Laserfiche WebLink
Item No. 5 <br />Meeting Date: September 2, 2008 <br />Type of Business: WS <br />City Administrator Review _______ <br />City of Mounds View Staff Report <br />To:Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From:Joe Rhein, Consulting Engineer <br />Item Title/Subject:Streets and Utilities Committee: <br />Recommendation for Non-Conforming Driveways <br />Background: <br />On October 22, 2007, the City Council approved the recommendations of the <br />Streets and Utilities Task Force for the Street and Utility Improvement Program. <br />The approved recommendations included that all driveways within each project <br />area receive a concrete apron adjacent to the concrete curb. <br />The City Code has existing requirements regarding driveways for residential <br />properties. The requirements pertain to the number of driveways allowed, as <br />well as the width allowed for each driveway. <br />All driveways in the 2009-2010 Street and Utility Improvement Project area were <br />evaluated for non-conformance with City Code during the preparation of the <br />feasibility report in December 2006 (when the project was previously proposed <br />as the 2007-2008 Street and Utility Improvement Project). The following is a brief <br />summary of the feasibility report findings. <br />Multiple street access points <br />Current City Code allows for one street access per residential property. As of <br />December 2006, several properties were found in the project area that had more <br />than one access. All of the properties with multiple street access points had the <br />accesses in place prior to the ordinance being adopted by the City. Therefore <br />Code would allow them to remain in place if the property owner so desired, <br />unless the City deemed the access to be a danger or public safety hazard. <br />The feasibility report recommended if a property owner with multiple access <br />points chose to, and was allowed to, maintain more than one access point, then <br />all costs associated with any access beyond the first be the complete <br />responsibility of the property owner. Under the financing plan for the 2007-2008 <br />project, the costs would have been added to the assessment for that property. <br />It should be noted that there are properties within the project area that have a <br />second, unimproved soil driveway access. Soil driveways are not allowed under <br />City Code. Therefore a property owner would not be allowed to maintain their <br />second soil access.