Laserfiche WebLink
Craig Van Sant <br />Appeal 11-89 ' <br />Page -6- <br />xC� <br />to <br />The weakness in the Applicant's argument is the fact that no licensed or taxed <br />= s <br />commercial activity has occurred on the site. At no time during the previous <br />r <br />N <br />ownership was there a Business License issued by the City of Everett for the <br />tCa' S <br />business activity on -site; and, at no time during the previous ownership were <br />ri 9 3 <br />�3 x H <br />Business and Occupation taxes ever paid to the City of Everett for the <br />K C� <br />H �7 <br />business conducted on -site. <br />0 LZO <br />n H <br />The business conducted on -site appears to have been work that was done at dome <br />z <br />for the benefit of the previous owner's employer who is located outside of the <br />y pt. <br />City of Everett's city limits. All commercial transactions were done at the <br />O H <br />business office of the employer and all licenses a nd taxes were obtained and <br />ty <br />H CM <br />were paid through the employer's address, which is not an Everett address. <br />Hy <br />Thus, at best, the subject property was a workshop for an employee but was not <br />> <br />a commercial entity nor a commercial use. <br />C <br />H <br />As a result of the limited activity, the non -conforming use status for <br />N <br />commercial purposes terminated at the subject property. Further, the variance <br />0 tv En <br />issued in 1971 lapsed and is no longer controlling (reference is made to the <br />or <br />M <br />Variance Lapse Ordinance, EMC 19.70.080). Thus, because no official <br />C3C+.7 <br />y y9 W <br />documented activity has been transacted on the property, the use cannot be <br />considered non -conforming for commercial use In the R-2 zone. <br />II. <br />WAS THERE A MULTI -FAMILY NON -CONFORMING USE ESTABLISHED <br />FOR THE PROPERTY AND HAS THIS USE BEEN CONTINUOUS? <br />No record of official City action establishing the multi -family use of the <br />_ <br />subject property has been presented. In fact, the only evidence to support <br />• ' <br />multi -family historical use of tho subject property was testimony that the <br />previous owner had allowed his children to live on -site. However, the record <br />-•; <br />does indicate that the building does have a history of City intervention to <br />(�• <br />correct zoning violations at the property, including the inhabitability of the <br />structure. Included in these actions have been attempts by the City to forbid <br />occupancy of the structure for residential uses. <br />The City's actions and the lack of evidence to support a non -conforming <br />multi -family residential use prevent the property from being designated as <br />non -conforming use or as a non -conforming building. Accordingly, the property <br />- <br />cannot be considered non -conforming. <br />SUMMARY <br />Because of the failure to establish as non -conforming, either as a commercial <br />or a multi -family use or building, the property at 4228 South Third Avenue, <br />Everett, Washington, cannot be certified as a non -conforming use/building. <br />