Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-21-1997 Planning Commission MinutesV . ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ROLL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chair Dale Lindquist, Charles Schroeder, Sandra Smith, Janice Berg, Elizabeth Hawn, and Lili McMillan. William Stoddard was absent. The following represented the City Staff. Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, City Planner Elizabeth Van Zomeren, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Council Member Goetten was present. Vice Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. (The meeting began with Agenda Item #23. Items # 1 and following continue after discussion of this item.) SKETCH PLAN ( #23) #2263 BROOK PARK REALTY 3560 -3700 SHORELINE DRIVE SKETCH PLAN REVIEW • The applicant was represented by Bill Gleason of Brook Park Realty and John Gleason of Eagle Crest Builders. Gaffron reported that the 9.8078 acre property is located west of the twin homes in Navarre, which are the only multi - family dwellings in Orono. The property abuts Shoreline Drive on the south and the Dakota Rail to the north. West of the property is a gravel and landscaping- - business, which is non - conforming in its use. The subject property is located in the LR -1C1, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. The LR -1C allows for two units per acre. The 1 C1 allows for a PRD with a 50% increase to 3 units per acre. The proposed development would be four units per building. There are wetlands located to the front of the property and the northwest. Runoff drains to the south into Carman's Bay from Casco Point to the east. The concept plan results in a development density of 4.6 units per acre. Per the zoning requirements, the 9.8 acre property would allow for 29 units where 45 are proposed. Gaffron reviewed the code sections that apply to the development plan. Section 10.30 Subdivision 16(I) disallows rezoning of the site to M -6 Multiple Family PRD because the site is adjacent to an LR district. M -6 is the only zoning district which would allow densities such as that proposed. Section 10.55 Subdivision 15(A)(3) allows credit for wetlands for density purposes for sewered residential property. Section 10.60 Subdivision 2 disallows density in excess of 4 units per acre of dry buildable land. The property in question has about 7 acres of dry buildable allowing for about 28 units. Section 11.10 Subdivision 14 prohibits the granting of • variances to the density provisions of the code. This results in the proposed 45 units being too many to consider under the current code standards. • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #23 - #2263 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Gaffron reviewed the memo regarding wetlands, hardcover limitations, engineering issues, and sewer and water connection charges. There is a concern about possible wetland encroachment along the west side. The wetlands require confirmation and may require some restoration. There is a 35% hardcover limit for a PRD in the LR -1C District. A letter is included from the City engineer regarding the proposal. The preliminary determination for sewer and water connection charges is approximately $3800 per unit. The memo also outlines PRD standards for consideration. Gaffron informed the Commissioners that under a PRD they have the opportunity to create what they would like to see for such a development and give direction to the developer. The applicants were asked to comment. Bill Gleason indicated that they had been unaware of the limitations on the property being adjacent to the LR District. It is their plan to develop affordable housing through higher density. A portion of the development plan is laid out on neighboring property not yet acquired or part of this proposal. He noted there is a driveway currently crossing over wetlands. The wetlands will • be preserved. Entry into the property would be from Livingston Avenue. Gleason said his goal is to provide a lower unit cost through higher density. He proposes a unit would cost about $135,000 or less if the 48 unit density was allowed. Gleason said they would redo the plan if the 48 unit plan was not allowed. Each unit will include two bedrooms, two bathrooms, a double garage, central air conditioning, and appliances. There will be a front entry with garage entry on the other side. There will be four units per building. There were no public comments. • Smith asked if the applicant had reviewed the letter from the City Engineer. Gleason said he had no issue with the contents of the letter. He said he thought the driveway may be a problem. John Gleason asked what would be involved with restoration. Gaffron said it would likely include reexcavation and revegetation. Gaffron said the driveway has been a long standing issue for the City as it encroaches on property being developed and needs to be resolved. He felt it was resolvable. Hawn asked what the cost figures are for affordable housing. Gaffron said the top of the affordable range is a $120,000 valuation, which results in the estimated $135,000 cost per unit not meeting the affordable criteria. More density would be required to reduce the cost. 2 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( 423 - #2263 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Berg indicated that the land value attributes to the cost. She felt the proposal was too high density. Smith said the plans are an improvement over what is on the property now but saw a problem with resolving the density issue. Hawn questioned whether the same size units would limit the type of residents who would purchase the property. She asked whether the developer has considered building some units bigger to allow for more of a mix of residents. Bill Gleason said the main issue was with keeping costs down. They are gearing their development to young couples or singles. They originally considered providing housing for empty nesters but there is not enough room for one level housing. The acreage would only allow for 16 one -level units, and Gleason felt empty nesters would desire a housing cost less than $130,000. Berg asked if the interior units in the building would be smaller. The applicants said they were all the same size at just under 1500 s.f. finished. • Berg asked what market analysis the developer has done to determine who their buyers would be. Bill Gleason said he thought $150,000 per unit would be too high for townhome buyers. He acknowledged that land costs were high but felt the street and infrastructure costs were the main concern. Berg inquired what the development cost per unit would be. John Gleason said it would be about $30,000 with the lot. He noted that access to the property would be through an existing neighborhood which sets the tempo for the housing. Gleason said the homes would have maintenance free siding. He also indicated that an association would be formed. The entry cost would be $120,000 with options available that would increase the cost. The homes would include a set package. Gleason said building two level townhomes is more affordable. Bill Gleason said the unit development cost would be about $15,000 to $16,000 not including the land. Berg noted that the cost would increase for the premium lots. McMillan questioned the road access to CoRd 15. Gaffron said it is shown in concept only if the adjacent property is similarly developed in the future. • (Schroeder arrived at this time.) 3 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #23 - #2263 Brook Park Realty - Continued) McMillan asked about guest parking. Bill Gleason said each unit would have room for two cars in the garage and two cars in front of the units. There will be room elsewhere for parking and a public road going through the development. Green spaces will be provided. Hawn asked if it was impossible to rezone the area. Hawn indicated that the property is the last area available for affordable housing. The proposal is way over the density that can be allowed but Hawn said she favors the effort. Bill Gleason reiterated that they misunderstood the zoning. Gaffron said any higher density would require rezoning. He informed the Commissioners that in order to allow more than three units per acre, a new zone would have to be created. Hawn asked if there were any other area where low cost housing could be built. Gaffron said he did not think so, this is the only area zoned for multiple family in Navarre. Hawn said she would like to pursue rezoning of this property. Berg said she would consider reviewing it but not for the number of units as proposed. McMillan agreed with Berg. Berg said she understood the concern but felt the number proposed was too dense. Smith agreed with Berg. • McMillan noted that any density between 29 and 45 units would still require rezoning. Gaffron said this would require changing the LR -1C -1 zone standards or creating a new zone which takes time. Smith also indicated that the unit price would not necessarily come down much in cost. Smith said she overall supports the proposal but does not favor rezoning to the extent needed for the density requested. She said the other issues are probably solvable. Berg said she liked the look of the proposal. John Gleason said they would try to maintain the price. He asked what the time frame was for rezoning. Gaffron said the Council would likely want to review all of Navarre on a comprehensive level and estimated a minimum of six months. John Gleason asked if the Commission thought the proposal with less density was favorable. Berg concurred noting the desire for affordable housing while still meeting the benchmark density. Gleason asked how they could come up with a density level. Smith informed him that any density level over 28 or 29 units would require rezoning. Gaffron reiterated that density over 28 units would require at least six months for review of the zoning. 