Resolution 3326 - Laserfiche WebLink

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