Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-1997 Planning Commission MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 • ( 0) #2305 ROGER AND ELIZABETH OLSEN, 815 PARTENWOOD ROAD - VARIANCES - 6:47 -7:03 P.M. The applicant and architect, Kathryn Alexander, were present. Bressler presented pictures of the property. The applicant is proposing remodeling and expansion of the residence to include a 4 -stall attached garage. The application requires variances for lakeshore setback and hardcover in the 0 -75' setback. There is no problem with average lakeshore setback as noted in the topographical map. The residence currently has a 3 -stall side loading garage. The driveway configuration is proposed to be changed. The existing residence encroaches the lakeshore setback. The allowable building space is limited by the property. Only a portion of the existing foundation will remain; further information is included in the packet. The total hardcover is proposed at 19 %. The 1.02 acre property is located in the one acre zoning district with 2/3 acre in the 0 -75' setback. The street setback is also restricted. Bressler reported Staff recommended approval subject to maintaining a 34' lakeshore setback from the designated OHW where 75' is required. Encroachment on the lakeshore setback will not be increased by the improvements. Staff recommends hardcover be • maintained at a maximum of 14.5% in the 0 -75' lakeshore setback where 20% is existing, 16% is proposed, and none is allowed. Bressler indicated that the amount of existing hardcover excluding landscaping underlain by plastic is 14.5 %. This figure could largely be met by eliminating several proposed decks and existing patio area on the lake side of the residence. By approving this percentage, there would be no net gain in the amount of hardcover on the property, not including plastic under landscaping. Staff recommends all landscape underlain by plastic in the 0 -75' lakeshore setback be removed prior to commencement of new construction. The applicant has agreed to this provision. Staff also recommends that no further hardcover variances be granted to this property in the future. Mr. Olsen, in noting the difficult lot, said he preferred not to reduce the hardcover further than the proposed 16% to 14.5 %. Ms. Alexander said the total hardcover is less than the 25% allowed. Hawn informed the applicant that trading hardcover for landscaping underlain with plastic is not the same and does not justify the additional hardcover. Lindquist said he agreed noting there is a large amount of structure on the property and is of the opinion that the applicant should maintain the 14.5% hardcover maximum. 0 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #3 - #2305 Roger and Elizabeth Olsen - Continued) Stoddard asked Bressler to explain the suggestions for hardcover removal. Alexander noted that as suggested, the hardcover would still be over 14.5 %. Bressler informed McMillan that he arrived at the 14.5% by subtracting the landscaping underlain with plastic from the hardcover. The balance of hardcover to be removed would come from eliminating a portion of the patio, dog run, decking, or decreasing the size of the addition. Olsen said that he would have to eliminate the existing patio or addition even if all of the decking was eliminated. Lindquist informed him that if the residence was new construction, he would not be allowed any structure in the 0 -75' setback. Olsen acknowledged that the home would not have been able to be built to meet today's standards. Alexander noted that the patio consists of pavers and asked if pavers with drainage holes is still deemed hardcover. Lindquist said they were. Alexander said eliminating 1.5% of hardcover would consist of 497 s.f. When asked by Hawn what items are necessary, it was noted that the dog kennel could be gravel and the patio could be reduced in size. This would amount to less than the decrease being required. The patio is 810 s.f. and could be reduced. There were no public comments. Stoddard moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2305 for lakeshore setback, hardcover variance in 0 -75' setback, subject to revised Staff recommendation including a 41' lakeshore setback variance for structure to remain at 34' from the OHW, hardcover variance for a maximum of 4415 s.f. in the 0 -75' setback, and plastic under landscaping removed in the 0 -75' setback. The reduction in hardcover in the 0 -75' setback will be decided by applicant subject to staff approval. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ( #4) #2308 BROOK PARK REALTY, 3560 SHORELINE DRIVE - PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - 7:03 -7:39 P.M. Bill Gleason was present representing Brook Park Realty. Van Zomeren reported that the application was tabled at the last meeting to allow time for the applicant to meet with Staff, City Engineer, and landscape architect consultant from DSU. A revision was provided last week by the applicant. Engineering comments have been received. Van Zomeren did not receive comments from the landscaping consultant. . She did speak with a representative of the fire department. 