My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02492
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2400
>
pf_02492
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:54:35 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 11:33:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2492
Planning Files - Type
Minor Variance
Address
2126 ROSEWOOD LN S
Applicant
HANSEN, DARYL
Status
APPROVED
PIN
172923140040
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 />~~¿;Id <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 12-14-92 <br /> <br />ITEM NO.:,:ß I 3 <br /> <br />Department Approval: <br /> <br />Manager Reviewed: <br /> <br />Agenda section: <br /> <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Consent <br /> <br />Daryl Hansen request for minor variances at <br />2126 s. Rosewood Lane. <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />1. ci ty ordinances require City residences to have a 30 foot <br />rear yard and a 30 foot front yard setback. Daryl Hansen, on <br />behalf of Dr. David Hopstock, is requesting a variance to <br />allow the Hopstock' s to expand their existing dwelling by <br />adding a family room and a attached three car garage. The <br />proposed three car garage would have a 19 foot setback from <br />Hythe street instead of the required 30 feet. <br /> <br />2. The Hopstocks have also purchased a narrow strip of land <br />from the city adj acent to Hythe street. This changed the <br />front yard from Rosewood Lane to the Hythe street side <br />because it is the street side' with the least amount of <br />frontage. The existing structure would then have a non- <br />conforming rear yard of 26 feet instead of the required 30 <br />feet. Before the additional land was purchased, the setback <br />was conforming because it was a side setback instead of a <br />rear setback. <br /> <br />3. The Minor Variance Committee unanimously recommended approval <br />of the minor variances based on the necessity to save mature <br />trees on the site and the hardship of having to remove a <br />portion of the house to bring it into compliance. <br /> <br />4. All affected neighbors indicated their approval of the <br />proposed variances. <br /> <br />Alternatives: <br /> <br />1. Deny the variances based on the finding that no hardship <br />and/or practical difficulty exists. <br /> <br />2. Grant the variances because a hardship and/or practical <br />difficulty exists on the site. <br /> <br />Policy Obiectives: <br /> <br />1. To insure that development occurs consistent with the City's <br />zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.