Laserfiche WebLink
' PC Exhibit D <br /> Mike Gaffron <br /> From: Mike Gaffron <br /> Sent: Tuesday, December01, 2015 3:45 PM <br /> To: 'John Kieffer' <br /> Subject: RE� Orona File 15-3792 NoUCe of Planning Commission Action <br /> Attachments: Driveway layout sketches far discussion.pdf <br /> John— <br /> Melanie and I have discussed your dilemma; here are our thoughts: <br /> - The City has on occasion in the �ast granted setback varlances in ofder to save a mature tree.As often as not, <br /> the impacts of the construction proce�as well as the physical presence of a structure within the root zone end <br /> up leaving us with a dead tree and the justification for the variance is lost. <br /> - It's pretty clear that centering a detached garage on t�e property 30'back from the street will require removal <br /> of the tree. Based on the survey,the tree is 26'-27'from the south side lot line, so a 21' wide garage located 3' <br /> from the side lot line and 30' from the street lot line would be only 2'-3'from the tree. Much af the root zone <br /> would be covered or destroyed. <br /> - Staff would not support a 3' side setback to the south. We would potentially support a 5'setback, but only if <br /> you received a letter of full support for the side setback variance from that neighbor. <br /> - One of the reasons we cauld support a 5'setback is to maximize the usability of your side yard. With such a <br /> narraw lot, offsetting the garage could have the beneflt of allowing for a more open visual feel,and allow a vlew <br /> of the house from the street, making fQr a more inviting sidewalk and entry. <br /> � The narrow lot wldth does not support the cancept af a side-loading garage unless one side of the garage is <br /> virtually on the side Eot line. Such a variance would not be approved. <br /> - An end-loading garage 10'east of the tree(approximately 50 feet from the street) would be roughly 30'from <br /> the house and be roughly 304 s.f. less hardcover than your initial plan. Howe�er,there is still the Issue of how <br /> much o#the root zone would be impacted,and the tree would be within a foot or two of the driveway, uniess <br /> you were able to angle the garage to keep the driveway further from the tree. <br /> - Locating the garage at 50 feet from the road,angled or not, places it within apen space on your lot that the <br /> southerly neighbor probably enjoys having;it could make them feel boxed in. <br /> We think that,even though you and we would Uke to save the tree, iYs not sufficient justification for the granting af <br /> variances,and it's Iocated such that even if setback variances are granted, it's at risk. From a staff perspective, aside <br /> from the increases in hardcover,your original plan with the attached garage makes sense given the site of the house and <br /> the lot, and the abi�ity ta have the room expanslon above it. But the Planning Commission clearly did not find a <br /> justification for the hardcover increase.The obvious solution for that is to ha�e a detached ga�age closer to the street. <br /> Another option might be to create a narrower, double-deep garage. <br /> I'm attaching 5 schematic drawings showing some of the garage location alternatives and their pros and cons. A Is the <br /> obvlous choice to minimize hardcover—but tree goes away.On A-B-C 1 haven't drawn in the driveway, but it would <br /> necessarily include a backup apron.On D and E [`ve sketched in the driveway. These drawings are for illustrative <br /> purposes; the on�y one we could support without further qualification is A(or B if nelghbor likes 1#). <br /> Hope this helps as your planning progresses. <br /> Mike <br /> Michael P.Gaffron <br /> Senior Planner <br /> Ctty of Orono <br /> (Street Address}2750 Keiley Parkway <br /> (Malling Address)P.Q.Box 66,Crystal Bay, MN 55323 <br /> Phorte:(95Z�249-4622 <br /> 1 <br />