3514 WETMORE AVE 2018-01-02 MF Import

12. The City of Everett Planning Department submitted a memo addressing streetscape issues im multi -family neighborhood infill areas. The City submitted that it is required to address "reasonable measures" to ensure that the City can accommodate population allotted to it pursuant to the Growth Management Act process. As a result, she residential areas around the downtown area have been zoned for higher densities. (exhibit 9, long range comment, page 1) 13. The City hired consultants to develop strategies to encourage quality redevelopment in the Core Residential Areas around the downtown area. Included in the consultant's analysis were comments that the streetscapes in the area were not sufficient to attract new quality development. The consultant recommended enhancing bicycle/pedestrian access, improving streetscape conditions, addressing safety issues and adopting design standards to increase the desirability of the area. The City acknowledged that the redevelopment has been slow and has met some resistance. (exhibit 9, long range comment, page 1) 14. The multi -family neighborhood infill portion included the subject property and surrounding areas The City submitted that the low streetscape quality in this area is a significant constraint in attracting desired development. The City also indicated that in an enhanced pedestrian environment, setbacks and adopted sign guidelines are necessary and be included as part of the Comprehensive Plan. In part, because of a need for adherence to the Comprehensive Plan and the desire to make streetscapes more pleasant and desirable, the City recommended denial of the requested variance. (exhibit 9, long range comment, page 1; testimony of Ms. Weldon) 15. The grant of the permit for the variance would not adversely impact the rights of adjacent property owners or tenants. As previously noted, the properties on Wetmore Avenue are multi -family, and some of these properties, including those north and south of the subject property, have access off Wetmore Avenue for parking purposes. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 4) 16 A property owner in the area submitted a letter opposing the installation of the proposed drivewa) because it would remove on -street parking. (exhibit 8, comment letter) The City, when questioned about the parking for the multi -family and commercial structures on Colby Avenue, indicated that parking is available for those structures, and according to the City's information, little, if any, parking for these structures occurs on Wetmore Avenue. (testimony of Mr. Brick) 17. The terms and limitations of EMC 13.16 would create some hardship to the Applicant in that the cost of the access for the garage would be more expensive. It would involve a more detailed construction project with significant engineering having to be done because of the difference in slopes. It would also require a detailed storm drainage plan to control the storm drainage of the water in the