Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-17-2019 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Jon Ressler, Commissioners Chris Bollis, Mark Doepke, Bob Erickson, Dennis Libby, Mark McCutcheon, and John Thiesse. Representing Staff were Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, City Planners Melanie Curtis and Laura Oakden, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Dennis Walsh was present. Chair Ressler called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 13,2019 Libby moved,Thiesse seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of May 13,2019, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. NEW BUSINESS 1. LA19-000032 JOHN ADAMS,ON BEHALF OF GREGG AND DENISE STEINHAFEL, 2265 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,WETLAND ALTERATION PERMIT/REZONING,6:31 P.M.— 6:45 P.M. John Adams,Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting approval of a wetland alteration and rezoning approval in order to remove a wetland from the City's Wetland Overlay District. The property owners are contemplating creating a building pad for a sport court approximately 300 feet northeast of the existing home on the subject property. The desired location of the building pad/sport court conflicts with an existing 958 square foot Type 1 seasonally flooded wetland. The applicants are proposing to mitigate this wetland with the purchase of wetland bank credits out of the City. To impact or fill a wetland,the Watershed District must approve the Sequencing and Replacement Plan and the City must approve a rezoning and issue a wetland alteration permit. According to the homeowners,this is the most practical location on the property for the improvement. Rezoning is necessary so the wetland is no longer subject to the standards of the Wetland Overlay District. The original land disturbance proposed was approximately 14,000 square feet of cut and fill to create the building pad but has been reduced to 11,000 square feet. The details of the MCWD review and Sequencing and Replacement Plan are outlined in Staff report. If the Planning Commission or a member of the public would like to review the details, Staff can go into further detail. Planning Staff observes that the removal of the wetland and the subsequent grading will likely not impact adjacent properties or the lake. Staff recommends approval of the request. Doepke asked how many residents are within the area that have been notified of the proposal. Curtis indicated she received one telephone call from an adjacent property owner who had a question about which wetland was at issue and Staff helped walk her through that. Page 1 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. John Adams,Applicant, stated this is a very small wetland that gets a little bit of water in it in the spring when the snow melts, but it is not a wetland that is wet very much of the year. The amount of land involved is 958 square feet. The property owners received approval from the MCWD for a 60' x 120' sport court. The original proposal was 14,000 square feet, which is approximately one-third of an acre. The property owners indicated they did not require that big of a sport court and the amount of fill now being required is approximately 11,000 square feet. This site was chosen for maximum tree preservation and proximity to the house. One of the alternative sport court was located near the lake, which did not make sense due to the lights and the other alternative site would have required the removal of a number of trees. As a result, it was felt that this was the best spot. It is approximately 300 feet away from the house behind the garage. The property owners will be purchasing twice the amount of wetland credit as what is being lost. Originally the Watershed District agreed to allow the credit to be purchased outside Hennepin County but have since requested the wetland credit be purchased in the county. Thiesse asked if they will be raising the grade for the sport court up to the elevation of the driveway. Adams indicated he does not believe so. Thiesse stated it appears the driveway is what is stopping the drainage out of that area. Thiesse asked where the drainage will be directed toward. Adams stated they are going to be directing it away from the driveway, but they will look at running a culvert under the driveway if that is the best solution. The black area depicts the area where the trucks would come into the site. Libby asked if they have an idea at this point where they will be purchasing the wetland credits. Adams stated they do have a purchase agreement for land in Hennepin County in place, but that they do not know the exact location right now. Bollis asked if they have considered relocating the sport court north/south of the proposed location so it does not impact the wetland. Adams indicated the proposed site does not impact as many trees and it is not visible from the lake or from the neighbors' homes. Ressler stated he is trying to get a better understanding of the location. Preservation of trees is important but changing the wetlands is also important. Ressler asked why this particular location is best suited besides the trees. Adams stated they hired ISG to look at it and they performed the wetland delineation. ISG felt that this was the best place for the minimal amount of tree loss and it has a good proximity to the home, is behind the home, and will not be visible from the lake. The Watershed District and Army Corps also reviewed it. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. Page 2 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. Thiesse indicated he did visit the property and it is not much more than a low spot in the ground. Thiesse stated in his view it would be easier to create a new wetland than it would be to preserve the trees since they are mature trees. The only concern would be to have the water treatment occur where it is supposed to happen. Thiesse stated they will be losing a wetland, which is allowed under the rules,and they will be creating double the size wetland for someone else. Doepke stated he would concur with Commissioner Thiesse. Bollis stated he would hope there is a spot close to this property to replace the wetland. Otherwise it seems to be an appropriate spot for the sport court. Curtis noted in the past Staff has had conversations with the Watershed District about onsite versus off site wetland mitigation, and the Watershed District indicated that they found with their monitoring that they are able to accomplish a higher quality of mitigation when it is a larger area that is being banked rather than trying to create and maintain a new wetland on site. Thiesse asked if the existing wetland could be increased. Curtis stated it could be done in addition to that if the Planning Commission would like Staff to explore that, but the Watershed District has already reviewed it. Libby commented it is a very significant sized site and that wetlands do not relocate well, which is a concern. Since there is a substantial amount of other habitat within close proximity, Libby stated he does not feel the wildlife will have too much of a problem with relocating to one of the other areas and that he would be in favor of this. McCutcheon stated given the process that has been gone through, he would approve it. Ressler stated he also tends to agree with the comments. It is easier to recreate wetlands than replace mature trees and the proposed location appears to have minimal impact to the neighboring properties, so he would be in support of it. Erickson moved,Thiesse seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000032,John Adams,2265 North Shore Drive,wetland alteration permit/zoning. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 2. LA19-000036 BRENT TEELE,577 PARK LANE,VARIANCE,6:45 P.M.