Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> 9. The lot area of the subject property is 25,202.1 square feet. The maximum <br /> percentage coverage allowed is 40 percent or 10,080.88 square feet. The <br /> proposed building coverage of the site based on the Applicant's plans is 2,564 <br /> square feet or 10.17 percent of the entire site. (exhibit 15, revised site plan, page <br /> 1; testimony of Ms. Weldon) <br /> 10. In order for the variance to be granted, the criteria as set forth in EMC <br /> 19.41.130.0 must be satisfied. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3) <br /> 11. As required by local and state law, notice was given to property owners within the <br /> general vicinity (500 feet of the subject property), and was published in the <br /> Everett Herald. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3; exhibit 11, affidavit of posting; <br /> exhibit 12, affidavit of publication) <br /> 12. The City received three comment letters. One of the responses was from an <br /> abutting property owner (Beglau) concerned about the location of the southern <br /> property line and the removal of trees. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3; exhibit 8, <br /> comment letters, page 1) Another individual (Frey) questioned whether the <br /> height variance would impact views from her home at 4523 Seahurst Avenue. <br /> (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3; exhibit 8, comment letters, pages 2 and 3; <br /> testimony of Ms. Frey) The other comment letter (Schmitz) submitted that the <br /> requirement for the height limits should remain and the variance be denied. <br /> (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3; exhibit 8, comments letters, page 4) <br /> 13. The Applicant submitted.that the property owners immediately south of the <br /> subject property (Beglau) received a copy of the proposed site plan that depicts • <br /> the southern boundaries of the subject property. The site plan included drawings <br /> locating trees that are to be removed and the ones that will stay. The trees that <br /> are to be removed are near the building site and consist of alders and some <br /> diseased maples. The remaining cedar and hemlock trees will remain and <br /> provide protection of the adjoining property and the slope from slippage. (exhibit <br /> 9, applicant's response, page 1) <br /> 14. • The Applicant responded to the Frey submittal by contending that the removal of <br /> the trees would be a benefit because some of the high vegetation would be <br /> removed, and a view of the Sound would be available from the second story of <br /> Ms. Frey's home. In response to Ms. Schmitz's comments, the Applicant stated <br /> that the variance is needed because the location of the site requires a daylight <br /> basement to support the proposed structure. The variance would allow the <br /> proposed house to be seen from the street at approximately the same level as <br /> neighboring houses, and the house would be more in line with existing designs of <br /> homes in the neighborhood. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3; exhibit 9, applicant's <br /> response, page 2) <br /> 4/) <br />