11-03-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission October 20, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 6 some relocation of the fire hydrants would be necessary, as the fire hydrant on County Road I appears III to be located within the driveway of the site. He added that the Fire Department is somewhat apprehensive about utilizing fire hydrants for a project when they are not located on the site. He explained there is some question as to whether or not the fire hydrant located across the street would be sufficient to meet the needs at the rear of the building, and this will be determined. Chair Peterson commented there did not appear to be any issues, with':>#h . exde'ption of the fire hydrants, and suggested that staff proceed with the next step", '<' ,w op* NitomorN, ire Planning Associate Ericson stated staff would draft a resoluttn for considrat'tna next meet g sir:>:� � ��=t:<:><; < ni Commission on November 3. t ,> :> N:.: of the Planning 407 ',EA . : ,'ytsYt^.,'iii z';; '`"ziv ° < <' 6. Special Planning Case No. SP-074-99 �>�<:.:: < ��• Ar lemili*, Discuss proposed Ordinance 642, an ordinance amending the Zoning ,d re ated to driveway widths and curb cuts. A',>!i,u >:;�l+»i"fig'>�� ... e m `' r 1 . 9 meetf`' t`e Planning there Planning Associate Ericson stated at the Orbe6, �:.. et. g_^,;.;,, :: Commission, was discussion of the options that could_,beput into lace to resolve some of the hardships, which are a growing issue, as more houses are,, ing three car garages, which necessitate wider driveways. • ...., Planning Associate Ericson stated giff was directed.to,d ff an ordinance that would amend the City Code to allo :br driveways ; ould be 3$feet0te or the width of the garage, plus an additional 12 feet, `:.'• '::was ter x lained4t rdinance would not restrict a property owner with e g . <`.: t�. , ias is presently one-sta g:.ra v a lesser the they could still have a driveway 35 feet wide, p y allowed, howe. e ' :s ertov '`?vii 36-foot garage could increase that width by an additional 12 feet. ': > ;: «% ilf LQi t;,,: •md Planningssociate Ericson ktmented that staff does not feel the allowance of wider driveways wouldeifSult in many situationshere there would be an excessive amount of impervious surface. Heexplained that typicallyi owner would not desire to construct more driveway surface t , .bsolutely necessa<; 'due to the great expense involved. 1.��```: • Associate. :"> son advised the City currently allows a maximum 22-foot wide curb cut for t ; .; _ < :.:;'end there has been some discussion that the curb cut be increased to 24 feet. He E'� ' zx ken with the Director of Public Works, Mike Ulrich, who indicated that increasing the cu .'nt . two feet to accommodate this would be acceptable, therefore, the proposed 24-foot curb cut has been indicated in the ordinance. Planning.Associate Ericson explained that the ordinance before the Commission was the first draft and could be amended until the Planning Commission is comfortable with its writing, after which, a • resolution will be prepared to forward to the Council for first and second reading.