Laserfiche WebLink
� � � <br /> y � y � <br /> Cy � , A . ... . . <br /> y �� ° 6� !.�7 - <br /> Ox0 " - <br /> �H � <br /> VJ M <br /> Hz <br /> BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT <br /> O M pC FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER VARZANCE NO. 1-91 <br /> N [�+7Q <br /> Or O <br /> E3ased upon the written request for a variance from the City's zoning _ .. .r� <br /> �y� code by: � <br /> g y y 1�pplicant: Sanice Stephenson <br /> � Cy� 225 Bridgeway <br /> � � � • Everett, WA 98201 <br /> y p y Location: 225 Bridgeway <br /> itereinafter referred to as "Applicant, " for a variance from Section <br /> e , limiting total lot coverage to no more than 35% of the lot area <br /> and limiting lot coverage by accessory structures to na more than 10� <br /> of the lot area whether attached or detached from the residence. The <br /> proposal is to construct a 350 square foot garage and breezeway <br /> adC.ition. Total lot coverage of 1609 square would be increased to <br /> 2040 square feet of which G36 square feet will be garage and carport <br /> space. The lot size is 5,072 square feet which will allow a maximum <br /> footprint of 1,775 square feet and a maximum 507 square of accessory <br /> buildings. The percent of total lot coverage would be 40.2� with <br /> 12.5$ of lot coverage being by accessory buildings. <br /> ��� PZNDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:_ <br /> 1 � Cr�terion No. 1• <br /> �_ _ . <br /> �� That the variance is necessary because of exceptional or <br /> extraordinary circumstances regarding the siz�, shape, topography, or <br /> location of the subject property; or the lo�ation of a pre-existing <br /> � improvement on the subject property that conformed to the zoning code <br /> �.�. in effect when the improvement was construct-ed. <br /> a. Findings� The lot does not meet th-a 7,000 square foot minimum <br /> lot size requirement. This lot is one of the smaller lots along <br /> �� Bridgeway and of the plat. Also, if the lot was vacant, a 2 <br /> story house could be built with a smaller footprint so that lot ��--A.;�_ ��,��; s <br /> coverage would not be exceeded. <br /> ( � <br /> �`�� b. Cnnclusions: There are exceptional or extraordinary <br /> circumstances regarding the size of the subject property. <br /> i <br /> ��1� Criterion No. 2: <br /> That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the property <br /> in the a*ea of the subject property or to the City as a whole. <br /> a, F;nr�inqs.� No adverse comments have been received from the <br /> s��.. <br /> public at this time. The addition may actually enhance the <br /> �_ , neighborhood by providing storage of items laying �utside the <br /> ;F;�'(� '�'� house. <br /> i. y., . <br />`� �. b. Conc].usionsi The variance should not be materially detrimental <br /> � to the property in the area of the subject property or to the <br /> F �,:• <br />