Agenda Packets - 1986/10/13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commiss.in V D September, 19 Regular Meeting H-O Page iWo--_---- Mr. Gjerde presented pictures to the Planning Commission of Mr. Young's driveway. lie stated his own had been in very bad repair and needed replacing. Chairman Mcuntin explained that when finding for an appli- canL on a variance request, they must find a hardship which must be unique to that property, and the hardship cannot be self-created by the property owner. Mr. Gjerde stated he felt his hardship was lack of room to park vehicles as he has a single car garage, and without the additional 5 feet on the side of his driveway, there would be no place to nark the three cars or boat. Commissioner Miller stated she felt the contractor should have checked with the City to see what the Code calls for before installing the driveways. Director. Thatcher replied the ultimate responsibility rests with the property owner., to insure that any work being done meets Code, and that the contractor is licensed in the City. Mr. Gjerde stated that one corner of his garage is about 4 feet from the property line. Chairman Mountin stated she has a real problem with the driveway encroaching on the lot line, and she reminded the Commissioners they cannot consider an economic hard- ship. Director Thatcher reported he has gone through the files and can find no variances that were ever granted for these two properties, Chairman MonnLin also pointed out that according to Code, no driveway can be any wider that 22 feet at the curb cut, and Mr. Gjerde's driveway is considerably wider than 22 feet. Mr. Gjerde replied he had driven past a new home on Sherwood that has a three car garage and the driveway goes straight out to the street, and is wider than 22 feet. Director Thatcher replied he would have Staff look into it. lie also chocked for the Commissioners and reported Mr. Gjerde's lot is DO feet wide. Chairmnn Mountin stated she has a problem with a lot that size encroaching on the neighbor. She addcd that while the neighbor at this time may not mind, there is no assurance or who will live in those homes in the future and what their feelings may be. She also stated she did not want to delay n deeision any longer on this item, and that if the Planning Commission should deny the variances for the two properties, the property owners would have the right of appeal to the Counci.I.