11/10/2021 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board November 10, 2021 Page 5 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Reinert agreed. Mr. Wipperfurth shared his driveway is 26 ft. wide with a 45 degree angle in front of the third stall near the street. He stated he would prefer the driveway continue straight down from the third stall. He surmised residents with large lot widths may be frustrated to know they can only have a driveway 26 ft. in width. He said residents with narrow lots, who desire a wide driveway, run into the issue of the driveway infringing on the front yard space. He commented he likes the idea of increasing the driveway width to 28 ft. Mr. Vojtech said although his driveway is 20 ft. wide, there is dead grass on either side of the driveway due to parking. He stated he would be in favor of increasing the driveway width. Mr. Laden commented what occurs at your garage has very little to do with what occurs at the street. He continued, the spacing between garage doors and the size of the garage doors should not dictate driveway width. He encourage the Board to enforce whatever width is decided upon. He explained most of the variances the Board has addressed were the result of the homeowner’s mistake in not understanding how wide the driveway can be. He said the minimum lot width is 80 ft. and if 30 ft. of the width is driveway, 50 ft. remains for green space which is adequate. He recommended increasing driveway width to 28 ft. or 30 ft. except on lots smaller than 80 ft. wide. Chair Tralle agreed with Mr. Laden’s recommendation to increase the driveway width to 28 ft. or 30 ft. He understood Mr. Settimi’s frustration with needing more parking space since his children have moved back home. He commented, although Mr. Settimi could rent a garage for his boat, it does not fully address his parking issue. Mr. Grochala noted in a parking lot, three adjoining stalls equals 27 ft. in width. He stated one concern with widening the driveway is as the width is increased a third isle is created and if cars are parked in that third stall visibility is limited for pedestrians on the street. He said the City recognizes the 36 ft. driveway width, approved several years ago, was not appropriate. He explained the decision was partially driven by the increased size of garages. Another concern the City has with increasing driveway width is the City owns 12 ft. of right-of way for utility purposes and this would be infringed upon. He said the City spends approximately $3,000 on replacing driveway aprons when streets are reconstructed and residents bear that tax. He concurred with Mr. Laden’s comment that whatever width is decided upon needs to be enforced. He stated no matter what width is chosen, there will always be someone who does not think the driveway width is large enough. He recommended the Board determine width based on what would accommodate vehicles going into and coming out of driveways. He said City Council will make the final decision regarding width, but they will look to the Planning and Zoning Board for recommendation.