—6:54 P.M. Brent Teele, Applicant,was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting a hardcover variance in order to construct an addition to the existing home. The property owners are proposing to demolish an existing nonconforming detached garage. The new addition will consist of new garage stalls and upper living space. The proposed addition would meet all of the setback requirements for the zoning district and incudes a reconfiguration of hardcover, which currently exceeds 25 percent. The current hardcover is at 34.45 percent and it would be Page 3 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. reduced slightly to 34.43 percent. The applicant is requesting to basically maintain the same level of hardcover that is currently on the property. Staff finds the applicant is working to bring the existing property into conformance with the City Code. The proposal meets the structural coverage and all of the setbacks set by the City Code on a substandard sized lot. The request to maintain the same level of hardcover for the site but in a different configuration seems reasonable while decreasing the current setback nonconformities. No public comments have been received. Planning Staff recommends the Planning Commission review the practical difficulties. If the Commission agrees with the findings, Staff would support approval of the request. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Brent Teele,applicant,stated the whole purpose for the renovation is to have an attached garage for easier access to the house and to create additional living space above the garage. He has four teenage children and will be getting remarried, so they are attempting to create additional living space. Under the proposal they will be able to maintain the required setbacks and current hardcover level. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:48 p.m. Jo McDonnell, 559 Park Lane, commented she and her husband are pleased with the proposal. There is quite a bit of water flow from the hill and that it is her understanding a permit was approved for some sewer work or drainage work. Given that there are a lot of water issues on the street, it is good to move those structures away from the road. McDonnell stated they actually demoed their house and rebuilt. The former garage was nonconforming as well and was in the way for the drainage, so it would be good to get this structure away from the street as well. Tim O'Donnell, 559 Park Lane, stated it is really difficult to come up with a plan that meets all the requirements given the size lot, and the fact that the hardcover will still be at 34 percent is amazing. Most of the homes in the area do not meet the hardcover requirements. O'Donnell stated they are in support of the application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:50 p.m. McCutcheon stated the amount of massing in the area likely contributes to the runoff and not increasing the hardcover is a good thing. McCutcheon stated he does not see a problem with the proposal. Libby stated the proposal seems practical and helps meet the applicant's family needs. Libby indicated he would be in favor of it. Erickson commented it seems like a common-sense solution. Bollis, Doepke, and Thiesse indicated they are in favor of the proposal. Page 4 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Ressler stated they are reducing the sprawl of the lot by bringing the structures closer together as well as reducing the hardcover slightly. Ressler stated he is also supportive of the proposal. Thiesse moved,Erickson seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000036,Brent Teele,577 Park Lane,granting of a variance. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 3. LA19-000037 TODD AND KATHRIN LONG, 565 HANLON AVENUE,VARIANCE,6:54 P.M.—7:03 P.M. Todd Long, Applicant, was present. Curtis stated the applicants are requesting a rear street setback variance in order to build an addition on the west side of the home along with a new porch on the alley side of the property. The applicants own both 565 Hanlon and the unaddressed parcel to the south. The property owner recently requested a lot combination to combine the two separate PIDs into one tax parcel. The lot setbacks, area, and width analyses are based on these lots being combined. The property's 129 feet of depth is challenging,particularly due to the street setbacks of 50 feet on the east and west sides. The lot is also nonconforming with respect to area and width. As a result,the applicants are left with an approximate 29-foot deep building envelope, which is somewhat inconsistent with the neighboring properties. Staff finds practical difficulties inherent to the size, location of the existing home, and the rear property line justify the variance allowing the small addition. Planning Staff recommends approval of the variances as requested. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Katherin Long,Applicant, stated it is an older house with an outdated porch and that they are remodeling the property and adding a porch. When they did the redesign, they made the porch slightly larger to make it look more modern. The property has a lot of challenges and the improvements will make it look a lot more attractive. Ressler commented the addition looks nice. Long stated it has existing entry steps that are half the proposed size. The roof is not necessarily structural, but it is more aesthetically appealing. There are three lots and they are requesting to combine the lots into one. Curtis noted the lot combination is administrative and is in process. Doepke asked if there would have been any other alternatives if the lots had been combined prior to this application. Long stated there is a current porch there and they are not changing too much on the property but they are doing more remodeling. Curtis noted that area is low and is probably not suitable for building on. Page 5 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 6:58 p.m. There were no public comments relating to this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 6:58 p.m. Thiesse noted they are putting a front door on the other side away from Hanlon. Curtis stated that is how they currently and historically access the home. The previous owners a number of years ago requested a little sign at the end of the road to direct people towards the home. Thiesse stated he believes the porch is practical and he would be in favor of it. Doepke indicated he would concur with that. Bollis stated he is in favor of it. Due to the setbacks, it would be difficult to keep any kind of entry on the home within conformance. Erickson stated he is in support of the application and the recent lot combination has increased the lot area and the north and south setbacks, which are things the City likes to encourage. Libby stated the addition is architecturally complementary to the house and he would be in favor of it. McCutcheon indicated he is in agreement. Ressler stated it is difficult to do much more on the lot and that the proposal seems practical and reasonable. Ressler stated he would be in favor of it. Libby moved,Bollis seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000037, Todd and Kathrin Long,565 Hanlon Avenue, rear/street setback variance. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 4. LA18-000038 GREGG KATCHMARK, 140 LEAF STREET,VARIANCE, 7:03 P.M.—7:11 P.M. Gregg Katchmark,Applicant,was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting a front yard variance and is proposing to construct an 800 square foot addition to the home. The property abuts the creek that flows from Lake Classen to Stubbs Bay, which is a protected tributary and subject to a 75-foot structure setback as well as the standard limitations on hardcover in the 0-75-foot zone. The home is currently set at an angle from the front property line with the closest point setback being 36.7 feet. The proposed addition would expand the building footprint on the south side of the property, which would be conforming to the side setback, but would expand the home into the required front yard creating a 31.7-foot setback. The existing home is located in a nonconforming location. The front yard setback overlaps with the 75- foot creek setback located in the rear of the yard. The limited building envelope creates the need for a variance for any addition to the home. The proposed addition is aligned with the existing home in creating a reasonable building envelope. Page 6 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. To date,no public comments have been received. Planning Staff recommends approval of the front yard setback variance. The Planning Commission had no questions for staff. Gregg Katchmark,Applicant, stated the existing tuckunder garage really does not fit a car, so they are proposing to construct a new garage and also would like to take advantage of that by creating additional living space above the garage. Katchmark commented the proposal seems the most sensible and helps create a more workable house. