Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,November 21,2016 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> ROLL CALL <br /> The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: <br /> Chair John Thiesse, Commissioners Kevin Landgraver, Bruce Lemke, Denise Leskinen, and Loren <br /> Schoenzeit. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner <br /> Michael Gaffron, City Planner Melanie Curtis, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Lili Tod McMillan <br /> was present. Commissioner Chad Olson arrived at 6:33 p.m. <br /> Chair Thiesse called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. <br /> NEW BUSINESS <br /> 1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17, <br /> 2016 <br /> Schoenzeit moved,Leskinen seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission <br /> meeting of October 17,2016,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. <br /> 2. #16-3877 GEORGE STICKNEY ON BEHALF OF BPH PROPERTIES,930 AND 970 <br /> PRAIRIE VIEW LANE,AND 1020, 1050, 1100, 1160 AND 1180 MOONEY LAKE DRIVE, <br /> VARIANCE,6:32 P.M.—7:04 P.M. <br /> George Stickney, BPH Properties, was present. <br /> Gaffron stated the applicant, on behalf of the owners of the seven lakeshore lots abutting Mooney Lake, <br /> requests a variance to exempt the properties from the average lakeshore setback regulations. The plat was <br /> approved last year. An item brought to Staff's attention by one of the builders on the site was that the <br /> average lakeshore setback was not addressed in the plat approval resolution. The average lakeshore <br /> setback line is predicated on the relationship of the home locations on the immediately adjacent lots. <br /> Since Staff does not process very many subdivisions on the lakeshore, it was something that was not <br /> addressed as part of the Mooney Lake subdivision review. <br /> Gaffron stated the areas depicted in yellow are the locations of the proposed homes. These locations were <br /> approved at both preliminary and final plat approval. What was not recognized at the time is depending <br /> on the timing, certain homes could be built before others and they could have an impact on the lakeshore <br /> setback for a new home going in. Under the ordinance as currently written, administration of the average <br /> lakeshore setback is completely reliant on the location of the existing homes on the two adjacent <br /> lakeshore lots. When there is no home on one of the adjacent lakeshore lots,the required average setback <br /> is defined as the lake setback of the home on the opposite adjacent lot. When neither adjacent lot contains <br /> a home, the average setback is undefined, and the applicant's home may be placed at the required lake <br /> setback for that zone. Gaffron stated the language could result in some unacceptable scenarios. <br /> As it relates to Lot 1,the average setback line is defined by the point of the house on the two adjacent lots <br /> closest to the lake. The neighboring house is in the City of Plymouth. The house on Lot 1 will not have <br /> an issue if they construct on the proposed location. To build any closer to the lake would be problematic <br /> given the steep slope heading down to the lake. Lot 1 in its proposed location will be more than 200 feet <br /> from the lake. <br /> Page 1 of 26 <br />