Laserfiche WebLink
e <br /> ' MIN�UTES OF TFIE � <br /> ORONO PLANNING CONINIISSION MEETING <br /> Monday,September 17,2012 <br /> � 6:30 o'clock p.m. <br /> Landgraver encouraged the applicants to retain the berm and the trees. <br /> John Gorman stated none of the trees or berm will be removed. , <br /> Curtis stated her concern is that the will come in with a ro osal�is n�25 percent and that she <br /> Y p p �. <br /> does not have the ability to guide them on how much hardcover ill be allowed by the Planning <br /> Commission. Curtis noted given what has been discussed so�ar, e applic ts. ill not reach the 25 <br /> percent hardcover limit. <br /> Schoenzeit noted the pool consist of a significant am unt of hardco, er. <br /> Thiesse asked if the urchased the house with the ool�` <br /> YP p , <br /> Curtis indicated they did. Curtis stated it might be likel tha��is completely built out and that if this <br /> addition does not fit on the lot, it does not fit on the 1� <br /> ,{'�'�. � . , . <br /> , Thiesse stated the Planning Commission needs de�irii e nurnbers o.xespond to. <br /> r <br /> � � <br /> Gorman noted they will not be able to reach�he�5 pexcent l mYr. ���� � '� � <br /> Leskinen asked if they would like the�ir�`a plic�tabled. <br /> � � �' <br /> Gorman indicated they will make fhe changes and come�back before the Planning Commission. . <br /> "� �,��� ' <br /> Schoenzeit moved,Landgra�er seconded,to table Application 32-33576,John and Sherry Gorman, <br /> 3585 Fredericlz�tr.eet. VOTE�'c``^� yes 6,�Nays 0. <br /> �'"�. ��, '� <br /> 6. 12-3542 CI'I'Y OF ORONO,AMEND tiONING CODE SECTION 78-72,LOTS OF <br /> REC ,7:59 P.1GI:�8 18 P.M: �`"��;� <br /> � �-," " � � �'� <br /> Gaffron s ated in March of 20�.2,the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 92,Third Series,which in part <br /> �amended*Zoning Code Section��8-72 to�bring it into compliance with Minnesota Statutes. The sta.tutes <br /> rec�uire that'loc�al governments allow n�nconforming single lots of record within the Shoreland to be <br /> develo,pedregardless of lot�are�f the�,one,meet local setback requirements;two,have a sewer � <br /> connec`tio ar confor•ming septic system; and three,have no more than 25 percent hardcover. <br /> The statutes als addres�thaf a�re part of a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under <br /> common ownership,�wh�� ichmus be considered as individually buildable if each lot meets 66 percent of <br /> the DNR standards for'`lot area and lot width and has a sewer connection or conforming septic system and <br /> has not more than 25 per ent hardcover. � � <br /> The significant difference between the two categories is that single lots of record are not granted an <br /> automatic lot width variance but just an area variance. In either case,the DNR standards are much less <br /> restrictive than Orono's historic lot area and width requirements for the"LR"zoning districts. <br /> Having spent the last six months implementing the new standards, Staff questions whether Orono's <br /> regulation for the %z acre and 1 acre"LR"zoning districts granting automatic area and width variances <br /> Page <br /> 15 <br />