06-27-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LANNING COMMISSIONi\ 14, \f94 HONirTES or THE 0«0N0 PlAWnWG COBOOaHEIJ>ON MAY lA, l«M SION MEETING 994 in the Orooo City Council ir Charles Schroeder. Commissioners c Rowlette, and Dale Lindquist, ring represented staff: Building and anning and Zoning Administrator [son. Chair Schroeder called the WATERTOWN ROAD - lEARING TO BE RESCHEDU^D MEETING OF JUNE 24,1994 AT LOAD • APTER-THE FACT CATION WITHDRAWN BY CITY 1499 BIRCH LANE - CONDITIONAL ING Dg and Affidavit of Publication were eport and stated that staff le conditions listed in the staff report, going to be close and unsure that »usth stated that this was what the City lire a final grading plan with building he purpose of the depression was to low they were creating a swale to ig. Mabusth reviewed the elevations the filling of the flood plain as in commented that the reason for the ►ove normal and provide somewhere I recommend approval of #l9u» lly Liljequist at 3940 Birch Lane iport and requiring the applicant and vations prior to City Council leview. (#4> 1911 ERNEST LEMMERMAN,4tttTONKAVIEW LANE-VARIANCES. COWTINCATION OF PUBLIC HEARING Chair Schroeder noted that the Certificate of Mailing and the Affidavit of Publication were on file with the Qty. Mabusth reviewed the staff report and outlined the area that was buddahle. Ernest Lemmermaa was present. Chair Schroeder noted this was a public hearing continued from a pervious meeting. Ken Hickey staled he owned the lot immediately adjacent to that of the applicant, and suted he had sent a letter to the Planning Commission. He sUted he was opposed o building on this lot because it n substandard, and it will cause erosion in the area. He befieveo the buildaMe area was too close to h» house. Rowlette inquired about the average lot sizes in the area and Mabusth responded that they are all half-acre 1 plus acres in this area, and she noted that the subj^ lot » .78 acres in area. Lemmermaa commented that he had purchased the land so that his homestead lot would be larger and more usable. Mabusth noted that the property had sewer available and would have been issued a buildiag permit if the lot contained .8 acres or 80% of required area. Discussion ensued legardiag the lot line reanangement and the lop of bluff definition as it would apply to the subject properly. Lindquist sUted that he had problems with the application because the proposed lot area was under half an acre and the potential for further variances being requested in the future because of the size of the building envelope. Mabusth reviewed the building em'elope locatioa that complied with Orono stewards. Lindquist questioned whether the lot was buildaMe given it’s size. Schroeder stated that the Planning Commission had approved the lot line rearrangement with the proposed areas and dimensions and he felt that they could not take the position that the lots were now too small. Nolan commented that since they had approved the lots, then needed to make it the best it can be given the parameters they have available. He preferred to give the applicant a reasonable building envelope and see something built that was feasible. Hickey stated he felt that the lot should not be built on and while he has had an opportunity to purchase the properly he felt it was too expensive. Chair Schroeder stated that the Planning Commission could approve the request with a note in the file that the Planning Commission would look at changing the building envelope through review when plans were formally submitted. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Berg, to recommend approval of #1911 lot area variance as proposed and a building envelope as defined by the required setbacks for Ernest Lemmerman at 4620 Tonkaview Lane, with the requirement that the sketch of the defined building envelope be included as part of the resolution granting approval of the area variance in order to alert a future owner of the unique sloped building envelope. Ayes 5, nays 1. Lindquist stated he felt the lot area was too small to contain