2008_0728_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

11 7' 400 BACKGROUND 4.1 Roseville's housing stock has generally been well maintained, but as the space needs and preferences of homeowners change over time, even small improvements are limited by zoning regulations. If a variance were required for some minor deviation from Code requirements but the property owner could not demonstrate the "hardship" condition that is essential for approving a variance, the homeowner would be discouraged from continuing to make investments in the property. 4.2 In 1999 the Zoning Ordinance was amended to allow the Community Development Director to review and approve (subject to certain conditions and criteria) limited encroachments into required setbacks without requiring the homeowner prove that s/he would be burdened by some undue hardship if the provisions of the Code were strictly enforced. The policy decision at that time was that allowing minor deviations from zoning requirements to facilitate ongoing investment in Roseville's housing stock was more preferable than relaxing the zoning requirements (e.g., reducing the required front setback from 30 feet to 25 feet) or effectively preventing reasonable improvements by strictly enforcing the existing City Code. 4.3 Since this Setback Permit process was adopted, at least 175 such minor deviations have been reviewed administratively, and most of these were approved since applications are typically not submitted if the fundamental conditions for approval cannot be achieved by the property owner. Without an administrative process of review and approval, the vast majority of the residential improvements represented by the Setback Permit applications would never have been made because of the lack of a true "hardship". 4.4 Planning Division staff has identified several passages in the existing ordinance language pertaining to Setback Permits (i.e., §1013.05 of the City Code) that are confusing, unnecessarily repetitive, or in conflict with the intent of the ordinance. As staff has considered corrective changes, minor excesses in impervious coverage have stood out as another category of deviations from code requirements that could be reviewed and approved or denied through a similar administrative process. 5.0 REVIEW OF THE EXISTING SETBACK PERMIT PROLESS 5.1 Setback Permits can be applied only to properties zoned R- I (i.e., single-family) or R-2 (i.e., duplex) , and allow for the following: a. principal structure encroachments of up to 6 feet into the front yard setback and/or principal structures as close as 3 feet from a side property line; b. accessory structures as close as 3 feet from side and/or rear property lines; and c. driveway/parking area encroachments as close as 2 feet from a side property line. 5.2 Because Setback Permits allow deviations from Code requirements, similar to a variance, nearby property owners are informed of the application, invited to identify their questions and concerns in writing, over the phone, via email, or at the administrative hearing held to formally review the proposal, and they may appeal the administrative decision. (Incidentally, the appeals process identified in the existing ordinance lacks clarity and is the subject of part of the proposed TEXT AMENDMENT.) It is not uncommon for neighbors to be concerned about some aspect of the proposal, but requiring additional screening, PROJO015—RCA-072808 (5).doc Page 2 of 6