0 0 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) The revised plan includes construction of 30 townhomes on 9.93 acre site with access from Livingston Avenue. The units are connected with four per building. The northerly units will be served by a road. The southern units will be served by a driveway. The Mound Fire Department would like to see the 6" water main looped, which will increase the unit cost by $1.50 -$2.00 per square foot, or the units sprinkled. The 22' road width was recommended by the landscape architect in order to maintain trees. The City Engineer has agreed to that width, while noting it does not meet City standards. The issue involved is fire safety versus saving trees. The City Engineer supports the sanitary sewer and water design, which conflicts with the opinion of the fire department. Details will be required for final plan. City Engineer Kellogg recommended Livingston Avenue be extended to the west and sanitary and water main stubs be extended as well. The drainage area map was thought to show high calculations at 20 minute concentration and recommendation is made for a maximum time of concentration of 15 minutes. Pipe grading or sizes may need to be revised. A paved swale or erosion control should be provided downstream from the piping. Details of the pond outlet control and weir should be provided for review. The timber weir may present a future maintenance problem and an alternate outlet structure may be desired. The 19 units served by temporary cul -de -sac exceeds the maximum of 10 allowed. Van Zomeren noted there is no history in Orono of similar townhouse development and questioned whether this should be maintained or changed. Livingston Avenue design is not built to a 30 mph speed and the radius should be increased to 275 ft. or reduced speed warning signs installed, which Staff recommends. The City Engineer also asks that a typical street section be provided to verify the proposed pavement design. Van Zomeren said the landscape consultant has indicated that the revised plan is an improvement and noted the identification has been provided for the larger stands of trees. The preservation level of trees is at about 50 %. Van Zomeren said it was her opinion that the application be tabled to the January meeting in order for review of fire department and engineering recommendations. Since there is a two month span of time, Van Zomeren said a recommendation could be made by the Planning Commission based on the comments received by the City Engineer and landscape consultant. Mr. Gleason said he received a letter dated November 13 from the landscape architect. Van Zomeren reported that she had not received it. A copy was given to Van Zomeren for her immediate review. i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Gleason said the 6" water line will come to the property line and there had been concern over the amount of water flow. As far as looping the main or sprinkling the units, Gleason said he would do what is required and asked if there was a way that the system could be looped. Gappa said he was unfamiliar with it and would have to review the layout to see if enough water could get to the location. Lindquist asked for comments from the applicant regarding the road width. Gleason said the fire marshal thought a 20' width was satisfactory and 22' is proposed. He thought there was no other option for the dead -end cul -de -sac. Gleason said the owner of the property to the west is currently not interested in selling. Van Zomeren said the road would not be extended to the end of the property, only the sewer and water improvements would be located there. The driveway would dead -end at the cul -de -sac. Lindquist agreed that whatever occurs with the property to the west does not factor into this application. Hawn asked if the driveway could extend to CoRd 15. Gleason said no. Concern was voiced regarding the inability to turnaround at the dead -end. Lindquist questioned whether a cul -de -sac could be built there. Hawn was informed that the driveways would be two car lengths. No parking would be allowed along the side of the road. Guests would have to park in the driveway of the units or gain permission from other residents to park in their driveways. There were no public comments. Lindquist asked about the time schedule. Gleason said he was beginning to enter a time crunch due to having to redesign the subdivision. He noted that he was uninformed of any problem with the driveway until now. The fire department had not indicated that having to back into a driveway to turnaround would be a problem. Gleason said it is not a through street, only a private driveway, and access can be gained. Gleason did not believe there was room for a cul -de -sac and additional trees would be lost. Lindquist noted that three residences are allowed on private driveways for single family residences and in this proposal, there are 11 units. Gleason noted there were no guidelines for townhomes in Orono and as a result, new issues are continually being raised. Stoddard indicated that the Commission was attempting to balance safety with tree preservation. He supported having a turnaround. He did not envision a problem regarding the looped water main or sprinkler system since the applicant was willing to do what is necessary. 