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. McCutcheon stated the 75-foot setback is tough to work around and that the applicant's proposal is within the spirit of the setback. Libby requested to see an aerial of the area. Libby stated he tends to be in favor of it but that he would like to get a better visualization of the area in front of the garage. Oakden pointed out the location of the neighboring properties. Libby indicated he would be in favor of it due to the circumstances and the need. Erickson commented it is a unique situation that has reduced the building envelope and has created the justification for the variance. Bollis stated he would agree there are unique circumstances and the proposal is very practical. Doepke stated the proposal is very reasonable. Thiesse asked if they are removing the blacktop under the garage. Oakden indicated it is currently a tuckunder garage and they are proposing to go over the existing hardcover. Thiesse noted the blacktop extends beyond the garage. Katachmark stated there is a little swing out of the blacktop, which will be converted to grass. Thiesse stated other than adding some structure, nothing else will really change. Thiesse stated he says a practical difficulty and that reorienting the addition will not change matters. Page 7 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Ressler stated if they attempted to make it conforming to the setback, it would result in a very weird looking structure. The proposal does not change the viewpoints of the adjacent homes and seems to be reasonable. McCutcheon moved, Thiesse seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000038, Gregg Katchmark, 140 Leaf Street,front yard variance. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 5. LA19-000039 BRANDSTETTER CARROLL,INC.,645 TONKNAWA ROAD/CAMP TEKO,AMENDMENT OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES, 7:11 P.M.—8:30 P.M. ,Applicant, was present. Oakden stated this is a proposed Master Plan for Camp Teko. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to intensify the existing camp use and variances for hardcover and a building in the 75-foot lakeshore setback, buildings within the 30-foot bluff setback, and a variance from the one-year deadline for the proposed master plan. Camp Teko has been operating in Orono since 1965 and is located in the LR-1B zoning district on a 17.96 acre parcel with approximately 1,500 feet of shoreline. Camp Teko has submitted a Master Plan for the camp with multiple improvements. These include a new program center, program cabins,waterfront improvements, changing rooms, parking, a welcome center, a maintenance building, entrance monument/gates, cabin renovations, leader lodge, a pavilion,program platforms,new shelters,restrooms, and a new trail and path network. The applicant is implementing the Master Plan in phases. Phase one consists of construction of a program center, program cabins, some trail improvements, and the changing rooms. The applicant is requesting the necessary approvals to implement the master plan. The goal is to review the proposed submittals; and if approved, would allow the issuance of building permits in the future provided they align with the Master Plan. This process would allow for the review and permitting process to be streamlined and lessen the burden on the applicant. The applicant is requesting the following approvals: 1. A conditional use permit for intensifying/expanding the existing camp use. 2. A variance for hardcover and building within the 75-foot lakeshore setback for a replacement storage shed. 3. A variance for improvements in the 30-foot bluff setback for proposed new pavilion and two new program cabins. 4. A variance from the one-year expiration date to allow for implementation of the Master Plan to happen in phases beyond four years. If the CUP is in use and the proposed improvements align with the Master Plan, any variance approvals should be approved with the Master Plan. The proposal meets the required yard setbacks for all new buildings and additions,the wetland setbacks, and the average lakeshore setback. There is currently a boat house, a storage shed,and part of a cabin located within the 75-foot lake yard. The new, larger storage shed, however, does not meet the lakeshore Page 8 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. setback and would require a variance. There are currently multiple cabins located within the bluff impact zone and bluff setback. The plan proposes removing all of these buildings. The proposed plan also includes a new pavilion on the same footprint of an existing cabin within the setback. It is also showing two new program cabins within the setback. The proposed buildings will all be outside the 20-foot bluff impact zone but are proposed to be within the 30-foot bluff setback. The new buildings do not meet the bluff setback and would require a variance. Camp Teko serves 60-160 campers at a time. The applicants have evaluated their parking needs and have stated that as the camp exists today, all parking needs are met with the existing gravel lot. The existing gravel parking lot is much smaller than compared to the new proposed parking areas. The proposed plan shows 60 total stalls, which the applicant believes will be more than adequate to accommodate the daily camp operations. There are no specific parking requirements for nonprofit or religious camps. Staff did perform an analysis of the parking under two different guidelines. Churches, auditoriums, and undertaking establishments require at least one stall for each four seats. Staff determined that there is a maximum capacity of 240 people in the main assembly hall, which would require 60 parking stalls. A community center, post office,YMCA,YWCA, physical cultural studios, pool halls, libraries, private clubs, lodges and museums require one stall for each 300 square feet of floor area in excess of 2,000 square feet of floor space. The main assembly hall is 9.440 square feet,which would require the facility to have 35 total spaces,which is met. No hardcover is permitted within the 75-foot lakeshore setback. The applicant is proposing a new storage shed and a new changing room building where no hardcover is permitted. City Code only currently permits one lockbox no greater than 20 square feet in area and no higher than 48 inches in height. Aside from the 100-foot setbacks from exterior property lines,the Code did not contemplate separate regulations for properties at the scale of the subject camp use where the storage needs for equipment, including lifejackets and water toys, is more substantial. No buildings or structures are permitted within 30 feet from the top of the bluff. The three new buildings are proposed to be placed outside the bluff impact zone, which is 20 feet from the front top of bluff, but they are shown to encroach in the 30-foot bluff setback. Staff has included an analysis of the practical difficulty and conditional use permit in its report. Staff finds that the Master Plan meets all the requirements for a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission should review the items for consideration to address the proposed variances. The bluff area covers most of the shoreline limiting the accessibility and use of the property. The proposed storage shed within the 75-foot lake yard would be used to house lifejackets, paddles, and lake use accessories, consistent with water-oriented storage, which is permitted to some extent. The buildings proposed in the bluff setback are shown to be built on stilts to give a treehouse cabin feel and protect the grading and bluff area. The overall proposed Master Plan is using the land in a reasonable manner and takes into consideration the unique characteristics of the property. The variance from the one-year action on the different components of the Master Plan appears appropriate in this situation since the applicant has developed a comprehensive Master Plan intended to take years to fully implement. Page 9 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17, 2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. The Planning Commission should consider the issues outlined in the Staff report. If the Planning Commission is in agreement with the conditional use permit for the Master Plan, each variance request can be reviewed separately. If the conditional use permit is denied,the requested variances should be denied