4 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #23 - #2263 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Bill Gleason asked how the determination of 28 units was made. Gaffron said it was determined by the dry buildable and would result in 28 -30 units. Berg said the applicant also has to consider the surrounding neighborhood. The proposal will increase the traffic which has to be considered. She noted that the addition of the adjacent parcel would result in the County reviewing the traffic as well. McMillan indicated that with no code allowing density over 28 units, the density level cannot be determined at this point. Bill Gleason said they could review and re -tool the plan if rezoning was a possibility. Gaffron said if the Commission would like to consider rezoning, the Council should review the sketch plan first to see if they support the idea of rezoning. John Gleason clarified the water and sewer connection charge of $3800 per unit. Gaffron said • density level would not change the unit cost. (Dale Lindquist arrived at this time.) SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARINGS/PUBLIC INFORMATION REVIEWS ( #1) #2187 DONALD AND ROBIN HELGAGER 3265 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 7:12 -7:24 P.M. The Applicant, Robin Helgager, along with Neil Heupel, were present. Gaffron reported that the application is a continuation of a public hearing for remodeling of the residence. The applicant received approval for a 5' east lot line setback in 1996 and removal of the existing detached garage and addition of an attached garage, a family room, and a change in the driveway. A revised proposal was reviewed early in 1997. Gaffron indicated that the property requires a 50' setback from CoRd 6, 150' setback from Lake Classen, a 30' side setback, all of which leaves little room for expansion of the footprint. The lakeshore setback requirement has increased since the original residence was built. • • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #1 - #2187 Donald and Robing Helgager - Continued) The original 1997 proposal included a mother -in -law apartment. The current proposal does not include an apartment. A second story is planned over the garage area. This would result in the second story being located within the 30' setback with the proposed 5' setback. Gaffron asked Commission to consider this proposal and how it might affect the adjacent property's view of the lake. He noted that the Planning Commission had found it difficult to allow additions to the residence towards the street. There will still be an encroachment of the lakeshore setback but less than that with the existing garage that will be removed under the proposed plan. Heupel said the front entrance is now established. He said while the suggestion by Hawn for an addition to the rear was appreciated, they had forgotten about the septic tanks being located in that area. Other alternatives were not possible resulting in the request for the second story above the garage. The current entrances to the home are from the porches on the front and side. Hawn said she saw the driveway in front of the home as being a problem. Heupel said it serves as a turnaround only. Robin Helgager said it is dangerous to attempt to turn around any where else. Hawn questioned whether the driveway has to be extended across the whole front of the is residence. Helgager said they are losing their parking currently used and are not able to park side by side. Smith noted that there is no place to park off of the property. McMillan asked how large the driveway area will be. Heupel said it is about 25' wide and the length of the home. Helgager said she has three small children and the property drops off to the side and would like the area for the children to play basketball. Smith said the proposal is an improvement over the last application. While she does not like to see adding to the mass of the structure, she prefers this proposal. Hawn asked if the driveway would be blacktopped. Helgager said she would like it to be as it is the only flat part of the yard. McMillan asked if the next door neighbor approved of the plan. Heupel said he lived next door and was in support of the plan. Hawn inquired about trees being affected by the proposed plan. Helgager said one tree was lost, but they plan on planting more trees. Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2187 for the hardships noted. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. • 0 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21, 1997 ( #2) #2238 CHIC DWIGHT AND FRED GUTTORMSON 1220 TONKAWA ROAD VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:24 -7:58 P.M. The Applicants were present. Gaffron reported that the application had been previously tabled at prior meetings. The question revolves around the after - the -fact variance for deck and enclosed porch improvements, and a new hardcover variance request for a 32'x30' detached garage. Gaffron directed attention to the memo of June 12 regarding the applicant's discussion with him regarding options of reorienting the proposed garage and relocating the driveway loop and eliminating the loop in the yard to eliminate hardcover in the 0 -75' setback. No conclusions were made. The issues still involve the reconstruction of the deck, deck enclosure, and detached garage. The potential tradeoffs were reviewed as noted in the memo. Lindquist asked the applicant to respond. • Guttormson said he discussed the options with Gaffron. • Dwight said they have agreed to remove the deck at the lakeshore if the garage and deck enclosure are allowed. The gravel driveway would be eliminated resulting in reduction in hardcover. Guttormson questioned whether the enclosure is actually a building. Lindquist said it was and would have to be reconstructed to code. Lindquist said the garage as proposed should be moved to meet the 15' setback and loop driveway eliminated in the 0 -75' setback. Gaffron said if the removals were made, the applicant would remove the shed, gravel driveway to lake, and lakeside deck but wished to leave the loop driveway as it is. Hawn noted there were two sheds by the lake. Guttormson said both sheds would be removed (one already has been removed). Hawn asked about storage of the motor home. Guttormson said it is parked elsewhere during the winter months and parked on the property during the summer when not in use. Lindquist asked if the applicant was willing to reduce the driveway loop. Guttormson said he has made it as small as possible in order to still be able to turn around. 7 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #2 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) Smith suggested the applicant remove the portion of the loop in the 0 -75' setback which she felt would allow enough remaining space for turnaround and parking. Guttormson responded that he does not need the garage enough to eliminate the driveway loop. Dwight said they are unable to park on the road and would lose space needed if they had to remove the loop. Hawn asked the size of the current garage and the use for the proposed garage. Guttormson said the existing garage is 22' wide. The new garage would be used for storage and parking of two cars. Lindquist asked if there are any changes agreed to regarding elimination of the loop driveway for the new garage. Guttormson said he would remove the lakeside deck. Hawn informed him that the deck enclosure was approved with agreement to remove the deck by the lakeside. She indicated that the applicant proceeded with the projects which required removals as conditions of the approval. Hawn noted the garage is a separate issue from the first variance and the approved • variance should stand as written and not be allowed for reconsideration. Dwight said Staff told them to repair the deck and did not mention needing a permit. She said they do not feel what they did was out of line. Hawn agreed but said the proceedings called for the enclosure and reconstruction of the deck. Dwight said her understanding is the driveway to lake and lakeside deck removals were to allow for the deck enclosure. She indicated that they realized they did not need sliding doors and believed the removable screens used did not constitute a deck enclosure. Dwight said they also did not remove dirt as previously proposed. Berg noted that the prior conversation related to removal of the gravel driveway, shed, and lakeside deck. She noted the need for the Planning Commission to clearly communicate the issues to the applicant. Smith and Berg were in consensus regarding removal of the lakeside deck. Berg said the ordinance must be protected noting the attempt to accomplish the needs of both the applicant and City. Berg reviewed the issues of the lakeside deck, enclosure under the deck, the reconstruction to code of the deck for safety reasons with required permits obtained, removal of the two sheds by the lakeshore, one already removed and one which will be removed, the new garage, the loop driveway in the 0 -75' setback, and the driveway in the 0 -75' setback. 8 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #2 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) Berg said any type of construction under the deck would require the lakeside deck, gravel driveway to lake, and sheds be removed in order to allow any enclosure regardless of sliding doors or dirt removal. Dwight said the original application included removal of dirt and patio doors. Gaffron confirmed that the dirt was not removed. Lindquist said in order to obtain the new garage, the loop driveway in the 0 -75' setback would have to be removed. The deck enclosure would require the other removals as noted. Schroeder agreed. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve Application #2238 for reconstruction of the deck and underneath deck enclosure with permits to be obtained and improvements built to code with the understanding the 8' gravel driveway, lakeside deck, and lakeside sheds are to be removed. