Laserfiche WebLink
August 26, 2021 <br />To: Everett City Council and Dan Eernissee, Economic Development Director <br />RE: Proposed Amendments to Home Occupation Regulations <br />I have the following concerns regarding the proposed amendments to the home occupation regulations: <br />1. A resident across the street from me was in the tow truck business and was being dispatched out of his <br />home. There was no activity occurring on the property other than him receiving phone calls or texts, but the <br />tow truck was parked in the street and was very noisy when warming up or idling for long periods, including <br />hours at a time. This occurred all times of the day and night, and woke us up multiple times at night. The <br />noise from the truck truly disturbed our sleep/well-being. The proposed code would limit hours of <br />operation of a business, but a tow truck business should not be allowed to operate in residential zones even <br />in daytime hours. I don't see anything in the proposed code that would prohibit that use. Please add tow <br />truck dispatch to the list of prohibited home occupations in Title 19.05.067.J. <br />2. I'm concerned that the proposal opens up residential neighborhoods to uses that allow more employees and <br />customer visits, such as barber and beauty shops, retail, etc. Everett commercial zones are underutilized. <br />Allowing commercial uses as home occupations takes away opportunities for commercial properties to <br />prosper, and provides an unfair advantage to commercial uses operating from homes vs. commercial areas. <br />These are the types of uses the City needs to locate on ground floors of mixed use buildings to make those <br />building types successful. Please don't allow additional commercial uses in residentially zoned areas. <br />3. I have major concerns regarding the cumulative impacts of multiple changes that Everett is proposing that <br />affect parking availability. The Rethink Housing proposals provide for higher densities in residential areas <br />and would require less or no parking (such as for accessory dwelling units and in residential areas near <br />transit zones). Many of the housing units in older parts of Everett already have minimal parking and rely on <br />on -street parking. The proposal would allow commercial uses with employees and clients as home <br />occupations, with no additional parking required. The cumulative impacts of these actions on existing single <br />family neighborhoods could be significant. The SEPA review for the proposal did not provide any analysis of <br />the proposed impacts to parking on residential areas. The impacts could be significantly more adverse in <br />single family neighborhoods near institutional facilities, such as Providence Hospital and Everett Community <br />College, where parking supply is already stressed. Please don't allow commercial employees and <br />customers in residential areas without required on -site parking. <br />4, I don't see any way for the City's enforcement staff to monitor businesses to see if they meet the proposed <br />standards of no more than 2 on -site employees, no more than 2 customers or clients on site at any time, <br />and not more than ten customers or clients on the property on any day. Would they sit in their cars from 8 <br />AM to 6 PM to monitor who comes and goes? Put cameras in alleys to see who is entering the house from <br />alleys? Or would neighbors be required to do that in order to request enforcement action? Please don't <br />make enforcement actions difficult/impossible for City enforcement staff and neighbors. <br />5. My gut reaction is that I don't want to see gun and ammunition sales occurring in my neighborhood. Are <br />there any studies or statistics addressing increases in home robberies or other crimes if gun sales are <br />allowed in urban residential areas? <br />Thank you for considering my comments. <br />Mary Cunningham, 1605 Oakes Ave, Everett, WA 98201 teamwebermc@gmail.com <br />