My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-15-2002 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2002
>
07-15-2002 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/16/2023 4:04:08 PM
Creation date
2/16/2023 4:00:05 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
384
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR AUGUST 24,19«8 <br />P <br />(#5) #2390 DAVID RAHN, 1385 REST POINT ROAD - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 4144 <br />David Rahn was present. <br />Van Zomeren stated the City Council has reviewed this application at its July 27.1998 meeting and <br />referred the application back to the Planning Commission for consideration. The Planning <br />Commission recommended a 22’ x 22’ garage with sidewalk and driveway as presented at its <br />August 17.1998 meeting by a four to two vote. <br />Van Zomeren stated total hardcover would be 2.482.75 squa;e feet or 31.3 percent, noting the <br />amount of hardcover in the 0-75 ’ zone be credited against the hardcover in the 75 ‘-250 ’ setback. <br />Rahn stated the Planning Commission reduced the garage by two feet, noting he had requested a <br />22* X 24* garage, which is a reduction of 44 square feet. Rahn questioned the accuracy of the <br />hardcover figures. <br />Van Zomeren remarked the hardcover was miscalculated on this application and should be 2.532 <br />square feel instead of the 2,482.75 square feet, because of the size of the garage apron shown. <br />Kelley questioned whether there might be a need for retaining walls along the slope of the driveway. <br />Goetten suggested a contractor be contacted to look at the property. <br />Rahn stated if any retaining wall is necessary, it would be along Ihe south side of the driveway, and <br />would possibly require a foot and a half high retaining v/all. noting he was a contractor for 15 years. <br />Mayo* Jabbour stated he has serious problems with this application in that the Applicant was <br />inforir ed at the time the residence was constructed that his future hardcover v/as limited. Jabbour <br />expressed concerns that citizens in the future might coni truct their residences to the maximum <br />hardcover limits and come back before the City Council ai a later time and request additional <br />hardcover for a garage because it has been stated that all people in Minnesota deserve a garage. <br />Rahn stated it was not his intent to mislead the City Council about his plans for a future garage, <br />noting that his plans all along called for a garage to be built in the future. Rahn commented his <br />hardcover was not reduced by subtracting the amount in the 0-75' from the 75 ’-250 ‘ area until the last <br />cornment at the last City Council meeting before the Resolution was passed, and he was led to <br />believe he had 1.000 square feet of available hardcover after the residence was ccnstructed. <br />Mayor Jabbour staled he was entitled to 25 percent hardcover. <br />Rahn remarked he understands the City Council ’s position, but is in need of storage space, noting <br />the proposed garage is smaller than the minimum standards for an average garage in Minnesota. <br />Rahn stated his other option would be to construct a buiidind pad and build a 20’ x 20' storaae <br />building. <br />Van Zomeren stated the accessory structure cannot exceed the height of the principal structure. <br />Rahn commented he could construct it without a sidev/alk to reo jce hardcover. <br />Page 5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.