My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03270
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03270
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2007 10:18:22 AM
Creation date
12/9/2004 7:01:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3270
Planning Files - Type
Zoning Text Amendment
Additional Information
Section 1004.01A
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
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
<br />3.2 Section 1004.01A5 Size Limits: It has been determined that language needs to be clear <br />on whether an allowance over the 40% rear yard calculation requires a variance or is <br />included as part of a conditional use permit process and what encompasses the 40% rear <br />yard area. The city policy and current procedure is to allow those requests over 40% to <br />be included as part of the CUP process. Staff has also had to explain to citizens how to <br />calculate a parcel or lots square footage. The Zoning Committee concluded that a <br />property owner should be afforded a larger garage under certain circumstances and that <br />the CUP process would be the mechanism for determining the validity/appropriateness of <br />such a request. The Zoning Committee further concluded that language could be included <br />that explained how to determine a lot's allowable rear yard area. Line 41 through 43, <br />page 1, attempts to clarify the 40% requirement. A modification to Section 1004.01A12 <br />has been proposed that provides for an increase of the 40% rear yard area allowance. <br /> <br />3.3 Section 1004.01A8 Driveway Required: It has been determined that the current <br />language is not clear as to whether recreational vehicles seasonally stored or seasonally <br />stored vehicles or "collectibles" require a paved surface to a detached accessory <br />structure. The city policy and operating procedure has been to not require the additional <br />paved surface if the accessory building is used primarily to store these vehicles versus <br />having a detached garage with regular vehicle use during the non-winter months. Line <br />37 through 39, page 4, attempts to provide clarity on this issue. <br /> <br />3.4 Section 1004.01All Overall Area: Currently, main floor living area is calculated by <br />determining the living space occupying the main level of a home. However, staff has <br />found that computerized records are not always accurate, nor typically identify main <br />floor living area. The issue, in this instance, is to regulate overall accessory building <br />square footage by limiting it to main floor living area of the principal structure (home) as <br />a means to limit or differentiate between the massing of all the structures on the site. <br />Thus, using the exterior dimensional footprint of the home (excludes attached garages <br />and covered porches) would be more effective in determining living area. Line 38 and <br />39, page 2, attempts to clarify this issue. <br /> <br />3.5 Section 1004.01A12 Requirements For Increasing Maximum Size: It has been <br />determined that the code is clear as to what is a permitted process and what requires a <br />conditional use permit process. However, it is unclear whether additional conditions <br />need to be developed other than those in Section 1013.01 of the Roseville City Code. <br />The Zoning Committee determined that the current conditional use permit process should <br />remain and that no new conditions be created. The Committee also suggested including <br />the conditional use permit criteria stipulated in Section 1013.01D as a means to clarify <br />what is necessary to support a conditional use permit application. Line 8 through 23, <br />page 2, attempts to provide clarity to a number of issues surrounding the requirements for <br />maximum size of accessory structures. <br /> <br />3.6 In addition to clarifying the sections listed above, the ordinance has been renumbered to <br />provide a clear format. <br /> <br />PF3270 - RCA (021201) Page 2 of3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.