6509 COMMERCIAL AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

� � t� � uu � � � . NOV 1? i986 C1TY ��t� ;1�1` APPrAI, Lc,Tm�R rla�� .�•.y .. �, Re: Kenneth W. Diedrich Variance Application for existing lhzplex This application request is for . the right for the continnous use of existing duplex located at 65�9 Commercial in 3verett, �9A. Acquired subject property is c}uestion in 1978 at which time the subject property wa� a single family residence. On 11-8-82 I was issued a building permit from the city of �aerett to convert sub�ect property from single family residence to a duplex. In which I paid all necessary fees for obtaininp, necessar� building permits. In which there was also a $248.00 fee for seo-rer development. Sinc� at the time of application I have been paying commercial rates for both sewer and water. The tax assessor's office has also recognized subject propertins being a duplex. Also I have been paying higher premium for building being insured as dunlex. At time of apnlication for building��permit I was not aware that the le�al description o£ subject property was iricorrect. I£ so� I wou.ld have applied for a variance at that time in which the :verett °lanning Department was granting variance's for under sized lots. I believe that the code in question in beneficial to certain situations, In my case I do not believe so; for I have more un- built ground compa��ed to any duplex or single family residence within a one mile radius o£ subject property. I feel that I should not suffer the loss If I am made to convert back to single family residence for the majority oP the area is multipul family dwellings. In no way would th.e building adversely af£ect any of the properties within the area. To tlie best of my knowledge and belief no neighbor has any ob�ections to subject property remaining to be a duplex. The request as made is necessary for the preservation and en�oyment oP the existing use of subject property� that a:iy change wau13 be detrimental to the subject property and I, Por it would become a hardship for my family and i for we took out second mortgage at time of construction, without income from rental unit we could not af£ord to keep building. By keening subject property duplex it would not be material� detrimental to the public 's welfare nor will it be in�urious to the properties in the surrounding ar.ea, The re�uest if granted will not adversely affect the comprehensive gen�ral plan now existing. • F�cltIB�T 4 hPPucPrNr RPc�A�.