Resolution 3208 - Laserfiche WebLink

0d6 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION RE: AP-#2-89 4/27/89 Page 4 3 . Subsequent to the Hearing Examiner' s June 3 , 1988 decision, the Everett City Council approved a merger clause in the City of Everett' s Zoning Code. This merger clause, approved on October 13 , 1988 , required that lots that do not meet zoning standards and are acquired by common conveyance prior to December 1 , 1956 , are to be considered merged. This ordinance changed the procedure approved by the Hearing Examiner. 4 . Subsequent to the June 3 , 1988 , Hearing Examiner decision, but prior to the October 13 , 1988 City Council amendment of the Zoning Code for merger clauses the Applicant filed an application for development of property on 3402 Tulalip Avenue, Everett, Washington. On September 2 , 1988 , the Applicant filed for a boundary line adjustment for three lots on the subject property. 5 . The new merger clause in the Everett Zoning Code requires that lots that do not meet zoning standards and that are acquired by common conveyance prior to December 1 , 1956 , be merged so that they conform to the Zoning Code requirements of lot size, frontage and width standards. The application, as submitted by the Appli- cant, would not qualify for a boundary line adjustment under this ordinance, but it does satisfy the requirements of the City boundary line adjustment ordinance in effect at time of application. 6 . On October 31 , 1988 , the Planning Department granted prelimi- nary approval to the boundary line adjustment application sub- mitted by the Applicant for the property at 3402 Tulalip Avenue, Everett, Washington. 7 . Notice of boundary line adjustments by the City was not required and thus, the City did not provide notice to adjacent property owners of the pending action. . The City also did not notify contiguous property owners of its decision to grant pre- liminary approval on October 31, 1988. No appeal of the City' s Administrative Determination was submitted. 8 . Subsequent to preliminary approval, survey activity occurred on the subject property. At that time the Planning Department received inquiries about the boundary line adjustment. 9 . In light of a Washington Court of Appeals decision R/L. Associates v. Klockars , 52 Wn App 7260n February 3 , 1989, the City Planning Department reviewed the preliminary approval of October C00143