03-09-06 Planning Comm. Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCdL DECEMBER 14, 2005 Murphy stated that he believes the improvements he would be making to his property would beautify the area, and noted the clear-cutting of the property adjacent to him as this property is being developed. Murphy stated that he has worked with a respected landscape architect to develop the site plan for his property. He pointed out the horseshoe driveway across the street from his property as well as the one down the street, noting that they have existed for some time without any problems. Murphy noted the pedestrian traffic on County Road B-2, and felt that the horseshoe driveway would improve pedestrian safety. Murphy noted that the City's mission statement also indicates the fostering of long-term growth for the community. He pointed out that in purchasing his home, it needed some improvements. Murphy felt that the improvements he has made to his house as well as the proposed horseshoe driveway with landscaped island were an improvement for the community. Keis felt that landscaping improvements could be made to the property without the addition of the horseshoe driveway. Murphy indicated that aturn-around spot would not work on his property and would result in the loss of the large pine tree on his property. Keis pointed out that the City has both a problem and an issue. He noted that the City allowed horseshoe driveways prior to the 1980 Code, and also noted that horseshoe driveways have been put in after the 1980 Code was adopted. Keis stated that the City could deny the Variance request, but would then be faced with what to do with the horseshoe drives that were put in after the 1980 Code was adopted. Keis stated that he personally does not mind horseshoe driveways. He felt the made sense along busy streets and generally can make life easier. Keis pointed out that a second curb cut for a horseshoe driveway does not increase traffic on the street, and can make things safer. Although aback-in T configuration will do the same Ching. Keis indicated that he cannot support a Variance for this request given there is no hardship present. Keis felt that the option that would have to be pursued is a text amendment to the Code. Without that, Keis felt that the City would have to go back and address the horseshoe driveways that were put in illegally after the 1980 Code was adopted. Allan felt that the City had to look to the future on this issue. She noted that there are many people living along streets that are busier than County Road B-2. She also noted that most people back out of their driveways and there has not been a problem with safety as a result. Allan felt that if a Variance were granted to allow this horseshoe driveway, many other property owners would be seeking the same Variance.