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

All three facilities would have a substantially smaller parking ratio than the proposed project (1.22 stalls/unit). The Applicant also stated that the typical resident in these facilities is less likely to own a car than the generai population. The rate of ownership declines as the residents age. The anticipated demand for guest parking has been inciuded in the 72 parking stalls proposed. On-street parking is available on 16th Avenue S.E. �onclusions: 1) The front portion of the site contains a considerable amount of sloped area. The buildings have been t;ept back away from this area in order to avoid the need for substantial grading of the froni ot the site. The locations of the proposed buildings effectively reduces the area that is available for parking. 2) The variance will not affect adjacent property owners or property within the sarcie zone. The property to the south is owned by the Applicant and ia developed with senior housing, similar to instant proposal. The property to the east is owned by the City of EvPrett and is developed with a regional stormwater detention facility. The property to the west is developed with a large apartment complex. This complex has its own off- street parking, and also has access to on-street parking on 16th Avenue S.E. 3) Strict application of the B-2 parking standard would require a total of 89 parking stalis on tfie site. The current parking standard does not differentiate between various types of residential uses with regard to parking, and therefore does not recognize that elder�y residents may not own and operate automobiles in the same manner as the general population. Other senior housing projects have received variances in the City of Everett and, and have not been reported to have parking probiems. The City is in the process of amending the Zoning Code to add a new parking standard for senior housing projects. In the future, it is likely that this type of variance will no longer be necessary. The Planning Director hereby g�pf�approval of the requested parking variance. 3. Physical setting -Whether the proposed Binding Site Plan, site plan and other required application information properly takes into account the topography, drainage, vegetation, soils, and any ether relevant physical elements of the site. Findino: The topography of the site is irregular, consisting of several knobs and humps. On the western portion of the site, there is a slope extending downward from west to east. The !:ity identified wetlands on the site during a prior SEPA review involving an apartment complex and the Silver Lake regional detention facility. Portions of the wetland were filled during the construction on the detention pond. A small portion of one of the wetlar,ds remains in the southeast portion of the property. Approval was granted to the property owner for the fiiling of these wetiands in exchange for dedicating land for detention facility an� implementing a wetiand mitigation plan. No further approvals are required for the filling of any remaining on-site wetiands. Conclusion: The proposed binding site plan would not have an adverse impact on the physical setting. 4. Public Services: (i) Adequate Water Su�olv 3 � _