1619 CHESTNUT ST 2016-01-01 MF Import

� Criterion No z• , That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the I � property in the area of the subject property or to the City as a whole. i a. Findinas: The applicant is required to install curb, gut- �' ter and sidewalk along the frontage of his property as i part of this project. There is no need by the clty for the remainder of the unused right of way. The applicants are also required to provide a five foot wide landscaped I strip along their entire Cheatnut frontage except for driveways. b. Conclusions: It does not appear that granting this vari- � ance will be detrimental to the property in the area or to the city as a whole. In fact, the area will be improved by the addition of landscapinq, curb, gutter, and side- � walk. ! �riterion No. 3• That the variance will only grant the subject property the same qeneral rights enjoyed by other property in the same area and zone as the subject property. ' a. Findinos: other property owners in the same area have � constructed multiple family units at the same density as the applicant is proposing. b. �pglusions: Granting this variance will allow the appli- cant to achieve the same density as others in this same area. Criterion No. 4• That the variance is the minimum necessary to allow the subject � property the general rights described in Criterion 3. a. Findinas: The zoning would permit twice the density that the applicant is proposing; however, the variance re- quested will allow him to build to the same density as � others in the area. � b. Conclusions: The variance requested is the min+mum neces- � sary to allow the same general rights as possessed by others in the area. 'r Criterion No. 5: � The granting of the variance is not inconsistent with the goals and policies of the �verett General Plan. � a. Findinas: The General Plan designation is Multiple Fami- � ly, 15 to 25 dwelling units per acre; however, this project is vested under the old zoninq code at R-4 density which would allow 58 dwelling units per acre. This pro- � posed project has a density of 29 dwellinq units per acre. ° The project density is half of what the zoning would allow � and so is closer to the limits of the General Plan desig- nation than if it were built to the maximum density , ` � permitted by the zone. The General Plan is a guide to de- i velopment; however, the actual density is determined by I 4 the zoning ordinance. � . Conclusions: Granting this variance would not be iinconsistef�t with the General Plan. . Z t