10-10-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1988 Subject: #1338 DuWa;.,n2 & Connie :chibilla, 3235 Crystal Bay Road - Variance - Resolution Application - Request for hardcover and accessory structure area variances to construct a new garage. Zoning District - LR-lC, Single Family, 1/2 Acre, Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action Dated 10/5/88 Exhibit B - Title Documents in Question Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 9/30/88 Exhibit D - Proposed Resolutioi. Discussion - The applicants are proposing to construct a two car garage at. the rear of their property. Due to the topography of the - , te, this garage will have a storage area below it, with the total floor area of the structure being 1,248 s.f. (624 s.f. on each floor). At their October 3rd meeting, Planning Commission recommended approval of this size variance based on the proposed non -obtrusive appearance and proposed use of the structure, finding that the space underneath is necessary to support the structure and there is no point in making that space unusable for storage. The garage foot print and dimensions are 24'x26'. The garage and its associated driveway at the rear of the property, accessing to a private driveway on the railroad right-of-way, will increase the existing 29.6% hardcover in the 7:)--250' zone, up to 39.6%. The property formerly did contain a garage in this location, but that garage was removed after it sustained major damage in the 1987 super storm. Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested hardcover variance, subject to no future additional hardcover on the property. Please review the memo of September 30, 1988. You will note that a 33' public easement for highway purposes shows up on the survey, and the prol.oseci garage would be located on this apparent easement. The applicants have gt,estioned the validity of that easement, and their attorney is currently attempting to verify the validity of that easement. Based on documer is which have been reviewed by staff and the City Attorney, there may be some question as to whether that easement correctly should be recited on applicants' title, however, it is in the title hence the City Attorney's opinion is that until such tame twat easement is no longer of record, the City would be remiss in issuing a building permit for a structure on that easement. It is likely that the property owners will have to initiate a "proceeding subsequent" to have the easement removed from their title. If during that Proceeding it is determined that the City has a legal interest in this "public easement for highway purposes', at that time the City may have to determine whether the public interest would be best served by allowing that easement to be extinguished. "71