My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-17-2023 Planning Commission Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2023
>
01-17-2023 Planning Commission Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/18/2023 8:30:00 AM
Creation date
1/18/2023 7:56:25 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
194
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />November 21, 2022 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 8 of 13 <br /> <br />property with a 500 square foot firepit/patio on the north portion 43 feet from the Ordinary High Water <br />Level (OHWL) and a 470 square foot firepit/patio area 50 feet from the OHWL on the east side of the <br />home. The Applicant has identified lot size, shape, and safety as practical difficulties supporting the <br />driveway variance and has not addressed the firepit/patio areas. The parking area is situated 31 feet from <br />the OHWL where a 75 foot setback is required. Additionally, it exceeds the 8-foot permitted width of an <br />allowed driveway encroachment within the 75 foot setback. Two new patio areas are in the 75 foot <br />setback where hardcover is not permitted. Based on the updated as-built survey and hardcover <br />calculations there is approximately 3,600 square feet of hardcover within the 75 foot setback where 657 <br />square feet was approved. Curtis stated that 3,029 square feet of new, unapproved hardcover exists on the <br />property within the 75 foot setback. A comment from a neighbor was received that was generally in <br />support of the driveway improvements. This is a newly created lot; the property was platted in <br />2018 under the City’s current regulations. The plans submitted for the 2020 building permit for the home <br />and the current owner provided the allowed driveway access permitted by the Code within the 75 <br />foot setback. The home and driveway were designed to comply as much as feasible with the zoning <br />Codes. Staff does not find practical difficulty supporting any of the after-the-fact hardcover setback <br />variances. Planning Staff recommends denial and further recommends that the hardcover improvements <br />be removed immediately. <br /> <br />Jaime Wallis of Chanhassen, on behalf of Applicant Paul Taunton, said the initial violation was in <br />relation to the driveway. The patios did not come up in the violations which is why they had not been <br />addressed prior. Regarding the 8 feet allowed for the driveway, the problem is with the radius of the turn. <br />Mr. Taunton had a driveway study done and one cannot make the turn in or out of the property without <br />encroaching on the neighbor’s property and one cannot back out of the driveway. If they had an 8 foot or <br />11 foot driveway one would generally back out into a two-lane road but in this situation one would have <br />to back out, go approximately 150 yards past three homes to another road to back out of the property. She <br />gave photos to the Commissioners and noted the driveway turn is a significant problem. An easement was <br />granted to access the property and Ms. Wallis stated a delivery driver or Amazon truck cannot get in there <br />because they have to back out the entire length of the road which is a safety hazard. That was the <br />reasoning behind it. <br /> <br />Ressler noted Staff clarified how strict the City is, especially with lakeshore setbacks and hardcover, and <br />if there is not a reason to rebuild in like-kind. It looks like it was made abundantly clear in the application. <br />Ressler asked for a comment on the awareness. <br /> <br />From Ms. Wallis’ understanding, the awareness of the 75 foot setback was there, and in the previous <br />permit or survey that was approved, there is a hump in the purple area that allows for a turn. It was <br />designed not to encroach any further to the lagoon side. Ms. Wallis thinks Mr. Taunton bought a property <br />and was not aware that he could not access the property, build the home he wanted, and is now struggling <br />to get a vehicle out of the property. Putting the patios aside, Mr. Taunton is just looking for some <br />practicality regarding the driveway. Ms. Wallis took a video of trying to get on the property with a <br />standard-sized truck which cannot be done without encroaching on the neighbor’s property. Trucks <br />cannot deliver on the property so they park trucks in front of neighbors’ houses and block their driveway. <br /> <br />Chair McCutcheon asked if the Applicant is concerned about hardcover so close to the lake. <br /> <br />Ms. Wallis replied because they are permeable pavers, Mr. Taunton did not believe it was deemed as <br />something that could not be in the space because water can flow through it. She noted he is still within the <br />hardcover for the size of the property but the setback is causing the difficulty as Ms. Wallis understands.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.