06-13-2016 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 13, 2016 7:00 o'clock p.m. *8. #16-3828 CITY OF MEDINA/STONEGATE FARM, INC., 2940 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 6632 AND WETLAND REZONING ORDINANCE NO. 169 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6632, a Resolution Granting a Conditional Use Permit Pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 78-96619671968 and 78-1698 through 78-1610 Ordinance No. 169 for the property located at 2940 Sixth Avenue North. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 9. #16-3830 ZEHNDER HOMES, INC., 1255 DICKENSON STREET — VARIANCES Senior Planner Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting variances for lot area, lot width, front setback, side setback, side street setback, and structural coverage in order to construct a new residence on the property. Gaffron noted the property at one time did have a house on it and is in a neighborhood where the lots range from a quarter acre up to 1.5 acres. The lot is located in the 2 -acre zone and is zoned RR -1B. Gaffron noted this lot is significantly smaller than two acres and consists of roughly one-third of an acre. The buildable area is approximately 35' x 20'. The applicants are proposing to construct a new residence on the property. The driveway would come in off of Keene Avenue. The applicants are requesting a setback variance to the 50 -foot standard on the Dickenson Street side, a front setback of 30 feet where 50 feet is normally required, and a side setback of 13.9 feet. The applicants meet the 50 -foot requirement in the rear. The structural coverage proposed is 16.6 percent where 15 percent is normally allowed. Staff is recommending approval of all the setback variances as well as the lot width and lot area variances. Staff finds it difficult to support the structural coverage variance based on this being new construction on a lot that has been vacant for the past five years. In the past, Staff has supported structural coverage variances in situations where a clear practical difficulty exists. The structural coverage variance in this case is a direct result of the proposed deck with the top of the railings exceeding six feet in height above existing grade, making the deck calculable structural coverage. Gaffron displayed a sketch of the proposed house and pointed out the location of the deck. The Planning Commission felt there were a number of factors that suggested the lot coverage variance was appropriate. The Planning Commission felt the deck would be minimally visible from the street and not visible from the Keene Avenue side. In addition, there was likely more structural coverage on the lot in 2008 than what is being proposed currently. Gaffron displayed an aerial photograph of the house that was there up until 2011. Gaffron noted there was also an additional house on the lot that was removed in 2008, which resulted in the lot having 21.9 percent structural coverage. The other factor the Planning Commission looked at was that while the deck could be constructed lower, it would require a couple of steps down and it was the feeling of the Planning Commission that it made the deck less functional and could be construed as a practical difficulty. Page 3 of 14