03-13-2023 City Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 13,2023 6:00 o'clock p.m. Johnson moved,Benson seconded,to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving LA23-000001, 2617 Casco Point Road,variance.VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0. 16. LA22-000070,STACY KROMENHOEK,4085 WATERTOWN ROAD,AFTER-THE- FACT VARIANCE Staff presented a summary packet of information.Nye said this an after-the-fact variance for 4085 Watertown Road. The applicant is requesting this after-the-fact variance for a side yard setback for a deck and more specifically,deck stairs. This is a very,very narrow lot and small for the RR1A zoning district and actually has overlapping side yard setbacks,so there was no building envelope and due to these practical difficulties,variances were granted back in 2021. Staff reviewed a final as-built survey and found that the deck stairs didn't comply with the setback. They built 17.3 feet from the northern property line where a 19-foot setback was approved. Staff reached out to the applicant with this information asking them to modify or remove the deck stairs to comply with the setback. Instead,the applicant is requesting an after-the-fact variance so that the deck and deck stairs can remain in place as they are now with the approval of a 17.3-foot setback. Staff is recommending denial of this application. The construction error that resulted in the deck stairs being constructed beyond the setback does not technically constitute a practical difficulty. The Planning Commission heard this application at a public hearing on February 21. They found that there were practical difficulties and also believe the smaller setback would not negatively impact the character of the neighborhood. They voted in favor of approving the after-the-fact variance with a vote of 5 to 0. The applicant is here tonight to answer any additional questions. Stacy Kromenhoek, 1025 West Cove Lane,Minnetrista,Minnesota, explained when they did the original survey,the surveyor misread the building plans and put in four-foot stairs instead of three-foot stairs so that accounts for about 12 inches of the 20-inch offset. Then the general contractor dug the footings eight inches off,resulting in 20 inches total of a deviation. The GC is not around to make the correction. He has since lost his license. I am not the homeowner. Pm just trying to help out the homeowner because I was originally going to live there. We do have the support of the neighbors. It is a very narrow lot,but we did build a really beautiful home for the homeowner.We talked about it with the Planning Commission, about the harm versus the pros of leaving it as is. It's 20 inches. I think if I would have come to the commission and asked for a 17.3-foot setback originally, instead of an 18 foot,I believe it probably would have been approved because this is such an incredibly narrow lot.And I think we did a really good job making a home that fit as best as it could in that footprint.But mostly,I think it's really about undue harm for this homeowner who had no fault in this and neighbors to have footings dug up and construction again for another summer. Overall,we feel like everybody benefits with an approval. Johnson said he watched the original Planning Commission hearing and said he believes he would have approved it at the time. The question to me is,how do we handle these after-the-fact requests?We've got another one up next after-the-fact and so I worry a little bit about precedent-setting.But in this particular case,I think we would have approved it as a City.And I think it was an improvement. This property got pushed back farther from the road than it was before which made it more conforming. For that reason,I'm in support of just approving this. The staff did a good job catching it,and so that that part of the process worked. Page 5 of 21