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. The above approval does not include the garage. Question was raised about how much of the loop driveway would have to be removed. Guttormson noted the trees located in the area which • he says he is trying to maintain. Schroeder informed him he needs to determine how important the trees are. The applicant reviewed his options regarding the driveway. Smith said the portion of the loop driveway located in the 0 -75' setback would have to be removed. She felt the remaining portion was adequate for the needs of the applicant. Guttormson said he would be unable to turn his Suburban around without backing in. Schroeder informed Guttormson that in order to move the application forward to the Council, they would have to make a recommendation or the application would be tabled regarding the garage. Guttormson requested a motion be made regarding this issue. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to deny Application #2238 for the garage portion of the application. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( 0) #2253 DAVID REINHOLD 3551 LIVINGSTON AVENUE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED TO AUGUST 18, 1997 This item was continued to the August 18, 1997 Meeting of the Planning Commission. • Gaffron indicated that the neighboring property owners were advised of the continuation of this application. 0] ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #4) #2254 CURTIS AND BARBARA PALMER 2710 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 7:58 -8:07 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the application is a request for a variance to allow addition of storage space above an existing garage. The garage is located in front of the principal residence and is therefore non - conforming. Van Zomeren noted the building pad for the property. She indicated that the additional structure would add to the bulk in the non - conforming area. She felt there were other areas where storage space could be added. Van Zomeren said Staff did not find adequate hardship to justify the request. The size of the added storage area would be 5'9" and 16' towards the street side of the garage. Mr. Palmer said the lot was hilly. The garage had been built prior to the current code. He • believe the request is a good way to gain storage space and would be pleasing in appearance. Palmer said the front elevation would allow the roof line to continue its downward slope. McMillan asked how much additional space would be gained. Palmer said it would be about 100 -150 s.f. There were no public comments. Smith asked if the applicants were the owners of the property when the porch and addition were constructed. It was indicated that they were. Smith said the property may be a residence where additional changes would result in too much coverage. The applicant indicated that no additional ground cover would occur. Smith replied that the request would result in added bulk too close to the street. Hawn said she originally was not in favor of the request but after viewing the property, she felt the front of the house was obscured by the garage. The houses across the street were also located down a steep decline which makes a significant difference to her regarding the view of the property. Palmer noted that the house next door was more prominent. Smith inquired about the condition of the foundation. The applicant said the apron has settled and pulled away from the garage. 10 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #4 - #2254 Curtis and Barbara Palmer - Continued) Lindquist said he agreed with Hawn. McMillan asked if there were any other storage sheds. Palmer said no and indicated that the property was too steep to allow it elsewhere. Smith suggested the applicant consider converting the porch to storage space or moving it back on the property. Palmer said he felt this option would not be aesthetically pleasing or functional. He indicated that the porch was added onto the front of the house. Barbara Palmer said the added storage space would allow her husband to stand up in his existing workshop. Schroeder said he thought they were looking for storage space noting Staff thought such space could be located elsewhere on the property. Palmer asked where it could be located. Schroeder said there is adequate building pad and is opposed to adding to the bulk of the structure. McMillan said she preferred two structures instead of adding a third. • Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2254 noting an additional accessory structure would be more than what is needed. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 1, Smith. (Item #5 was moved to the end of the agenda as the applicant was not present.) ( #6) #2256 JAMES AND MARY RIVERS 1442 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:07 -8:08 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the applicants are proposing changing the roof line of the existing residence. Replacement is necessary because of damage from snow accumulating in the valley in the roof. A variance is required because the house is located in the 0 -75' setback. Staff recommended approval. • The applicant had no additional comments. 11 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 LJ ( #6 - #2256 James and Mary Rivers - Continued) There were no public comments. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2256. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( #7) #2257 DENNIS A. MEYER 4685 TONKAVIEW LANE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:08 -8:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that although the memo indicates the need for both lot area and lot width variances for construction of a new residence, only lot area is required. The 0.69 acre property has 82% of the 140' standard which is satisfactory. Gaffron noted that the survey, elevations, and plans are provided. The new residence would meet the 35' front setback, 10' side setback, and hardcover requirements. The northern two - thirds of the lot is within the 500 -1000' lakeshore setback. Gaffron said the applicant was asked to submit a grading plan because of drainage to the south. The drainage runs to a property also owned by Meyer. The drainage issue needs to be resolved. The applicant is willing to work with Staff and City Engineer. Gaffron noted that the plan was revised to eliminate a height variance. Staff recommends approval. The applicant said he plans on building a larger home than his current one. During public comments, the neighbor to the west indicated that a fence line he has maintained has been determined to be located 8' into the Meyer property which includes the driveway. Meyer said there is an overlap of the plat and driveway area. He has no intention to remove the fence or change the perceived boundary. Berg informed him that this issue would have to be resolved by the two property owners. Lindquist asked if there was any conflict. The neighbor said he had not surveyed the property when he purchased it. Schroeder said the boundary change would require a lot line rearrangement. Lindquist said the Planning Commission would only act on the application requested and informed the neighbor to work with Meyer to resolve this boundary issue. Meyer said he was willing to work with his neighbor. 12 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #7 - #2257 Dennis A. Meyer - Continued) Shirley Bull, 4690 Tonkaview, asked if the variance was approved, if it would be setting a precedent for the neighborhood due to the lot size. Gaffron said the LR -1B Zoning District requires one acre lots but the lot sizes in the Tonkaview neighborhood range from .39 to 1.61 acres. There are 11 lots that are larger and 7 that are equal to or smaller than applicants, so he does not view the request as setting a precedent as it falls within the average. Bull noted that the applicant also owns 4655 Tonkaview, the lot to the south. She questioned whether the applicant was taking land from this property to add to the proposed lot to make it adequate in size. Gaffron said there is no intent to make a lot line rearrangement and the two lots are separate lots of record. McMillan noted that the driveway on the west side would be used to access two tuckunder garages to the south. With five planned garages, she voiced concern with runoff to the south from it. Smith asked if a drainage plan was being requested. Gaffron said the drainage plan has been submitted but has not yet been reviewed with the City Engineer regarding continued drainage to the south. He questioned whether the north half of the house could be made to drain • to the north but noted the lots across the road are all lower than Tonkaview and questioned how it would affect the properties to the north. The additional hard surface will add to the drainage. Gaffron said a stormwater pond might be necessary. Lindquist said approval could be subject to drainage approval by the City Engineer. The applicant said he would be willing to do what is necessary. Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to approve Application #2257 for lot area variance subject to acceptable grading and drainage plans approved by the City Engineer. