02-25-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

nuily 3i!,000 SF property be Uinited to a bouse and garage footprint of2391 SF. Therefore, we can conclude that the lot is unusually narrow for its length. Unique to the cibting structure location The existing structure sits well back from the lake (134J ft at its nearest point), but because of the lot depth, dw garage sits 145 feet from the street side property line, accounting for a very long driveway. The garage sits along the northern border of the property and requires a turn-around to back vehicles out before traversing the 143-foot driveway. Because of its location a^ need for a turnaround, the vehicular aspect of the property is somewhat unique. 2201 SF of impervious driveway, all necessary to allow cars to safely enter the garage, turn around, and exit the property. It is conceivable that the driveway be reduced in size to allow vehicles to enter the gai^e, but to elimiiute enough square footage to bring the property into compliance would require the elimination of the turnaround. It is certainly possible to argue that the unique nature of the garage location, along with its distance back from the street requires a degree of impervious surface that makes it a hardship. The applicant does not wish to remove the turnaround area of the driveway for Mfety reasons. Pheasant Road is a neighborly area of many young families, and to require the owners and visitors to the house to back up into the street is putting impervious surface issues ahead of the public welfare. Further Arguments The intent of the hardcover ordinance is to prevent overcrowding on Orono properties, which can lead to negative impacts on water and drainage issues in die lakeshore impact zones. Many Lake Minnetonka communities embrace a similar 23% impervious surface ratio for the same reasons. Orono is unique in its breakdown of the impervious coverage ordinances into separate zones. Although the 73’-250 ’ setback zone is at 34.2% hardcover (9.2% over the ordinance), no hardcover exists in the 0’-73’ zone and the hardcover in the 250 ’+ zone is at 10.2%, putting the entire property in a impervious to property ratio of 20.9%. It is the narrowness of the property and the concentration of the hardcover in one zone that makes this property non-conforming and problematic. The proposed plan assists drainage and accommodates a design that increases the functionality of the house. The plan eliminates 312 SF of impervious surface in areas closer to the lake than where it is being added, and the proposed property will, at project completion, have an impervious surface ratio equal to the current level (i.e. we are not adding to the hardcover total). This is sim/^y a request to aliow the current conditions to he maintained in order to refurbish, remodet and improve the existing house. The proposed project has no negative implications to this specific lot, its immediate neighbors, or to the neighborhood in general. The public welfare is not in harm’s way, and the panting of a variance for this project provides no special provisions to this lot that other residents of Orono are not entitled, as it is an alre^y non-conforming property and a clear hardship is present, as noted above. APPLICANTS’ LEGAL NAMES Matthew A. & Kathleen M. DollifT(husband and wife) it •• t .> r