Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Driveway Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Danville Town board approves driveway-width variance to aid homeowner's wheelchair access
Summary
The board approved a variance allowing a wider driveway at a property referenced in the transcript as 179 Velvet to accommodate a petitioner's wheelchair-bound mother-in-law; staff also said it plans to seek a UDO amendment to address three-car driveways more broadly.
A Danville Town board approved a development-standard variance on a residential property the transcript refers to as 179 Velvet on a motion and second after hearing testimony from the petitioner that the change is needed so a family member who uses a wheelchair can enter and exit a vehicle more safely.
The petitioner told the board he wants to remove an inward curvature in the driveway and extend the apron straight to the road to create space for three vehicles and to avoid on-street parking during family gatherings. "My mother-in-law is in a wheelchair, and she only has one leg," the petitioner said, describing how the current curve forces the vehicle and wheelchair to move at an angle and limits parking.
Staff explained the sequence of applicable standards: a previous ordinance allowed 24-foot driveways, the Unified Development Ordinance adopted about a year earlier limits driveway width to 20 feet, and the petitioner sought approval to exceed that limit for constructability and accessibility reasons. Staff said the petitioner could build to the sidewalk under current rules but that would leave several feet of grass prone to mud; the petitioner said he will pay the costs to match the sidewalk depth and any apron work.
After technical discussion about right-of-way boundaries and constructability (including compaction and apron width), a motion to approve the variance carried. The presiding moderator called the roll and recorded affirmative votes: Brady (Aye), Tracy (Aye), and other members recorded as voting in favor; the motion was recorded as approved.
Several board members expressed concern about a recurring pattern in which builders or sellers appear to have told homeowners they could build features later found not to conform with town rules. One member urged outreach to developers and homeowners associations to clarify what is permitted; staff indicated the office may bring an amendment to the planning commission to reconsider the 20-foot rule so three-car driveways are better accommodated.
The board approved the variance with the constructability conditions noted by staff. Staff will proceed with permit processing under the conditions described and noted plans to pursue a broader UDO amendment with the planning commission.
