Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> Monday,September 19,2022 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> affording some opportunities in like-kind,but exceeding is historically where the Planning Commission <br /> P <br /> has very rarely(especially in these districts)allowed encroaching on lakeshore setbacks because those <br /> modest encroachments become a hindrance for the enjoyment of the neighboring homes.This creates a <br /> problem because it creates precedent for Applicants in the future which is why the Commission has had to <br /> take a very hard line.He noted one can have a home without a deck,that is not a practical difficulty. The <br /> Commissioners want to help get this through but without practical difficulty they are not in a position to <br /> support. <br /> Mr. Gates noted they could build a much bigger house if they knock the existing down but they did not <br /> want to do that. It may not be a direct practical difficulty but does factor into the equation.He spoke about <br /> options for the back of the home where there is not the ability to put a deck somewhere else.He does not <br /> think it is unfair to ask for a small variance to build the deck.He finished walking the Commissioners <br /> through the plans on screen. <br /> Kirchner clarified the Commissioners are required by State Statute to fall back to the practical difficulties. <br /> He is struggling to find practical difficulties in this case. <br /> Chair McCutcheon opened the public hearing at 6:42 p.m. <br /> Patty Saiki,2874 Casco Point Road,does not see gutters or drainage shown and that is one of the critical <br /> points. She noted living with a narrow sideyard regarding the fire department they would need hook-and- <br /> ladder.All insurance companies watch the fire departments and rates will go up if the City does not <br /> manage widths between houses. She is just giving the Commissioners a heads-up. <br /> Charles Price,2813 Casco Point Road,shared that he lives to the west of the subject property. Mr.Price <br /> strongly objects to one of the pictures Mr. Gates showed that it will not affect his view of the lake but <br /> would now be filled with elevated deck,sofas, couches,umbrellas,grills, and the Mr.Price would be very <br /> uncomfortable if the City allowed a deck in that space.He noted the property owners who will suffer the <br /> water runoff from these proposed variances are at great risk of accelerated erosion on their bluffs as well <br /> as an increased risk of their bluff sliding down into the lake as so many nearby bluffs have already done, <br /> including his at 2813. The shoreline of the subject property and nearby properties have a risk profile that <br /> is much worse than most on Lake Minnetonka,primarily due to the high elevation above the lake(his <br /> property is 42 feet above the water)and the soil makeup is a loose mix of clay and sandy loam that can be <br /> easily eroded by running water. Many properties nearby have experienced severe erosion and severe <br /> slippage into the lake with huge expense and loss of yard size. If there ever was a case to minimize <br /> hardcover,this is the case.Mr.Price noted this property already has a patio of about 120 square feet <br /> which has been adequate for multiple families over decades. The Applicant wants to add another 360 <br /> square feet of deck very near Mr. Price's home and yard in a prohibited way. It is safe to assume the <br /> Applicants will not go through all of this to have a 480 square foot deck to quietly sit and read a book; it <br /> is expected that it will be fully furnished with all of the previously mentioned things,and a sound system. <br /> Mr. Price's yard could feel like they are living next to a loud bar or a night club.All of this illegal <br /> development will be between the Price's home and their view of the lake,and every person on the deck <br /> will be able to look directly into his living room day and night from only 22 feet away.He stated there are <br /> rules and laws in place which, if followed,will make all of this unnecessary. Simply put the Applicant <br /> bought a lot which cannot be made to fulfill their wishes. This lot is only 12,217 square feet and the <br /> average width is less than 55 feet.The Applicant should either purchase a lot more appropriate for what <br /> they desire or they should meet current rules and laws that protect the property owners,Lake Minnetonka, <br /> and the environment. Several years ago Mr.Price attempted to move a detached garage and attach it <br /> Page 3 of 9 <br />