2015-06-03_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

expanded to accommodate two cars. But the proposal seeks variances to expand the 91 nonconforming attached garage to accommodate 10 or more automobiles. Although the 92 zoning code does not impose a limit, per se, on the size of an attached garage, Planning 93 Division staff believes that a proposal for a 10-car attached garagefar surpasses what is 94 reasonable to expect on a suburban residential property. 95 There are unique circumstances to the property which were not created by the landowner. 96 Planning Division staff believes that the history of additions as described in the applicant’s 97 written narrative has created unique circumstances on the property, but the variance request is 98 not a result of these unique circumstances.The applicant’s desire to store a very large number 99 of cars at his home is, instead, causing the need for a variance. 100 The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.The existing 101 attached garage encroaching into the required front yard setback is already unique in the 102 neighborhood; Planning Division staff believes that the proposal might not introduce a new 103 nonconformity where none existed previously, but a significant expansion of the attached 104 garage and the front-facing overhead door within the front yard would cause the property to 105 become still more incongruous with the character of the locality. 106 City Code §1009.04 explains further that the purpose of a varianceis “to permit adjustment to 107 the zoning regulations where there are practical difficulties applying to a parcel of land or 108 building that prevent the property from being used to the extent intended by the zoning.” 109 Provisions of the zoning code are designed to facilitate the development and maintenance of 110 functional one-family dwellings and adequately-sized accessory storage facilities (e.g., garages, 111 garden sheds, etc.). Residential needs change over time, and variances from the standard zoning 112 requirement are sometimes needed to allow improvements that enable residential properties to 113 continue meeting the needs of new and future homeowners. Planning Division staff believes, 114 however, that the proposal is out of scale with the use of a residential property as intended by the 115 zoning provisions and that no practical difficulties exist because reasonable use of the property 116 can be achieved without approval of the requested variances. 117 Roseville’s Development Review Committee(DRC) met on May 7, 2015 to discuss this 118 application. In addition to the zoning issues addressed above, the DRC expressed significant 119 concerns about the use of the proposed garage space by future property owners. A person who 120 does auto repair, for example, could easily be attracted to such spaces, buy the property, and 121 begin repairing cars before City staff is aware of it; at this point, when the new owner is heavily 122 invested in the property and relying on the repair income, stopping the prohibited home 123 occupation becomes exceedingly difficult.Other illegal activities are also attracted to oversized 124 garages, such as landscaping or construction firms and hoarding. 125 126 At the time this report was prepared, Planning Division staff has not received any 127 communications from the public about the variancerequest. 128 129 denying the requested variances to §1004.05, 130 §1004.08B, and §1004.08C of the City Code, based on the proposed plans, input offered during 131 the public hearing, and the comments and findings detailedin this report. 132 PF15-006_RVBA_060315 Page 4 of 5