On 05/24/2021 the Municipal Services Committee took up a request from a homeowner for a variance to municipal code 19-91 (f)(5) to extend his driveway 10 feet into the greater front yard.
Municipal Code 19-91 (f)(5) states “Whenever practicable, the extension shall be located on the side of the driveway such that it extends toward the nearest side lot line. When such a configuration is not possible, the property owner may install an extension no greater than four (4) feet into the greater front yard. Any extension into the greater front yard of the property that is more than four (4) feet wide shall require approval from the Municipal Services Committee.”
Essentially, the current driveway is only about 8 feet wide. He wanted to extend it by 10 feet on either side of the driveway for a total final width of 28 feet. However, city code requires approval from the Municipal Services Committee for any extension into the greater front yard area of a house that is more than 4 feet.
Mike was not the homeowner but he was appearing on behalf of his son who is the homeowner. Mike explained that his son could not be there because he was in the National Guard and had been activated last year because of Covid and was currently in Madison.
Mike had previously owned the home and he said that when his son purchased it from him, one of the first things they did was try to figure out how to get more parking. It’s a 4 bedroom house with only a 1 car garage and room for one vehicle on the driveway, hence the need for widening the driveway. Mike stated that his son plans to build a bigger garage in the future, but not soon given how high the price of lumber currently is.
He said that even if they extended it 10 feet into the front yard/toward the house, they would still have 15 feet between the driveway and the house. On the other side, there would still be 30 feet between the extended driveway and the neighbor’s lot line. There was plenty of room and there shouldn’t be any issues with water runoff into the neighbor’s yard or anything of that nature.
Mike got a little flustered while giving his presentation and said he hadn’t spoke publicly since high school, but he pressed on. He said his son was hoping to get the variance so that he wouldn’t have to park vehicles on the street. They’re in the middle of remodelling the house and there are issues with having enough space to park vehicles, the trailer of supplies and tools, and storing the materials.
He hired Fischer-Ulman Construction to do the work. They would be putting in all new sidewalks, a new apron, and new curbs so everything would be done the way the city wants.
He finished by saying another reason they wanted to expand the driveway was to make more room to place garbage cans out for pickup so they weren’t blocking most of the driveway. He added that snow removal and leaf collection were also sometimes impeded by the number of cars that were parked on the street, so being able to park their vehicles in the driveway would help with that.
Alderperson Brad Firkus (District 3) who is the Chair of the committee asking Director Paula Vandehey to speak.
She said the only thing she wanted to add was that they did check to make sure the project would meet the city’s lot coverage requirements. There was no issue there.
Alderperson Firkus said that was going to be his question, and then stated that it did look like a pretty good sized lot.
Mike said they weren’t even at 50% coverage as far as putting up another garage, so that wasn’t going to be an issue.
Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) asked what the available parking currently was. How many cars could they park and why did they need more space?
Mike said his son was a young man. The current driveway was 22 feet long by 8 feet wide so it could fit one minivan, and a little bit bigger truck would really fill it up. The existing garage is a one car garage which he will just have to live with for right now. Currently, a lot of the building materials for the remodeling project are stored in there, so they essentially have one parking spot. His son would probably get married someday so they would need room for two cars, and he also has a small fishing boat that Mike would rather his son store at his house rather than at Mike’s house.
That last comment elicited some laughter from the committee.
There were no more questions and the committee voted unanimously to recommend that the variance request be approved.
Alderperson Firkus explained that that vote meant they were recommending to the Common Council that the variance be approved, then it would be on the Common Council to officially approve the variance at the next Common Council meeting. He could not remember if the city would proactively contact Mike with the official approval or if Mike would have to contact the city. Director Vandehey said they would contact him. Apparently, he works for the city so it won’t be that hard.
View full meeting details here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=859283&GUID=E61B399B-56FA-4917-AF91-9DF4CEF29157&Options=info|&Search=
Be the first to reply