Your question was a surprise! Semi-circle driveways are common, as you know. Sounds as though you are between a rock and a hard place with the local bureaucrats. Any chance that you could design the circular drive so that it swings around and exits at the entrance? This would be one curb cut and might resolve the problem. Not the best design idea but some thoughtful landscaping could mitigate the awkwardness.

Yes, I agree semi-circle driveways are so common. In the neighborhood that I grew up in, everybody had one. You were in the minority if your house didn't have one. I have never heard of it being considered more than 1 driveway. Unfortunately, we don't have enough room in the front yard to do a complete circle drive and have it look nice. Plus, bc of where we have to put our septic, we couldn't do a complete circle drive. I find it very frustrating dealing with town bureaucrats who make decisions simply because and feel no need to base their decision on anything, much less anything objective. The thing is that if the ordinance had been written to specifically regulate the number of entrances or curb cuts, we would have been fine with it, but bc it just says one driveway per residence, we feel like the town is being arbitrary and capricious in reading words into the ordinance that aren't there. If a semi-circle driveway is 2 driveways, where does one end and the other begin? By a similar logic, if a home has 3 entrances, does it make it 3 homes?

What is the design or functional purpose of the semicircle, in your case?

Perhaps it is viewed in surface area covered, either as an area or percentage of lot covered.

- Audric

I don't think your town ordinance has anything to do with driveways per se, but has to do with curbs. The town is responsible for the curbs and making and maintaining 2 sloped curbs for your property costs the town more because of the extra work involved, and if you were allowed to do it then others must be allowed to too.

I really don't think you will change their minds unless you told them you would pay for and be responsible for the second curb. Maybe then they would allow you to do it.

Honestly, this is not a design question or a question that you will get any resolution here.

I have to read zoning ordinances from a number of communities all of the time. Some things are well defined while others are not. It is up to the controlling authority to apply the descretion of those that are not so clear. The best you can do before getting an attorney involved is to make sure that there is not a clearer definition within the by-law than is being missed (sometimes these are hard to find, or they can be pieced together in a number of places throughout the by-law) and to make sure that those who are applying their discretion are actually the ones with the authority to do so. Sometimes the building commissioner has the authority while other times it is the planning board or ZBA.

One thing for sure, it is not up to the results of an internet survey.

I realize that it's not up to an internet survey to decide whether or not we can have a semi-circular driveway. I was hoping though that somebody could point me to some sources or authority on driveway design. I have found some helpful articles on the internet that support the notion that the semi-circle driveway is a common type of single driveway. In any event, the ordinance has nothing to do with the surface area of the lot covered or maintaining the curb (we already do that). It is simply a broadly worded ordinance and the town is attempting to read into it restrictions that aren't there. A better approach for the Town would be for them to re-write the ordinance, but they haven't bc nobody has challenged the way they have applied it, until now. The way it is currently written, they are distorting the language to meet their needs, which legally is wrong. Unfortunately, most people never bother to challenge things like this, especially in small towns, and so it continues.

Who are you arguing your case with? - the bureaucrats or the elected officials? I don't know how things work where you are, but here there is usually a 'Committee of Adjustments' made up of town council members, who hear arguements from both sides when someone wants to do something that is outside of what zoning allows. We had to go to the Committee when we renovated here because a small triangle of the proposed double-car garage was outside the front yard set-back limit for our street. We made our case to the committee and, in advance, got all the neighbours (the by-law allowed neighbours within a specified number of feet to object to the changes) to agree - in writing - that they didn't object to the garage. The town planning staff reviewed the property and the house plans and told the committee that 'it would not be detrimental to the neighbourhood'. The committee approved the change unanimously and said they rarely saw such a comprehensive petition! So my advice is check thoroughly the processes in the by-laws and use them to pesent sound arguements. If you can get neighbours on your side, that might help if the purpose of the restriction is about retaining neighbourhood character.

A few circumstances that could aid your plight are whether you are on a busy street or not, whether you have room to contruct a turnaround (ie, hammerhead), and how far back from the road the inside edge of the circle is from the road.

You could certainly have more leverage in claiming hardship if backing out is a safety hazard and you have no alternative method of turning the car around.

Most zoning by-laws have a definition section (sometimes they are hard to find). Many zoning by-laws can now be downloaded from municipal websites in pdf form. These are easily searchable, if that helps. I have seen "driveway" defined as an "The travelway for vehicles between the access and the garage or parking area" (this would not be good for you), but I've also seen it defined as a "travel way" (which would be good).

Zoning boards have a lot of descretion that is backed up in court. It is very difficult to overturn their descretion when applying their interpretation of an unclear definition unless they have not applied the definition consistantly.

If the definition is not written or not written clearly, your interpretation of it is no more valid than theirs, so you will not stand much of a chance of overturning it.

I would suggest that you try to force them into writing a clear definition as early as possible in order for them to have to commit to it. This would open the door for alternatives that do not go outside of their definition. If you proposed something that fits the definitionm it would have to be accepted or it would be much more easily appealed.

I would have already turned it into a political argument and got thrown out. Something like "Big government and loss of personal freedoms start at home"

I like the string suggestion!

Well, that's why I asked essentially why you wanted a semicircle drive--not that your reasons are the end-all, but that really important (safety) reasons have more chance of being given an exception or might be part of your collateral argument, even if you are able to make a more basic argument such as, "you don't actually have a rule against it". Also, you used the term "to fit their needs" which might imply you know something about their needs that conflict with your plan, that might be the inferred reason for their saying no. Of course, interfering with our freedoms may be a driving need for many beaurocrats!

You know the lawyer stories: first, the vase was not broken; second, if it was broken, I didn't do it; third, if I did it, I had a really good reason, and so on.