7.4. SR 02-27-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Planning Commission Page 3 January 24, 1995 -------------------------------------------- maximum standard. Variances are subject to the 5 standards outlined above. The new accessory structure ordinance, which allows 2,000 square feet for accessory structure space in the Rla zoning district and 3,000 square feet in the Al zoning district has worked well for the majority of .the residents building accessory buildings. The City only received one request in addition to this proposal to exceed the maximum size. Since the new ordinance was implemented, the City has, however, received complaints from some property owners that the City is allowing too many and too large of accessory buildings in the Rla zoning district and it is starting to distract from the residential quality of the neighborhoods. The City has also received the opposite complaint, stating that the City is too restrictive and that more accessory structure area should be allowed to enable equipment and other miscellaneous items to be stored indoors rather than outside, which can become an eyesore. Each complaint is valid. The City has also received more concerns relating to businesses starting in accessory structures. It is difficult for staff to regulate small businesses which seem to spring up over night in some of the larger accessory buildings. It is also difficult to prove in certain cases that apart-time business such as an auto body shop exists in an accessory building without a great .deal of staff time proving the matter. All in all, however, it does appear that the current ordinance works well for the majority of the property owners. It is important to note that virtually any reasonable standard for accessory structure area will be challenged from time to time through a variance request. Staff feels it is important to develop a reasonable standard and not deviate from that standard unless valid findings exist. RECOMMENDATION Although staff sympathizes with Mr. LeFebvre's request to store his motor home indoors, it is staff's opinion that this particular request does not meet the five conditions for granting a variance and therefore, recommends denial of the variance to exceed the maximum size of accessory structure area based on the following findings: 1. Literal application of the provisions of this ordinance will not deprive the petitioner of substantial property rights, as he is still allowed to build 2,000 sq. ft. of accessory building area. 2. Other property owners in this area are also subject to the same requirements for accessory structures, therefore, the situation is not unique to Mr. LeFebvre's property. There are no special conditions or circumstances which are peculiar to the land or • structure causing the need for a variance. pc:v94-18