Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Driveway Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garrett Park Council narrows driveway right-of-way standards, flags ADA and tree protections
Summary
After sustained discussion, the council confirmed interim driveway permit standards: minimum 2-foot concrete apron where no sidewalk exists, five-foot apron extension where sidewalk exists, limited allowance of ADA-compliant pavers with recorded agreements, and a policy against second curb cuts that would endanger Town-owned trees.
After a lengthy discussion of driveway work in Town right-of-way, the Garrett Park Town Council clarified standards the town will apply when issuing permits. Town Manager Barb Matthews summarized prior February 2026 guidance and presented engineering advice from Clark | Azar.
Town staff and the council reiterated Clark | Azar’s recommendation that a concrete apron be a minimum of 7 inches in depth and that, where no sidewalk exists, a minimum two-foot concrete apron be required. Where a sidewalk exists, the council agreed aprons should extend back from the road at least five feet or until they meet the sidewalk. The council allowed pavers as a non-standard installation only if they are ADA compliant, set in 7 inches of concrete, and accompanied by a recorded Public Right-of-Way Agreement that holds the Town harmless and transfers with the property sale.
Members discussed second curb cuts and circular driveways and agreed there would be no Town Council approval requirement for second curb cuts in general; however, no permit for a circular driveway would be issued if it would imperil or require removal of a Town-owned tree. Council members also discussed the difficulty of allowing permeable pavements in the right-of-way because of ADA constraints and engineering concerns about maintenance and durability during road repaving.
Councilmembers acknowledged remaining unresolved items, including precise definitions of 'repair' versus 'replacement' and how variance-like requests would be handled. Town staff said they would return with clarified language and application processes. Resident Jim Cole had urged the council to scale back the draft standards because of cost and to consider an appeal process; the council’s agreed standards reflect an effort to balance roadway protection and resident flexibility.
The council did not adopt an ordinance at the meeting but recorded the interim standards and directed staff to formalize permit language for future action.
