3006 NASSAU ST 2016-01-01 MF Import

BOARD OF ADJUST!lENT FINDINGS� CONCLUSIONS AND ORDSR VARIANCE N0.4-8� p �(�� v �.aR 0 i 198? ................................ ._ CIT`( �f EVERE� pub:ic Works De4t. Based upon the written request for a variance from the City's zoning code by: Leona Barber 3006 Nassau Everett, WA 9g2�1 hereinaftar referred to as "applicant," for a variance from E.M.C. 19•78•040, Side Yards, to allow: an addition to an existing family residence that would have one and one-half foot side yards instead of the five feet required by Code. on the following deseribed property: Lot 28� Blk 723, Plat of Everett, Div. H Cammonly known as: 3006 Naasau The Hoard oi Adjustment, folloWing a public hearing on said application held �, on March 2, 7987 and further having reviexed all testimony, makes the ; following Findings, Conclusions and Order: EINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. That there have been axceptional or extraordinary circumstanees or conditions applying to the subject property or as to Lhe intended use thereof that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity or zone. Finding: Tiie existing single family structure was constructed in 1929 on a 25 foot xide lot with one and one-half foot side yard satbacks and is a legal nonconforming building since it was constructed prior to 1956 xhen the current zoning code was adopted. The applicant wishes to make an addition by extending the existing side walls to the west and squaring off the rear of the house. Tha 3000 square foot, 25 foot wide lot is also nonconforming as to lot area and lot width. Current code requires a 5000 aquare foot minimum lot size and a 50 foot 1ot width. The small size of the lot and the location of the existing structures limit the design possibilities. The location of the proposed addition allows for the best use of available space and leaves the small yard area available for family use. Even though it is a single family use it is located in an R-3, t9ultiple Family Low Density Residential zone which has no limit un gross floor area ratio. Conclusion: There are exceptional circumstances a�plying to this property that do not apply generally to other property in the vicinity and zone. 2. That such variance is necessary for the ;reservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the appellant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same vicinity or zone. Findin : There are other properties in this area that do not meet the required side yard setback.