Laserfiche WebLink
35. Applicant representatives also responded to public comment, submitting the following <br />information. The developer would provide sanicans through vertical construction and <br />secure the site with fencing. The proposed landscape plan does include native species. <br />The Applicant is working with the City on off-street parking, to ensure the project meets <br />applicable codes. The proposal does not seek to increase building height above what is <br />allowed by code. The existing elevation of the site would be reduced between two and <br />eight feet. Currently there is a high spot in the middle, and all of the height would be <br />reduced to provide useable building area. The code allows the buildings to be 35 feet <br />above finished grade so long as they meet setbacks. The Applicant is aware of view and <br />bulk/mass concerns and is designing features including roof pitch and various fagade <br />treatments to address the apparent scale of the buildings while still meeting density. The <br />project proposes to prohibit short term rentals of the individual townhome units, which <br />would be fee simple tots, and owners would otherwise have the same rights as owners of <br />surrounding residential development. The Applicant does not intend to prohibit long <br />term rentals. Applicant representatives agreed with City responses regarding the use of <br />geotechnical engineering to design any required retaining walls, which would have any <br />necessary drainage incorporated into their design. Addressing the concerns of neighbors <br />with existing structures with nonconforming setbacks, the Applicant is aware of these <br />structures and intends to have conversations with those property owners when it comes <br />time to make arrangements for neighbors to be able to access their structures. Regarding <br />groundwater from the east, an Applicant representative testified that the offsite basin has <br />been modeled and the Applicant is aware that there will be a lot of offsite water that goes <br />through the project's system. The proposed vault is not intended to be an infiltration <br />vault. The discharge frorn the project would be required to match the runoff from the site <br />if it were forested. Testimony of Albert Torrico and Andy Reaves. <br />36. Having heard all testimony and reviewed all Applicant submittals, Planning Staff <br />maintained their recommendation for approval of the unit lot subdivision and the <br />requested design modifications. Exhibit 1; Niels Tygesen Testimony. <br />CONCLUSIONS <br />Jurisdiction: <br />Unit lot land divisions are Review 11 land use decisions decided by the City of Everett Planning <br />Director. EIYfC 15.02.070.B(9)(a). However, pursuant to EMC 15.02.070.B(12), if the Planning <br />Director determines that the land use decision should be heard by the Hearing Examiner due to <br />potential project impacts or public concerns, the Director may require the permit application to <br />be reviewed using Review Process 1I1 per EMC 15.02.030.C. <br />Criteria and Standards for Review: <br />Pursuant to EMC 19.25.040, a unit lot land division application that complies with all of the <br />following general evaluation criteria listed below, the requirements of Chapters 19.24 through <br />19.27 EMC and this title, and applicable city standards shall be approved. In any such approval, <br />the city shall make written findings that the application has made appropriate provisions in <br />accordance with the requirements of this section. An application that does not comply with these <br />criteria shall be denied by the city. <br />Everett Hearing Examiner <br />rindings, Conclusions, and Decision <br />Sage Homes Northwest LLC (RE111122-001) page 15 of 22 <br />