1614 BAILEY AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

� � property immed ately west of the subj�.ct site) did express concems over the existiny structure. b. Conclusions: The City provided wiitten netice to all property owners within 300�eet of the subjer.t site. 'i he City received Ietters frorn prope:ty ewners within the �mmediate vicinily of lhe subJe�.t site, all ��f which were in opposition of the requaated variances (Exhibit#8,#�1, #10,#'I 1). The City af Everett P�blic Works and 6uildin� Departments had t:�e opportunity to review ihe proposal. The following comments were provided at the heering: a) Building permits are require�; b) Compliance with the State Building Cod� (1597 Edition) is required, including: opening� not allowed within 3 feet of the property line, and 1-hour fire resistive cor,struction is required within 3 feet of the property line; c) Compl�ance with the 2002 National Electric Code; d) Compliance with th� 2000 Stato Plumb'tng Code; e) Compliance with the 1997 State Mechanical Code; f) Compliance with the 2001 Sate Energy Code; gl The runo(f from the site rnust be handles in a manner that wil� not adversely affect adjacent properties. Criterion No. 3: That the variance will only grant the subject property the same general rights enjoyed by ether property in the same area and zone as the subject property. a. Findings: The applicant has stated that many properties in the area have homes which encroach into setback areas and which may sit over property lines. While many of the structures in the area may not comply with current building setbacks, many of these structures could be certi�ed as legal non-con(orming, indicating they were constructed prior to annexation into the City of Everett and the code standards in effect today. Upon review of the City's Permit Database, two variance applications were approved for garage and carport encroachments into the front setback for properties within the immediate vicinity of the subject property. b. Conclusions: Although several s:ructures in the area may fail to comply with the required setbacks it is likely that ihese structures were built prior to the effective date of the Zoning Code which established these requirements. 'fhe City concludes that the setback encroachments on the subject site are the result of building additions which were made to the structure without the benefit of Ci?y permits after the effective date of the Zoning Code and after annexatien into the City o( Everett Criterion Nu. 4: That the variance is the minimum necessary 'o a�!uN the s�bject property the generdl nyhts described in Criterion 3. a. Findings: See Criteria #3. b. Conclusions: See Criteria #3 3