Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contested hearing: resident asks council to allow existing steep driveway to serve new home; safety, cost and precedent debated
Summary
Property owner and applicant asked the council for a special exception to use a grandfathered steep driveway for a new house. Neighbors and councilors raised access and winter‑safety concerns; staff and the fire chief said regrading, pullouts and width improvements would be required to meet code or obtain a favorable recommendation.
A contested public hearing on Sept. 18 asked the Summit County Council to grant a special exception allowing a new home to use an existing, grandfathered driveway whose grade exceeds current county standards.
Applicant Braden Louder and design consultant Dirk Rockhill told council that building an entirely new, compliant driveway next to the existing access would be costly, would cut into pasture and require substantial new cut‑and‑fill. Rockhill said the existing asphalted drive has served the neighbor’s home for decades and that the proposed branch to the new lot meets current code where it is newly constructed; the objection is to a roughly 100–300‑foot stretch of the grandfathered drive with sustained grades reported in the 13–19% range.
County engineering and the fire department flagged safety issues. Staff and councilors noted the county standard limits average driveway grade to 10% with limited contiguous sections allowed up to 12% for 250 feet; the packet shows segments of the existing driveway rising to 19% in places and an average slope above code. Councilor Roger said the principal concern is public safety and emergency access, and the North Summit Fire chief’s guidance in staff materials recommended against approval unless the driveway is regraded and widened, pullouts are added and other infrastructure changes are completed.
Applicant and neighbors asked for an opportunity to redesign the existing pavement profile rather than build a second full driveway alongside the current one; David Wright, owner of the existing driveway, said it has been used for 35 years by ambulances and service vehicles. Council members recommended tabling the application to allow the applicant to return with engineering alternatives that either bring the existing drive into compliance (by regrading, adding pullouts and widening) or demonstrate why the special‑exception criteria are met. Staff judges it likely the applicant can identify engineering solutions but warned that there is no guarantee the council would grant an exception if the code cannot be met.
What’s next: the council paused formal action and directed the applicant to work with county public works, planning and fire staff on engineering options. Councilors signaled willingness to visit the site if that would aid assessment.
