Laserfiche WebLink
original structure, facility, or improved area nor does it include construction of a <br />maintenance road or the dumping of maintenance debris; <br />9. Forest practices on city -owned watershed property located in remote areas not <br />contiguous to the Everett corporate boundaries, undertaken in accordance with the <br />requirements of the State Department of Natural Resources. <br />B. Reasonable Use Exception. <br />1. Nothing in this chapter is intended to preclude reasonable economic use of property as <br />set forth in this title. If the requirements of this chapter as applied to a specific lot would <br />deny all reasonable economic use of the lot, development will be permitted if the <br />applicant demonstrates all of the following to the satisfaction of the planning director: <br />a. There is no other reasonable use or feasible alternative to the proposed development <br />with less impact on the critical area; and <br />b. The proposed development does not pose a threat to the public health, safety and <br />welfare on or off of the subject lot; and <br />c. Any alterations permitted subject to the requirements of this chapter shall be the <br />minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property; and <br />d. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is <br />not the result of actions by the applicant in subdividing the property or adjusting a <br />boundary line, thereby creating the undevelopable condition after the effective date <br />of this chapter; and <br />e. The proposal mitigates the impacts on the critical areas and buffers to the maximum <br />extent possible. <br />2. Reasonable Use Decision Process. Whenever an applicant for a development proposal <br />submits a reasonable use proposal to the planning director, the submittal shall include <br />the following information which will be used to evaluate the criteria for reasonable use <br />exception: <br />a. The location, size, and description of the areas of the lot which are either critical <br />areas, required buffers, or setbacks required by this chapter; <br />b. A description of the location and area of the lot which is within setbacks required by <br />other standards of the zoning code; <br />c. An analysis of the minimum development necessary to achieve "reasonable <br />economic use" of the lot, including a narrative which includes a factual basis for this <br />determination; <br />d. An analysis of the impact that the development described in subsection (B)(2)(c) of <br />this section would have on the critical areas and buffer functions, including an <br />analysis of impacts on fish and wildlife resources; <br />e. An analysis of whether any other reasonable use with less impact on the critical areas <br />and buffers is possible. This must also include an analysis of whether there is any <br />practicable on-site alternative to the proposed development with less impact, <br />including reduction in density, phasing of project implementation, change in timing <br />of activities, revision of lot layout, and/or related site planning considerations that <br />would allow a reasonable economic use with less adverse impacts to the critical areas <br />