Laserfiche WebLink
-4- <br />There was a general discussion between the Board members and the <br />applicants to see if there were alternatives, also to establish <br />frontage, road right-of-way and height of the proposed single <br />family residence. <br />After visually viewing the subject property and considering all <br />the facts and testimony, it was moved by Mr. Zook, seconded by <br />Mr. Hoagland and unanimously carried to grant the variance as it <br />meets all the requirements of Section 19.70.060 of. the Everett <br />Municipal Code, Paragraphs 1. 2, 3, and 4. <br />A hearing was held on the application of Michael Hancock, 9402-1st <br />Avenue, Everett, Washington 98204, for a variance from Section <br />19,14.630 of the Everett Municipal Code,Minimum Lot Size, for <br />permission to reduce the square footage of four proposed single <br />family building lots of a short plat from the required minimum lot <br />size of 7,000 square feet to 6,075 square feet. <br />Legal Description: Lot 9 Block 10 Plat of Intercity <br />Add. Div. No 1. <br />Approximate Location: 1st Ave. and Marilyn in Intercity <br />Zoning: R-1 Single Family Low Density Residence <br />Mr. Hancock represented himself and made the following statements: <br />1. He purchased the property in 1965. <br />2. lie has gone to great expense to extend the sewer line to <br />his propertl. This was done previously in conjunction f <br />with another developer. <br />3. He needs a four lot short plat to make the construction <br />feasible. <br />4. Some of the requirements he has been asked to provide on <br />this project are: <br />a. Blacktop the street. <br />b. Construct curbs and gutters and sign a Power of <br />Attorney authorizing the City to go ahead with curbs <br />and gutters. <br />c. Relinquish ten foot of property along Marilyn and lst <br />Avenue to the City for road improvements. <br />d, Provide a temporary turn around. <br />A letter from the Planning Department was read into the record and <br />commented on by Gerry Ervine of the Planning Department. <br />Their memorandum indicated that if the variance was granted, an <br />unacceptable precedent would be established. <br />Also a memo from Brad Cattle, the City Attorney, was read and his <br />concern was that the Board does not have the jurisdiction to rule <br />on the subject variance. <br />Mrs. Marksworth, an adjacent neighbor, was against the granting of <br />