5114 NARBECK AVE 2016-01-01 MF Import

.+rr NARRATIVE STATEMENT ,,�.,, I am submitting a varianca reque5t �o ci�ar,c�e the setback requiremsnts for my let- lcnown as l,at 3. NarUeck A✓a. The setback reque�ted on tha east side of the p2•oa�rty is IS raet insteaci of 25 Yeet. and on the wesr sida 20 ceet instead of 25 feet. (Re4ui!-�ments equal to or less than �hess are alreadj in existance in some Snohomish C:�untY developments) (?) I feel th,�t tha nresent determination oc the east border baing declared thP front of the Prop=:t�: penalize:; 1ut 9 hecause there is no access available to the pr•o�erty From thia direction at all. The Proposed road extension of idarbeck Avz is �ust that, Aroposed and non-e;tista�:t t� serv� thi.s property. Public works informed me it had hjo time tuble fur �nis road when T_ inauired at the be3inning of 19t37. (2) Under pres=_nt zoning ot RS. 12,50�J sq ceet of land is required for a residential lot. Lot 9 contaius only 11,911 sq feet bacause Psrt of it :vas dadicated for the road ri.ght-of-way by agreement of the city and the developer. I was told br a city planning de[�artment employea 1:hat this nresented no problem, however, to obtainine a builditig permit be�ause the condition er.isted as a benefi� to Y.he citY. Ttie problem created, however, is that the lot is already at disadvanta3�� b�� havzng 6£i8 sci feet less of SP3CC than do all the other ioCs. (3? All other lots of Narbeck Park have EO feet of road frontaqe which allows a E1e�ibilit; of home design and access to Y.hat home. LoY. 9 has ap;�roximatel7 20 ieet of 3CCES31U1Llty and is then land lockad on ail remairiing horders. (4) This prop=rtv is cunsi-ler�d vie�r p mperty, as are all tha other lots of tha surroundin� area. it To take acivanta3e eE the view, it is ne�essary r.o build the front or.ientation of the home facins the north (��r 3own the scr=et). If the sarage were to be placed to ba uasabl= from tha e,tiistin� aaproa;:h as platted, and the e�:isting setback of 25 feet were ;net, I would find the livin4 part of my house with very little ef Lhe view (pe:haps 10a) left accessi�te beca.ise of �he existir:g neuse cr. lot 7. (5) After conferrin4 �ith the planning d=partment Earlier this Year i sec aoout te ha•.�s a house designad (aL great expensel and in the. most reasonanle cashion, lwith th> 7.ivir.g areas in the view zone instead of th� garae�). I arrived at an agreement with �1r. Bigelc:v, che uwner af iot 8, on eranting an easement of insress and egress over the driv� area of his or�pertY. It was after all. oE this had b�en undsrtaken : discovered that I had heen misinformed on my nr=vic�us inquit-y LO Y119 piannins deFaYtment as tc the rear setbac� requirments for thi., lot. T had prev�ously been informed GY13L 20 feet was required and was suese�iuer.tly told "IJo. som�one must have madGa mistal:e, it's 25 feet". This creates a ma�or problem as the house is now too lone. The other par� of the Problem with conformic:g to the east setback of 25 f=et is t;�� curving lot line r..reated by the road right-of-way. I am ia comL�liance with it i:i the back, out noc in the fr»c. (Plea�e note alot map ror clarification of this point). EXHIBIT 3 NARRATIVE STATEMENT