Resolution 4351 - Laserfiche WebLink

17. The variance will allow the subject property to be developed in a manner similar to other properties in the area. (Exhibit 1) 18. It appears that the variance requested is the minimum necessary to allow the subject property to be developed in a manner consistent with other properties in the area. (Cunningham testimony) 19. The proposal is consistent with the Goals and Policies of the Everett General Plan. It will allow development of the multiple-family structures in a manner that the density will be similar to that as allowed in the Everett General Plan. The proposal is consistent with the goal of providing infill within the City limits and creating additional multiple-family dwelling units. (Cunningham testimony) 20. The need for the requested variance is not the result of any action of the Applicant. The fill that was placed on-site that has necessitated the variance is the result of road development by governmental bodies. (Exhibit 1) 21. The City of Everett was designated as the lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed project. A Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance was issued for the subject property on September 13, 1996. No appeals of this threshold determination were filed. (Exhibit 8) 22. The Applicant submitted support for the proposed recommendation of approval issued by the City. (Sullivan testimony) Jurisdiction: The Hearing Examiner of the City of Everett has jurisdictional authority to hold a hearing and to issue the recommendation. That authority is set forth in EMC 2.23.020. Based on the above findings, the Hearing Examiner enters the following conclusions: CONCLUSIONS 1. In 1982, the subject property was rezoned to an R-3 PRD zone. At that time, it was the intent of the property owner (not the current Applicant) to develop the subject property consistent with the rezone. The subject property, however, was never developed. In 1992, the property was subject to a request for an Intent to Rezone the site from the R-3 PRD to the R-3 zone in order that the property could be developed with 36 units in multiple-family structures. The City of Everett granted the approval of the Intent to Rezone with a five year limitation. The five year limitation will expire in 1997, and the Applicant has requested a five year extension with a minor development revision of the Intent to Rezone the 2.9 acre site. (Finding 1) 2. In addition to the requested extension and minor development revision of the Intent to Rezone, the Applicant has also requested a variance from the development standards for the height of buildings in R-3 zones. The Applicant requested that the height of the buildings to be developed on-site be measured from the existing grade 5