HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-1915 - Granting a utility variance for Jess A. Darling for property located at 3327 Sunnyside Boulevard, Marysville Wa~•~
~...z-
1 '>'j
CITY OF MARYSVILLE
Marysville,Washington
RESOLUTION Noffl5""
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MARYSVILLE GRANTING A UTILITY
VARIANCE FOR JESS A. DARLING FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3327
SUNNYSIDE BOULEVARD,MARYSVILLE,WASHINGTON.
WHEREAS,on January 28,1998 Jess A.Darling applied for a
utility variance pursuant to MMC 14.32.060(4)from the provisions
of MMC 14.32.020 which precludes utility service to properties
located outside the City limits and outside the adopted RUSA
boundary for property located at 3327 Sunnyside Boulevard,
Marysville,Washington;and
WHEREAS,Applicant's request also requires a variance
pursuant to MMC 14.01.040(2)from the provisions of MMC
14.01.040(1)which prohibits connection to City sewer service
unless the subject property is also connected to City water;and
WHEREAS,on November 9,1998 and January 11,1999 the City
Council of the City of Marysville held a public meeting
concerning the variance application and made the following
findings:
1.Applicant has applied to Snohomish County to develop a
plat which would require approximately 62 sewer connections.The
property is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary and has a
Marysville Comprehensive Plan designation of Medium Density
Residential (4-5 DU/ACRE) .
2.The subject property is located in the Snohomish County
CWSP and would be provided water service from the PUD.Because
of the availability of water service by the PUD,it would cause a
practical difficulty to require the extension of City water
service.
3.The utility variance has mutually been held in abeyance
while the City conducted an analysis of the utility needs
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Sewer Plan.Since
submittal of this application,the City has designed a sewer
trunkage system that could serve the applicant's property as well
as the general region in the vicinity of applicant's property.
4.The City has planned to develop the sewerage system in
the region in phases.Phase I has been designed and let for bid.
Applicant's request would require development of Phase II.A.
5.In light of the above-referenced findings,the
authorization of the variance will not be materially detrimental
to the public interest,welfare,or the environment.
RESOLUTION - 1
/mv/darling.res
..'Ii,.;'~0-
,,-
l -
6.The above-referenced findings reflect exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject
property that do not generally apply at present to other
properties in the same vicinity.
7.
enjoyment
possessed
The variance is necessary for the preservation and
of a substantial property right of the applicant
by owners of other properties in the same vicinity.
8.The granting of a variance in this case will not be
inconsistent with the long-range plans of the City utility system
or jeopardize utility availability for properties within the City
limits,so long as the utility connections are limited to the
proposed use,which is Single-Family Residential.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MARYSVILLE,WASHINGTON AS FOLLOWS:
A.The variance for the applicant's connections to City
sewer without water for property outside of the City's RUSA
boundary is hereby granted,subject to applicant meeting all of
the following conditions:
1.Connections to the City sanitary sewer system
shall be contingent upon the construction of Phase I and a
portion of Phase II (to MH 22)of Trunk "D."
2.The applicant shall participate and work with
other interested parties in development of Phases II.A and
II.B of Trunk "D."
3.The applicant shall pay a fee of ONE HUNDRED
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000)in addition to all other normal
connection fees and assessments.Said $100,000 shall be
applied toward the development of Phase II.B of Trunk "D."
4.The applicant shall comply with all applicable
provisions of the Marysville Municipal Code as it pertains
to the provision of sewer service.
5.The applicant shall execute an agreement with the
City which would address the following issues to the City's
satisfaction:
(a)Mitigation of development impacts.
(b)Compliance with City development standards.
(c)Consistency with City Comprehensive Plan and
land use designations.
(d)Provisions under which the property would be
annexed to the City.
RESOLUTION - 2
/mv/darling.res
•
• c-'
(e)Such other matters as deemed necessary and
appropriate by the City.
B.This decision shall be final and conclusive with the
right of appeal by any aggrieved party to the Superior Court of
Snohomish County by filing a Land Use Petition pursuant to the
Land Use Petition Act within twenty-one (21)days after the
passage of this resolution.
PASSED by the City
day of ~
Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this
,1999.
ATTEST:
CITY OF MARYSVILLE
rlJ te)£#0
BY~CITY CLERK
Approved as to form:
By~k:tAJ....u.eO
CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION - 3
/mv/darling.res