Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission March 20, 2013 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda <br /> <br />None. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />5. Planning Cases <br /> <br />A. VR2013-001 Variance for a Second Driveway and Curb Cut <br /> Applicant: Colvert & Theresa People <br /> Address: 7900 Greenfield Avenue <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller requested the Commission consider a variance for a second driveway <br />and curb cut for the property at 7900 Greenfield Avenue. She explained a variance was <br />approved for the second driveway in 1994 with the condition that it could remain in place only <br />for 10 years or until the property was sold. She described the case in further detail stating the <br />second driveway was requested by the previous property owners because the detached garage is <br />quite a distance from the house. <br /> <br />Associate Heller indicated the property was sold in 2002 to the applicants, and they were not <br />made aware of the driveway conditions and would like the second driveways to remain in place <br />due to Mrs. People’s mobility difficulties. She noted the City Code limits driveway curb cuts for <br />single family residential lots to one without a variance. This property has had two driveways in <br />place for 19 years, and a temporary variance was approved to install the second driveway. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson recalled this case from 19 years ago, stating originally the property owners were <br />parking in the yard to be near the house and had created a dirt driveway from the repeated <br />driving on the grass. The owners wanted to install a concrete driveway in this location and were <br />told by City Staff that they needed to apply for a variance for the second curb cut. The <br />Commission was split on whether to approve the variance, so they compromised and added the <br />time limit for the driveway. He stated in most cases he opposed second driveways, however <br />with this case, the situation was unique and he recommended the variance be approved. <br /> <br />Commissioner Rundle did not oppose the second driveway either. <br /> <br />Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned what additional expense the City would incur for the <br />second curb cut. <br /> <br />Associate Heller explained that the expense for the second curb cut and apron would be paid by <br />the property owner during the street reconstruction project. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:16 p.m.