as well. Sample motions are included in the Staff report. Ressler noted Item No. 1 talks about intensifying the existing camp use and on the plan there seems like there are a number of things being relocated along with the addition of the pavilion. Ressler asked whether there is going to be increased enrollment. Oakden stated Staff views intensifying the use as someone using the land in a more intense way, such as by adding more structures, creating a more detailed trail system, using the land characteristics, and reworking the stormwater on the property. All of those changes on the property are seen as intensifying the use under a conditional use permit. The applicant is proposing 11 new buildings, for a total of 16 buildings, which is an intensification of the use. Ressler asked if the variance from the one-year expiration date has to do with inaction on the Master Plan. Oakden stated as it is written in City Code, all variances expire within one year if not acted upon. The applicant would like to perform the project in phases and would prefer the variances to be tied in with the Conditional Use Permit. Ressler asked if the motion of the Planning Commission should include a sunset date on the variances. Oakden stated right now it is proposed to be infinite since it is tied to the Conditional Use Permit. As long as the applicant is working towards completion, it would not have an expiration date, but if they want to deviate from the plan,they would need to come back before the Planning Commission. McCutcheon noted those regulations are in place to prevent ongoing construction. Ressler asked how many total buildings there will be after the project is completed. Oakden stated she believes there will be 21 total buildings on the site after completion of the Master Plan. The overhead depicts each building and it goes up to the Letter U. The gray depicts proposed buildings and the white depicts existing buildings that are proposed to remain, but some of the gray buildings are proposed as replacements to what currently exists. Libby asked if the improvements are generated by an increase in enrollment. Oakden stated her understanding is they are using the site to the best of their ability today and the improvements would allow them to use the site better and perhaps to host additional activities. Doepke asked exactly what the bluff setback is. Oakden indicated City Code defines a bluff, a steep setback, a bluff setback, etc., and that a bluff is considered a 30 percent grade over 25 feet at the top of the bluff. At the top of the bluff there is a 20-foot bluff impact zone. The City also has a 30-foot bluff setback from the top of the bluff to protect the bluff impact bluff. The applicant is proposing to remove things outside the bluff impact zone and have three buildings proposed within the bluff setback. Page 10 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Doepke asked if there is ever a geological survey of the bluff required as part of an application to determine whether heavy rains would impact the bluff. Oakden stated it is her understanding the engineers do an analysis of the slope but that she is not sure whether they perform an analysis of potential slope failure. Curtis stated the bluff impact zone is the actual bluff itself. Rabbi Marsha Zimmerman stated she is the senior rabbi at Temple Israel and they are 141 years old. Temple Israel has owned Camp Teko for the last 54 years and before that it was a Boy Scout camp. Temple Israel believes in the power of giving young people a camp experience because they know two of the top Jewish traditions or experiences are camping and a trip to the Jewish State of Israel. Temple Israel believes Camp Teko provides the children with a strong identity and teaches them the strength of independence. As it relates to the intensified use,they would like to use Camp Teko more often. The strategic plan developed in the past two years identified that the use of Camp Teko is very crucial and important and it should be used more. Currently Camp Teko is limited to 165 campers because of the possibility of inclement weather and there is a wait list because the available slots fill up within two weeks. The congregation would like to include more campers. Currently 40 percent of campers come from the congregation and 60 percent from the wider community. The other component of the intensified use is the ability to offer different activities. This project will allow children to experience Camp Teko in a very different way, will teach them what it means to live on the land, and provide them with the experience of sleeping outdoors. Currently the program allows kindergarteners the opportunity to attend the camp and they would like to expand the program so middle schoolers can have their own experiences at the camp. There are very few bathroom facilities and those are clumped into one area. The reality is that a number of kids can fit in the lower level, but the bathrooms are on the upper level,which is not safe when there is inclement weather. The program center will have a teaching kitchen and bathrooms located on the bottom level. Ressler noted they are looking to intensify enrollment. Ressler asked whether they have a gauge as to how many that will be increased to. Zimmerman indicated no more than 200. Ressler asked whether the total number of structures will go from 16 to 21. Zimmerman noted many of the structures are not usable because they have not been upgraded. Camp Teko also offers sixth grade winter retreats and they are looking to enhance that programming as well. Rick Parker, Brandstetter Carroll, stated they are based out of Cleveland, Ohio, and that his career has focused on designing and improving camps around the country for the past 40 years. Parker stated to his knowledge as part of the overall project 11 new structures will be added and six buildings will be removed. A big part of the intensification is to provide more indoor space. Camp Teko currently has a dining hall, a bath house, and a small program facility,which means most of the time they are outside. The plan will provide a variety of indoor space with bathrooms as appropriate. The other element of the plan is improvement of the parking lot. To some degree there is some confusion about where to go once Page 11 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. they enter the parking lot and one of the proposed structures in the middle of the parking lot is a welcome center with bathrooms and an expanded pavilion. Part of what Brandstetter does when they look at properties is to access the physical conditions and make recommendations for renovations, but they also listen to the client when they talk about the activities currently being held at the camp. Brandstetter wants to make sure the experience on the property is rich and fulfilling. Park indicated he believes in a green and sustainable approach and that he is very conscious of the impact of what they do in a physical build environment to the land. A large portion of the property is wooded. Part of what they are looking for is to find a balance between minor tree removal and eliminating open activity spaces. The topography is rolling and is somewhat challenging. Some of the objectives are to make sure the children are safe as well as preserve some open spaces. The one encroachment into the bluff setback would allow for two new cabins. The plan is not proposing any construction in that area that requires substantial grading. At the end of the development, the topography will look basically the same with the exception of a few trees. As it relates to erosion, they will have geotechnical testing done to better understand the composition of the soils, and depending on what that is, it will determine what the foundation is. If it turns out the foundation has to go down 30 feet,they will not do that,but they have not gotten to that level of design yet. McCutcheon commented it appears they have made a big effort to reduce the impact to the trees. McCutcheon asked how tall the welcome center building will be. Parker indicated it will be approximately 28 feet high and will be placed over an existing hardcover tennis court. Ressler asked if the Planning Commission will be approving the Master Plan as is and not approving any of the individual structures. Oakden stated the Planning Commission would be approving it as is. Staff report contains five conditions, which