Laserfiche WebLink
, <br /> • . � • �,;. �,. <br /> � � <br /> : . ._..._ _. _. . � . . ,. ,,,,. <br /> ... v ,,,. <br /> �:..:J_ ___.::_...__.... • yu_.�:..' ., . . •...._. �.. :.._..r.'�._ � •_. :: �-.:.::.�.i:.,� <br /> � . . . . . I <br /> ,o Del ftussell, President � = .� � "^;' <br /> Board of Ad�ustment . , �VQrLK• ` <br /> FflOM publie Works Department . (d�' . . 't� �"�' � . <br /> h-' <br /> . r...�•.:�:., . <br /> � y�.'.-;y���''c,y-��:: <br /> OATE October 1� 1979 `�`� '' <br /> SUOJECT CITY OF EVENEtT. CVERET7, WASHINGTON � �±F��" �~:''• <br /> Item N, Agenda of October 1, 1979 % - ' <br /> Board of Ad justment Hearing " "�'�'=,'�~:%' <br /> d`1�, :'' ' <br /> Having received the Board oP Ad�ustment^o�eptember 26, 1979, for the Varlance ,'. � <br /> Hearing on a request at the southuest corner of Colby and A3rd Lo provide three- � . <br /> fourths of the required off-street parking spzce3 raLher than Lhe required E7. <br /> spaces, the Publie Works Department would ordinarily request a postponement ' <br /> of the item for an in depth reviex in order to supply the Board of Adjustment <br /> Nith a specifie,, supported reconmendation. However, Puhlie Works has ' � <br /> been involved in substantial, recent parking reviewa in the area that <br /> allows the Department to conelude that a month's delay on this proposal <br /> xould result in a supported strong recosmer,dation Por denial baved on <br /> the followin6 known information. <br /> 1. No special efreumstances apply to this site or neighborhood <br /> that would allox non-adverse input from this Department. <br /> 2. The site is centrally located in an area heavily impacted <br /> by an existing on-street parking problem. <br /> 3. The quality of life in the neighborhood has deteriorated as <br /> a result of an on-street parking problem as is evidenced <br /> by i�i'put includin� petitions sent 1:o the Traff'ie Enginecr, <br /> Transportation Advisory Committee, and City Council to take <br /> aetion to correet the parking problem experienced by . <br /> neighborhood. The current two-hour parking restrictiun resulted <br /> from the numerous alternatives considered. <br /> • 4. ' Commonly, the Zoning Code for off-street parlc3.ng requirements <br /> for elinics and professional offices has Ueen shown Lo he lesa than <br /> or barely adequate for these uses as is evidenced Uy t:lie parki.nb <br /> � problems in virtually eyery neighborhood containing such a <br /> facility. Reducing thc�req�lreocnt by 18 spaces,..ce?�c p].aces an <br /> unnecessary burden on this neiglibort,00d. <br /> 5. The parking survey provided by t:he applicant does not refleet <br /> what is commonly experieneed in parking studies Lakett Uy the <br /> City in those same areas. Cxam�ilc: Their em�vey shor:; �l3rd Streetj <br /> Hcyt to F.ucicer, as ha�•i�� 20 spaces 2nd ]3 af ti.hose • ' <br /> t� . occupied. There is a maximum of 12 leQal suaces in that Ulorlc <br /> � Their survey shows that 16 spaces exist on 43rd Street in the bloe{: <br /> ad�acent to the proposed Clinic and further showed tl�at 10 were full. <br />;� There are 15 leza] a�aces and at least 4 ,Paces will be los.t� <br /> i pronosed Clinic drivetiaa s, resulting in one remainirig spac� Cor <br />, <br /> overflow froro the clinic. <br /> 6. ' The expected escalation of 6rowth in the area �,�ill result � <br /> in further demar.d for on-street parking. <br /> 7. Assuming that their occupancy figures are correet, there ' <br /> are �!3 vehicles parlted in 60 �pacea (City's figure) leaving <br /> 17 vacant spaces, some as far as 2 blocks away from the Clini.e. <br /> TUcse 17 �acant spacca would be required to absorb the entire <br /> overload of Sust the new Clinic. Note: The 18 off-street spaces , <br /> - __ . � <br /> . I <br /> ' �► <br />