Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,March 17,2014 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> would be used in that analysis. Anything over 50 percent of that would need to meet the City's definition <br /> of a story. Curtis noted the applicant is not looking for a variance from that at this time. <br /> Landgraver asked if the removal of the roof on the porch would alter the fact that it still extends into the <br /> setback. <br /> Curtis stated it would not. <br /> Landgraver asked if there are neighboring properties that would be impacted. <br /> Curtis stated there is a cabin on each of the adjoining properties which determines the average lakeshore <br /> setback line. Curtis stated it is her belief this cabin will not be very visible, and that the inclusion of the <br /> porch, deck, carousel or other structure will not be blocking the lake view from the neighboring properties <br /> but it is a setback requirement that needs to be addressed. <br /> Curtis displayed an aerial property of the subject property and two adjoining properties. Curtis noted <br /> there is a significant amount of vegetation between the properties. Curtis stated the elevation of the grade <br /> also drops down and that the south side of the applicant's home is located on the high point of the <br /> property and then it drops down on either side. <br /> Lemke asked if the house could be moved back ten feet. <br /> Curtis stated Staff is suggesting that but that the builder would need to speak to the topography of the land <br /> and whether that would impact their plans. <br /> John Reimann, 21957 Minnetonka Boulevard, Greenwood, stated they are attempting to minimize the <br /> impact on the land and any excavation that would be required. <br /> Leskinen asked if there is a clearing where the new home could be pushed back into. <br /> Reimann stated the lot is very wooded and that they are placing the home in the clearing that currently <br /> exists. Reimann indicated there is a number of beautiful maple trees located on the property. <br /> Landgraver asked if he would be amenable to excavating a little bit more to locate the house further back <br /> which would eliminate the need for a variance. <br /> Reimann stated they would be, but that he does not really understand what is meant by an average <br /> setback. Reimann noted the current house has existed in that location since approximately 1957 and that <br /> they would like to be able to appreciate the lake without the cabin being in the way. Reimann indicated <br /> given the elevation of the lot, a person cannot see the water until they are right up to the shore. Reimann <br /> stated they would like to minimize any disruption to the land as much as possible but that they would be <br /> willing to do whatever needs to be done. <br /> Leskinen stated she appreciates the applicant not wanting to further disrupt the land and the trees. <br /> Leskinen stated with the roof of the deck being removed, it would be less impactful, but that she is not <br /> sure if the desire for minimal disruption of the land is enough of a practical difficulty for an average <br /> lakeshore variance. Leskinen indicated she is more inclined to be okay with it under these circumstances <br /> but that she is open to other thoughts on the matter. <br /> Page 17 of 26 <br />