1321 COLBY AVE GENERATOR BLDG 2018-01-02 MF Import

( �, � (9) Consistency wilh the goals and policies of lhe Everett General Plan for lhe area and land use designation which the properly is located. (10) Compliance wilh lhe provisions of this ordinance and other City, Sta!e, and Federal regulations. (11) Accessibility to public transit and traffic reduclion measures proposed by the Applicant io reduce dependence o(the proposed use on the automobile. 5. The proposed facilily would provide emergency ulility service to the hospital. A City of Everett eleclrical inspector voiced concerns about llie about lhe ApplicanCs existing emergency generator and its critical circuit loads. The City and Applicant determined that if too great an eleclric load were placed on the existing generator, it could tail or be unable lo provide for llie necessary power supply. The proposed facilily would house generators which would provide the necessary power supply. A need for the Special Property Use Permit has been proven. {exliibit 1, Tyler testimony) 6. All existing Cily services are available and in close proximity of the sile. There are no impacts to access, utililies, and public services. (exhibit 1, Tyler tesfintony) 7. Tra(fic may be yenerated as part of ihe construclion on-site. Once lhe (acility is developed on-site, its operalion would be on-going, and no addilional traffic would be generaled. The proposed use would have no impact on lraffic, pedestrian circulalion, or public safety. (exhibif 1, Tyler testimony) 8. The proposal, as originally proposed, would resuli in lhe eliminalion of approximalely 10 of 22 parking stalls lhat have been designated for physician parking. (exhibit 1) Upon queslioning at lhe public hearing, the Applicanl was given an opporlunity lo presenl wrillen materials wiih regard to a re-slriping pl�n. A post hearing lelter was submilted on Febn�ary 6, 2004, to the City of Everett Senior Planner suggesting re-striping of nine parking stalls adjacent to the new building. Wilh this proposal, there would only be a loss of three slalls, and 19 staff parking stalls would be available at the end of Phase I. With the construction of Phase II, an addilional four parking stalls would be removed, leaving a lolal of 15 stalls. (exhibit 9) According lo lhe Applicant, lhe lotal net loss of parking stalls would be seven. In response, on February 6, 2004, the City implied acceptance of ihe proposal, as submitled by the Applicant, and indicated ihat parking should be verified al the time of building permit issuance, as well as the issuance of the Cerlificale of Uccupancy (exhibit 10). 9. 7he proposed generator building would be located adjacent to an exisling landscape buifer on lhe south side o( 13'" Streel and at the base of an existing retaining wall. These localions would muffle the amount of noise generaied by the sile, as well as minimize visual impacts to the building. There is also an �L�'/