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( #8) #2258 GERALD A. WALSH 180 BIG ISLAND VARIANCE PUBIC HEARING 8:20 -8:22 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the request is for a lot area variance. He indicated that the RS District ordinance was adopted in 1983 which defined combining a group of parcels as a Record Lot granting them lot area variances and the majority deemed buildable. The property owners were required at that time to file formal documentation to acquire this variance. The applicant is 13 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #8 - #2258 Gerald A. Walsh - Continued) asking for this variance now that was granted for the other properties. The property in question has changed ownership several times. The subject property consisting of two tax parcels is 100' wide, 280' deep, and .64 acres in area. Gaffron said staff recommends approval per the provisions of the RS district and legal combination to result in one tax parcel. The applicant said he had no additional comments. There were no public comments. Schroeder was informed by Gaffron that the RS designation still applies. McMillan moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2258. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( #9) 92259 MARK AND LAURIE HEADRICK • 1850 FOX RIDGE ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:22 -8:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron indicated that a letter was received from a neighboring property owner. Gaffron reported that the request is for side and front setbacks to convert a garage to a family room and add anew garage. The required side yard setback is 30', which exists at 24.5' and is proposed at 5'. The required front yard setback is 50', existing at 38.6' and proposed at 36.6'. The current zoning for side setback was adopted after the house was built. The property is located in the two acre zoning district. Gaffron informed the Commission that the proposed two car garage addition will also include a mudroom, deck, and kitchen expansion. It would be located 5' from the north side lot line. It meets the 50' setback from the front. The proposal also includes a bump out to the front of the existing garage. • 14 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #9 - #2259 Mark and Laurie Headrick - Continued) The 1.78 acre property has .4 acres of wetland to the rear. The house is located on an elevated portion of the property which drops off to the wetlands. The property has a failing septic system. The area is being considered for municipal sewer but at a cost of about $30,000 per unit. The neighborhood has suggested the cost is prohibitive and sewer installation is not scheduled. Gaffron said the drainfield replacement capability is limited due to the topography of the property. The information includes a letter of hardship. The main issue is with the side setback. The front setback for the 2'x10' wide bump out is small. Staff feels the side setback request is extreme from 30' to 5'. He noted that the 1/2 acre zoning, Orono's least restrictive district, requires 10' setback. Gaffron compared the home's location to the neighboring properties. It has the least separation between homes in the neighborhood and he feels the separation should be maintained in the two -acre zoning. He did note that the property is limited for location of an addition. He asked the Commission to consider the addition approval with respect to the neighboring property location and asked for direction. • Lindquist read the letter from neighbor, Tobin Dayton, into the record. The letter opposes the proposal. Headrick said they have looked at their options noting the restrictions. They are requesting a kitchen/family room addition. They were informed that foundation work to locate the addition elsewhere would be too expensive. They are also concerned with the aesthetics. Headrick indicated that the kitchen is situated in this corner of the house. The proposed garage is as small as possible for two cars. During public comments, Tobin Dayton said he was present to answer any questions about the letter noted. Smith noted that adding onto the other side and enclosing the deck would not address the kitchen. Headrick said the property drops off 12' at that location and fill is currently located there. Lindquist indicated that there are homes where no additions can be located. He saw a problem with a 5' setback and felt the addition could not extend to that degree. Smith agreed. Headrick responded that other properties in the neighborhood have received variances. Schroeder said it would be less problematic to go forward towards the street with an addition. • Headrick questioned whether a garage could be placed in front of the garage. Lindquist said it 15 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #9 - #2259 Mark and Laurie Headrick - Continued) would depend on how close it would be to the road and the setback. He noted that the garage is already closer than allowed, and he would have a problem with lessening the setback. Lindquist said he felt the only solution would be an addition to the rear. Mrs. Headrick said three contractors have informed him that the cost would be prohibitive to construct an addition to the rear. Smith noted that the Commission looks at applications individually and other neighborhood additions are in context with the neighborhood. Headrick asked if this home was not in context. He was informed that it was not in the scope of the neighborhood as far as the side setback is concerned. Mrs. Headrick asked what would be considered. Gaffron asked about an addition straight back behind the garage. Headrick said there would still be an issue of fill but less amount of fill in that location than elsewhere. The worst scenario for fill is to the rear of the kitchen. He said • Gaffron's suggestion could be considered. Mrs. Headrick said 3 /4ths of the addition of the garage would require pilings if located behind the current garage. Lindquist said he would consider a small variance to the side setback but not a 5' setback. He explained that the Commission can table the application or make a motion. Hawn asked if the garage could be built on the other side of the house. Mrs. Headrick said the same problem would occur and it would have to be accessed through the living room. The Headricks asked the Commission to vote on the application. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to deny Application #2259. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( #10) #2260 BENJAMIN MILBRATH 3265 CARMAN ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:45 -8:52 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. • The Applicant was present. 16 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #10 - #2260 Benjamin Milbrath - Continued) Van Zomeren passed out photographs of the property. The application is a request for CUP and variance to replace a retaining wall, which has been removed, in the 0 -75' setback with a keystone type wall. A variance is required to remove a walkway on the north side of the timbers. Grass will replace this area but the retaining wall will encroach into the side yard. Van Zomeren said staff recommends approval. The applicant said his goal is to have less hardcover. Milbrath said the plan would allow the drainage to flow into the front yard instead of the neighboring property and aids in presenting a natural setting. There were no public comments. Hawn noted that the property needs relief as soon as possible. She noted that much of gravel under the deck has swept into the neighboring property and would like to see the gravel removed from the property. Milbrath said the gravel would be left there for now and removed once the walls are in place. He will replace the gravel with wood chips under the deck. Milbrath said the • neighbor is pleased with his plan and the improved drainage situation. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application 42260. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren said the application will go before the Council at their July 28 meeting. Milbrath noted that he would not be in attendance. ( #11) #2261 TONY EIDEN COMPANY 345 LEAF STREET VARIANCE PUBLIC BEARING 8:52 -8:54 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren said the application is for a lot area variance for a 1.77 acre property located in the 2 acre minimum LR -lA Zoning District. The applicant is in the process of purchasing the property owned by Tom Meyer. Van Zomeren said Staff is concerned with the lack of a proposed plan but the building pad as outlined should not create any problems. Van Zomeren said she would recommend screening from the Luce Line. • 17 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 (#11 - #2261 Tony Eiden Company - Continued) Tony Eiden had no comments to add. There were no public comments. Hawn asked if the applicant was satisfied with the setback requirements. Eiden said he was and would be able to meet them. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2261. