2016_0523_CCPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The residential lot size language from 1956(i.e., 85 feet in width, 11,000 square feet in area, and 13 so on) worked well up until the new zoning code was adopted in 2010; under the updated zoning 14 code, however, the original lot size parameters have continued to apply to single-family lots in 15 LDR-1 zoning district, whereas smaller single-family lots (i.e., 60 feet wide and 6,000 square 16 feet) are allowed in the LDR-2 district, and even smaller single-family lots (i.e., 40 feet wide and 17 4,800 square feet) in the MDR district. Since the 2010 zoning standards were adopted, approving 18 plats with lots for single-family detached homes has been largely problematic if those single- 19 family lots have been less than 85-feet wide and 11,000 square feet in area. The proposed 20 amendment deletes the size specifications from this section of the subdivision code, refers the 21 reader to the applicable zoning district standards, and re-letters the subsequent code provisions. 22 §1103.06F: Side Lot Lines 23 Code it 24 focused on regulating community growth through plats and developments that converted 25 agricultural or unused land into residential, commercial, and industrial subdivisions. The 26 provision that became §1103.06F (i.e., Sidelines of lots shall be substantially at right angles or 27 radial to the street linethat lots were designed with regular, predictable shapes. When 28 the application of this regulation is in the context of a new plat with new streets, compliance is 29 relatively easy to achieve. But this provision is much more difficult to applyand comply 30 withwhen minor subdivisions of two or three lots are proposed parcel by parcel. 31 Based on some of the recommendations of the 2007 Single-Family Lot Split Study, the 32 Subdivision Code was amended in 2008 such that §1103.06F now reads 33 be at right angles or radial to the street line, and §1104.05 34 specifies that the Variance Board is responsible for acting on subdivision variance requests 35 through the same process as zoning variances. Individual minor subdivision applications of 36 existing parcels in suburban subdivisions (that frequently are not laid out in a rectangular grid) 37 have proven to be increasingly challenging to process as a result of these amendments to an 38 outdated Subdivision Code that regulates all subdivisions as though they are large plats of open 39 land. 40 Strictness of Side Lot Line Requirements 41 Having adopted stricter requirements for how new lots are shaped, fewer subdivision proposals 42 are able to meet those standards. If Roseville is to continue to allow single-family residential lots 43 to be subdivided or split if they meet the standards, as recommended in the lot split study, then 44 Roseville should adopt less rigid standards that are more easily met by a variety of parcels. 45 The other option is to decide that adhering to the stricter lot-shape standards is more important to 46 the community than allowing new parcels to be created that meet or exceed the size and area 47 standards. This mean that some 48 potential subdivisions of relatively large parcels would be prohibited if new side lot lines are not 49 strictly perpendicular or radial to the street line. 50 Subdivision Variances 51 If the City Council were to decide to maintain strict requirements for the alignment of new side 52 lot lines, it would be inappropriate to then encourage subdividers to seek variances from those 53 strict requirements. Code requirements should be amended as necessary to fairly reflect what 54 Roseville intends to support or prohibit, reserving variances for those instances of actual hardship 55 or practical difficulty. 56 10.a PROJ0001_RCA_20160523-Lot lines and sizes (3) Page 2 of 3