Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> Mounds View Planning Commission September 1, 1999 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 2 <br /> • <br /> 4. Approval of Minutes <br /> A. August 4, 1999 <br /> MOTION/SECOND: Stevenson/Miller to approve the May 19, 1999 meeting minas corrected. <br /> Ai% 41P <br /> Ayes— 8 Nays—0 & Thi«. t7:n carried. <br /> 5. Planning Case No. 568-99 Nrst:.' t _..:` : <br /> Property Involved: 8359 Red Oak Drive `' , " <br /> Consideration.of a variance request to allow for a 44-foot' ipi' ; :dri -way. <br /> Applicant: John Henning 4 ,N,,,,-:z .. k.: <br /> VOW <br /> The applicant was present. `< ><:. <br /> 40 <br /> Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff1:1- <br /> AW ort asfollows: f,` ° ' <br /> or <br /> sxiar .: <br /> The applicant, John Henning, properter at 8: Red OaDrive, has requested that the Planning 0 <br /> NOVW AV Commission approve a variance f r, a drive._. ay nine feet wider than is allowed by Code. The <br /> maximum width for a driveway is 3.4 feet. The Th011f.tlicAritiOshes to add a nine-foot wide parking pad <br /> alongside the arage, which._ot*provide access s ' es the driveway to increase to a width of 44 <br /> feet. Th way, howeve a ..rows to 1 e t s it approaches the street. <br /> Vitilifii <br /> Ericson state d th :>s ;ject proper ":»t loc. ted north of Ardan Avenue, between Ardan Avenue and <br /> County Road iN;;,,iiAtAlgd theo e www:.as built this year, and the applicant is in the process of <br /> completing the : _ ; 14: w and lan d sca ing, and the driveway was the last project undertaken. He <br /> stated, at t 6,time Mr. t&fnttmitted his application for the driveway, he was told that the Code <br /> proid•' . , .- •• a .•- 1: . hat-point,he applied . <br /> koiti C4' k <br /> i <br /> Eli son stated staff has reviewed the seven criteria presented for examination in granting a variance, <br /> it.;t:•er toestablish a hardship or extraordinary circumstance that would warrant the granting of such <br /> a: ;, :T. He pro de"a brief overview of the criteria, and stated that staff was not able to discern <br /> e ` a •0 ir Ed hardship in this case. <br /> EriCait `">ated the applicant has a three-car garage, which cannot be expanded any further due to <br /> setbacks and the width of the house, nor can it be expanded to the rear, therefore, it is as large as it <br /> can be on the subject lot. He stated, in this regard, staff understands the applicant's position, in that <br /> it would be nice to have a parking space along the side of the garage, so as not to block one of the <br /> three access doors to the garage. He stated, however, this would require creating a driveway that <br /> is larger than that allowed by the Code. <br /> 0 <br />