Laserfiche WebLink
1111 PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> MEMO <br /> To: Mounds View Planning Commission <br /> From: James Ericson, Planning Associate <br /> Subject: Driveways <br /> RE: Planning Case No. 568-99 <br /> Date: Meeting of October 6, 1999 <br /> Background: <br /> At your meeting on September 1, 1999, John Henning, property owner of 8359 Red Oak Drive, <br /> was before the Planning Commission to request a variance for a wider than allowed driveway. As <br /> you may recall, his driveway was installed after staff had informed him that the proposed <br /> driveway was too wide. While the appearance of the driveway certainly is not unappealing, the <br /> fact remains that it is too wide, and there did not appear to be any basis for granting a variance, as <br /> there was no discernible hardship. <br /> Staff indicated that perhaps the Code could be modified to allow for wider driveways in some <br /> situations, given that three-car garages are no longer the exception--three car garages are the <br /> norm. With that, the Planning Commission tabled Mr. Henning's request, directing staff to <br /> research this issue as to what other cities require--or do not require--with regard to driveway <br /> widths. <br /> The following table represents the end product of this research. <br /> Driveway width requirement Driveway width requirement <br /> at street(property line): in yard: <br /> Mounds View 22' at street 35 feet <br /> New Brighton: 24' at street None <br /> Arden Hills: 22' at street Cannot exceed 25% of front yard width <br /> Fridley: 28' at street None <br /> Roseville: 26' at street None <br /> Spring Lake Park: 24' at street No wider than the garage <br /> Shoreview: 24' at street None, so long as impervious surface <br /> does not exceed 40% coverage of lot <br /> Blaine: 30' at street None <br />