requires them to have a building permit that is reflective of the Master Plan, and if there are any major changes to the Master Plan,they would need to come back before the Planning Commission. Oakden stated they would be approving the footprint,the general height of the buildings, and the general aesthetics of the building. Ressler asked if there are dimensions of each of the buildings included in the Master Plan. Oakden stated there are,but that this is a high-level look at the Master Plan. The Planning Commission could change the conditions that have been laid out by Staff. Ressler asked if they would be leaving anything out there for approval at a later date. Parker stated the hardcover analysis identifies by building the amount of structure. Parker stated he realizes this is a little unusual since they are requesting indefinite approval, but what they often see is that most Master Plans go out for 15 to 20 years because things change. Most likely at some point things will change. Most CUPs are set up for something that is longer term, especially for nonprofits, since it gives them time to raise the funds. Libby asked whether Mr. Parker will be involved in this project long-term. Page 12 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Parker indicated that is the goal. One of the first items they tell the client is that most of the buildings will likely need to have sprinklers. Bollis asked why the two new buildings cannot be pushed 10 feet to the north out of the bluff zone. Parker stated they did rotate the structure, but if those two buildings are pulled back farther, it will constrict the area between the two buildings to the point where it will be pretty crowded. One of the goals is to preserve that green space. Without making it a major structure,the building could be up about eight feet and still have the feeling of a treehouse, which is the reason for pushing it out there somewhat. Bollis stated even if the buildings were moved back ten feet to be outside of the setback, it appears they would still have the feeling of a treehouse. Parker stated if they are pushed back,the second building will encroach upon a fire circle that is surrounded by trees and the trees will need to be removed. Doepka noted on Page 44 of the report it appears the cabin is more of a vertical. Parker indicated what is on the screen is more accurate. The reason it has been oriented that way is to capture the southern sun because they would like to integrate solar panels at some point. Doepke stated it appears that at least have of the structures are supported by the beams underneath. Parker indicated that is correct. Bollis asked whether they could reduce the size of the building by ten feet. Parker stated they require all that indoor space and that reducing the size of the buildings would change that configuration and impact the function of the indoor space. Erickson stated he has a concern about the statement relating to the sanitary sewer treatment, including possibly two new connections to the public street. Erickson asked what type of sanitary treatment is currently being used or is proposed to be used. Parker indicated the site is connected presently to the municipal system. The line going from the dining hall pipe is not the size of the program center line and that the goal is to have a single line out to the road. Parker stated they have not gotten to that level of engineering yet. Erickson asked if their plan is that all effluent will end up in the municipal sewer. Parker indicated that is correct. Parker stated it will also be likely that some onsite water storage will be required for fire suppression since that is not connected to the municipal system. Libby stated many of the camps he attended were not new and that he can see the practical application of the proposal. Libby asked how many weeks of the year children will be at the camp. Zimmerman stated the current summer program is about eight to nine weeks and then five weekends for sixth graders. They would like to increase some of the weekend time in the fall and spring in order to Page 13 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. bring more of the school kids out to the camp to experience the different seasons. There is a caretaker who takes care of the buildings and Camp Teko also employs cooks, counselors,nurses, and administrative staff through the summer. During the weekends there are rabbis, administrators,and a cook on the site. The weekend camp goes from Friday afternoon to Sunday morning. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m. McCutcheon stated if you drive by Camp Teko, you barely know it is there, and that the applicant is only asking to increase it by18 percent over a period of years. If it was developed as a residential site, it would have a lot more massing, so from that point of view,the Master Plan does not seem too egregious. The storage shed does not seem unreasonable. McCutcheon noted normally the City does not allow setback deviations to the bluff and asked how much it exceeds the 30-foot setback. Thiesse indicated it looks to be seven to nine feet. McCutcheon stated the phasing in of the project is somewhat of a concern and that he does not want the project to become a burden to the neighbors,but none of the neighbors have come tonight to express any concerns. Oakden stated it appears the three buildings are set right at the bluff impact zone at different corners and are, at maximum,ten feet in. Libby stated as a practical matter, camps need to be maintained and making the improvements over time makes sense. Libby stated he does not really have a problem with the bluff and that the project and site is very non-intrusive, and traffic is not a problem. Erickson commented he is very supportive of the mission and making it more available to the public, but that he has some concerns with regards to both the bluff impact and the lakeshore setback. Stubbs Bay had three small rental cabins that were tied into an old septic tank that flowed into the lake periodically, which is why he questioned the septic system. Erickson stated he is concerned that the plan has relied too heavily on old buildings and putting a new building in the same location and that they have not seen a great deal of justification in terms of practical difficulties. The applicant has stated if the two buildings are farther apart, it would be less walkable, but that has never been applied as a practical difficulty. Erickson stated he would like to see major changes to the plan that respect the bluff and lakeshore. Bollis stated he would like to see some type of deadline placed on the Master Plan and that he also does not see a practical difficulty for the variance to the bluff. Doepke commented he supports the mission but that he does not see why it is not possible to move the cabins back from the bluff. Doepke stated it may be possible to move all three of the buildings to Page 14 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. maintain the distance between them. The other concern is the storage shed down by the swimming area. The size of that shed will be increasing, which would be less of an issue if the size was not increasing or if the profile of the shed from the lake would not be increased and possibly built back. Doepke stated he also would like some type of horizon on the proposal. Doepke stated he does not know what the deadline should be,but in his view there has to be some type of sunset date. Thiesse commented this is a great asset to the community and that he likes the concept but that he is struggling with the practical difficulty for the encroachments. The applicant is proposing two buildings on stilts in a bluff area, which the City really does not want, and there is some selective removal of the undercover in that area, which is also a concern. Thiesse stated he would like the applicant to try harder on relocating those buildings. As it relates to the storage shed in the 0-75 setback, Thiesse stated he does have difficulty with that variance since the City usually does not allow that. It appears the storage shed could be moved back. As far as the time extension,Thiesse stated he would like to do a look back in five years. Ressler asked whether the applicant would be agreeable to moving the boathouse. Zimmerman stated in her year five years is absolutely reasonable,but that they need to obtain the funding for the improvements and keep the camp