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. (Item # 12 follows item # 16) ( #13) #2264 JANET C. KIERNAN 1491 SHORELINE DRIVE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:54 -9:20 P.M. • The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that an application had been previously reviewed and approved for reconstruction and additions to the residence in 1996. He reviewed that application and the new changes requested. The applicant had determined that it would be impossible to save the existing superstructure and is proposing a new residence. A one -stall addition to the garage would meet the setback. There would be an additional encroachment to the front setback and a new small encroachment to the side. The issue is with new construction being an opportunity where all the setbacks, especially the lakeshore setback, could be met. Lot area and width variances are also required. The one acre property, 187' in width, is located in the two acre zoning with a 200' width standard. Gaffron indicated that the property may be sewered in the future but continues at this time to require use of a septic system. Kiernan noted the hardships on the property with the maple tree to the north side and the Indian mounds to the rear where a 50' setback is required. Kiernan said to renovate the property would require an additional two to three courses of block to create more headroom and a better foundation. During public comments, John Ericson, 1620 Shadywood Road, clarified that the encroachment of the 75' setback would be allowed with a major remodeling but would be required to be met if 18 C� ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #13 - #2264 Janet C. Kiernan - Continued) new construction. Gaffron said it is questionable whether the use of current footings would allow "grandfathering" of the current setback. Lindquist said the use of the current foundation would have to be clarified. Gaffron said from the staff standpoint, the application as presented is viewed as new construction. Hawn asked if the applicant considered a plan which would move the house back on the property. Kiernan reviewed her plans noting the designer, contractor, and inspector felt it would be more expensive to mesh old plans with new. Kiernan said she had not considered moving the house back. She indicated that it would incur more expense to have another plan drawn and she would prefer not to. Schroeder said it would not necessarily involve a totally new plan. Lindquist was informed that all of the existing structure would be removed except for the foundation. Lindquist said he would recommend that all structure be located behind the 75' setback. Kiernan asked if a 30' side setback would be considered a problem. Lindquist said it was not from his perspective. He was informed that the existing side setback is 14.5'. Hawn noted that the property is very well screened. Schroeder noted there were trees located on the other side. Lindquist noted the small size of the lot for the zoning district. He asked if the property is going to be sewered. Gaffron said it is the City's intent to do so as soon as all property owners involved are on board. It has been determined that the cost of the sewer project is more than earlier anticipated. Hawn inquired about hardcover calculations. Gaffron said they have not been included. He noted that the property was allowed 27.6% in the 75 -250' setback and 2.9% in the 0 -75' setback, and the applicant intends to meet those requirements. Kiernan said she thought the current plan proposes less than that amount. Lindquist said he would recommend all hardcover be behind the 75' setback. Schroeder said the issue is the prior approval allowing the hardcover amounts as noted. Lindquist noted this application is for new construction. Gaffron explained the necessary changes to move all structure behind the 75- setback. Hawn suggested making the driveway more narrow and perpendicularly connecting it to the house. Kiernan said the costs would then double. 19 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21, 1997 ( #13 - #2264 Janet C. Kiernan - Continued) Kiernan asked whether the patio could remain in front of the 75' setback. Schroeder noted the improvements with new construction are better than what would occur with remodeling. Smith said she would be concerned with allowing the patio. Schroeder indicated that the application could be tabled for further consideration or a motion could be made. He explained the purpose in improving the lakeshore setback and the status of new construction. McMillan asked if this was true with use of the existing foundation. She was informed it was. Kiernan asked how much foundation usage denotes new construction. Gaffron said it was not specified. He said the building pad would be gone and only the foundation left. He also noted that the building inspector has not yet tested the foundation and is not convinced it is all usable. He suggested tabling the application to make this determination. The side setback hardships were reiterated, being the trees, septic system, and Indian mounds. Lindquist moved, Smith seconded, to table Application #2264. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. • (The meeting was recessed for a short break.) • ( #14) #2265 ROBERT LUND FOR GRAYDON AND MICHELLE NEWMAN 1655 BOHNS POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:27 -9:31 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was represented by Robert Lund. Van Zomeren reported that the irregular shaped lot is located in the LR -113 Zoning District. The proposal is to tear down the existing structure and construct a residence located partially in front of the average lakeshore setback. Staff recommended approval. The representative had no further comments. During public comments, John Ericson, asked if the new residence would be located behind the 75' setback. Van Zomeren reported that it would. 20 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #14 - #2265 Robert Lund for Graydon and Michelle Newman - Continued) Smith asked why the residence would be located in front of the average lakeshore setback. She was informed by Lund that there are a large number of trees on the property and the residence will be built to line up with viewing the lake through the trees. Schroeder asked how far forward the home would be. He was informed that the orientation of the home would change but would be between 83' and 85' forward. It was noted that there is no way to avoid encroaching into the average lakeshore setback. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2265. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0 (Berg was absent during the vote). ( #15) #2266 RONALD AND ROBIN HOHRMAN 190 CYGNET PLACE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:31 -9:34 P.M. • The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the request is for variances to the rear and side yard setbacks for construction of a screen porch to the rear and a one stall addition to the garage to the east. The lots in the area do not meet lot area requirements and create long narrow building pads. The 30' side yard requirement is proposed at 28'. The 50' rear yard is proposed at 46'. Van Zomeren said structural coverage is not an issue. There is a small front yard encroachment. Staff recommended approval. The applicant said the residence is located just barely into the setback and the proposal is the only alternative for an addition. There were no public comments. McMillan asked if the neighboring properties were notified. Van Zomeren said they were. She indicated she received one call and sent out information to that person. She received no complaints. Schroeder moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application 42266. Smith asked if a new is driveway would be built for the garage addition. The applicant said it would be widened but a pad is already located there. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 21 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #16) #2267 JOHN O'SULLIVAN FOR ADAM SMITH COMPANY 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING 9:34 -10:05 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the application is for a commercial site plan review for a proposed driveway from Shadywood Road through an easement. He noted the vacation and conceptual vacation of Navarre Lane. The proposal would grant approval for creation of an easement across and in front of what is the church building to enter the western portion of the site. A revised plan presented on this date shows a head -in entry instead of parallel parking spaces. Gaffron showed the larger concept plan. He indicated that the concept plans briefly reviewed by Planning Commission last winter called for access from the Culvers' site to the church property all along. He noted that as proposed this would result in two accesses on Shadywood Road for • traffic leaving the church site. The current proposal would add the southerly of the two accesses allowing traffic to take a left turn and then head south to the light. Gaffron said he feels another access is necessary for the Culvers site. He noted the unusual traffic pattern on the site with its counterclockwise direction. Gaffron said the car wash stacking has not presented any conflict to date. He said the proposal adds both an in and out access and Hennepin County has expressed their support of the proposal. The City Engineer has suggested a right in and right out access only. Gaffron said staff recommends approval of the proposed access on a temporary basis, maintaining City's future ability to move the access to the north if appropriate when the church site is developed. O'Sullivan said there is difficulty with access during rush hour. He indicated that the work to acquire legal easement has been done and merging of the site plans are in process but months away from completion. He feels the proposed location is the right site for the curb cut. He disagrees with the right in/right out concept as the access would be the furthest access from the intersection than any other property. He cited the amount of traffic through the intersection. O'Sullivan said he has received the support of the Police Chief and noted the County's-favor of the plan. O'Sullivan said the County has no plans in the short term for a right turn lane. O'Sullivan said the proposal will improve the traffic flow. John Ericson said he thought the County would not approve a curb cut at that location. Gaffron read a letter into the record from Dave Zetterstrom of Hennepin County supporting the curb cut. • 22 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #16 - #2267 John O'Sullivan for Adam Smith Company - Continued) Ericson commented that he was unable to obtain a curb cut when he requested it. O'Sullivan indicated that he has closed off one curb cut, had three approved, and currently has two curb cuts. Ericson asked if it would be a common curb cut for both businesses when developed. Gaffron said that would be the City Engineer's recommendation but not what is being proposed. O'Sullivan noted that he has 400' of frontage. Lindquist asked where the applicant is in the plan for development of the church site. O'Sullivan said it would be in the fall or winter at the earliest time. He said he would support