1824 LOMBARD AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Cri,erion No. 1: That the variance is necessary because of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances regarding the size, shape, topography, or location of the subject property; or the location of a pre-existing improvement on the subject property that conformed to the zoning code in effect when the improvement was constructed. Findings: The appiicant has stated that the requested variance is necessary due to the narrowness of the subject property, which only measures 39 feet wide. The size of the proposed garage, 22' x 24', is such to accommodate the applicants personal vehicles on site. The garage is proposed at one foot from the rear property line in order to maintain a modest size backyard. The applicant has stated that the structure is being proposed three feet from the south property line in order to accommodate the maneuverability of a ?_4 feet long, 8.5 foot wide boat on the north side of the proposed structure. The Board finds that the oxisting residence on site is nonconforminq with respect to setbacks as it is only four feet from the southern interior property line, rather than the five feet required by code. They also find that the subject lot is substandard with regards to lot width and therefore ihe applicant is limited as to the placement of the proposed structiire on site. However they did not feel tnat a three foot interior side setback was warranted. Instead the Board finds that a four foot side setback from the southern property line is in keeping with the nonconforrning setback of the resider.ce and therefore would be no more nonconforming than what already exists on site. By placing the garage 2.5 feet off of the rear property line, rather than the one foot proposed, the structure would comply with the rea,-yard coverage requirement, and still provide for adequate yard area between the garage and the rear steps of the deck. b. Conclusions:. A reduced setback in keeping with the nonconforming selback of the residence would allow for the proposed structure to be built on site and still maintain useable storage space to the north of the proposed structure, while making the site no more nonconforming than already exists. Criterion No. 2: That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the property in the area of the subject property or to the City as a whole. a. Findings: The applicant has stated that street parking in the neighborhood is at a premium. The addition of an on site garage would allow for vehicles to be parked on site rather than on street. Additionally, a boat could be safely stored on the norih side of the proposed structure. By providing on site parking for the needs of the property, there is less of a need to utilize the limited on street parking. Section 34 of the Everett Zoning Code requires a minimum of two off street parking stalls per single family residence. The majority of the homes in the area have the ability to meet this requirement. The �Y