pf_03501 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

into the new detached accessory building (garage). Given the current site conditions, any modification to the home, detached garage, driveway or patio, would require a lot coverage variance and a setback variance. The Community Development Staff has reviewed the existing (immediate) site conditions, adjacent property situations, and the submitted proposal to determine whether there is a reasonable alternative/solution that would alleviate the need for one or more of the requested variances. Based on our review of the existing situation at the Koenig parcel, Staff has concluded that there currently is not adequate distance between the side entry stoop and the east property line to adequately install a driveway that has a comfortable width, without encroaching on the required setback and reducing maneuverability to the proposed garage. The situation becomes more complicated with the placement of the detached accessory building on the narrow parcel with mature trees and an existing patio. Placing the detached garage further to the rear would afford a proper setback for the garage and part of the driveway, but such a location would add unnecessary driveway and impervious coverage to the parcel. Storage on the Koenig parcel is limited and any expansion of such a use would most certainly require a variance. That being said, the Planning Commission should consider an optional design of the storage slab proposed behind the new garage that is approximately half the size of the 176 sq. ft. proposal. Community Development Staff has determined that the property can be made more livable and put to a reasonable and practical use under the official controls, if the three variances are granted. 5.9 The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner: The Koenigs own a parcel created in the late 1930's and a home constructed in 1940, which parcel is much smaller (6,750 sq. ft versus 11,000 sq. ft.) and 35 feet narrower than the standard lot offered under the current City Code. 1940 and 1950 lots in Roseville are generally narrow and not a deep as today's standard parcels, and the homes were small and included single stall garages. Given the current site conditions it is not reasonable or practical to require that the garage be placed further (west) into the backyard or further towards the rear (south) property line. While City Staff has worked with the property owner to minimize/limit impacts, the Koenigs can do little without an approved deviation (variance) from the City Code. The Community Development Staff has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner (structure placement prior to code, drainage, and topographic issues). 5.10 The variance, ifgranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality: The improvements proposed are consistent with other homes and parcels from the same era. Further, though the proposed detached garage is larger than the existing detached garage, the structure's design will be compatible with the roof lines of adjacent structures to minimize massing impacts. The Community Development Staff has determined that this variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality, nor adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare, of the city or adjacent properties. PF3501 - RPCA 080603 - Page 4 of 6