6 0 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #4 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Gleason suggested the possibility of constructing a hammerhead at the end of the driveway instead of a turnaround. Gappa thought that was feasible noting it has been done elsewhere. Gleason said this would solve the problem of inadequate room for a complete turnaround. Gleason said he would mark the driveway as a private drive. Lindquist asked if there were any problems with the landscape report. Gleason indicated there were no problems as far as he was concerned. He said he is in favor of adding landscaping and reducing the setback for saving trees. He questioned the need for a buffer from the garages facing CoRd 15 as there is a considerable distance separating the two. He said landscaping is beneficial for marketing. Gleason thought the landscape plan could be approved when the final plat is presented. McMillan noted the design for the front doors being in the middle of the units. She asked if this was advantageous for those in the middle units having to walk all around. She asked if this was a question of providing a common area versus losing privacy. Gleason thought the residents will use their garage entries. Guests may walk around or possibly use the garage entry as well. Gleason feels the courtyards will be attractive and be private with the trees surrounding them. Any problem would be more for guests than for the residents. Gleason said there was the possibility of moving the two middle units forward and placing a service door on the side of the garage. Gleason did not believe this was an issue, however, with only four units per building. McMillan said some privacy would be lost by the middle units with walking traffic going back and forth. McMillan asked about snow plowing. Gleason said the shoveling will be provided by the homeowners association. He added that the area would be very wooded and walkways will wind around the treed areas. Gleason thought the courtyards will be used by the residents noting there are patios by the front doors as well. Lindquist noted the issues of the 6" loop or sprinkler, hammerhead, landscaping recommendations, and fire chief report have been reviewed. Van Zomeren said she would like to know what the applicant is required to do regarding the road. Lindquist indicated the 22' width and hammerhead would be a sufficient tradeoff for preserving trees and was satisfactory with the fire chief. Hawn asked if a 22' width was the maximum that could be provided. Gleason did not know if any wider road could be provided and did not see any reason to expand that width. The length is more of a concern but is solved with the use of a hammerhead. Gappa noted the difference between single family and townhome units and the ordinance applying to single family residences. He thought the shorter length was a trade -off. 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 • ( 44 - #2308 Brook Park Realty - Continued) Van Zomeren said the preliminary plat and PRD will move forward to the Council for their review. Conformity to subdivision regulations will be reviewed. A letter of credit will be necessary or public improvements installed. Lindquist thought a letter of credit would be satisfactory. The next step after Council review will then be final plat. Hawn asked about the center island suggested by the landscape architect. Van Zomeren said the reasoning was to lessen the amount of pavement made by a cul -de -sac. Gleason said he thought the decision was made to eliminate an island. Van Zomeren said the City Engineer did not favor the island but the recommendation was made by the architect. Gappa reported that an island is not desirable for effective snowplowing. Lindquist moved, Stoddard seconded, to approve Application #2308 for preliminary plat. Before final plat review, the water loop or sprinkler system needs to be resolved. A revised plan with a hammerhead turnaround that addresses the landscape architect's and City Engineer's comments will need to be submited. The revised plan will not include a center island in the cul -de -sac. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARINGS 1p ( #5) #2311 LOREN FRITZ, 3845 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - VARIANCE - 7:39- 7:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Photos of the property were presented. Bressler reported that the applicant is proposing a total of 914 s.f. of additions to the existing residence. The existing residence is located 7' from the rear lot line. The proposed addition will be located within the required rear setback but will not further encroach the required yard than the existing residence. Bressler reviewed the issues 1 through 6 as reported in the packet. The sloping topography was noted. The existing deck, residence and proposed additions are 5', 7, and 16.1' from the rear lot line, respectively. A prior rear yard variance was granted in 1975. It was noted that a wood retaining wall is located on the neighboring property to the south. The high volume of traffic is also considered a deterrent to locating the addition closer to the road. Staff recommended approval of the rear yard variance with the existing shed relocated to a location meeting the yard setback requirements or be removed. