4944 ELM ST 2016-01-01 MF Import

-- _ - - � � � � o � � � AP D R 0 1 1989 ........................................................................ CITY OF EVERETT Public Wurks Uept. HOARD OF ADJIJSTFIL�N'P FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER VaRIliNCE NO. 3-89 Based upon the written request for a variance from the City's zoning code by: Michael T. Anderson 4944 Elm St. Everett, WA 98203 hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," for a variance from E.M.C. 19.14.050 (C) , Rear Yards to allow the addition of a single car garage to an existing single family home and provide a rear yard setback of six feet rather than the twenty feet required by code. On the Pollowing described property: Div. 3, Lot 44 , View Ridge Addition Commonly known as: 4944 Elm St. The Hoard of Adjustment, following a public hearing on said ap- plication held on April 3 , 1989, and further havinq reviewed all testimony, makes the following Findings, Conclusions and Order: FINDINGS aND CONCLIISIONS: �it rion No. 1• That there have been exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject property or as to the in- tended use thereof that do not apply generally to other proper- ties in the same vicinity or zone. a. Findina: The property consists of an existinq single fam- ily structure that was constructed in 1950 on a 75 foot by 100 foot corner lot. The house is oriented to the east towards Elm Street and has an east and west setback greater than the twenty foot front and rear yard required by code; how- ever, the zoning code defines the front yard as beinq to the north towards Alder Street since that is the length of the lot. The Applicant is proposinq to construct a sinqle car attached garage on the south end of the ex- isting sinqle family structure that would be six feet from the south property line . Since the zoning code defines the south yard as the rear yard the code requires a twenty foot setback in- stead of the six feet the Applicant is proposing. The house on the adjoining lot to the south is also oriented towards Elm Street so their side yard would abut the six foot setback the appli- cant is proposinq which would function as a side yard instead of a rear yard. b. Conclusion: There are unusual circumstances applying to the subject property since it is a corner lot and there is an existing single family structure on the lot that is oriented to what is technically the side yard but that is functioninq as a front yard since it has the required twenty foot set- back. In addition the side yard of the house to the south abuts the portion of the subject lot where the proposed garage will be constructed, so the new construction will match the existinq set- back pattern (see Exhibit 4) .