the temporary location status but did not feel it would be the best option if only one curb cut is allowed. Schroeder asked if his objection is due to the elimination of the parking spots. O'Sullivan said it was. Schroeder asked how far north the access would have to be to gain a free right turn. O'Sullivan said it would not occur. O'Sullivan said the County told him he would have to make the best of the intersection as it is. Lindquist noted Navarre Lane was half vacated. Gaffron said it was vacated to the County road right -of -way. The remaining portion is conceptually vacated pending the church site development. Lindquist asked if the proposal can be accomplished with the vacation still being conceptual. Gaffron said it could as it was still part of the public right -of -way. Schroeder said he supports the temporary approval as it leaves options open. Hawn said she is concerned with the traffic flow on the site. She feels the curb cut would intensify the traffic flow. Hawn noted at the time of the restaurant approval, the applicant was required to install a railing next to the doorway, install a sign, and place station markers for the lanes. She indicated this was not done and compounds the safety concerns of the site. O'Sullivan said the sidewalk reconfiguration resulted in the determination that no railing was needed. Hawn asked who made that determination. Gaffron said he was not involved. O'Sullivan said staff reviewed it and approved it. Berg said she typically has seen cones located between the lanes. O'Sullivan said the cones were not required. Hawn said she would have to review the minutes for the record. She had thought they were to be immovable and permanent. Hawn said she still has concerns regarding safety. She has viewed children running across the parking lot and noted there was no sign for stopping in the walkway. Lindquist asked Hawn • what she would like to see done. Hawn showed where the sign and railing were to be located. 23 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #16 - #2267 John O'Sullivan for Adam Smith Company - Continued) Berg said she does not see the need for a railing at this time. O'Sullivan said the situation was no different than at other businesses and found it difficult to regulate people's stupidity as far as their safety goes. Schroeder noted the practicality of not having a railing with parking located in the corner. McMillan noted there is a 4' wall. Hawn said she would like a railing in place as originally planned and approved. Lindquist questioned how traffic has influenced the lot. Berg said the Commission should review how the lot was configured and see what was allowed by staff. • Hawn said she would vote against the curb cut for safety reasons without minimal safeguards in place. McMillan asked how far the curb cut was from the intersection. Gaffron said it was about equal distance. Smith said she agrees with Hawn but does not like to hold up the plans. She would like to see comprehensive plans for the site without having to access the church property, which she feels intensifies the use. Lindquist agreed with seeing the comprehensive plan for the site. Schroeder said the use would be the same but allow for a right turn out onto CoRd 19. He would like to see "zebra" striping to suggest to customers that they walk farther down for safety. McMillan said the traffic flow would be increased down County Road 19. Schroeder moved, Berg seconded, to approve the temporary curb cut with the expectation that it will be reviewed during the phase two construction. Approval would be subject to zebra striping in the crosswalk. Vote: Ayes 2, Schroeder, Berg; Nays 4, Lindquist, Smith, Hawn, McMillan. Motion denied. 24 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #16 - #2267 John O'Sullivan for Adam Smith Company - Continued) Lindquist said he would like to see the whole layout. Hawn said she would prefer to see the whole plan and voted against the motion for safety. Smith cited safety and need for viewing the layout as reason for denial. Gaffron asked for a motion that would incur a positive vote outcome for better direction. Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded, to deny the access as proposed as safety issues are not addressed. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 2, Berg, Schroeder. ( #12) #2262 NED BUTTERFIELD 3745 WATERTOWN ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 10:05 -10:08 P.M. • The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. is The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported that the request for a conditional use permit to change the grade of the 2.37 acre property, which currently slopes away from Watertown Road. The change would allow the creation of an area for a building pad as the property owner is discussing building a new residence on the site. The greenhouses on the property have been removed. The applicant has hauled in 100 cubic yards of fill but the applicant's engineer estimates it will require an additional 2000 cubic yards. Van Zomeren said staff recommends approval. She added that there appears to be no drainage problems. The applicant had no comments to add. There were no public comments. Smith moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2262. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 25 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #17) #2268 ROBERT T. CALLAN 2995 DEER RUN TRAIL VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:09 -10:13 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the application is for a front setback variance for construction of a new residence on a back lot. He reviewed the orientation of the residence noting it would be served by a private driveway outlot. By definition, the lot line abutting the access outlot is the front lot line of a back lot, resulting in the east lot line becoming the front lot line. This is inconsistent with the other lots on the south side of Deer Run Trail, all of which have their designated side lot lines as the easterly or westerly lot lines. The property owner's intent is for this residence to face north. The back lot requirements result in a 75' setback where there would normally be a 30' side setback. The home will be oriented similar to the other homes on Deer Run Trail. One and a half times the normal side setback would result in 45', which is the east setback requested by the • applicant. Staff recommended approval with the condition that the house be oriented the same as the other homes in the area. The applicant noted that this will aid in buffering of trees for the septic sites. He wants to maintain the trees on the property. The variance will eliminate cutting into the hill on the west side of the lot. The applicant said the owner of adjacent Lot 5 would like to comment but was unable to attend. He will have the opportunity at the Council review to respond. Smith moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2268. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( #18) #2269 CONLEY BROOKS AND GERALD MCCOURTNEY 1045 FERNDALE ROAD WEST SUBDIVISION OF LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 10:14 -10:37 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicants were present. • PM . ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #18 - #2269 Conley Brooks and Gerald McCourtney - Continued) Gaffron reported that the application is for a lot line rearrangement for property on West Ferndale Road. The existing substandard lot is proposed to be divided and attached to two adjacent properties. Gaffron reviewed the division. The property at 1045 Ferndale Road West (lots 11 and 12) with an existing house will be split, with a portion added to the McCourtney property to the west and the remainder to the Brooks property to the north across the road. The house at 1045 will be removed. The portion of 1045 north of the road, Parcels H and E, will be combined with Parcels A and F. Gaffron noted potential difficulties identified by the submitted survey, including the separation of Parcel C from 905 West Ferndale. He said this would have to be considered under a separate application. Gaffron did not know whether it had been used for hardcover calculations for 905. He indicated that there are docks on the small property (Parcel B) not shown on the plat maps and it is not known what properties they serve. He noted there are discrepancies between the survey submitted and the County plat maps. Gaffron said the proposal adds lakeshore to property currently not having lakeshore. He is indicated that a "Special Lot Combination" can be required if combination of two lots separated by the road is not allowed by the County. It would then require City approval to sell the combined parcels separately. Gaffron said staff recommends approval of the subdivision with recombination of parcels as proposed. The applicant was questioned regarding his intent for the existing garage noting the existing residence would be removed. McCourtney said the garage is already located there, and he intends to replace it. He indicated he would probably need other variances to do so. He asked if he would be compromising his position if he removes the garage now for reconstruction later. Lindquist said he would be in a better position if he left the garage in place for the time being. The other Commissioners agreed. McCourtney said he would come back before the Planning Commission with his plans in the near future. Gaffron said he would recommend removal but the applicant has the prerogative to keep it in place. He noted that the garage encroaches into the right -of -way and is in a dilapidated condition and would have to be removed at some point. He agreed that the applicant is better off leaving it in place for the time being. Lindquist noted that the setbacks would then be known. During public comments, a gentleman said he represented Robert Floyd, the