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #5 - #2311 Loren Fritz - Continued) Lindquist recommended the applicant come to an agreement with the neighboring property owner regarding the wood retaining wall. Fritz said the wall is a replacement of what already existed to prevent erosion, and his neighbor supported the building of the wall. Fritz said the shed has been there for 30 years and is in good repair. It is used for lawn equipment. Fritz said he would object to removing the shed as it does not create any problem for the neighbors and is overshadowed by the barn to the west. There were no public comments. Lindquist said he supported the proposed addition and maintaining the wood retaining wall. However, he recommended the shed be moved. Fritz said the relocation of the shed would create an eyesore if relocated. Fritz also indicated that he would have to dismantle the shed as it is bolted down. Mrs. Fritz said the area suggested for the shed location is marshland and unbuildable. McMillan asked if the shed would require rebuilding when it became deteriorated, if it could be built in the same location. Bressler said it would require a variance. Bressler said the shed is in good condition at this time. Lindquist moved, McMillan seconded, to approve the rear setback variance of 13.9' to allow the proposed addition to be located 16.1' from the rear lot line where 7' is existing and 30' is allowed. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ( #6) #2313 TOM AND KARI STEINKE, 910 DAKOTA AVENUE - VARIANCE - 7:45 -7:49 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Bressler presented photographs of the property. The proposal is for construction of a second story addition over the existing residence. The existing residence currently encroaches the side setback. The variance would allow additional structure in the required setback but would not encroach further. Bressler reviewed the four issues as indicated in the packet. Staff recommended approval of the application. 9 Mr. Steinke had no further comments. MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 • ( #6 - #2313 Tom and Kari Steinke - Continued) Mrs. Steinke indicated that the addition would be a bedroom over the dining room. The residence currently has a walk -up attic. There were no public comments. Stoddard moved, Hawn seconded, to approve Application #2313 for a side yard setback variance of 17.6' to allow the existing side yard setback of 12.4' to remain where 30' is required. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ( #7) #2314 JOHN BESSESEN, 2505 -2507 KELLY AVENUE - ZONING AMENDING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 7:49 -9:00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The Applicant was present. Van Zomeren reported the applicant is requesting a zoning amendment to revise the duplex credit district. If that approval is received, a conditional use permit would be • required. As the ordinance is currently written, a conditional use permit would only be possible if the zoning lot is adjacent to an industrial or commercial zone and built within 200' of that zone. • Van Zomeren showed the location of the Highway 12 industrial area and the residential area within 200' that is not separated by a roadway. The area eligible is located to the south of the highway. Staff has historically required that adjacent lot lines be contiguous. If a more liberal viewpoint was taken and the road was not considered, that area could possibly cross the road. The other location is in Navarre. Van Zomeren displayed where the subject lot and commercial zoning is located. Van Zomeren said the terminology in the code needs clarification. The existing location where the fire station was located is not eligible for duplex credit as it is outside the commercial zone and the 200' limitation. Van Zomeren said she and Gaffron discussed modifying the duplex credit. The B -3 zoning is the only zoning that could be extended to capture that lot and eliminate the 200' requirement. The 200' eligibility could be changed to reflect 400' from the B -3 district. The B -1 and B -6 zoning districts would be eliminated for duplex credit. 