06-27-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5. Slightly more than half of the proposed OAS footprint will be constructed below grade, with the portions that rise above grade high enough to be defined as a ‘story’ comprising approximately 1,400 s.f. This low profile in a south facing slope will result in a reduced degree of visual impact as compared to an OAS of 3,300 s.f footprint constructed completely above grade. The size of the proposed OAS is related to the needs of the property owner for his non-conunercial vehicle storage needs. However, the size of the OAS may be attractive to future owners who would attempt to use the OAS for business or commercial activity, which would be inappropriate and not allowed in the this residential neighiMrhood. Therefore, it would be appropriate to establish covenants that prohibit the future commercial use of this OAS. A half-bath with toilet and sink proposed on the main level of the structure are for convenience due to the distance between the OAS and the principal residence structure, and will not provide the potential for occupancy of the OAS as a separate dwelling unit. This half-bath will most likely be connected to the existing main residence septic system rather than use a holding tank. A CUP for this minimal level of plumbing is not expected to result in use of the site incompatible with the single-family dwelling nature of the neighborhood, and is not inappropriate if subject to the standard covenant limitations required by code. The City Council finds that the land area within or permanently associated with the property that is not includable toward the lot area calculation for Oversize Accessory Structure purposes, still acts as open space that mitigates the visual impacts of the oversize structure, and that the in^ility to include that area acts as a hardship to the property. If the total area of the lot and outlot including wetland is used, the lot at 4.985 acres would allow a 2,000 s.f. footprint for an individual OAS. In order to support the size structure proposed. Lot 1, Block 1 and Outlot A should continue to remain in common ownership as long as the OAS exists on the property. The City Council further finds that because the City ordinances do not address the aesthetics or visual neighborhood compatibility of accessory structures, the property could, without an OAS variance, be developed with a number and variety of accessory buildings to accomplish the applicant’s goals in a manner that would be less Page 3 of7 i