HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC minutes-11-16-2009 �
` MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, November 16, 2009
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(# -3435 LOREN AND STACEY SCHOENZEIT,4480 FOREST LAKE LANDING, CONT.)
Chair Kan closed the public hearing at 8:28 p.m.
Kang stated she i � agreement with the applicant and encouraged the applicant to be se tive to the
privacy concerns of t neighbors.
Rahn stated it is in everyon 's best interests to provide some privacy screening t that in his view it is
not necessary to make that a c dition of approval as part of this application �nce the residence does not
encroach into the setbacks.
Schoenzeit stated he would like to negot' te with the City on the loc ion of the easement. If that piece of
land is given up,they will need to wark wit he City to find a s � able location for the geothermal wells
that they would like to utilize.
Curtis stated it can be a recommendation by the Plann� Commission and that the City Engineer will
need to look at it as well as the City Council.
Schoenzeit stated they would like to work with e City on a su ble alternate location.
Rahn noted the sewer line does not only rvice the Schoenzeit prope
Schoenzeit indicated it should be n ed that the sewer is located on their pro �today without a
easement. They would like to e sure that they can completely utilize the pr erty the way the ave
designed their project. �
Rahn moved, Kang se nded, to recommend approval of Application #09-3435,Lor and Stacey
Schoenzeit, 4480 F est Lake Landing,granting of a lot width ��ariance, a lot area vari ce, a side
yard setback var' nce, a rear yard setback variance, and hardcover variances,with the
understandin he applicants will work with the City in coming up with an equitable easeme
across this roperty. VOTE: Ayes 5, l�ays 0.
6. #2009-00730 THOMAS AND VIRGINIA SMITH, 2105 SUGARWOOD DRIVE,
REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SUGAR VVOODS COVENANTS, 8:35 P.M.—8:48 P.M.
David Steingas, Steiner&Koppelman, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting the requirements ar standards of the covenants of the Sugar
Woods development be waived. The first involves removal of trees greater than 2 inches diameter within
the required yards. The second involves grading within the required yards.
A special review procedure was established by the City in dealing with requests of owners who are unable
to meet the special standards agreed upon by both the City and developer Sid Rebers in the early 1990s
for the Planned Residential Development of the Sugar Woods subdivision. The Smith application is a
request to allow grading within the protected area, to help solve the drainage problems on the site, within
the "no grading zone/woodlands protection area,"i.e., in the setback areas defined within each lot.
_ Page
_ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _.
15
�
MINUTES OF THE {
ORONO PLA?�'NING COMMISSION MEETING �
Monday,November 16, 2009
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#2009-00730 THOMAS AND VIRGINIA SMITH, 2105 StiGARWOOD DRIVE, CONTINUED)
The City has received a letter today from the Sugar Woods Homeowners Association Board indicating
they are not opposed to the project.
The current plan continues to involve some grading within protected zones as well as the installation of
retaining walls. The proposed retaining walls, although not individually greater than four feet in height,
may appear to be 9-10 feet tall due to the tiered configuration.
The intent of Mr. Rebers in establishing "no grading/no tree removal zones" in each lot and within the
common outlot areas was to protect the natural woodland he had nurtured for a number of decades and to
provide Sugar Woods with a unique character all its own. To a great extent his goals have been met, as
Sugar Woods remains a heavily wooded neighborhood with homes in close proximity yet largely hidden
from each other and from the passerby.
To some extent the proposed grading is necessary to resolve drainage issues and minar tree removals are
necessary to do the grading. �Iowever, the fact that the proposed residence is proposed to extend the full
width of the building envelope makes it difficult to accommodate drainage without doing some grading
within the setback areas. A smaller footprint and/or a different configuration may better suit the site.
The new home is so close to the side setback lines that any attempt to minimize grading encroachment by
adding retaining walls would place the walls in the protected zone. There is no immediate residence to
the north, as there is a common outlot corridor north of the property.
The woods behind this property are fairly dense and the next home is quite distant, so the impacts in the
rear yard are minimized. The new home will have no flat back yard, and is proposed to be graded toward
the rear of the home and then directed to the east.
In order to construct an adequate driveway access to the site, grading must be conducted within the front
setback area. Grading to access the site is acceptable; however, what is acceptable is the minimum
grading necessary to construct the maximum 20 feet wide, straight driveway as allowed within the
covenants. The driveway as proposed curves into the site and a significant portion of the driveway
parking pad area is located within the front setback area. The covenants do not allow for the parking area
to extend into the setback area.
From Staff's perspective, the grading outside the building areas will most negatively affect some
significant and mostly small diameter trees. Only the significant trees have been shown on the plans. It is
critical that consideration is given to the tree removals and the proposed planting plan in terms of
maintaining the privacy and wooded feel of Sugar Woods.
Staff would recommend that the Planning Commission pay particular attention to the replanting plan in
determining whether it will suitably re-establish the intended natural barriers. Curtis noted the applicant
does have the right to appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council.
Steingas stated he is willing to work with Staff to correct the drainage issues and to re-establish the
plantings. The natural grade to this neighborhood is above the drainage on this property and that the
runoff currently goes across their building pad, which is what they are attempting to correct with this
_ Page
_ _.
_ __ _ _ _ ... ___.
16
�
MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,November 16,2009
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(#2009-00730 THOMAS AND VIRGINIA SMITH,2105 StiGARWOOD DRIVE, CONTINUED)
proposal. Steingas stated he did address the Sugarwood's architectural review committee and they are
aware of the situation.
Schoenzeit asked whether a variance will be required.
Curtis indicated a variance is not required but that this is merely a request for a waiver from the
Sugarwood covenants.
Schoenzeit asked whether the City has the authority to waive the covenants.
Curtis stated the City does have the power to waive or change those covenants as it relates to this
development. The City Engineer is currently working with the applicant's engineer to determine the most
appropriate drainage and grading.
Schoenzeit asked whether the grading plan would go before the City Council.
Curtis stated if the Planning Commission approves the request, the application would not need to go
before the City Council for fina] approval,but that if the Planning Commission denies the request, the
applicant does have the ability to go before the City Council to appeal their decision.
Rahn asked who originally created the covenants.
Steingas indicated it would be the developer, Sid Rebers. Steingas noted the neighbors do not want a
drainage easeinent through their property and that he needs to work with Bonestroo on that issue.
Chair Kang opened the public hearing at 8:47 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Kang closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m.
Schoenzeit moved, Rahn seconded, to approve Application #2009-00730, Thomas and Virginia
Smith, 2105 Sugarwood Drive,Request for Waiver of Sugar Woods Covenants. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
P NNING COMMISSION CO El�TTS
'-�
7. PORT OF PLANN G COM SSION REP NTA VES ATTENDIN
COUNCIL EETINGS OC OBER 26, 200 AND NO MBER 9, 2 9
Schoenzeit reporte n t October 26`�'City Council, d noted that a major top� o iscussion was
parking for the Dakota rail in the Bayview neighb rhoo The City Council re ed that Three Rivers
study the situation f he nd develop an overa parking pla far the Dakota ail in ono. Schoenzeit
/f
_ _ ___ __..._. __ .
Page �
__ __._ ____ __ _
17