Laserfiche WebLink
In granting the variance in ques�ion the Board did not find <br /> as required by the ordinance, that tnere are er.ceptional or extra- <br /> ordinary circumstances or conditions app1Ying to the subject pro- <br /> � that do not apply yenerally <br /> i <br /> perty or as to the ir.tended use thereof. or zone. Conseqvently, the � <br /> to other properties in the same vicinity � <br /> Boards action in granting the variance was ultra-vires and should ; <br /> iI <br /> 1 <br /> be reversed. � <br /> p, THE BOARD OF AD.TUSTMENT ACTED 1 <br /> pRBITRARILY �D C�ND INUDISREGAR� �F <br /> CONSIDERATION, � <br /> TFiE FACTS, �`1D IN AN ULTRA VIRES MANNER I <br /> gy GgANTING A• VARIANCE WI�i�UT EVIDENCE <br /> IN THE RECORD THAT SPECIAL CONDITIONS _ <br /> PERTAIN TO THE PROPERTY SUCH THAT AN <br /> UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP WOULD RESULT FROM <br /> THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE OFF-STREET <br /> PARKING RERUI�MENT. <br /> The Everett Municipal Code, �ection 19 .70.060A, provides that <br /> ustment may authorize variances �i <br /> � the Board of Adj • i, <br /> "only -where, owing to special �hedliteralp-enforcement� � <br /> a specific piece .of property, <br /> ot the provisions. . .of this title would cause undue or <br /> unnecessary hardship." owin to <br /> There is no competent proof in the record that, 9 <br /> special conditions pertaining to the property in question. an undue <br /> or vnnecessary hardship would result from the enforcement o{hehe <br /> off-street parking requirements. Thus. the order grantin4 <br /> variance was made without consideration, and in disregard, of the <br /> facts. Sucr arbitrary and capricious, ultra-vires action warrants <br /> reversal. State ex rel Carpenter v. Everett Hoard of Ad'ustment. <br /> 7 Wn. App. 930 , 503 P.Za 1191 (1972) % <br /> State ex rel Randall, su ra, <br /> at �• <br /> -9- j <br />