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 • ( #7 - #2314 John Bessesen - Continued) Van Zomeren said, if the City's intent is to allow duplex housing, it first needs to be determined where that housing should be located and then place it in the zoning. She does not feel it makes sense where the use is currently allocated. She says it is important to buffer the industrial and commercial areas with higher density but is not the best method to achieve this end. The zoning situation for the subject lot needs to be revised before the lot is eligible for a conditional use permit. Van Zomeren is concerned that the "duplex credit" is a moving target because it changes based on commercial or industrial zoning. Van Zomeren reported that there are alot of small lots where duplexes can currently be located under the duplex credit process. She feels this should not be encouraged. The church property rezoning that occurred in 1996 changed the 200' eligibility and needs to be eliminated in her opinion. Van Zomeren asked if the non - conforming structure should be demolished and the area zoned for duplex. The presence of Outlot A at the lakeshore precludes single family development, according to the applicant. Research found that the reasoning behind the outlot had to do with a concern over multiple docks on the wetlands. Van Zomeren said the most restrictive way to change the ordinance to allow the property to have a duplex constructed on it would be through the B -3 district. This would not • affect the existing duplexes. John Bessesen had no comments at this point. The hearing was opened for public comments. Todd Jones, 2501 and 2503 Kelly Avenue, reported that his property is adjacent to the subject property. Jones said he is unclear on what four lots are affected. Van Zomeren explained where the lots are located. The 400' limitation would add two single family lots to the south. Jones said he cannot see the single family lots being utilized for the duplex use. He agrees the site is blighted and understands the problem with setback. He believes the opportunity for duplexes would be good for the city. He believes the plan is reasonable and would clean up the property. Austin Evans, 2497 Kelly Avenue, lives north of the subject property in a townhome, and cited the text amendment. He said the subject property has been on the market for five years and its current condition is not in keeping with the neighborhood. He understands the economical problems with providing a single family residence. He feels changing the zoning to accomplish the request is extreme. He feels changing the existing duplexes zoning allowing one dwelling unit on 1/2 acre is more feasible. Evans feels the only use of the property as it is now is to have the City condemn it and make it a park. Evans • believes all the residents along Kelly Avenue would support the redevelopment to a duplex. 11 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #7 - #2314 John Bessesen - Continued) Chuck and Candy Nadler, 2509 Kelly Avenue, live south of the subject property. Chuck Nadler said he is concerned with rezoning the area to the east to allow more duplexes. He is not sure this would be the right solution. Nadler wanted the applicant to answer whether he will do as he is proposing. If so, Nadler said he would support the application. He believes the proposal would result in a high quality duplex. Nadler indicated that Outlot A creates the problem for creating a single family residence. He is not convinced that the outlot could not be eliminated if the townhome residents and City work together. Evans said he would be willing to aid in eliminating the outlot and get all docks in the same location. Jones thought this solution could be worked out but wanted to maintain the right to enjoy more lakeshore for walking. Bessesen said he had presumed the property was zoned for duplexes when the purchase agreement was written. He found out differently when the property was surveyed. Bessesen said the plans call for duplexes at a value of $350,000- $400,000 for each side. He did have a concern with the gas station nearby but had a Phase I EIS conducted, which • showed no problems. He then found that the zoning is for single family site but the outlot is problematic. Bessesen said the Kelly Avenue Association owns the property around the townhomes. Outlot A is landlocked and causes problems for single family purposes. If the outlot was eliminated, he would prefer to build a single family residence. The existing four townhomes could establish docks in front of their own units. Bessesen said he represents the owner, Bradley Hoyt. He would like the opportunity to work out any problems if possible to improve Kelly Avenue. Stoddard said he appreciates Staff s initiative in extending the zone to 400'. He believes it will affect four lots, two of which have sold for over $1,000,000. He does not believe it would be a good idea to change the zoning in order to change these lots. Stoddard said the outlot has presented a problem for perspective buyers of the property. He believes single family housing is preferable in the neighborhood. He said consideration could be given to change the zoning for the one lot. Bessesen responded that State law does not allow this to occur. Bessesen noted the rights of the townhome owners regarding the outlot and would like to be able to build another townhome. He indicated that Hoyt has listed his home for sale and plans on living in one of the units. Stoddard suggested Bessesen speak with the neighbors regarding their feelings and obtain information on the background of Outlot A. 12 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #7 - #2314 John Bessesen - Continued) Van Zomeren said previous noted Staff concerns with impacts on the wetlands if more docks were established. She believes the outlot was established because of dock issues. Van Zomeren