Laserfiche WebLink
b. Conclusions: The subject site aoes have extraordinary features, <br />such as the shoreline and existing wastewater treatment <br />infrasiructure and pending plant expansion, which limit the options <br />for placement of a centrally localed maintenance building. <br />Criterion No. 2: <br />That the var.ance will not be materially detrimental to the property in the area o( <br />ihe s,ubject property or to the City as a whole. <br />a. Findinqs: The applicant has stated that the site is over 450 acres <br />in area, and is currently developed with 190 acras of wastewater <br />treaiment ponds, a seven-acre mechanical treatment processing <br />area, administration buil6ings, and other support in(rastr�cture. <br />There are no residential structures within close proximity to the site. <br />The proposed maintenance building is entirely contained within Cily <br />of Everett owned property. <br />A SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) review has been completed <br />as well as a shore!ine permit, biological assessrr,ent, special property <br />use, floodplain elevation certificate, and JARPA (Joint Aquatic <br />Resources Permit Application). No public cnmments were recsived <br />during any of above application review periods. <br />The City (inds that lhe proposed structure is not out of scale or <br />characler with the existing infrastructure already present on site and <br />therefore the proposed variance should not be detrimental to the site <br />or area as a whole. <br />b. Conclusions: The City provided notice by posting the sile and <br />providing advertisement within the official city newspaper, and no <br />comments were received. The proposal should not be materially <br />detrimental to the neighborhood area or lhe City as a whole. <br />The proposed variance has been reviewed by the City Public Works <br />and Building Departments. At the time of sta(f report preparation, no <br />comments had been received. Comments from City departments <br />and responsible jurisdictions have been provided to the applicant <br />based upon the SEPA and Shorelir�e applications which have been <br />previously reviewed. <br />Criterion No. 3: <br />That the variance will only grant the subject property the same general rights <br />enjoyed by other property in the same area and zone as the sub�.�ct property. <br />Findinqs: The applicant has stated that the requested variance is lo <br />accommodate the cc.istruction o( a centrally located maintenance <br />facility for an existing water pollulion control facility. The site is over <br />450 acres in area and is comprised of the City of Everett water <br />pollution control facility. The subject property Functions as a critical <br />water quality facility for the enlire Cily of Everett. Two previous <br />variances have been approved on site, in 1987 and 1998, for pole <br />buildings to be constructed below lhe regula�ory flood protec;tion <br />elevation. � <br />