My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02586
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2500
>
pf_02586
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:57:39 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 11:50:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2586
Planning Files - Type
Minor Variance
Address
1142 RUGGLES ST
Applicant
HANSON, VERNON
Status
APPROVED
PIN
152923410099
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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 />1') '~ (, <br />tf,':J <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 7-12-93 <br />ITEM NO.: 'E-~ <br /> <br />Department Approval: <br /> <br />f3 <br /> <br />Manager Reviewed: <br /> <br />Agenda section: <br /> <br />~c:t} <br /> <br />Consent <br /> <br />Item Description: <br /> <br />Vernon Hanson request for a minor variance at <br />1142 Ruggles Street. <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />1. City ordinances require that sideyard setbacks for driveways <br />be 5 feet from the property line. <br /> <br />2. Mr. Hanson's home is. located on a street that is currently <br />under reconstruction as part of the Pavement Management <br />Program. <br /> <br />3. Mr. Hanson would like to widen his driveway by 5-1/2 feet to <br />allow him to have a 2 car driveway. This would require a 2- <br />1/2 foot side yard variance. <br /> <br />4. The Minor Variance Committee unanimously recommended approval <br />of the variance. It was the committee's belief that moving <br />the driveway further to the west would be impractical as it <br />would require moving an existing fence and planter island. <br />It was also the Committee's feeling that being able to park <br />two cars off the street was of benefit to the community. <br />5. All affected adjacent property owners indicated their <br />approval of the proposed variance. <br /> <br />Alternatives: <br /> <br />1. Deny the variance based on the finding that no hardship or <br />practical difficulties exist on the site. <br /> <br />2. Grant the variance based on the finding that a hardship or <br />practical difficulty is present on the site. <br /> <br />Policy Obiective: <br /> <br />1. To insure that development occurs consistent with the City's <br />zoning ordinances and comprehensive plan. <br /> <br />2. To grant variances where hardship and/or practical <br />difficulties exist. <br /> <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.