04-14-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

n MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 24,2003 7:00 o’clock p.m. 5. U02-2874 RICHARD KAIL - 3753 CASCO A VENUE - VACA TION, Continued approved the lot area, but denied the lot coverage by structures variance. The application was then heard by the City Council on February 24,2003, during which the Council discussed two options to increase the size of the property: vacating the adjacent alley or purchasing city owned land adjacent to the property. The applicant chose to pursue vacating the adjacent alley. The Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to deny the application for vacation, since the unimproved right-of-way may someday be used for stormwater drainage management, possible future utilities, and/or public access for the neighborhood to reach Lake Minnetonka. Bottenberg continued that, staff too, would recommend denial of the vacation application as proposed by Richard Kail. Sansevere asked the applicant if he could provide a more compelling argument that would overcome concerns expressed by staff in the packet. Kail stated that, currently, his structural coverage was 16.3%, if he were allowed to vacate the alley; his structural coverage would decrease to 15.07%. While both Planning Commission and City Council representatives wish to be good neighbors, Sansevere explained that there is a point in which they must follow the restrictions set forth in the codes and maintain staff recommendations. Sansevere indicated that his position would be small lots, small homes, big lots, big homes and he could not support the application. White agreed that, based on staffs opinion, he would have to support their position. Kail asked why the City felt the need to retain two alleys, and questioned the rationale for stormwater runoff when the water doesn’t flow thru his alley in the first place. Sansevere maintained that City staff had legitimate concern and issues with regard to stormwater drainage and utilities. He asked staff to explain why they felt the alley would be necessary. Gappa stated that no one knows what the future might hold with regard to stormwater, access, or utilities, and pointed out how difficult it often is to obtain easements later for stormwater ete. Kail indicated that he would grant easements back to the City, and was merely looking for enough land to cover his structural coverage requirement. Bottenberg stated that, even with the alley, the applicant would be 28 s.f. over with his plan. Page 4 of 9