10-20-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission October 6, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 5 1111 Commissioner Miller inquired if the last sentence of Page 3 of the Resolution should end with the word"typical," and the phrase"arguably uniform in appearance" be omitted. Ericson stated staff would delete the words following the word"typical." Commissioner Miller further inquired if language should be included on Page 4, Item 3 of the resolution to indicate that the existing shed would be removed. Ericson stated that a building permit would not be issued unless the existing shed was removed. Commissioner Miller inquired if there was a time frame for the removal,i:' - -`sting shed. Ericson pointed out that it would be necessaryfor the li o re :..: isting shed prior pP �� ,.:: ..xV to constructing the proposed structure, as it is to be const A • in the s9`lea:;° s; ' . MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Kaden. To Approve Res itjon No' •5-99, a °> • 115:.;,/ Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit t t�'„°•, i r an Oversize. .". oAlan and Tammy Doroff, 8270 Eastwood Road, Mounds Vie '<` tB0.Case No. 571-99, as `*` aa amended. Ayes—7 Nays— ‘1- bt;on carried. A404, 'Kx4i2v Planning Associate Ericson stated this item wry;; > iebef :;;fie Coun or' a public hearing at the October 25, 1999 City Council meetin• Y. • 7. Discuss 'options for amend :e 9< e Ci V>>ode to for driveways wider than 35 feet. P Y Planning Associate Ericson t • .t the Seo`=` r ' t 99 Planning Commission meeting, a resident of 4 ity had a•s : '1 • the Co� i o request a variance to allow for a 44-foot drivewa'.. < :`' Co• ` •rohibits a• veway in excess of 35 feet. He stated staff was directed t.:440,4", and after surveying a number of neighboring communities, t<$.; • that NO..•a 4w s requirements are on the more restrictive end of the spectrum in to • mu • of driveways and curb cuts. Plannin'.ssociate En' • ,: he City requires a maximum curb cut of 22 feet at the street, and • s one other city, ` - �' Is, requires a curb cut that narrow. Other communities require >y ; q q betV-n 24 and 28 feet, d e city of Blaine allows 30 feet at the street. He explained that most o!(11, communities su ed did not have a requirement in terms of the width driveways. Some £ • unities restrict..;s= width of driveways in relation to a percentage of lot width, one ity requi e driveway be no wider than the garage, and another community requires • surface coverage of the lot can not exceed 40 percent. Planning Associate Ericson stated staff is requesting direction to revise the City's 35-foot width requirement, to reflect more current times in which three-car garages are the norm. He explained that the Code was written during a time when single car garages were the standard, and it does • not appear unreasonable to staff to amend the Code to allow for wider driveways. He stated staff has proposed language which indicates"the lot width, driveways or parking areas shall not exceed