My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf10-016
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
2010
>
pf10-016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2014 4:18:48 PM
Creation date
7/17/2013 9:14:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
10-016
Planning Files - Type
Conditional Use Permit
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5.0 CONDITIONAL USE ANALYSIS <br />5.1 Section 1004.01 A3 (Size Limit) limits the total floor area of accessory structures to the <br />lesser of the following: <br />a. 40% of the required rear yard area (i.e., 1,200 square feet on this property); or <br />b. 864 square feet (being the smaller of the two figures, this is the permitted limit) <br />5.2 Section 1004.O1A4 (Requirements for Increased Size), however, allows up to 1,008 <br />square feet of total accessory structure floor area as a CONDITIONAL USE. <br />5.3 Section 1004.01 AS (Overall Area) further limits the size of accessory structures by <br />stating that the combined floor area "of attached garage and detached accessory <br />building(s) shall not exceed the exterior dimensional footprint of the principal structure, <br />excluding any attached garage footprint." The proposed 1,008-square-foot accessory <br />building would be within this limit because it would not exceed the approximately 1,300- <br />square-foot footprint of the principal structure (which does not have an attached garage). <br />5.4 Although the applicant plans to complete the new garage prior to removing the existing <br />garage and a portion of the paved area behind the house, the proposed, "final" site plan <br />(included with this staff report as Attachment C contains impervious surfaces on about <br />26% of the property. Section 1004.016 (Dimensional Requirements) limit such <br />impervious surfaces to 30% on a residential property; Planning Division staff <br />recommends requiring that the existing garage and driveway area be removed within 90 <br />days of when the permit is issued for the proposed new garage. In a case like this, a <br />provisional Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) would be issued upon the satisfactory <br />completion of the new garage, and the permanent C.O. would be issued once the old <br />garage and excess impervious coverage is removed. <br />5.5 Looking at the proposed building elevations included with this report as Attachment D, <br />the eastern end of the building would contain two overhead garage doors, but the site <br />plan does not appear to indicate an expansion of the driveway approach to serve both <br />doors. City Code § 1004.01 A 13 (Driveway Required) requires a paved driveway for <br />garages storing daily-use vehicles; as long as the existing driveway spans the width of the <br />northern overhead door of the proposed garage, this Code provision might not require <br />pavement in front of the second overhead door if that side of the garage is used only to <br />provide access for occasional-use vehicles or other household equipment. If the driveway <br />is expanded to serve both overhead doors, the total impervious coverage would be <br />required to remain under the 30% maximum; based on the aerial imagery and the <br />proposed site plan, the impervious coverage limit does not seem to be a problem, but this <br />would need to be verified on the site plan submitted for the required building permit. <br />5.6 All of the above Code requirements work together to allow the proposed structure, but <br />this one building will utilize the maximum extent of such allowances and preclude the <br />construction of any other accessory buildings on the property. <br />5.7 The CONDITIONAL USE process required for the approval of the proposed garage is <br />partially intended to provide an opportunity to review the proposal to ensure that it <br />wouldn't have significant adverse impacts on adjacent properties. Even though the <br />proposed garage appears to be roughly in line with the garage on the neighboring <br />property to the south, its 42-foot side wall is considerably longer than a wall that would <br />be found on a garage that meets the Code's smaller, standard size. Planning Division staff <br />PF10-016 RPCA 080410 <br />Page 2 of 2 � '� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.