1329 63RD ST SE 2018-01-02 MF Import

M 0% Narrative Statement - Background Information - Our decision to rebuild the garage was developed from the following. The existing structure needs a new roof which is estimated at costing $2000.00. We have two vehicles for commuting to work, one vehicle to haul a boat, and two motorcycles. The existing structure only covers two vehicles. Adding two more spaces (one garage and one carport) would cost appx. $1500.00. Maintenance and improvements on this structure would involve a $3500.00 investment. The existing structure is awkwardly placed in the middle of our backyard, leaving a 16' yard between the house and garage and a somewhat larger yard behind the garage at the back of the lot. We are just starting a family and currently have one baby. There is no good place on our lot for a small child to play safely. The front yard is adjacent to a busy through street linking Evergreen and Beverly Blvd. where drivers In do not follow the 25 mph speed limit. The one back yard is too small for play area and the other yard is not visible from the house. IMX Considering the $3500.00 already required for necessary maintenance and improvements to the existing structure, we feel an additional investment by relocating the structure would give us more for our money and better utilization of the space on the lot. We are seeking a variance to Chapter 19.16.040 of the R2 zoning code which limits the maximum lot coverage by an accessory structure to "10% of lot covered or 1000 square feet which ever is less". The knit total lot square footage is 17,000 and the proposed structure is 1700 sq. ft. or 10% of the total lot size. The exceptional circumstances unique to the subject property are that most other lots in the general area have been subdivided or are smaller and therefore do not have the space available for& a building equal to the size of cur proposed structure. Only one lot with equal size has rear lot access. Also other property owners in the area do not appear to have the same amount of property possesions or hobbies that the subject property owners have. Therefore they do not require the eize of building equal to the proposed structure. The appellants feel that they have the right to coven and protect all three vehicles, boat, and motorcycles from the v;eather while maintaining the current size of workspace available in the existing structure. The difference between the sq. footage of the existing ve proposed structure is one garage and one carport space. At least three other property owners within 300 feet of subject property have sizable garages and shops. One has 1400 sq. ft. In between three buildings which gives him coverage for six vehicles. Another has 1000 sq. ft. between two buildings and still another and has a 900 sq. ft. structure. All properties in the vicinity of the appellant have sizable back yards that are visible from the house making for a safe place for children to play. EXHIBIT 3 NARRATIVE STATEMENT