going during that time. Parker stated the boathouse would store all the life jackets and other equipment the kids use at the beach. If the size of the structure stays the same,the life jackets and other items would likely be strewn around on the beach. The site goes up pretty dramatically at that point, which means the building would be pretty far up on the hill. There is 10 feet behind each of those elevation lines going up the hill. Parker stated they can certainly look at the orientation to minimize the appearance from the lake,but if a new structure is not allowed,they may have to leave what is there currently. Doepke asked if there is any foliage between the shed and the lake. Parker indicated it is buckthorn. Thiesse stated he was assuming the contours were one to two feet and that it is ten feet. Parker stated as it relates to the bluff,they can look at it and figure out if there is another option. Ressler asked what the dimensions of the boathouse are. Oakden indicated the dimensions were listed in the hardcover calculations and that to her knowledge it is 150 square feet, which is approximately 10' x 15'. Ressler stated he would like to see that located further up the hill as long as they are not hauling canoes up the hill. McCutcheon commented it is a camp and an asset to the community and that hauling lifejackets and other items up the hill might not be feasible. Page 15 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse stated he realizes there is a large wall down there and that perhaps they could incorporate some plantings to make the building less visible. Parker stated they will look at that, but that it would be a hardship to haul all of that equipment up the hill. Barnhart stated the first issue he heard tonight relates to the timing and that Staff would be fine with the five years. The purpose behind the timing was to avoid coming back every year to the Planning Commission for renewal of the variances. It would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to say they do not support the bluff variance since that provides feedback to the applicant and the City Council. The applicant can make changes prior to the Council meeting if they want. The last issue related to the shoreline, and similar to the bluff setback, it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to say they do not support it rather than trying to redesign it here. Ressler stated in his view five years is reasonable and that he does not have an issue with increasing the enrollment to 200. Ressler stated he hardly knew the camp was there when he was growing up and that the public apparently does not have a concern with the use expanding. Resler stated as it relates to the setback to the bluffs,he is struggling with that request, and that he would like to pass it as proposed for the Council to weigh in on that issue. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission can support the Master Plan and then identify areas of nonsupport for the bluff and the location of the storage shed. Approval or disapproval does not mean the applicant cannot supplement their answers to the City Council. Thiesse moved,McCutcheon seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000039, Brandstetter Carroll,Inc.,645 Tonkawa Road/Camp Teko, Conditional Use Permit,subject to a maximum enrollment of 200; granting of a variance for hardcover for the building located in the 0-75-foot setback; denial of the encroachment into the 30-footetback with the caveat that the applicant relocate the two buildings; and the imposition of a 5-year deadline on the proposed Master Plan,subject to conditions of Staff. Barnhart stated the Planning Commission is granting permission to continue to use the property indefinitely, but what it requires is that any new buildings that are not built within those five years would need to come back for renewal or an amendment to the conditional use permit. Doepke asked why Commissioner Thiesse is allowing the shed. Thiesse stated this is a camp and not a private residence. There is a steep slope in that area and there is already a wall there that the structure could be tied into. Ressler stated the structure also is not large. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1, Erickson Opposed. 6. LA19-000040 L. CRAMER BUILDERS& REMODELERS,3280 FOX STREET, INTERIM USE PERMIT,8:30 P.M.—8:58 P.M. Greg Jurvakainen, L. Cramer Builders,was present. Page 16 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Curtis stated a new home is being designed for building permit on the site. This project will involve the export of approximately 4,000 cubic yards of material in preparation for construction of a new home foundation and subgrade sport court area. The applicant proposes to export this from the site out of the City. The proposed home will not be out of character with the neighborhood. The applicant is not proposing to change the grade but rather remove excess material from the site. Public comments were received from the homeowners' association and are included in the packet. Staff recommends approval of the Interim Use Permit. Staff recommends the applicant provide photo documentation of the condition of the City's roads on the route prior to hauling. Repair to any damaged roadway will be the responsibility of the contractor. The Planning Commission had no questions for Staff. Greg Jurvakainen, L. Cramer Builders,stated they are planning to build a new home and are looking to export the fill that is coming from the subgrade sport court which is located partially under the garage but also comes out into the proposed auto port. The intent of City Code limits the grade not only on the lot but pool terracing, which limits the use of the excavated dirt on the site. As a result,the material has to be exported off the site. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. Libby noted only one written public response was received which recommended that the builder meet and discuss the project with the homeowners in the area and damage to the roadway,probably relates to the traffic involved with exporting the material. Libby asked whether any of those meetings have occurred. Curtis stated that individual is out of town. Jurvakainen indicated he did reach out to him and that he seemed to have the understanding that there was a homeowners' association. As a common courtesy, L. Cramer typically sends a letter to the neighbors, but there is actually not a homeowners' association in this case. Jurvakainen stated he understands the concern relating to damage to the road, but that he does not believe there is any homeowners' association tied to this home or an architectural review committee. Curtis stated Fox Street and Leaf Street is County Road 84 going over to Old Crystal Bay Road, which is a public road. This residence is the third lot in on the private portion of Fox Street and there currently is another home being built on that section of road. As far as the City is concerned,they want to maintain the public road as it is, but if it is a private road,the City is not going to enforce financial restitution on the builder and it is up to the residents to do that. Jurvakainen stated his understanding is that there is a loose handshake agreement relating to road maintenance and that his client would be more than prepared or happy to share in those costs. Page 17 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Libby stated even if there is no homeowners' association,he still wants to make sure he is sensitive to the handshake agreement. Jurvakainen noted the real estate agent reached out to the attorney and he commented that he knows of no reason why the buyer would not rely on what is discovered on examination of the title to the property, and upon examination of the title,there is no homeowners' association on file. L. Cramer will send a letter to the neighbors. Curtis stated she would not necessarily take the public comments as being opposed to the project but more as expressing a desire to have communication with the builder. The comments raised a question about a situation that may result in a need for some type of mitigation. Ressler stated perhaps Staff could help facilitate that discussion prior to this application going before the City Council. Thiesse noted it would be at least 300 truckloads and asked if there is a proposed route for the haul route. Jurvakainen indicated the haul route would be Fox Street