My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-19-2000 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
06-19-2000 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2023 4:06:36 PM
Creation date
3/16/2023 3:59:25 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.
/
297
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).
View images
View plain text
#2564 <br />Page 2 <br />3. Section 10.25, Subd. 6(B): Side Setback: The minimum requirement for side yard setback in the <br />LR-IC zone is 10 feet. Variance Request: To permit a side yard setback of 2.9'-3.4' where 10' is <br />required; replacement of the second story and roof continues the existing substandard side setback <br />of 2.9'-3.4' on the west side of the house. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION: <br />The Planning Commission recommended by a 5 to 0 vote to: <br />Deny the application as pre?“nted. <br />DISCUSSION <br />The remodeling and addition will result in an increase of structural coverage on the lot to 2,433.2 <br />s.f. (18.7%), where 2,188.7 s.f. (16.8%) exists and 1,954.5 s.f. (15%) is allowed. The lakeside deck <br />is considered structure because it is more than 6' above grade. Prior to and after the Planning <br />Commission meeting. City Staff discussed with the applicant options to reduce the structural lot <br />coverage. These options include redesigning or lowering the lakeside deck by leaving a portion of <br />the deck for direct access and ramping to a ground level deck, removing the deck and have a ramp <br />to access a ground level deck, and ways to add fill to raise grade level. Any of these options would <br />result in reduction of structural lot coverage and eliminate the need for a lot coverage variance. <br />STAFF RECOMMENDATION: <br />The applicant has not submitted any additional information, choosing to continue with the plan <br />presented to the Planning Commission. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission’s concerns <br />regarding the increase in structural lot coverage. Staff reconunends denial of this application as <br />presented, but Council may wish to table if applicant expresses any interest in revising th*? deck to <br />make it low enough to not be considered as structure for lot coverage purposes. <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: <br />To direct staff to draft an appropriate resolution for the April 24,2000 City Council meeting.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.