Laserfiche WebLink
1 _ <br /> BOARD OF ADJUSIMENT <br /> j FINDINGS� CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER <br /> I VARIANCE N0. 23-87 <br /> i <br /> I Based upon the xritten request for a varian�e from the City's zoning code by: <br /> James and Sandra Thomas <br /> 935 Maple St. <br /> Edmonds, WA 98020 <br /> hereinafter reFerred to as "Applicant," ior a variance from E.M.C. <br /> 19.1?.060, Height, to alloW: <br /> a 27.5 foet height limitation rather than the 25 foot liQitstion <br /> required by Code. <br /> on the follor+ing described property <br /> Lot 7, Kenilworth Hills Div. 5 <br /> The Board of Ad�ustment, following a public hearing an said application held <br /> on June 1, 1987, anu further having reviewed all testimony, makes the <br /> � following Findings, Conclusions and Order: <br /> i <br /> I FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIUNS: <br /> t. That there have been exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or <br /> conditlons applying to the sub,ject property or as to the intended use <br /> thereof that do not apply generally to other properties in the same <br /> vicinity or zona. <br /> IFindingr The applicants designed a home appropriate for the lot <br /> and in character xith the surrounding homes, some of which have <br /> received varianees from the height limitation. The proposed variance <br /> would allow construction of a traditional style two-stor.y hame that <br /> would add to the quality of the neidhborhood. <br /> i <br /> !I Conclueion: The proposed variance appears to be a reasonable request. <br /> I2, That such variance is necessary for the preservation and en,7oyment of <br /> i a subetant'.al property right of the appellant possessed by the owners <br /> iuf other properties in the same vicinLty or zone. <br /> � Findin : <br /> � Slmilar variances have bean granted for other properties in the area, <br /> including one for Lot 3 of Kenilworth Hills Uivision granted on <br /> January 6, 1987• <br /> Conclu3lon: The ��ariance rrould allow a property right possessed by <br /> other o�mers in the vicinity. <br /> 3. That the authorization of sueh variance xill not be materially <br /> detrirnental to the public welfare or in�urious to property in the <br /> vicinity or zone in which the property is located. <br /> Finding: No comments were received from other CiCy Departments. <br /> The vierrs frum this area are to the north. Since all existing <br /> residential development is to tFe north, east or west of this lot, it <br /> will not create view blockage. The property is bounded on the south <br /> by a 75-foot greenbelt buffer� which effeetively eliminates any <br /> future concerns about vieW blockage to those properties. <br />