01-17-2023 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION November 21, 2022 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 13 proposing to increase the ceiling height in the entire main level, reflected in the approximate 2 foot roof height expansion. They are proposing to add a second story over the western portion of home increasing the overall height by 13 feet plus chimneys. There are four areas of footprint expansion proposed, shown in yellow, the largest addition is a 22’x 26.5’ garage addition on the rear which meets the required setbacks. The three other footprint expansions include the covered porch entry and 6.5’x 9’ addition on the street side of the home 60-feet from the lake, a small addition on the west side of the home 48-feet from the lake, and a small chimney addition on the lakeside of the home. The chimney is approximately 13-feet taller than the existing roof height and will be 18 feet from the lake. The property currently has 33.9% hardcover where 25% is permitted. The majority of the hardcover is located within the 75-foot setback. The Applicant is showing some new areas of hardcover and is proposing to remove 224 square feet of total hardcover resulting in 32.9% hardcover. Staff finds the location of existing improvements impede opportunities for constructing conforming additions, height, or footprint changes to the home. however, the scale of the proposal to expand the non-conformities within the ALS and 75 foot setback are at a level that may not be reasonable. The increase of mass within the setbacks is not supported by practical difficulties and for that reason Staff recommends denial. Sarah and Travis Wildenberg, 1421 North Arm Drive, purchased the property in July 2022. They love the architecture and design, as well as the large front yard. The proposed plans are what they hope will be their forever family home. Peter Eskuche, 18318 Minnetonka Boulevard, Deephaven, has been working with the Applicants to expand the home to fit their family as it is quite a small residence on a slab. Going below ground would not be possible and would be disruptive given the proximity to the lake which is why they decided to design above the main area of the home and garage. He noted they are trying not to increase hardcover because it is so far over. There are also extensive patios along the shoreline which are all being removed, and the shore will be stabilized and restored as much as possible. Mr. Eskuche believes restoring the structure would be less damaging than tearing it down because it is literally on the lake. He noted they are trying to keep the scale of the house to the east as it is a very close proximity. In several areas of the house, Mr. Eskuche is not sure they have 8 foot ceilings so they are trying update the function and scale of the house. Ressler asked if there is a design that allows them to go up without increasing. Mr. Eskuche noted there is a possibility on the lakeside, but the problem is that almost the entire house is within the 75 foot setback. In looking at the upper level plan and east façade, it is possible that not all of that space would be entirely needed. Chair McCutcheon asked if they considered the back of the property behind the average lakeshore setback (ALS). Mr. Eskuche stated they were trying to disturb as little of the property as possible. That would be an exploration if this does not go through, but it is more hardcover. Chair McCutcheon has never seen a house this close to the lake. He noted they have a long driveway which adds hardcover and a house with decking overhanging the lake. He asked if they make an existing situation worse in putting massing inside the ALS.