2003_1215_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

rear yards. The City Planner has determined that the original front yard, that adjacent to Sextant Avenue would remain the front yard, though strictly applying the City Code would conclude that with a corner lot the narrower frontage is the front lot line, thus the front yard. Further complicating matters is the rear yard, which is the opposite of the front yard. Mere, the City Planner has determined that the rear lot line is the north property line (opposite the front lot line) thus the rear yard. But again, the strict application of the City Code would prescribe the east property line as the rear yard. Lastly, the City Planner has determined that the interior side lot line is the east property lute} thus an interior side yard, and the west property line is determined to be the lot line adjacent a public street or corner lot setback. The Community Development Staff has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner (charge in type of lot and setback application because of frontage road). 5.12 The variance, r;f grante f, will not alter the essential character of the locality: Although a large attached garage is not a design feature of a 1950's home, the neighboring parcel to the north has a similar sized attached garage to that proposed by the City Planner. The reduced size proposed by the C ity P fanner 2 6 feet by 52 feet (1,3 44 sq. ft.) can be designed similar to that originally proposed by Mr. Norris and compatible with the existing home and neighborhood (hip roof, windows that minimize massing impacts, brick exterior building material, corner lot design). The Community Development Staff has determined that a 26 foot by 56 foot (1,352 sq. ft *) attached garage with the suggested variances, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality, nor adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare, of the city or adjacent properties, 6.o STAFF 1 COMMENDATION: 6.1 On December 3, 2003 the Community Development Department recommended approval of an 18 foot VARIANCE to Section 1004.02D4 (side yard adjacent a street) and a 9 foot VARIANCE to Section 1004.02d5 (rear yard setback) of the Roseville City Code for Daniel Dorris to allow the construction of a an attached garage at 1 547 Sextant Avenue, based on the information prodded and the findings in Section 5 and conditions of Section 6 of the project report dated December 3, 2003. 7.0 PLANNING COMM ION AC'T'ION: 7.1 On December 3, 2003, the Roseville Planning Commission held the public hearing regarding the Norris Variance request. No citizens were present to address the Conunissio . 7.2 The -Planning Commission asked questions of staff and the applicant pertaining to the two proposals (applicant & staff. Specifically, the Conuaission was interested in mowing the need for such an enormous attached garage and what the applicant felt were the hardships. PF3541 - RCA 121503 - Page 5 of 7