Laserfiche WebLink
c� <br />b. Conclusions: The granting of the variance would pertnit the <br />subject property the same rights enjoyed by other properties <br />in the area. <br />Crkerion No. 4: <br />That the variance is the minimum necessary to allow the subJect property <br />the general rights described in Criterion 3. <br />a. Findfnps: See Criteria #3. <br />b. Conelusions: See Criteria #3 <br />CNbrlo� No. 3: <br />The granting of the variance is consistent with the goals and polides of <br />the Everett General Plan. <br />a. Flndinps: The Everett General Plan designates this proparty <br />as 4.4 Mixed Use Commeraal/Multiple Family. <br />b. Concluslons: The proposed signage, for the commerGal <br />use of the subject property, is consistent with the Everett <br />General Plan. <br />CrlteHon No. 8: <br />The need for the requested variance is not the result cf a self-created <br />hardship. <br />a. Flndinps: The applicant has stated that the sign must be <br />removed due to a street widening project. The irregular <br />shape of the lot (triangular), and the location of the existing <br />building on site, have the effect oi limiting where the sign can <br />be reWcated lo on site. The sign was erected in the early <br />fifties, and remodeled in the eighties, both in compliance with <br />the codes in effect at that time. The proposeu location o( the <br />sign provides for both visibility of the sign, as well as moving <br />towards compliance with current code requirements. <br />b. Concluslons: The existing sign was erected with all required <br />permits and met the codes in effect at the time. There are <br />unique circumstances regarding the location of existing <br />improvements on the property and the shape of the lot, which <br />make the re'ocation of a sign on site difficult. The sign is <br />being removed due to circumstances beyond the applicanPs <br />