My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6427 BEVERLY LN 2016-01-01 MF Import
>
Address Records
>
BEVERLY LN
>
6427
>
6427 BEVERLY LN 2016-01-01 MF Import
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2017 9:51:20 AM
Creation date
1/23/2017 2:10:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
BEVERLY LN
Street Number
6427
Imported From Microfiche
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
112
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
September 14, 1970 <br />The regular meeting of the City of Everett Board of Adjustment <br />was held at 7:30 P.:•i. , SeptemUer 19, 19 %0 in the City Hall, <br />Council Chambers, City Hall, Everett, Washir,gton. <br />Mr. Cronin presided. Mr. Dickson, D1r. Champion, Mr. Ingram <br />were present. Dtr. Graff was absent. <br />The reading of the minutes of the nugust 3, 1970 hearing were <br />read and aooroved as read. <br />A continution on the application of bir. Ken Carpenter. 6927 <br />Beverly Lane, requesting permission to erect and maintain an <br />amateur radio tower to a maximum lieight of nir.ety (90) feet <br />above ground elevation cahich is higher than the thirty-five <br />(35) feet naximum permitted in an R-2 Single Family IIigh Density <br />Residence Zone, on Lot 45, Beverly Hills, Division No. 6 <br />(6427 Beverly Lane, Bverett, washington). <br />After hearing testimony by bcth the ooponents and pr000nents <br />the following findings were made by tlie Board of Adjustment: <br />1. Although testimony �oas offered that a ninety (90) foot <br />antenna height was desired bv the applicant, no evidence <br />was offered that such a height was necessary for �•�orld- <br />wide Ham radio operation. <br />2. 7n the opinion of the neighbors, oermission to arant <br />the requested variance would have an adverse effect <br />o: the neighborhood. This is displayed by a petition <br />con�aining the names of thirty-five (35) residents' <br />prote:.•ting a yranting of the proposed variance. <br />3. The Board, after visiting the site, noted the single <br />family characteristics of the neiahbornood and the <br />absence of nearby similar objects or even large trees <br />that an antenna could be blendeG into. <br />A motion was thereby made by t•1r. Dickson, seconded by hir. Ingram <br />and unanimously carried, to deny the application on the basis <br />that: <br />1. Tne proposed antenna ccould be incompatible in the neigh- <br />borhocd. <br />2. No hardship was indicated by the applicant. <br />n hearing was held on the anolication of Honnie N. Peterson, <br />1731 Oakes, for a variance from Seccion 15.04.090, F..C.C.(7,oning <br />Ordinance) ?t-2, Single Fa„ily iliqh Der.�ity Residence 7.one to <br />wave the minimum required side yard set-bac}: of ten (10) fect <br />to eight and one half (8-1/2) feet on the following described <br />pr.operty: <br />���Y�� !�b <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.