04-17-2017 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,March 20,2017 6:30 o'clock p.m. 7. 17-3912 BRUCE BIRKELAND,PID 07-117-23-31-0028 (Adjacent to 1298 Wildhurst Trail),VARIANCES,8:02 P.M.—8:38 P.M. Bruce Birkeland,Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a variance to facilitate an administrative lot line adjustment, which is a subdivision exemption,in order to create an additional one lakeshore lot where there is currently one lakeshore lot and one non-lakeshore lot. The southern lot is not a lakeshore lot currently. The applicant owns both lots and has presented two options: 1. Create two conforming lots,each meeting the LR-1B minimum area and width at the 75-foot setback. This would require a side setback variance allowing the existing home on Lot 2 to be located within three feet of the new dividing line. The side setback variance is needed in order to certify the subdivision exemption. 2. Locate the dividing line so that the existing home meets the required 10-foot side setback. However,this results in Lot 3 having 132 feet in width where 140 feet is required. A lot width variance would be required in order to process the subdivision exemption. Curtis noted Option 2 is the applicant's preferred option. The LR-1B requires 140 feet in width at the ordinary high water level and at the 75-foot setback for Lake Minnetonka. There should be at least 280 feet at these points for supporting two lakeshore lots. The plans submitted for either option do not appear to reflect conforming measurement of lot widths. The applicant should revise Option 1 to meet the width requirement at the OHWL and at the 75-foot setback if possible. The existing home on the property is in a conforming location currently. Curtis noted moving the common lot line in order to make the lot width conforming at the 75-foot setback results in the house and deck encroaching within three feet of the new lot line. The purpose for this application is to increase marketability by creating a second lakeshore lot. The Planning Commission and City Council should determine whether or not it is appropriate to grant a variance based on this type of need. It is unknown whether or not two lakeshore lots can be created that meet the dimensional standards of the LR-1B requirements if the existing home is removed. The preferred option of Staff would be to create two conforming lots. The existing home is likely a temporary situation,suggested by common redevelopment of homes of this age when the properties are sold. There is a sufficient buildable area on the property to accommodate a new home in a conforming location. After further analysis,it appears that neither lot in Option 1 meets the 140-foot requirement at the lake or at the 75-foot setback. There could potentially be an option that meets the requirements but Staff does not have that information at this time. If the applicant wishes to create a new lakeshore lot, Staff suggests the applicant show that both lots will meet the 140-foot requirement in both locations. Page 17 of 43