2016-00589 - new house - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Do not even think about revising the grading plan for the site.This lot had no grading, and there is no apparent justification at this late date to suggest a grading plan amendment. You can only take advantage of the extra 1 foot of fill in determining whether a basement is a story or not, but not in determining the defined height. See the attached definitions sheet. Mike Michael P.Gaffron Senior Planner City of Orono (Street Address)2750 Kelley Parkway (Mailing Address)P.O.Box 66,Crystal Bay,MN 55323 Phone:(952)249-4622 Fax: (952)249-4616 From: Mark [mailto:mark�@�ronber�assoc.comJ Sent:Thursday, May 05, 2016 11:25 AM To: Mike Gaffron<MGaffron@ci.orono.mn.us> Subject: RE: 1970 Hunter Drive Mike:The existing grade goes up from the 1018 contour to 1019.4 at the proposed house. Attached is what I came up with for height based on the current house plans. If they can raise the grade 1 foot which they are allowed can they lower the house 1 foot and be in compliance? They would then have to bring the retaining wall in a little tighter to stay under the 500 CY of excavation.Would that work?Or could we have George revise the grading plan for a couple of feet?The problem is they don't want to have the back of the house face County Road 6. From: Mike Gaffron fmailto:MGaffron@ci.orono.mn.us] Sent:Thursday, May 05, 2016 9:16 AM To: 'Mark'<mark�@�ronber�assoc.com> Subject: 1970 Hunter Drive Mark— I hope to get a letter out today on this, but here's the main issue: Our review confirms that the lowest level of the proposed house is a basement by definition, but the defined building height exceeds the 30- foot maximum. The building plans show the upper dormer with window has been removed,which we advised was necessary. However,the defined height is required to be measured based on the existing grade where it abuts the house, not the proposed grade that was used by the architect/designer on building plans(see attached two sketches). The survey suggests that the highest existing grade at any point on the house perimeter is at or near elevation 1018'. The lower measuring point used in the height depiction on the plans was approximately 1.5' below the main floor elevation,or about 1022', which is the proposed grade. Based on the 1018'correct measuring point,the building's defined height is approximately 34',exceeding the 30' limit. The building plans(and potentially the survey)will have to be revised so the house meets the 30' maximum. There may be a variety of ways to accomplish this, perhaps a combination of reducing the roof pitches, lowering ceiling heights, reducing joist depths, and lowering the house further into the ground (which impacts the amount of cut and retaining walls). 2