2011_0328_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

6 J11 5,3 broader community would be slight at most. Renters of the AID U will likely add a few &4 vehicle trips to the local road network each day; some could argue that the additional 65 vehicles constitute a negative impact on traffic (arid a violation of this general 66 criterion , but Planning Division staff has found in item "d" above that the potential,, 6 7' additional traffic would not impose an excessive burden on the public street 68 infrastructure. Likewise,, some may claim that a rental AID U will negatively impact 69 their property values (again, violating this criterion); staff believes that an AD U in 7'0 this location would not have a noticeable effect on the value of nearby property, nor 7'1 does staff believe that spending thousands of dollars on a proper market study to 7'2 isolate and quantify the potential effect on property values would be a judicious 7`3 expenditure. 74 5.2 REVIEW OF SPECIFIC CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA.- Section 1009.02D of the City Code 7'5 establishes additional standards and criteria that are specific to ADUs. This section of the 7'6 ordinance includes several such requirements, but the applicable ones are as follows. 7 . .... 7' a. An AD shall be located on a lot occupied by a one family dwelling. The proposal 7'8 would meet this requirement because the principal use on the property is a one-family 7'9 dwelling. 80 b. No more than one AD U hall be allowed on a lot. This requirement will be satisfied 81 as long as additional units are not approved or created in the future. 82 c. The one family dwelling on the lot shall be owner-occupied. Compliance with this 8'3 requirement will be verified as part of the required, annual registration of rental units &4 for each year the AID U is to be rented. 85 d. Maximu size of the AD U shall not exceed 600 square feet of living area. The 86 proposed ADU has approximately 710 square feet of living area, but the living area is 8 7' already configured as a separate dwelling unit from the main residence. Although 88 statutes and ordinances pertaining to nonconformities require that the potential use of 89 this living area an AID be formally approved as a CONDITIONAL USE,, the 90 nonconforming size of the unit is an existing condition that can be allowed to remain 91 as a nonconformity. Approving the present application would not eliminate the 92 nonconformity of the size of the second dwelling unit, but an approval would allow 9'3 the City to regulate the AID U as a conforming use. 94 e. The ADU shall have setbacks that meet the setback requirements for principal 95 structures on the property. The proposed AID U is within the principal structure, above 96 the existing attached garage. Since the living area is not proposed to be expanded 9 7' beyond its current limits, the proposal will satisfy this requirement. 98 5.3 Roseville's Development Review Committee, a body comprising staff from various City 99 departments,, met on February 17, 2011 to discuss the application. The only comments 100 not already represented in this report are that the formal approval of the AID U will trigger 101 heightened requirements in the building code; this does not affect the consideration of the 102 land use request, and the building permit required for the proposed improvements will 10'3 not be issued by the Building Official if the plans fail to meet the more stringent 1 G4 standards. 10 5 5.4 Review of the proposed AID U against the CONDITIONAL USE standards and criteria leads 106 Planning Division staff to conclude that the use can meet all of the applicable 10 7' requirements. Some of the requirements (e.g., owner-occupancy of the principal dwelling PFI I -004—RCA. — 032811 Page 3 of 4