owner of 960 Ferndale. He asked what the criteria is for allowing a property to subdivide for greater access to the lake and how it reflects on the future for other property owners. Lindquist said the • Commission reviews the applications case by case. 27 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #18 - #2269 Conley Brooks and Gerald McCourtney - Continued) In noting Parcels F and G as they currently exist in combination are substandard, Gaffron said the City is better off if the lots are not sold as a separate entity, as significant variances would be required to build since the majority of the property is in the 0 -75' setback. He indicated that the proposed split nearly meets the standard for 200' width and would require a slight adjustment to the west to ensure 200' width if that is an issue. Gaffron thought the plat map shows enough total frontage to meet that standard. Lindquist clarified that this is a special condition. He was asked if this decision affects the 20' strip of land in question. Lindquist said the deeds would have to be reviewed. The representative of Mr. Floyd said research was done, and he had a good idea who owned the strip of land. He said he would not want to have this application's decision affect other property. Hawn indicated that it would be difficult to say whether the application would impact other property. She indicated that the current application is clear in its intent and the Commission is only able to address the particular application at this time, not the other issues noted by staff. Gaffron informed the representative that he is welcome to present any information he might have • to staff. Robert Floyd said he had a number of concerns. He said he understood the issue of non- conformity but felt the desire to acquire shoreline would affect others. He asked what the criteria is for special conditions. He added that he is concerned with the larger picture and making a decision in a vacuum. He feels the decision will affect his property and his value and is inappropriate. He feels the Commission is opening a "Pandora's Box ". Schroeder said he understood the applicants purchased the property and have agreed to divide it. He indicated that they have the right to a lot line rearrangement. Gaffron said the City looks for adjacency when considering such applications. He noted that adding to property across the roadway is more in question but the City has done so elsewhere. He noted that Parcel F is a separate parcel subservient to the lot across the street (Parcels A -E -H) which he feels is as good an adjacency as can be found. He indicated that would be a substantial amount of Lakeshore with the rearrangement. Gaffron said if the Commission determines the need to meet the 200' standard, it can be discussed. He did not know how this subdivision would affect other docks in the area. Robert Floyd said the combination would affect his lot. He said with rapidly growing lots, it is difficult to know how changes affect him. He wanted to know the rules of operation. He feels • 28 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #18 - #2269 Conley Brooks and Gerald McCourtney - Continued) there would be a lot line shown as 5'. Schroeder indicated that the overriding issue is one of property purchase. Berg noted that people may purchase land and do a lot line rearrangement. She asked what the impact is that creates a problem for Floyd. Floyd said the ownership of Parcels B and D have not been determined. Berg said that determination does not affect this particular parcel. Floyd said he did not believe it was spelled out in the zoning code. Berg said she saw no negative result from this action. Berg informed Floyd that the Commission cannot hold off action pending a decision on parcels B and D as they do not know how that will address the issue. Floyd indicated that the lots were included in the evaluation. Berg said they were only referenced. Gaffron indicated there are other issues that are not discussable at this time. He said it was unfortunate that the survey work came in late which gave additional information that clearly needs resolution. Hawn indicated the Commission is obligated to act within 60 days on an application. Floyd said • he thought there was an option of tabling the application to look at other areas of concern. Hawn said the applicants have the right to a decision. Schroeder said the outcome is not clear but he sees the first principle as being the elimination of a substandard lot. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2269 as outlined, with the recommendation the existing house be removed. The garage is not required to be removed. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. It was noted that the application will be reviewed at the August 1 I Council meeting unless further information is provided that suggests some alternative action is appropriate. ( #19) #2270 MARCIA AND KENNETH HICKEY 4640 TONKAVIEW LANE VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 10:37 -10:46 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. • The Applicant was present. 29 . ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #19 - #2270 Marcia and Kenneth Hickey - Continued) Van Zomeren said additional information is required for completion of this application and recommends tabling. The applicant would like the Commission to receive an overview to give them direction. The property on Tonkaview is considered a through lot, but no access from that through lot. The proposal is to build a garage requiring a conditional use permit due to the through lot status. The structure is proposed at 1200 s.f. where 1000 s.f. is the limit allowed. A height variance is required as the residence is lower than the proposed garage. Van Zomeren indicated that an oversized accessory structure requires a farther side yard setback than what is proposed and is planned to be located in front of the principal structure. Staff recommends tabling the application due to lack of sufficient survey information. Van Zomeren said she did not feel the lot size is a problem but would like to see the hardcover calculations included on a worksheet. She asked for Commission direction. Kenneth Hickey said the location was chosen due to the topography of the property. There is a large slope on the west side that creates runoff problems for the neighbor. They plan on angling the structure for a turnaround to be able to pull straight in. • Lindquist asked if there was a reason why the 1000 s.f. limitation could not be met. • Schroeder said he would require hardcover information. He did not have a problem with a 10' side yard setback. Hickey said the height is to create a loft area. The principal structure is only 13' high. The applicant said he is willing to adjust the size to 1000 s.f. and a 20' height. Berg was informed the building would not be hidden. She said she felt the height was a little high. Lindquist said a 25 -26' height would be satisfactory. Schroeder said he would probably not have a problem with that height but the neighbors should be informed. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2270. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 30 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 21, 1997 ( #20) 42271 CHAD NILSSON 3210 NAVARRE LANE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 10:46 -10:55 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren said the application is for a rear yard variance to add one stall to the existing garage. The property is a corner lot. The street, shown as "Brooks Ave" on the survey, has been vacated. The proposal calls for a 30' setback and survey is included. Van Zomeren said Staffs concern is that the property is within 1000' of the lakeshore and no hardcover calculations were provided. She is unaware of where the driveway will be located which creates hardcover. The orientation of the garage doors is also unclear. Van Zomeren said she sketched the stall in on the drawing and would like it to be shown by the applicant. Nilsson said the shed will be removed. The driveway will be moved more to the east and gravel • added. He indicated the house is only 24.6' high and they will follow the house roof line. • Lindquist informed the applicant that the City will require an approved survey for the stall and driveway. It was noted that the property does not meet the lot area requirement and is questionable whether it meets the hardcover requirements. McMillan was informed that the garage doors was planned to face the east property line but due to costs are planning on driving straight in from the north. The applicant said he will obtain a survey with the driveway and garage located thereon. He was informed to include sidewalks in the survey if they are so planned. Lindquist said the survey needs to be brought up to date. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2271. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. Van Zomeren said she will send a notice to the applicant. 