2610 HILLSIDE LN 2016-01-01 MF Import

*o FROM DATE suo�ccr Mayor Anderson Frank Bennett May 8, 1969 Hillside Lane (N!r. Henry Bekker) � � 'J �� tUl MAY 8 '� :3 C-- �'[AYOR'S OFFICE �- � .�--G L( �: c. !� c. (� � 7 QTV OF P'ERETT. [VCqCiT \t�SMINGtON The question has been raised why a variance from the Zoning Code �vas granted to Mr, Henry Bekker permitting him to subdivide property abutting Hillside Lane into t�vo Suilding sites when only 30 feet of the property was aUutting a public dedicated street (Hillside Lane), Section 15, 04. O50 of Everett's Zoning Code states: "No lot or tract shall be subdivided for use as a building site. ..... unless all subdivisions aUut, for a minimum of 40 feet, on a public dedicated sl:reet or road. " Mr. Bekl:er's property was divided into its present configuration (30 feet only abutting Hillside Lane) prior to annexation oE this area into the city, Because of this fact, tlie City cannot take away the inherent right to constrnot a residence on this property, even though there is less than the required 40 feet abutting a dedicated road, Because the property o��ied by bir, Bekker contained 31, 500 square feet, the applicant requested a variance to subdivide this tract into two building sites of 15, 750 square feet each, This square footage was well above Uie 12, 500 �qqgre feet required by the code Uut oUviously did not abut 40 feet on a public dedicated street, It was the intention of the applicant to use the 30 foot strip of land as a common pri��ate driveway, It was the consensus of the Board of Adjustment that to require Mr. Bekicer to retain 3I, 000 square feet for one building site when the vast majority of existing home sites in the area was decidedly less would deprive thc o��mer ot suUstantial property rights possessed by other owners in the vicinity. The fact that this particular piece of property could in no �vay be suUdivided into t�vo building sites aUutting a dedicated road consti- tuted exceptional circumstances, Finally tlie Sranting of the ��ariar.ce �vould not, in thc Uoard's opinion, Ue detrimental to public welfare and the comprehensive plan would not Ue adversely affected, It must be noted thatthere was absolutely no logical method of obtaining a public dedicated street of required w•idth in order to serve Mr. Bekker's property, This is not a fact for property located east of Seavie�v Avenue. In that area there is a large amount of unused land capable of being platted into typical suUdivision tracts. �1'hen this is the case, the IIoard of Ad)'ustment docs not havc the prerogative to grant variar�ces for one or two building sites tliat may jeopardize future platting, If flie City does not require proper platting �vith dedication of adequate streets and installafion of necessary utalities, this area ��zll gro�v like Topsy tvith no rhyme or reason, The City�s responsibility is to require logical development of vacant property even though more than one individual or property owner must be involvea, Likewise, the City must protect tr., operty rights of o�vners ��•ho have in e£fect made legitiniate developmer.t decisions prior to coming under the city regutahons. This is one purpose of the Board of Adjustment. As 1 recall my conversation wzth Mr. Jake Kellam, he �ranted to subdivide property, without procid`_ng a public road, in an area that �vas conducive to piatting, �Vere this Permitted, :t would effecfively negate any future ?ogical development of a much larger area, �'