Laserfiche WebLink
_ . � <br /> i i <br /> i <br /> 1 <br /> (3) The variance will only grant the subject property the same general <br /> righls enjoyed by other property in the same area and zom� �s the <br /> subject property. <br /> (4) The variance is the minimum necessary to allow the subject property <br /> ihe general righls described in Criteria 3 above. <br /> (5) The granling of lhe variance is not inconsislent with lhe goals and <br /> policies of the Everelt general plan. � <br /> (6) The need for the requested variance is not the resull of a self- <br /> crealed hardship. <br /> 17. The variance would not be materially detrimenlal to the properties in the area in <br /> which lhe proposed building is localed. It would be limiled in height, screened by <br /> landscaping, and would have limited operations. (exlubit 1) <br /> 18. The exisling hospital site is intensely developed and available sites for the <br /> proposed facility are limiled. However, the hospital on-sile requires power during <br /> oulages. These are exceplional circumstances relaling to the localion of the <br /> subjecl property that warrant the grant of the variance. (Tyler testimony) <br /> 19. The proposed building is consistent wilh development patlerns of the hospital <br /> facility. It is not a grant of a special privilege but allows the facilily to remain in <br /> operalion during power oulages. (Tyler testimony) <br /> 20. The requesled variance is lhe minimum necessary. (Tyler testimony) <br /> 21. Th2 requested variance is c�nsistenl with the Everett Comprehensive Plan. <br /> (Tyler tes(imony) <br /> 22. The variance request is not a self-created hardship. It stems from the extensive <br /> use of the hospital and the need to provide elec.;rical services during power <br /> oulages. (exhibit 1) <br /> Jurisdiction: The Hearing Examiner of the City of Everett has jurisdictional authority to <br /> hold a hearing and to issue the decision. That authority is set forih in EMC 15.16.100. <br />� Based on the above Findings of Facf, the Hearing Examiner enters the (ollowing <br /> Conclusions: <br /> CONCLUSIONS <br /> 1. The Applicant requesled approval of a Special Property Use Permit for lhe <br /> construction of a 1,940 square fool emergency generalor building to be <br /> developed in two phases. Phase I of ihe development would be construction of a <br /> 980 square fool building wilh an 8,000-gallon underground fuel tank. Phase II <br /> �8 <br /> , <br />