My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-06-1999
MoundsView
>
City Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
10-06-1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/1/2018 2:44:31 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 11:18:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/6/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Driveway Report <br /> October 6, 1999 <br /> Page 2 <br /> As can be seen from the results of this research, Mounds View's requirements tend to be more <br /> restrictive than neighboring cities. While Arden Hills has the same maximum curb cut width for <br /> driveways, no City other than Arden Hills and Spring Lake Park puts any limitation on the width <br /> of the driveway as it approaches the garage. With Arden Hills, the width limitation is tied to the <br /> width of the property--a 200' wide lot then could have a 50' wide driveway. Spring Lake Park <br /> limits driveways to the width of the garage. The obvious follow-up question is, "How wide can a <br /> garage be?" The answer is 1,000 square feet. Thus a person could construct a 50'wide by 20' <br /> deep garage and have a 50' wide driveway. <br /> Because of this insight, Staff is proposing that the Planning Commission consider the follow <br /> amendment to the City Code pertaining to driveway widths. In Section 1104.01, Subdivision <br /> 4c(1)(a), the underlined and italicized text could be added to the existing sentence: <br /> "The combined width for driveway and parking surfaces shall not exceed thirty five feet (35'), or <br /> the width of the garage plus an additional ten feet(10). whichever is greater. " <br /> The other approach to solving this code imposed hardship is to remove the phrase "parking <br /> space" from that provision, so as to only measure the width of the drive, presumably interpreted <br /> to be the width of the garage. The downside to that approach is that it would open the door to a <br /> person paving his entire front yard. And while that would be a highly unlikely probability, I would <br /> feel rather uncomfortable knowing that outcome could occur. <br /> Recommendation: <br /> Please direct staff to draft language that would amend the Code to allow wider driveways in either <br /> of the two fashions described herein or in another manner yet to be discussed and to draft a <br /> resolution indicating the i . . f '. - . - a ation that-the eity-eouncil-consider <br /> and adopt such an amendment. <br /> J =,-,- <br /> James Ericson, Planning Associate <br /> N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\568-99\DRIVEWAY.RPT <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.