615 LAUREL DR 2016-01-01 MF Import

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Criterion No. 1: That the variance is necessary because of exceptional or eatraordinary circumstances regarding the size, shape, topography, or location or the subjec! property; or the location of a pre-existing improvement on the subject property that conformed to the zoning code in efTect when the improvement was constructed. a. Findinqs: The applicant has stated that ihe requested variance is necessary due to the unusual location and orientation of the existing residence. The house is located on the northwest corner of the lot with the front of the house facing east. The applicant has stated that there is not room for expansion to the north or west of the residence, and that constructing to the east would impair the architectural elegance of the rEsidence. The addition to the south would allow for the expansion of tlie current kitchen as well as provide for a second set of stairs to ti�e seccnd floor, which is a primary objective of this remodel project. The Board finds that exceplional and unique circumstances exist with regard to the subject property that were created when the house was originally constructed approximately 90 years ago. The structure was built prior to any zoning code standards coming into effect, and therefore the proposed area of expansion functions more like a side yard lhan the front yard, and the proposed improvement will be consistent with the existing building fa�ade. Also, the proposed expansion will include a set of stairs up to the existing second floor which will provide for an alternate means of escape from the upper tevel o( the house, thereby improving the safety of the si!e. b. Conclusions: � he subject property has unique design features that res�dted during the construction of the residence over 90 years a.7o, which are not typical throughout the City of Everett. The structure is I�cated in one corner of the lot with an orient2tion toward the side of the lot rather than toward the street, creating an extraordinary situation by virtue of the location of the improvements on site. Criterion No. 2: That the variance will not be materially detrimental to the property in the area of the subject property or to the Cily as a whole. a. Findinqs: The applicant has stated that the proposed remodel will add living space to the residence while retaining the arr.hitectural style of ;he structure, and not creating any view blockage. The Board of Adjustment is authorized to grant devialions from the City's Zoning Code which regulates the building setback from the property line. b. Conclusions: The City provided written noti�e to all property owners within 300 feet af the subject site. The City did receive hvo letters in support of the variance from neiohboring property owner= which have been included a= Exhibils #6 &#7. - L `��