Laserfiche WebLink
reminded there are code enforcement mechanisms in place to ensure maintenance, regardless of size or <br />ownership. <br />Since the meeting, the applicant has submitted an updated narrative: <br />In response to the Board of Adjustments reason of denial. Our response is. <br />9. Is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. This is correct without any <br />avrittenl attached covenants. A covenant recorded on the property deed stating that the parcel is not buildable would meet <br />this intent. The proposed split allows us to maintain the distinct character of our immediate area by maintaining a space <br />that has not been previously built upon. <br />2. The plight of the petitioner is not due to circumstances unique to the property. Not to split and sell <br />the eastern half of the property is one option. The other, to replat. Option one (above) is a valid reason not to replat. <br />3. The variance will alter the essential character ofthe locality. The essential charier of the proper will <br />only be altered if.• <br />■ A structure is built on the properly <br />■ No covenants are recorded on the property deed <br />■ Covenants recorded on the deed, are not enforced by the governing agency <br />ire accept a covenant of restriction and want to emphasi.Ze that this simple lot split will ensure that the property mill be <br />maintained as it is today, as a natural green space. This space will allow for families to garden and safely enjoy the outdoor <br />environment. <br />If the City Council determines the variance should be approved, staff recommends a deed restriction be <br />recorded, at the same time the variance is recorded, stating the parcel cannot be developed, unless platted as a <br />conforming parcel or combined with an adjacent conforming parcel. <br />Financial Impact <br />None <br />Attachments <br />■ Updated Narrative <br />■ Board of Adjustments Memo dated August 25, 2020 <br />