Development on behalf of Walgreen's has submitted a revised site
plan for their application to the City. Since their application has changed since the original
Planning Commission approval as a result this item will be placed on the Planning Commission
agenda of 2121102.
I have two questions:
1. Since this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission, does it need to
go the City Council first before being redirected back to the Planning Commission?
2. Since the public hearing was closed on 101'11101, do we need to advertise for another public
hearing/re-open the public hearing before a re- consideration?
Thanks!
For your edification: A Brief History:
A site plan, CUP and variance request was considered at the Planning Commission and a
recommending resolution was passed at their meeting of 1 0111101. At the Planning Commission
meeting, staff was notified that a property ownership issue was being brought forth by the
neighboring property owner.
At the meeting I informed the Planning Commission that the property ownership submitted to us
by the applicant was consistent with the property ownership list provided by Washington County.
Both showed that Jim Bradshaw /Bradshaw funeral home was the owner of the property being
considered. Since that time, investigation revealed that an unrecorded real estate transaction
had taken place and the owner of the shared access /easement area was Dr. Fred Kalinoff.
Walgreen's site plan now reflects all constructed improvements to be on their property (does not
encroach on easement area).
Updates on this project were provided at several City Council and Planning Commission
meetings since 10111101.