2325 JACKSON AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

-- � � �� r� � � od � � , � ; or_,T 13 t98G .......... ................ . ...........................� CITY OF EV[RET� BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT P�!��'�� W��'�S �n�,� FZNDINGS� CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER VARIANCE N0. 37-86 Based upon the wri:ten request for a variance from the City's zoning code by: James Howe 4027C Rucker Everett, WA 98201 � hereinafter referred to as "Applicant," for a variance from E.M.C. 10.16.050(A) Front Yards and E.M.C. 19. 16.040, Gross Floor Area Ratiu to allox: construction of a single-family structure that would have an 18 foot front yard setback instead of the 20 feet required by Code and a gross floor area ratio of .40 instead of the .35 allowed by Code. ! on the following described property � Lot 30, Blk. 31, Div. B, Plat of Pinehurst commonly lmown as: East of 2321 Jackson St. , The Board uf Adjustment, folloxing a public hearing on said application held i on October 6, 1986, and fiirther having revieWed all testimony, mskes the i � � follouing Findings, Conclusions and Order: ,I I FINDZNGS AND CONCLUSIONS: I� 1. That there have heen exce�tional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the sub�eet property or as to the intended use thereof that do not apply generally to other properties in the same � vicinity or zone. � �ind3ng: Sven though the lot in question is only 2,750 sq. ft. (25 feet by 110 feet), the City has certified it as a nonconforming lot I and will a]low construction of a single family res3dence. i i The 3asis for certifying it as a buildable lot is that it was created i prior to the area being annexed to the City on Feb. 6, 1962, and has � been held as a single parcel sinee 1958. The City Hill issue building permits for a house; however, due to the small size of the � I lot, it would be difficult to build on without a variance. I i � Conclusion: There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances � applying to this property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same vicinity snd zone. 2. That sueh variance is necessaz�y for the preservation and en,joyment of a substantial property right of Lhe appellant possessed by the owners � of other propertl=s in the same vicinity or zone. Finding: The applicant aill be able to construct a more funetional home if the variances are granted. iConclusion: The variance appears to be a reasonable request. I I i � I I