Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE . <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, October 20, 2003 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. � <br /> (#S) #02-2858 SCOTT STANDA, 2659 CASCO POINT ROAD, Continued <br /> 5. Does Planning Commission have any other issues or concerns with this <br /> application? <br /> Gaffron indicated that staff recommends denial of the application. In staff's opinion, if this <br /> reconstruction had been applied for before-the-fact, the encroachment over the shoreline <br /> and within 1 foot of the side lot line would have been questioned and likely not approved. <br /> He noted that the apparent expansion of the deck from a depth of 6' to 8' would certainly <br /> not have been approved. <br /> Gaffron maintained that, while the fact that the approval process has cost the property <br /> owner more than the project itself is unfortunate, but should not be a factor in determining <br /> whether the approval is granted after-the-fact. <br /> Maintenance and/or replacement of existing decks and lakeshore accessory structures is an <br /> on�oing issue along Orono's 40 miles of Lake Minnetonka shoreline. Gaffron stated that <br /> the Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the current policies and codes are <br /> appropriate, or whether they need to be relaxed or strengthened. <br /> If approval is granted, Plannin�Commission should address the excessive hardcover on <br /> the property and make a recommendation as to removals. An after the fact permit should <br /> be applied for so the building inspector can confirm the construction meets pertinent <br /> building codes. <br /> Chair Smith asked if staff had recommended to the applicant that he consider a lockbox. <br /> Gaffron indicated that the discussion had not pursued that far, since it was the applicant's <br /> intent to keep what he had. <br /> Mr. Standa volunteered to make additional removals of hardcover on the property, <br /> including the concrete slab behind the accessory structure, sidewalk along side of the home <br /> to the accessory building, and repair or removal of the crumbling lake access steps. <br /> Mabusth recommended the lake access steps be replaced for safety sake, since the lot is a <br /> steep lake lot. - <br /> Mr. Standa pointed out that the retaining walls would also be in need of repair in the near <br /> future. <br /> Hawn questioned the necessity of the fire pit and flagpole. <br /> Mr. Standa indicated that he would prefer to keep both his flabpole and fire pit; however, if <br /> it was mandated he could remove the fire pit. <br /> Page 4 of 29 <br />