01-22-2002 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 19,2001 6:30 o’clock p.m. (#01-2722 Michael and Monica Rnmn, Continued) Weinberger stated the Planning Commission had reviewed this application at its October meeting and tabled it to allow the property owner to consider options to the site plan in relation to garage si/c and setbacks. \Veinbcrger stated Brown Road is considered to be the front property line and Minnetonka Avenue being considered the side yard adjacent to street. The Applicants arc requesting variances to permit the replacement of an c.xisting garage with a 28 ’ by 24’ detached garage. I he Applicant is now proposing to construct the same si?e garaae as originally proposed with the location of the garage being slightly changed. The Applicants have indicated 'they arc agreeable to moving the garage back an additional five feet from the property line resulting in a 10-foot setback rather than six feet. There would be a live-loot setback to the allev, which is aareeable to Staff since the City docs not intend to develop ihc alley as a traveled road, ciirrentlv the a1le> is used for electric service. The Applicant did state he has a hardship due to the location of a mature pine tree that is located behind the garage with approximately a 35-foot drip line. 1 he Applicant is unable to move the cara-^c any further back due to the location of this tree. ^ ^ The Applicants have also agreed to redi.ee the si?c of the outside parking area to approximatelv a 15-foot width in order to accommodate some off-street parking. Weinberger stated the second part ol tlie application deals with the Applicant proposina to replace an existing fence that is six feet in height within the side yard adjacent to street setback where a maximum height fence is allowed to be 3.5 feet. The fence is intended to be a privaev fence to the back vard The fence is currently located 27 feet from the properly line. Weinberaer noted the Plannina '' Commission at its previous meeting did indicate general support for the fence heiaht variance fhe Applicants would like to increase the size of their back vard and relocate a portion of the fence in order to meet a 15-loot setback. Staff recommends approval of the variances to permit replacement of the fence within 50 feet of the street property line and replacement of the existing garaee. Brown stated he has spoken with his neighbor regarding this project, who has indicated he is suDDortivc of the project and is willing to help with the landscaping. Brown commented thev are plannin-to n| .nt some arborvitae m the yard and to reduce the size of the outdoor parking an as much as possible. ' Stoddard inquired whether any cars parked in the driveway would stick out into the street w ith the proposed new location of the garage. Brown stated the garage is proposed to be located 22 feet from the road. Brown stated in his view the change m the location of the fence will improve the look of the property. Brown indicated he is planning to erect a decorative fence rather than the current stockade fence. There were no public comments regarding this application. Smith inquired why the Applicant would like a six-foot fence versus a 3.5-foot fence PAGE 2