pf_03795 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4.3 The proposed, detached garage would allow the conversion of the existing, attached garage into additional living area as indicated in the previously-submitted building permit application. �. 4.4 At their meeting on December 6, 2006, the Roseville Planning Commission held the public hearing regarding the Ash request; no citizens addressed the Commission at the public hearing, but two property owners (Rick Boschee, 2540 Snelling Curve and Arthur Anderson, 1485 Brooks Avenue) indicated their support of the application to Community Development staff prior to the hearing. The Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT far Brian Ash, subject to conditions. 5.0 STAFF COMMENTS: 5.1 Section 1004.O1A5 (Overall Area) of the City Code states that the combined floor area "of attached garage and detached accessory building(s) shall not exceed the exterior dimensional footprint of the principal structure, excluding any attached garage footprint." The combined area of the existing and proposed accessory buildings is about 1,150 square feet, whereas the footprint of the principal building (even before the attached garage is converted to living area) appears to be in excess of 1,500 square feet. 5.2 The area of the subject property is approximately 42,250 square feet; § 1004.O1A6 (Maximum Total Surface Area) of the City Code permits up to 12,675 square feet of impervious coverage on a lot this size. Existing impervious surfaces cover about 9,650 square feet, and the proposed detached garage (with a reconfigured driveway) would increase the total impervious coverage to about 11,000 square feet. � 5.3 Pursuant to § 1013.01 (Conditional Use Permits) of the City Code, the Planning Commission and City Council must consider six criteria, set forth in the City Code, prior to issuing a CUP; these criteria are discussed in section 6 of this report. 6.0 REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA 6.1 Section 1013.01 (Conditional Use Permits) of the City Code requires the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the following criteria when reviewing a CUP application: a Impact on traffic; b Impact on parks, streets, and other public facilities; c Compatibility of the site plan, internal traffic circulation, landscaping, and structures with contiguous properties; d Impact of the use on the market value of contiguous properties; e Impact on the general public health, safety, and welfare; and f Compatility with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 6.2 Impact on traffir. The Planning Division has determined that an increase in traffic volume, due to the size of the proposed 908-square-foot accessory structure on the Ash property, is unlikely. � PF3795_RCA_010807 Page 2 of 4