Laserfiche WebLink
fronts Rockefeller Avenue, while the other residence at the rear of the property is <br /> a rental. The main residence is in need of repairs, including replacement of <br /> siding that is separating and causing water damage. In addition, a carport and <br /> shed on the south side of the main residence are rotting and must be replaced. <br /> In order to repair the residence, the carport must be removed. The Applicant <br /> proposes to rebuild the carport as a one-car garage with an attached garden <br /> shed. Financing for these repairs is through a housing repair loan by the Everett <br /> Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP). (exhibit 1, staffreport, page <br /> 2; exhibit 3, site plan, page 1; testimony of Ms. Weldon; testimony of Mr. <br /> Erickson) <br /> 5. The carport and shed near the main residence on-site are approximately 12 <br /> inches from the property line. The carport is in disrepair. The eaves from the <br /> roof of the shed cross the abutting property line. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 2; <br /> testimony of Ms. Weldon) <br /> 6. The City, during review of the non-conforming nature of the property, considered <br /> the architecture and location of the shed and carport. Upon review of the <br /> application for non-conformance certification, it was determined that the shed <br /> and carport were constructed after 1961, five years after the zoning code <br /> standards were established in the City. The shed and carport were not certified <br /> as non-conforming. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 2; exhibit 11, non-conforming <br /> certification; testimony of Ms. Weldon) <br /> 7. The shed and carport were constructed sometime between 1961 and 1978. <br /> When the Applicant purchased the subject property in 1978, they were on the <br /> property. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 2; testimony of Ms. Weldon) <br /> 8. The variance will not be materially detrimental to the property in the area or to the <br /> City as a whole. Public notice was given to all property owners within 500 feet of <br /> the subject property. There were two responses. A resident on FairFax Avenue <br /> (Westmoreland) submitted that the grant of a variance will provide additional <br /> safety for the adjacent house and the Applicant. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 2; <br /> exhibit 10, comment letters; page 1; festimony of Ms. Weldon) A resident on <br /> Rockefeller Avenue (Williams) did not specifically disagree with the requested <br /> variance but questioned whether it would set a precedent for future requests. <br /> (exhibit 1, staff report, page 2; exhibit 10, comment letters, page 2; testimony of <br /> Ms. Weldon) <br /> 9. The carport and shed have been in existence for many years, and the proposed <br /> one-car garage would be compatible with the existing residence and the <br /> adjoining property. The City submitted that the grant of the variance would not <br /> result in a precedent. (exhibit 1, staff report, page 3; testimony of Ms. Weldon) <br /> 10. The variance is necessary because of the circumstances regarding the location <br /> of a pre-existing improvement on the property and its size and shape. The shed <br /> / <br /> 3 '� <br /> ,:� <br />