Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> Monday, March 17, 2003 <br /> 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> (#03-2876 SEVIE LANNING, Continued) <br /> Gaffron concurred, stating that the virtual three story plan before the Commission was <br /> something that would not be approved in this situation. He asked if the Commission could <br /> support a 5' rear yard setback as opposed to 10'. <br /> As a minimum footprint house, Rahn found shifting the house back 5' acceptable. <br /> Fritzler maintained that the City does not know what will become of the railroad behind <br /> the home. <br /> Rahn agreed that a potential buyer should be made aware that the railroad could be used <br /> for something later on. <br /> Gaffron pointed out that this residence encroaches less into the railroad right-of-way than <br /> either neighbor's parcels. <br /> If the applicant tried not to obstruct the neighbor's views, Chair Smith asked what would <br /> be left for construction. She indicated that the new owner could legally build a 2 1/2 story <br /> home on the lot. <br /> Hawn asked if the neighbors could accept the current height restrictions, or whether the <br /> City could impose further height limitations. <br /> Stanton stated that a new home would be better than what currently exists, realizing that <br /> there is little space to work with. He indicated that he felt better having stated his peace. <br /> City Council member Sansevere arrived at 8:16 P.M. <br /> Since the lot is flat, Gaffron indicated that it would be difficult to build a 2 1/2 story home <br /> on this parcel. Based on height restrictions, he pointed out that the home could reach 34- <br /> 36' tall at the peak of the roof. Gaffron noted that the Planning Commission could further <br /> limit the height of the home by adhering to the average lakeshore setback. <br /> Hawn asked if the Commission could assign an absolute limit to the height at the average <br /> lakeshore setback. <br /> Chair Smith suggested taking the idea one step further by limiting the home to a single <br /> story at the average lakeshore setback. <br /> Lanning argued that the Commission was virtually making her home unmarketable by <br /> limiting her too much at this juncture. She believed a home under 1,200 s.f. would be <br /> unsaleable on Lake Minnetonka. <br /> PAGE 13 of 24 <br />