and that the end destination is in Hopkins. The hauling could possibly be done in two weeks or it could extend over the duration of the project. McCutcheon asked if there is some type of fee that would be required as part of the project. McCutcheon stated on certain projects where there is a lot of activity,the streets do get damaged, but that he is not proposing anything. Erickson stated he would be in support of Staff's recommendation. Bollis indicated he would also support it. Doepke stated he would tend to support the application. Doepke asked whether there has been adequate consideration of the potential damage to the road and the impact on some of the neighboring homeowners. Homeowners' associations can be created and then fall into disrepair and that it is conceivable the neighbors would get upset if there was undue damage to the road as a result of the dump trucks coming in and out. Doepke stated he is wondering what kind of protection there is, noting that it is not right to ultimately assess the homeowners that are living on what is a private section of Fox Street, and whether that has been taken care of by this agreement. Curtis stated she is not aware of what agreement they have. Barnhart noted the City can address the road situation by inspecting it prior to the project but the City cannot charge a fee. Libby asked if there is a difference between a single-family development versus a development and how the City can enforce road conditions and construction traffic. Before the Planning Commission there have been decisions on developments where there has been a requirement of the builder or developer before and after. Page 18 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Curtis stated the City does inspect the roads prior to development project construction as a standard routine and the City's consulting engineer performs a video walkthrough of the public roads. The City also holds the public hearing tonight to allow for public comments. There has been a comment received from an interested neighbor and it is probably in the builder's best interest to do the photo documentation, especially given the other project on Fox Street. Libby stated he wants to be responsive to the concern raised by the neighbor and that he does not want to be insensitive to either the builder or the resident. Ressler noted the Planning Commission cannot rule based on what might happen to the road and that that condition can be included in the motion. Bollis asked if there is a public easement over the private section of roadway. Barnhart stated Staff would assume there is a public easement. Doepke asked if that illustrated portion of Fox Road is the section of private road. Curtis indicated it is. Barnhart stated the City has control over how they maintain public roads, but the City does not have control over maintenance of private roads. Libby stated he reads the public comment as they are objecting to the deterioration of the private road. That resident should know who pays for and maintains that section of road. Doepke questioned whether it is reasonable to assume that every resident on the road read the letter. Doepke asked to what extent the Planning Commission can approve this without conditioning it somehow. Barnhart stated the City received a comment and some commissioners have expressed concern about the road. It would be appropriate to include a condition the Planning Commission feels addresses that concern as a recommendation, and how the City Council chooses to deal with it will come next. Thiesse recommended the application be approved and that L. Cramer is a very reputable builder in the City. The other homes have used the road to build their homes and that this builder should be entitled to do the same. Ressler stated he agrees and that the neighbors will still have an opportunity to be heard at the public hearing at the City Council meeting. Barnhart noted the Planning Commission formally has the public hearing, and that while the City Council does allow public comments on applications,they do not necessarily hold a public hearing. Thiesse stated the City Council will have the same information as the Planning Commission. Ressler indicated he is okay with the application without any sort of amendments or modifications. Page 19 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Libby asked if there is a diagram of the haul route. Curtis stated it is not an actual map but a description of the route. Erickson indicated he is comfortable with Staffs recommendation and that the applicant should provide photo documentation of the haul route, with any necessary repairs being the obligation of the contractor. Erickson moved,Libby seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000040, L. Cramer Builders & Remodelers,3280 Fox Street, Interim Use Permit,subject to the applicant providing photo documentation of the road condition of the haul route within the City prior to commencement of the project. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1,Doepke Opposed. 7. LA19-000042 MATHEW JASPER, 1929 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD, INTERIM USE PERMIT,8:58 P.M.—9:15 P.M. Mathew Jasper,Applicant,was present. Oakden stated the applicant is requesting an interim use permit to export approximately 1,000 cubic yards of material as part of the construction of a new home. The property is at a downhill grade from the rear to the front. The proposed house has a tuck-under garage, which is creating the excessive material that needs to be hauled off the site. The applicant has submitted a haul route that shows it will be delivered to the Lakeview site. No single site will receive more than 500 cubic yards of fill. The developer has indicated they will be performing street sweeping. Planning Staff finds that the proposal meets the requirements of the interim use permit. The excavation of fill will be tied to the building permit. The City Engineer has reviewed the application and has provided comments to address hauling and road accessibility as well as surface water runoff. Staff did receive a comment from a neighbor regarding some runoff concerns and the City Engineer provided some comments to the resident. Planning staff recommends approval of the Interim Use Permit in accordance with the City Engineer's requirements. Thiesse asked if this is pre-building permit and is only for the hauling of the fill. Oakden indicated it is. Matt Jasper,Applicant, stated the reason for wanting to take out more fill is that he will go over the 10 percent grade on the driveway. Jasper stated he does know one of the neighbors is concerned about runoff and that the excavation will allow the driveway to be more level and not sit up as high, which will help with the runoff. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:02 p.m. Page 20 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Debra Crooks, 1932 Eagerness, stated she was the one who submitted the written comments. Crooks indicated she has had conversations with Mr. Jasper and that she and her husband are extremely concerned about the runoff because another home went in this past year that had approximately a half acre of woods that is now cleared of trees. Substantial work has been done to get their crawl space dry. In addition,their lot is very small. Crooks stated she does not want to stand in anyone's way,but that she is very concerned about the design and how the project goes. Ressler asked if the Watershed District would weigh in on this application at the time the home is built. Oakden stated the Watershed District will be in charge of erosion control measures and Orono's City Engineer would also review it for runoff mitigation. The City Engineer did make some recommendations concerning runoff and further communication can happen at the building permit stage. Oakden stated this is a challenging area since the other homes are uphill from Ms. Crooks given the natural grade of the land. The subject property is a buildable lot and the applicant is not requesting any variances. Due to the grade and the construction of the home,they are creating the fill and exporting it. Ressler asked if the Watershed District and the City Engineer have the ability to address the runoff if no variances are being requested. Oakden noted she is not sure to what degree the City Engineer and the applicant have discussed this, but the City Engineer does review every new home prior to it being built and he will help mitigate those runoff scenarios as best he can. Elaine Peterson, 1921 Fagerness, stated the house behind them that was allowed to be built has caused a considerable amount of runoff onto their property. That property owner removed all the vegetation on the lot and there are still open gutters. Peterson stated they are suffering because of that and they do not want to have another house doing the same thing. Jasper noted his house is in front of that house so it should not affect Ms. Peterson's property. Jasper indicated he did speak with Mr. Crook and his contractor is going to install a cistern in the back yard and then run the gutters into it. All the rainwater from the house will run to the back of the lot, down the gutters, and into the cistern. There will also be retaining walls alongside the driveway and the driveway will be bellowed to both sides. Jasper stated he is trying to make sure that he does not impose on anyone. Libby asked if he has a drainage plan. Jasper stated he does and that he is working with Denali Custom Homes. The plan has already been looked at by the Watershed District and approval has been received from them. