Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Driveway Variance Denial topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ACC denies in-concept review and variance request for 19 Valley Crest Way over steep driveway and missing materials
Summary
The Sudden Valley Architectural Control Committee denied an in-concept application and a related variance request for 19 Valley Crest Way after committee members found the driveway slope exceeded the community standard and the submission lacked required materials.
The Sudden Valley Architectural Control Committee denied an in-concept application for a proposed house at 19 Valley Crest Way and a separate variance request tied to the same submission. Committee members said the application, presented in an in-concept review, showed a driveway slope near 19.9% and omitted several required documents.
The committee’s core objection was the driveway slope. Committee members and staff said Sudden Valley policy limits driveway slope to 15% (the committee noted a policy change introduced since the applicant last looked at the rules). Committee member comments repeatedly urged the applicant to reduce the driveway slope to 15% before resubmitting. Joel (staff member) and committee members John and Dan asked the applicant, Max, to return with a revised driveway design, property surveys, a tree plan, lighting plan, property-coverage figures, and other missing materials.
During discussion, Max said the request was an in-concept review intended to identify issues before a full submittal. He told the committee he was building the house for himself and said he could pursue drainage changes or modify the driveway layout to reduce slope. Committee members described an in-person site visit as necessary: “A long steep driveway is much different than a short steep driveway,” a committee member said, adding they would visit the lot before a final decision and that they could be flexible only after seeing the site.
Committee members framed the denial narrowly: they said the in-concept application was denied primarily because the driveway slope exceeded the 15% limit and because the application omitted required elements (height information, property coverage/open-space calculations, a tree-removal plan and survey). The committee encouraged the applicant to revise the driveway to 15% or less, include the missing materials in a formal submission, and offered to do a site visit and meet with the applicant on a Tuesday prior to a future Thursday meeting.
Motion and outcome: The committee voted to deny the in-concept application as submitted; a separate motion to deny the variance request tied to the driveway was also approved. Committee members said they would consider variance or discretionary adjustments only after a resubmittal with the requested materials and a site visit.
Why it matters: The decision reflects Sudden Valley’s tightened driveway and coverage policies and shows the ACC’s emphasis on submitting full documentation and on on-site review before approving new-construction projects.
What’s next: The applicant was directed to revise the driveway plan (reduce slope toward 15%), assemble the full application packet (surveys, tree plan, lighting plan, coverage/open-space numbers) and coordinate a site visit with staff before reapplying.
