204 E MAGNOLIA AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

� Alfred Norby Appeal Page -2- FINDINGS OF FACTS 1. On March 11, 1968, the subject property, a lot consisting of 7,300 square feet, had a zoning designation of R-2, Single Family High Density Residential Zone. On that date, the 3oard of Adjustment of the City of Everett granted the Appellant a variance to build a duplex on the lot. This variance was granted pursuant to the ordinances in effect at that time. (Doughty testimony) , For the length of the term of the variance at the time of the granting of the variance, Ordinance 3572 Section 20 (H) was the controlling ordinance. That section of the Everett Zonit�g Code cequired that a Building Permit and/or Occupancy Permit must be obtained within one year from the date of the Board's decision or the variance espired. (Staff report) 3. After obtaining the variance, the Appellant did not obtain a Building Permit and/or Occupancy Permit and 3id not construct a duplex on the site. It was not until the spring cf ].986 that the Appellant sought to obtain the nec�ssary permits to effectuate the variance obtained in 1968, and, the C`ty of Everett denied the Appellant the permit to construct the duplex. The d=nial was based on the fact that the Appellant 'had not effectuated the variance within the time allowed by Everett law. (Doughty testimony, staff report) 4. In 1984 the �verett City Council approved an ordinance prohibiting vaciancrs for increase of lct densities. As a result, the Agpellant cannot reapply for a variance to construct a duplex on the subject property. (Doughty testimony) 5. The Appellant submitted that th� variance was ac4uired prior to depressed economic condit'sons in western Washington and the City of Everett. As a result, it was financially difficult to consttuct a duplex at the time he had received the variance. As a result, he delayed the construction of the duplex until the time o£ his retirement, .�hich occurred cecently. (Norby testimony) 6. A witness testified that the appeal should be denied and that no duplex should be allowed in the single family zone in which the property is located. In addition, the witness submitted that geo�ogical reasons prohibit the allowance of a duplex on the subject property. (Lane testimony)