31 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #21) #2272 WYATT MOE 1230 SPRUCE PLACE VARIANCE AND LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 10:58 -11:22 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicants were present and assisted by JoEllen Hurr. Gaffron reported that the request is for a lot line rearrangement with hardcover, lot area and lot width variances, and possible road vacation. Loma Linda is located to the west end of the property and Spruce Place to the south, adjacent to the property. The property consists of two tax parcels. The northern parcel includes the house and a triangular portion west of the vacated roadway. To the south, the small lot includes a cabin. The proposal calls for construction of a new house where the cabin is located which would meet the side setback, 75' lakeshore setback, and average lakeshore setback. In order to place the home where it is proposed would require a hardcover variance to allow 35.7% hardcover in the 75 -250' setback where 25% is allowed. The applicant is attempting to balance the lot size and variances needed to enable the lot to the north into be sold. Gaffron reviewed the sketches of the plan. He noted the issue involves the City road encroachment and property maintained privately into the park property. The proposed rededication and vacation would allow the unused park and road right -of -way to be privately owned, and the applicant would give back to the City the land where the utilities and City road exist, and create two long lots. Concern is with the proposed lot dividing line creating lots of equal area resulting in an equal degree of variances for area, width, and hardcover. Gaffron suggests the north line of Spruce Place after vacation be moved to maintain the shoulder. The City Engineer and Public Works Director must review and approve the extent of right -of -way vacation. Gaffron indicated that the lot standards for the property are one acre with 140' width. The two tax parcels have been assessed for sewer. The issue is where the lot line is drawn. The 75 -250' hardcover is proposed at 19.4% for the property to the north and increasing from 10.9% to 34.7% for the southern lot. Lot coverage by structure is satisfactory. Gaffron said Staff recommends the vacation as proposed but it might require some "tweaking" to maintain the sewer easement and right -of -way. He noted if the vacation of the park area were to be split three ways, it was unknown how it would be divided and who would get what. He recommended conceptual approval of the lot line rearrangement with .6 acres in each and access • to the north lot from Loma Linda. A driveway serves both lots but he suggests an ultimate 32 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #21 - #2272 Wyatt Moe - Continued) separate access to Loma Linda to the northern property. Gaffron said it is critical to know what portion would be divided between the two lots. He suggested the applicant make formal application for a vacation and include proposed lot widths. JoEllen Hurr said the current building lot is very small, and the applicant's intention is to create two lots. The survey shows that the applicant owns the land where the road is located. They felt it was a good opportunity for the City to get the road which is needed. Hurr said Parcel A includes wetlands. She saw no reason to make the lots identical and would like to maintain a narrow strip on the shoreline. The location of the ditch delineates what can be done and can't be built over. Hurr suggested a conservation and flowage easement be taken on the property to the rear. She feels there is no need for access from Loma Linda with the driveway currently existing. Hawn asked if there would be a garage for the new home. Hurr indicated there would be. Hurr reported that each proposed lot is two times the size of the lot to the south of the property. • Lindquist asked how wide the lots would be. Mr. Moe said they are 60'. Schroeder was informed that the lots to the south have received variances. Schroeder asked what is currently happening with the cabin. Hurr said it is a buildable lot and sewer has been paid for. Schroeder asked what could be built there now. Gaffron said it would involve adding to hardcover. Hardcover percentages would be lessened by the rearrangement but a variance still required. The proposal is for a 2200 s.f. footprint home. Hurr indicated that the house is similar to the house to the south. Hawn said the plan was conceptually good but questioned what occurs until the vacation is approved. Hurr said the applicant is asking for conceptual approval in order to gain an idea of what can occur. Lindquist said he saw the situation as a win -win proposition. Hurr agreed. She said the applicant was not made aware of the need for a width variance when application made. Gaffron said staff did not have survey and was unable to catch all of the requirements due to that. Hurr said the applicant does not want to have more than .62 acre in each lot. With extensive drainage noted, she asked if Commission would approve the angle to the rear. With the right -of- way, it would possibly be reduced to about .55 acre. She asked if there was concern with • conceptual approval. Gaffron said that would be satisfactory with direction regarding the size of 33 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #21 - #2272 Wyatt Moe - Continued) the lots where the lot line should be drawn. He asked what the Commission directed as far as hardcover. Lindquist said the hardcover noted should be satisfactory. He would like to see lots closer to equal size. Hawn said angling of the lot line should be satisfactory and did not believe the shoreline should have to be changed. Schroeder asked if the applicant would end up having more hardcover. Gaffron indicated that other lots in the area average more than 25% hardcover. Schroeder questioned whether the cabin lot would be considered new construction. Huff said it would but the lot was two times the average size. Hawn was informed by Hurr that the side yard requirements would be met. Variances for lot area, width, and hardcover would be required. The hardcover would be at about 35 %. Lindquist thought the plans showed good progress for • the property. Mrs. Moe said they would like to build this fall and asked how the vacation would affect this time frame. She was informed that application for vacation was required and the application amended, which could be before the Planning Commission in August with review of the lot line rearrangement. Approvals could be received at that time for variances, vacation and lot line rearrangement for Council review at their August 25 meeting. The earliest time frame for receiving building approval would be September. Huff indicated that the property is handling the drainage. She also noted that the applicant is aware of the sewer lines. McMillan was informed by Gaffron that the vacation would be a separate hearing but can be done together with the park vacation. He indicated that the attractiveness of the application is the vacation and rededication over the actual roadway. Dave and Linda Walker, who live south of the Moe's, said they are in support of trading of the land as they are currently cut off from Loma Linda and virtually landlocked. Schroeder moved, Lindquist seconded, to table Application #2272 per Staff recommendation. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. • 34 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #22) #2273 MORGAN NELSON 3145 JAMESTOWN ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 11:23 -11:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Gaffron reported that the application is for lakeshore setback for construction of a gazebo on the property. The proposal would not meet the 150' setback from a Natural Environment Lake but meet the average lakeshore setback and is in line with adjacent homes. The side setback is met. The change in code from 75' to 150' setback occurred in 1992. The variance would be 19' at 13 P from lakeshore. The gazebo would be located off of the driveway. Gaffron said the Commission could recommend the gazebo be placed on the other side of the property to meet the 150' setback. The applicant said it makes sense to place it where it is planned. Nelson indicated that he will be proposing an addition to the home for the south side in the future. •Hawn asked if the applicant spoke with his neighbors and how the gazebo would affect their views. The applicant said he showed his plans to the neighbors, who signed the acknowledgment letter but did not specify whether they were for or against the plan. Gaffron indicated that since the neighbors were not present to voice an objection and did not send a letter of objection, he assumed they did not object. 0 The applicant was questioned as to the location of the gazebo. Nelson said he wanted it near the driveway to preserve his views. Smith moved, Berg seconded, to approve Application #2273. McMillan asked if the DNR was notified. Gaffron said the DNR is notified of the agenda as a whole and would probably indicate a self - imposed hardship if they had responded. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 1, McMillan, for lack of a hardship. 35 0 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 ( #5) #2255 RICK RICE 2700 KELLY AVENUE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 11:30 -11:30 P.M. The applicant was not present. Lindquist moved, Schroeder seconded, to table Application #2255. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ( #24) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JUNE 23, 1997 AND JULY 14, 1997 It was noted that the Council was concerned with approval of the Rahn application due to the structure location in the 0 -75' lakeshore setback but approved the resolution with a 3/2 vote as the remaining portion of the property is in the flood plain. • Gaffron indicated that the Council asked the developer of the property on Saga Hill, Jim Waters, to reconsider plans noting they were not in favor of changing the zoning or serving the entire area with sewer. • ( #25) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION No other issues were discussed. ( #26) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE JUNE 16,1997 MEETING Hawn moved, Schroeder seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 16, 1997. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. ( #27) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND THE COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JULY 28,1997 AND AUGUST 11, 1997 July 28 - Lindquist August 11 - Hawn 36 • ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR JULY 219 1997 • C� ADJOURNMENT Schroeder moved, Smith seconded, to adjourn at 11:35 p.m. Vote: Ayes 6, Nays 0. 37