3625 HOYT AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

N3ental Health Services, Inc. SPU 16-88 Page -9- 9. Although adequate garking of six spaces is available on-site, the Applicant contended that few of the residents will have vehicles. (Peterson testimony) 10. Zhe First United Methodist Church is the co-sponsor of the project. lhis church is located two blocks from the site. (Peterson �eatimony) 11. 'Ihe use will not have a serious adverse environmentai impact c;n the environmer�t oL the community. A Determination of t3on-Significance has been issued by the City, the lead agency. (exhibit 4) 12. The Applicant has been providing housing for independent living to mentally ill persons since 1982. However, studies cor.ducted by the State of Washingtcn indicate that there is a need for additional 164 beds for individuals who are parti.-.ipating in pro9rams such as provideci by the Applicant. (staff report, exhibit 9) Z;. �Ihe type of housing, as proposed by the Applicant; gr�vides assistance to mentally ill persons who are 1:..: inr.om�. It provides an environr.�ent where their r.c<u� car: be met while ]eading indeoendent live�. (1�eterson testirtany) 14. �he EWerett Planning Departinent recortmiended approval of the Special Property Use Fermit subject to the four conditiens as set f;;rth in the staff report. At the public h�aring the City withdrew condition #2• (Doughty testimony) 15. Some individuals who have lived in similar housing voiced suppoit of the request and testified to the needs f.or such housing. 16. Representatives of social and governmental agencies testified to the need for the type of housing as proposed hy the Applicant. 7hey submitted that this type of housing allows individuals to move through the systEn in a manner that maintains dignity and pride and instills a sense of independence. 17. Witness Aikire (EWerett Housing Authority) testified that the City of Everett neAds the additional housing as proposed by the Applicarit. Pccording to the Witness, often times rents and insensitive landlords prohibit the mentally i11 from securing �rmanent housing. Zfie proposal of the Applicant will alleviate part of this problem. '[4ie Witness also questioned the need for a Special Property Use Permit and indicated that such a requirement may be discriminatory. (Alkire testimony) CONCLCIS IONS 1. 'Itie application is for the approval of a Special Property Use Permit Eor the conversion of an existing six unit aparbnent building into an independent permanent housing co�lex for up to thirteen mentally ill individuals. The property is located at 3625 Hoyt Avenue, ,