10809 16TH AVE SE 2016-01-01 MF Import

, Building setbacks are: 10 front and rear yard, and five feet side yard. Other zoning standards include landscaping along the perimeter lot lines ar�d wi4hin the interior of the parking lot, screening of rooftop mechanical equipment and dumpsters, and the requirement for a pedestrian connection between the buildings and the street. Compliance of the proposal with these standards will be enforced at the time of building permit review and prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Conclusion: The proposed density, building setbacks and building height comply with the minimum zoning standards in this zone. Landscaping, screening, and pedestrian improvements must be consistent with the requirements of the zoning code. Compliance with these standards must be demonstrated prior to issuance of a 5uilding permit and a certificate of occupancy. Parking Wariance - Request for Administrative A roval Eindinas: The Applicant requested approval for a reduction in the number of parking stalls. The Zoning Code requires that 1.5 parking sta!is be provided for each dwelling. For the 59 dwellings, a minimum of 89 parking stalls is required. The Applicant proposes 72 parking stalls on the site. Th:� represents a reduction of 19% of the total required number of parking stalis. EMC Chapter 18.60.010 authorizes the granting of modifications and variations from the standards ii the Zoning Code, except for lot density. Variations up to 25% are reviewed by the Planning Director if the following criteria are met: 1. There are exceptional circumstances or conditions such as: location of existing structures; lot configuration; or topographic or unique �hysical features that apply to the subject property which prohibit the applicant from meeting the standards of this article; 2. The authorization of the modification or variation will not be detrimental to the public weifare or injurious to the property in the vicinity or zone in which the nroperty is located; and 3. A hardship would be incurred by the applicant if required to comply with the strict application of the regulations. As paR of the variance appiication, the Applicant provided parking data compiled from other similar projects that the Appiicant owns and manages in Snohomish County. All of I these projects provide housing !�r low income, elderiy residents. These inciude the following: �lame #of Units #of Stalls Ratio %Utilization Lynn Woods 38 19 .5 95 Silver Woods 38 19 .5 100 Lake Woods 60 38 .63 95 Evergreen Court 59 72 1.22 --- (proposed) The data in the above table suggest that available parking for existing housing projects operated by the Applicant is used at capacity. However, two of these facilities have a parking ratio of 0.5 stalls/unit; the Lake Woods facility has a ratio of 0.63 stalls per unit. �