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:12 p.m. Ressler noted the Planning Commission is just weighing in on the removal of the dirt. Thiesse commented it is a good use of the property and the dirt needs to be removed in order to construct the house. Page 21 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Doepke stated he is in agreement with that, and that the removal of the dirt will help lessen the slope and cause the runoff to be less and less likely to flow across the street. Bollis indicated he is in favor of the IUP to remove the dirt. Erickson stated he is in support of Staffs recommendation for the IUP and the recommendation regarding approval of the encroachment agreement. Libby stated he is in favor. McCutcheon stated neighbor input is good and that the applicant is taking steps in that direction. As far as the removal of the dirt, McCutcheon stated he is in support of the IUP. Ressler stated he appreciates the comments of the neighbors and that the neighbors and City are looking at improving the situation. Ressler indicated he is in favor of the application. Libby moved,Bollis seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. LA19-000042, Mathew Jasper, 1929 Fagerness Point Road, Interim Use Permit in accordance with the City Engineer's requirements and approval of the encroachment agreement for retaining walls within the right-of- way to stabilize the existing grade on the property. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. Libby encouraged the applicant to instruct his haulers to go slowly on the City roads. 8. LA19-000043 VUJOVICH DESIGN-BUILD,951 SPRING HILL ROAD,VARIANCE,9:15 P.M.—9:32 P.M. Greg Krause, Vujovich Design-Build, was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting approval of a lake setback variance to permit removal of an existing upper deck and construction of a one-stall garage addition and deck stair extending as much as 2.8 feet into the 100-foot lake setback of the north side of Long Lake. Long Lake is classified by the DNR as a recreational development lake. Properties served by City sewer have a required 75-foot setback requirement from the OWHL. However,this property,which is served by a private septic system, must meet a 100-foot setback from the lake. Staff finds that the location of the existing home, which encroaches into the rear setback and is right at the 100-foot setback,makes it difficult to make modifications or additions to and around the home. The property is wide but relatively shallow. In addition,there is a 23-foot elevation difference between the lake level and the home,which offers a feeling of open space and screening from any visual impacts resulting from the addition and the home. The applicant's proposal is to construct a single-stall garage addition on the west side of the home up to three feet into the 100-foot setback. Due to the elevation change from the lake level to the home level,the addition will not be visually apparent when viewed from the lake. Staff finds that there are special conditions relating to the existing home and property which support granting the requested lake setback variances for the garage and deck stair. Page 22 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. To date no public comments have been received. Planning Staff recommends approval. Curtis displayed an aerial photograph of the lot,noting that the lot is narrow or shallow. Thiesse asked if the 100-foot setback for a structure was put in place to also prevent drain fields from being within that setback as well. Curtis stated she is not sure if that is true or not. Erickson asked whether there is a municipal sewer line in Spring Hill Road. Curtis stated there does not appear to be. Doepke asked if the addition will come out from the house toward the lake. Ressler stated that would probably be better answered by the applicant. Bollis asked what the rear yard setback is. Curtis indicated it is 50 feet. Greg Krause, Vujovich Design-Build, stated this is an interesting lot,thin and narrow, and that they are looking at doing a single-car garage addition on the southwest corner of the home. A roof deck will extend on top of that creating additional outdoor space. The resident will be turning 86 years old this summer and they are looking to create an easy to access outdoor space. Doepke asked if the deck is going across the front of the garage. Krause indicated that is correct. Doepke asked why they cannot extend the garage to the west in an amount sufficient to be outside the setback. Krause stated they did explore different shapes of the garage and different locations, but what might look fine on an elevation view does not always work with the elevation. The architectural intent is to keep the the rhythm of some of the larger stone columns on the outside of the home. Thiesse stated the driveway would also not be very conducive to making the turn if it is pulled forward. Libby asked what the cost differential would be building a two-car garage straight out from the existing garage. Krause stated there are a couple of issues with that, and one is the turn-around. The other issue is that it is very expensive, and this is one of those cases where the garage is unique and there are complications due to integrating it into the existing roof. Page 23 of 24 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Monday,June 17,2019 6:30 o'clock p.m. Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 9:28 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 9:28 p.m. McCutcheon stated he agrees with Staff and that there is a practical difficulty due to the shape of the lot. Libby stated he would concur with that and that it is a good use of a relatively small area. Erickson stated he appreciates the applicant's efforts to minimize the intrusion into the setback. Bollis stated he sees the practical difficulty and that he likes the effort to minimize the intrusion. Doepke indicated he does not have a problem with the application. Thiess indicated he is in agreement. Ressler stated the project is not egregious and that the applicant has made some good points about the encroachment into the setback. Doepke moved, Libby seconded,to recommend approval of Application No.LA19-000043, Vujovich-Design-Build on behalf of Joanne Pastel,951 Spring Hill Road, lake setback variance. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. 9. UPDATE ON MAY 13,2019, CITY COUNCIL MEETING Barnhart reported on the following actions taken by the City Council: • Approved Mr. Bollis's preliminary plat on Consent. • Approved the variance at Ivy Place for replatting of Outlot A on Consent. • Approved the 2040 Comprehensive Plan but there might be further discussion this summer/fall on potential amendments. • The right-of-way vacation question at 4300 North Shore Drive was approved with Staff being directed to draft language in the resolution requiring an escrow and compensation. • The variance on Luce Line Ridge was denied but Staff was directed to bring back potential changes to the accessory structure code. ADJOURNMENT i •55 L� P Libby moved,Thiesse seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 9• p.m. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0. ATTEST: Jon Ressler, Chair Page 24 of 24