My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/19/2004 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
04/19/2004 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2012 10:58:29 AM
Creation date
3/9/2012 10:58:29 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MONDAY, APRIL 19, 2004 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> NEW BUSINESS <br /> 6. #04-2999 GEORGE AND MARILYN MILEUSNIC, 3243 CASCO CIRCLE, VARIANCE, <br /> PUBLIC HEARING (9:20-9:25 p.m.) <br /> George and Marilyn Mileusnic, applicants, were present. <br /> Curtis introduced the application requesting a hardcover variance in order to rebuild the 483 s.f. deck <br /> which is rotted and to add a screened porch beneath the new deck. The property is located in the LR- <br /> 1 C, Single Family Lakeshore Residential district, V2 acre minimum. She stated the applicants are <br /> requesting a hardcover variance for the 75'-250' setback zone, noting that the deck reconstruction <br /> and the addition of the proposed screen porch would not increase hardcover or structural coverage as <br /> it currently exists. <br /> Curtis explained that the current deck is located in the average lakeshore setback from the <br /> neighboring deck setbacks. With the proposal to screen in the area beneath the porch the average <br /> setback would be measured from the neighboring houses rather than the decks, causing the <br /> deck/porch to be slightly ahead of the average setback. However, due to the topography of the lots <br /> and setback from Lake Minnetonka, the deck affects no lake views. Curtis referred to photos 2 <br /> through 5 for illustrations of the neighboring lake views. <br /> Curtis recommended approval of the requested hardcover variance as the deck exists currently and <br /> the applicants are requesting to replace it in kind, there is a hardship to justify the variance. The <br /> variance is requested to maintain the square footage that currently exists and to be able to repair the <br /> rotted deck. Also, she noted the proposed deck would meet the average lakeshore setback. Curtis <br /> stated the request is for a hardcover variance of 31.05%where 25% is normally allowed and 31.05% <br /> currently exists. <br /> Further, neighboring lake views are not affected by the proposal, she recommended granting the <br /> average lakeshore setback to allow the screened porch to be built under the deck. <br /> Curtis also recommended a stipulation to remove all of the fabric and plastic liners in landscape beds <br /> that account for about 1% of the hardcover. <br /> Ms. Mileusnic commented that the deck needs repairs as it is not up to Code and that both neighbors <br /> on either side are thrilled the deck is being repaired. <br /> Rahn observed this application is an example of the on-going discussion about decks as hardcover or <br /> not. He recommended this should be a matter for further discussion with the Planning <br /> Commissioners and staff to finally determine whether or how decks should be considered in the <br /> hardcover calculations. <br /> Kempf noted he viewed the property, realizing that crushed rock is going to be replaced with concrete <br /> for the deck. He concluded that the deck is hardcover when compared to greenspace that is visually <br /> more attractive. <br /> Chair Mabusth commented that one might argue that a properly spaced deck is even better; but that <br /> the City takes the position that a deck is 100%hardcover. <br /> Page 31 of 49 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.