Laserfiche WebLink
� -.__ ___ ..,.�:� ., - - <br /> :� w.... <br /> Octbber 3, 1977 <br /> The regular meeting of the Everett Board of Adjustment was held at 7:00 p,m <br /> in the City Council Chaml-iers, City Hall, Everett, Washington. - <br /> Mr, Haird presided; l4r, Russell, Mr. Kristiansen: and Mra Slack were present; <br /> • • Mre Serg was absent. ' <br /> Under old busi:�ess, Mr. James Dupler of 320 Olympic Blvd, Everett, WA 98203, <br /> withdrew his application, , <br /> The following items are under new business: <br /> 1, L. A. Akers and Howard t400re wt;o are applying for 3312 Kromer. Thev <br /> are requesting permission to construct a sinqle family residence to within <br /> ten (10) feet of the frent property line rather than the required twenty (20) <br /> feet. Also to allow for. a deck to extend six (6) feet into the rear yard <br /> setback. <br /> LEGRI. DESCRIPTIOCt: Lot 10 except th= west 85 feet thereof and Lot 11 <br /> except the west 85 feet thereof, Block 783, Stanford <br /> � - Land Company's Add. to Everett <br /> ADDRESS: Approximately 3312 Kromer � � � <br /> 4 <br /> ZONING: R-1 Single Family Low Der.sity Residence <br /> Mr. Dan Hovey, 4619 Haker Drive, repr.esented Mr. Moore and Mre Akers. <br /> N's. Bovey made the following statements: <br /> 1. That the proposed new single family residence will be 22� feet <br /> • • from ground �evel. . <br /> 2. There have been other variancec granted in the imnedieite area <br /> for similaz requests. <br /> 3. A2so that taey are proposing a residence that will minimize the <br /> loss of view to the neighbors. <br /> There was some opposition from the neighbors. The main objection was the <br /> obstruction of view that •they have been ajoying for the past many years. <br /> After visually viewing the subject property and considering all the facts <br /> and testimony, it was moved by t•Ir, Russell, seconded by Mr. Kristiansen, <br /> and unanifiocsly carried, that the variance be granted for the following <br /> reasons: ._ . <br /> � 1. It does complp with Section 19.70.060 of the EVezett bfunicipal <br /> Code, Paragraph 2, which says that such variance is necessary for <br /> • ttie preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right. <br /> of. the appellant possessed by the owners of other property in <br /> the same vicinity or zone. <br /> I <br /> i <br /> i <br /> � <br /> �r. _ <br />