Laserfiche WebLink
;s an <br />:that <br />ions: <br />\ any <br />ire of <br />s: <br />area <br />all be <br />)n the <br />from <br />icture <br />:fmed <br />sless. <br />;s and <br />n a lot <br />e time <br />; order <br />essorv' <br />ii. If the property is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and principal <br />structure will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area requirement for the <br />given size of accessory building. <br />iii. In subdivision approval, the setback required for the oversize accessory <br />structure as defined herein shall remain. <br />Such covenant shall be binding on current and future property owners and shall be filed in <br />the chain of title of the property. <br />Property Setback <br />The applicant has requested the subdivision approval be amended to allow a rear yard to be <br />reclassified as a side yard. The property line in dispute is the west line. Building a house with the <br />rear of the house facing west would result in the activities associated most with a back yard being <br />located in what may become a side yard in the future for a property owner to the west. Back yards <br />function differently than side yards for "family activities". Staff is comfortable with the proposal if <br />the property owners agree to a condition a house will be built with the rear of the house being <br />oriented to the north. Therefore the west property line will serve as a side y^d. A second condition <br />would be to extend the front yard setback to 50' along the entire south lot line since it will serve as <br />a front yard. If the Planning Commission agrees Staff recommends the final Resolution recognize <br />this as a building standard to be met by present and future property owners. <br />Issues for Discussion <br />1 . When the Little Orchard Addition was approved it was the City's understanding the stable <br />and other outbuildings within the subdivision would be removed. The stable is an asset to <br />the property and the ovvners wish to keep the building, but are subject to movirig the structure <br />and placing a restrictive covenant over the lot for an oversized accessory building. <br />2. Is it the City's position the west property line should ser>/e as a side yard? <br />3. A Condition of reclassifying the property line should be that the residence must be oriented <br />not to use that portion of the property as the "rear yard'. It would make sense to construct <br />a residence facing the south. <br />U2494 Dan Andersen <br />2885 Little Orchard Way <br />Variance <br />5/17/99 <br />Page 4