Laserfiche WebLink
��>� <br />G x7 x <br />9 Hx cn <br />y xH <br />� H� <br />� H� <br />V1 N <br />x <br />� � r� <br />OH <br />��g <br />(y] Y (i <br />C" y � <br />C�i� y <br />H <br />o � v� <br />� H v�i <br />H O �n <br />,�. <br />_.. <br />BOARD OF AD.TUSTHENT <br />FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER <br />VARINiCE NO. 12-90 <br />Based upon the written request for a variance from the City's <br />zoninq code by: <br />Charles Pancerzewski <br />P.O. Box 885 <br />Mukilteo, WA 98275 <br />hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," for a variance from <br />S�c. 8 of the Zoning Code, side setback, rear lot coverage, ac- <br />cessory building lot coverage and bulkheads in setback areas, <br />to allow an addition to an existing structure that was formerly <br />used as a garage that has a zero (0) foot north side setback <br />instead of the five feet required by code. The north side of <br />the garage would be extended an additional six feet along the <br />property line. <br />on the property commonly known as: 3307 Federal (Lot <br />4, Block 785, Plat of Everett, Division H) <br />The Board of Adjustment, following a public hearing on said <br />application held on June 11, 1990, and further having reviewed <br />all testimony, makes the following Findings, Conclusions and <br />Order: <br />FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS• <br />Criterion No. 1: <br />That the variance is necessary because of exceptional or ex- <br />traordinary circumstances regarding the size, shape, <br />� topography, or location of th.e subject property; or the loca- <br />�� �► tion of a pre-existing improvement on the subject property that <br />�� conformed to the zoning code in effect when the improvement was <br />constructed. <br />�11 <br />� <br />.... � <br />a. Findinqs: The subject property consists of a single fami- <br />ly residence and a detached structure on a 25 foot by 120 <br />foot lot. Both structures are non-conforming for side <br />setback since they were constructed in the early 190o's <br />prior to our current zoning code requirements. <br />� <br />The detached structure is in very poor condition and ap- <br />pears to have been used as a qarage at some time since it <br />has a garage door; however, it is apparent that it has not <br />been used as a garage for a considerable length of time. <br />The applicant is proposinq to renovate the house and ga- <br />raqe. As part of the garage renovation, the applicant is <br />proposing to put in a cement floor and a foundation on the <br />west that will be used as a bulkhead for a fill to make a <br />level rear yard. The structure will be extended an addi- <br />tional six feet to make a total garage length of 24 feet <br />to prov:de a moce adequate space for vehicles and some <br />storaye space. The six foot extension would have a zero <br />foot side yard on the north side the same as the existing <br />qarage. <br />Conclusions: The unusual circumstances applyinq to this <br />property are the narrow lot width and the fact that there <br />are existing strnctures on the site <br />� <br />