said other regulatory bodies will have to be contacted regarding establishing docks in front of townhomes. She noted the amount of wetlands is large. Steve Weckman had informed her that the wetland map is confusing and requires further delineation. Berg noted there were similar docks located on Carman Bay. Nadler said he had been informed that Outlot A had been negotiated with the City and dealt with where the townhomes were built and the desire of a property owner to have docks located in one area. Jabbour agreed that dock clustering was encouraged at that time. Nadler suggested working with the property owners to have docks located in front of the units if proven economical. Jabbour said the history behind the outlot needs to be determined and the Commission needs to either agree or disagree with whether economics is dictating the location Berg noted that the lot across the street is unbuildable. • Lindquist indicated that the action to be taken at this time is for conceptual approval. Commission noted difficulty in changing the zoning. Commissioners all agreed that new development is desired but questioned whether it should be single family residence or a duplex. Hawn said she would be willing to look at eliminating Outlot A if it can be done and changing the zoning. She agrees with Van Zomeren that rewriting the zoning around one property is not a good solution and Commission should determine where duplexes should be located in the City. Bessesen said he understands the reasoning behind Van Zomeren's suggestions and the need to determine what method can accomplish it. Hawn said the issue needs to be reviewed comprehensively. Berg said research must be done on the history of Outlot A. Van Zomeren read the minutes of the 10/3/77 Planning Commission Meeting regarding Outlot A. She asked if the docks could be re- established for each duplex in order to eliminate Outlot A. Berg said the townhomes first have to be reviewed. Lindquist said rezoning can then be done. 13 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #7 - #2314 John Bessesen - Continued) Van Zomeren said the existing townhomes and this site could be rezoned and the density changed by text amendment using 400' or less. She noted she is not particularly in favor of using a distance measurement. She would prefer to eliminate the duplex credit as it currently exists. Jabbour informed the Commission how the duplex credit was established with the Shoreland Ordinance in the early 1990's. He noted there would be two PUDs for consideration in the near future. Jabbour thought the areas could be changed and the application done as a PUD. Van Zomeren said because the property does not quality for a conditional use permit, she does not believe it meets the acreage requirement for PUD. Van Zomeren indicated that the Planning Commission could consider recommending that the legal non - conforming use be re- established as a use on a lot of record if it met all other requirements; that would require amending a different section of the Zoning Code relating to non - conforming uses. The extend of the impact for this method is not known. Hawn asked what would take longer, the 400' text amendment or determining location for duplexes. Van Zomeren said the problem is textually amending the ordinance, which has the effect of a spot zoning. She is reluctant to do that at this time because the Comprehensive Plan is due to be revised before the end of 1998. Stoddard noted the neighbors comments that were made regarding the legal non- conforming use, zoning for the neighborhood, and the blighted site. He felt the outcome is dependent on the applicant. He suggested the applicant speak with the neighbors regarding changing the outlot and then construct a single family home, which he felt would be the best solution for both the City and the neighborhood. However, Stoddard said the issue before the Commission is to determine if a duplex would fit in with the neighborhood. Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve Application #2314 approving a duplex at that address due to the existing legal non - conforming use and change the zoning to establish the legal use provided no other variances are required on the construction. Lindquist questioned whether this can be done. Van Zomeren said it would be an amendment to another section of the zoning code but there is no language to that effect. She indicated this cannot be drafted without renotifying the public. Van Zomeren said a text amendment can be broadly done. This motion would require the application to be reviewed again in January. Van Zomeren cited the ordinance sections suggesting the text amendment be revised to apply only to the B3 District and the distance be reduced from 400' to 250'. Stoddard withdrew his motion. 14 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #7 - #2314 John Bessesen - Continued) Jabbour indicated that this would require a 4 /5th majority vote by Council and could not be reviewed until December 8 when a full Council would be in attendance. Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2314 for construction of a duplex amending this single lot zoning to include duplex credit approvals for construction within 250' from B -3 building due to its legal non - conforming use. McMillan questioned whether the property was more than 250' from the B -3 zoning. The number of docks (3) and their length (25') were noted. They are located adjacent to the neighboring property and allows people to walk across the outlot. Stoddard noted that the motion would allow the applicant and Staff to see what can be done before review at the 12/8 Council meeting. McMillan noted that LMCD approval would be required for moving the docks. It was noted that the language as it currently exists in the ordinance needs to be narrowed and limited to the B -3. Stoddard said there may be no need for an amendment as he feels the distance is less than previously thought. Stoddard amended his motion to eliminate the existing language in the code regarding duplex credit. McMillan seconded the amendment to the motion. Lindquist questioned how the Commission could get duplex zoning back in place with this motion. It would require Comprehensive Plan review and changes made. Lindquist said the motion would allow this application to go forward but additional work would be required. Hawn questioned whether the motion could legally be done noting the current rights of the property owners. Van Zomeren said the public notice posted would serve as notice for this motion. The motion was separated into two motions. The motion read: to approve Application #2314 for construction of a duplex and amend the single lot zoning to include the duplex credit approval for construction within 250' of the B -3 zoning district due to its legal non - conforming use. Vote: Ayes 3, McMillan, Stoddard, Berg; Nays 2, Lindquist, Hawn. Motion passed. 15 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #7 - #2314 John Bessesen - Continued) Stoddard moved but received no second to eliminate the language to allow duplex credit to the zoning code. McMillan suggested the issue be further reviewed before sending the recommendation to the Council. Lindquist said he voted against the motion as he is against spot zoning but supports the plan itself. The applicant was asked to research the background of Outlot A prior to the Council Meeting on December 8. Bessesen will work with Van Zomeren to solve issues of concern. ( #8) CITY OF ORONO - ZONING AMENDMENT - LAND ALTERATION REGULATIONS AND PERMIT CRITERIA - 9:10 -9:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Gappa reported that the zoning amendment is a housekeeping matter to streamline the • current code. The code currently requires a conditional use permit for any land alteration over 100 cubic yards. This creates a problem for what may be minor work. Staff has concluded that a Staff permit process should take place and change the ordinance to reflect the need for a CUP for land alteration over 500 cubic yards. There were no public comments. Lindquist moved, Berg seconded, to recommend approval of the Zoning Amending for Land Alteration Regulations and Permit Criteria. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ( #9) REPORT BY PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING COUNCIL MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 27, 1997 AND NOVEMBER 10, 1997 No report was given. ( #10) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION The Planning Commission will meet on December 17, 1997 at 6:30 p.m. Items for discussion will include tree preservation, home occupation, and review research regarding prior variances. 16 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997 ( #10 - Other Issues for Discussion - Continued) McMillan asked that Park Commission Chair Wilson be notified of the meeting. Jabbour indicated that the meeting may include information regarding the elimination of calculating landscaping underlain with plastic in the 0 -75' setback. Landscaping with plastic underlayment will be allowed in the 75 -250' setback if the 25% hardcover allowance is met. Jabbour reported that the park dedication ordinance is being challenged, and the City Attorney will be drafting a new ordinance. He stated a direct nexus must be shown between the park services provided and any subdivision requiring park dedication fees. Jabbour asked the Planning Commission to further investigate any application where prior Councils placed future restrictions to determine the reasoning behind their decision. He cited an example where the Planning Commission listened to prior Council advice in a recommendation, but the current Council mistakenly did not, resulting in what he felt was a hastily drawn and incorrect conclusion. ( #11) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE . OCTOBER 20, 1997 MEETING Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 20, 1997. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ( #12) PLANNING COMMISSION TO SELECT REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND THE COUNCIL MEETINGS OF NOVEMBER 24,1997 AND DECEMBER 8, 1997 November 24 - Stoddard December 8 - Berg ADJOURNMENT Stoddard moved, Lindquist seconded, to adjourn at 9:23 p.m. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. r Dale Lindq t, ai rson 17