119 W INTERCITY AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

LEGI�L DES�_ TPTION: The south 90 f.eet of Lot 11, Block 4, Shore Acres Add. to Everett. ADDRESS: ZONIAT� : Approx. 51ub Alki Dr. ��ngle Family Suuuruan Residential Mr. Bedient represented himself an� mentione3 the fact that Alki Street is a dead end street so there would be litt-le impact from e.dditional traffic. n neighbor, D1rs. Cook, objected to an additional single family neing built as she does not want her view obstrucced, 7'here was no other opposition from the audience. After vi�ual observation of the subject property and consideri.ng a'1 the facts and testimony, the IIoard granted the variance because it meets i:he re�quirements of Code No, 15,04.370 (Jurisdiction - Vari.ances) and because of the snecial nai:ure of the toPography of the lot, it does not adversely affect the comprehensive land use plan. i A hearing r�as held on the application of Lyle Posey, 119 V�est Intercity, �verett, 47A, for a variance from Section 19.14.050 i E.M.C. (Everett Dlunicipa7. Code) Yard Requirements, paragraph "A", � for permission t-o leave an existing carport to withi�i two (2) i£eet of the iront property line rather than the code requirement iof. twenty (?0) feet. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1G, Block 5, Znterci�y Div. 1 � ADDRESS: ZONING: 119 West Intercity Avenue R-1 Single I'amily Low De:isity Residence Dir. Posey spo}:e in his behali and made ihe f:ollowinq statements: 1. If the carport is allowed to remain, it would he a valuable asset to i:he area. 2. FIe L-hought the front yard setback should be thirty (30) feet from the centcr of the road right-of-tvay and di.d noi }:now where the City property line ended and . his property line started. 3. No building permit t•ras issued for the construciion of the carport as he did not know one was needed. There was no further conunent from the audience. After visuall_y viewing the subject property and consideri_nq all the facts and testinony, it c•:as moved by i•9r.. Russell, s��o;�a�a by Mr. Rristiansen, and unanimously approved to deny the applicant',. request for the fo].lowing reasons: 1. Nad t}ie request been asked before the �tructure c;as built, the Board caould noi: have c7ranted the r.cquest.