Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br /> <br />c. Planninl:! File 3518: Request by Michael Davis, 2730 Griggs Street, for a <br />Conditional Use Permit in accordance with Section 1004.01A4 and a <br />Variance to Section 1004.01A3 Detached Accessory Building Size) and <br />Section 1004.01A6 (Maximum Total Surface Area) of the Roseville City <br />Code to allow the construction of a 30 foot by 34 foot (1,020 sq. ft.) detached <br />accessory building. <br /> <br />Chairman Duncan opened the hearing and requested City Planning Thomas Paschke to present <br />verbal summary of the staff report dated September 3, 2003. <br /> <br />City Planner Paschke explained that Michael Davis, 2730 Griggs Street, seeks approval of a <br />Conditional Use Permit and a Variance to Section 1004.01A3 (Detached Accessory Building <br />Size) of the Roseville City Code to allow the construction of a 1,020 sq. ft. detached accessory <br />building in the rear yard. <br /> <br />Michael Davis has submitted a proposal to construct a detached accessory building on his lot. The <br />structure, a 30 foot by 34 foot (1,020 sq. ft) detached garage would be located in the general <br />location of the existing detached garage on the premises. The City Code limits detached <br />accessory buildings to a maximum size of 1,008 sq. ft. and impervious coverage to 30% of the lot <br />area. In this case, the proposed 1,020 sq. ft. detached accessory building is 12 sq. ft. more than <br />allowed by the Code with a Conditional Use Permit, and the total impervious surface coverage for <br />the parcel upon completion of the proposed improvements is estimated at 3,534 sq. ft. or 530 sq. <br />ft. above the parcels allotment. <br /> <br />The Davis home was constructed in 1954 and lies on a 10,013 square foot (75 feet by 133.5 feet) <br />lot. The lot has an impervious coverage allowance of3,004 sq. ft and a rear yard allowance of <br />900 sq. ft. The parcel currently includes a house foundation size of 1,091 sq. ft; an existing <br />detached accessory building side of 572 sq. ft.; existing driveway of 1,423 sq. ft; all totaling <br />3,086 sq. ft or 82 sq. ft. more that the City Code allows for the Davis parcel. The Davis parcel is <br />10,013 square feet in size, affording 3,002 square feet of impervious coverage. Built before the <br />30% surface coverage requirement, the existing improvements (principal structure - 1,091 sq ft., <br />driveway - 1,423 sq. ft., detached garage 572 sq. ft.) exceed the requirement of the Code by 82 <br />square fee (currently 31 %). <br />Mr. Paschke reviewed the development proposal with regard to the criteria in Section lO13.01.D <br />(Conditional Use Permit) of the Roseville Zoning Ordinance and has concluded the proposal <br />meets these criteria. Specifically, a detached accessory building is a permitted use in an R-l <br />District. The proposed detached garage will not create additional traffic or the need for additional <br />public facilities. With proper exterior building treatment, drainage, and landscaping, the building <br />will not have an impact on surrounding property or values. There appears to be no impact on <br />general health, safety, and public welfare. In addition, the project complies with the <br />Comprehensive Plan designation as low-density residential uses. The City Planner reviewed the <br />development proposal with regard to variance standards and determined that it is difficult to <br />justify a departure from the strict application of the City Code allowing the applicant to construct <br />the proposed detached 1,020 sq. ft detached accessory building. However, there is justification for <br />reducing the size of the replacement garage to a size closer to the 900 sq. ft rear yard maximum <br />afforded the parcel. Specifically, a 32 foot by 30 foot (960 sq. ft.) detached accessory building <br />designed with attic trusses would reduce overall impervious coverage by 60 sq. ft. and be nearer <br />to the rear yard allowance, but more importantly, the design would still afford Mr. Davis a three <br />car garage with ample interior storage area for the items indicated. <br />