Laserfiche WebLink
<br />the October meeting. In particular, there were concerns regarding the rear and side <br />yard setbacks, screening requirements, roof height, drainage, building materials, the <br />size of the accessory building compared to the size of the dwelling on the parcel, <br />and the use of a conditional use permit process for larger buildings. <br /> <br />2.4 The Zoning Committee met on October 5, 1998, to review the proposed <br />amendments and language revisions. The attached ordinance reflects the <br />consensus of this Committee regarding language revisions. <br /> <br />3.0 STAFF COMMENT <br /> <br />3.1 In reviewing this request, staff found the following: <br /> <br />1. Residential accessory buildings can reduce exterior clutter on residential <br />properties by providing storage for household goods, vehicles, and <br />recreational equipment. <br /> <br />2. Limiting the number, size, location, height, and appearance of accessory <br />buildings in residential zoning districts allows for such storage while <br />protecting the residential areas of the community from excessively large and <br />obtrusive accessory buildings. <br /> <br />3. Limiting the size of accessory buildings also maintains open space on <br />residential parcels. This open space is important for the absorption of <br />surface water run-off, allows for more air movement between lots, and helps <br />maintain the livability of residential neighborhoods. <br /> <br />4.0 STAFF RECOMMENDA TION <br /> <br />4.1 Based on the findings outlined in Section 3.1, staff recommends that Section <br />1004.01 (A) of the City Code be amended as detailed in the attached ordinance. <br /> <br />5.0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION <br /> <br />5.1 The Planning Commission held a continued hearing on this request on October 14, <br />1998. The Planning Commission discussed the application of the rear yard <br />coverage provision, the definition of "required rear yard," and the need to clarify <br />several sections of the proposed ordinance. After a brief discussion, the Planning <br />Commission recommended approval of an ordinance amending Section 1004.01A <br />of the Roseville City Code, based on the findings outlined in Section 3.1 of this <br />report. <br /> <br />5.2 An excerpt from the Planning Commission's draft minutes is attached. <br /> <br />PF3023 - RCA (10/26/98) - Page 2 of 3 <br />