A group of Angeline Heights residents are upset about how property north of their subdivision was rezoned for high-density housing.

That became evident April 14, as residents spoke during a “citizen comment” portion of the agenda, before the Bonney Lake City Council passed the ordinance to change zoning on a nearly one-acre parcel of land from single-family to high-density residential. The vote was 6-0 with Councilman James Rackley abstaining.

Landowner Joshua Hulburt’s parcel is on 184th Avenue East, southwest of state Route 410. Angeline Heights borders the southern boundary of Hulburt’s property.

High-density residential zoning allows for apartments, townhouses, nursing homes and group homes up to 20 units per acre.

A Comprehensive Plan amendment was approved in December that changed the site from single-family to high-density, as requested by Hulburt. A public hearing took place March 6 on the requested rezone.

According to a report and recommendation from Hearing Examiner Stephen Causseaux Jr., Hulburt testified during the public hearing that he wants to remove an existing house and put senior housing on the property.

Steve Boerstler, representing the Angeline Heights Homeowners Association, testified that the association and Hulburt had reached an agreement whereby the association would have design review rights on any construction on the site.

Also in the report, Hulburt’s attorney, John Blanchard, testified his client and the Angeline Heights group had reached an informal working understanding but Hulburt made no agreement that would limit what he could do with his property.

Addressing the council, resident Sara Tienery asked that members “carefully consider” the proposed zone change. She said the land was purchased by Hulburt several years ago and had been subdivided into four parcels, but the landowner had never built on it.

Residents said they have concerns about increased traffic and noise.

“It affects the neighborhood,” Tienery said. “We are frustrated because every time we make our concerns clear, we get shut down.”

Tienery said the subdivision residents are unhappy with the entire process.

“We don’t get notices and we had to make all the inquiries,” she said. “We’re not attorneys. We don’t have the funds to hire attorneys. The bottom line is we are concerned how did this get this far in the stage of getting it range-free. Our only avenue – if you approve it tonight – is to go to the Supreme Court.”

She said residents would have made appeals on the map change, but they were told by the applicant he was going to build a “little nursing home.”

“We now have traffic concerns, we have noise concerns and setback concerns,” Tienery added. “There are lots of concerns.”

She said the ordinance is for Hulburt’s personal and financial gain and not good for the city.

Hulbert told the council he has been working hard on the property for four years and that he plans to work with Angeline Heights residents.

“I know they (residents) didn’t get the conditions and everything they wanted in writing, but I’m still planning to work with them,” Hulburt said. “I want to make sure it’s a positive outcome for the neighborhood.”

Residents shook their heads “no” as Hulburt spoke to the council.

Before the vote, City Attorney Kathleen Haggarty told the council when they take action on a site-specific rezone, they’re acting in their quasi-judical capacity as “judge.”

Haggerty explained the council’s decision had to be based on the public hearing, findings and recommendations from the hearing examiner. Under the city code, the hearing examiner was appointed to conduct the public hearing on the council’s behalf.

She said, under terms of the city code, the council could take comments, but advised them not to let statements impact their decision.

Residents had one minute to comment on the matter.

“You can listen to them, but they are not to form part of your decision making,” Haggerty added. “It’s just to allow members of the community to have a voice.”

Before the comment period, Councilman James Rackley’s motion to move the issue to a workshop failed 5-2.

During public comments, Boerstler said a verbal agreement existed between the homeowners and a representative for Hulburt.

“He told us he would put in writing, that our HOA would have design review,” Boerstler said. During a public hearing, the association didn’t oppose the rezone request because of the verbal agreement, he said.

“We didn’t find out until afterward that the deal fell through and that he (Hulburt) had no intention, whatsoever, of keeping his word he promised us and shook his hand on,” Boerstler said. “Now it’s ‘residents you’re screwed. I can do whatever I want.’ The citizens have no voice.”

Jerri Bartholomew echoed Boerstler’s claim about a verbal agreement between the association and the property owner.

Rackley said he attended the negotiations between the homeowners and the developer, explaining why he was abstaining from voting on the ordinance.

Deputy Mayor Dan Swatman, filling in for Mayor Neil Johnson, said he wasn’t aware of anything that would stop Hulburt from exercising his right to develop his property how he wants, if it were rezoned.

“All the time in matters like this, there are winners and losers,” Swatman said.

He added the city’s Design Review Committee will be involved in the ultimate use of the property.

While leaving council chambers after the vote, Boerstler stood in the doorway and shouted, “Developers win, citizens lose.”