Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-16-1990 Planning MinutesMINUTES OF THE APRIL 16, 1990 ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ATTENDANCE 7:02 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present; Chairman Kelley and Planning Commissioners Johnson, Bellows, Hanson, Cohen and Moos. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Peterson was also present, as was Councilmember Callahan. 11516 MR. S MRS. WHITNEY MACMILLAN 1560, 1580 and 1620 FOX STREET PRELIMINARY ru?5DIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:02 P.M. TO 8:07 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. MacMillan were present for this matter. Also present were Mr. Larry Hanson of Schoell & Madson, Mr. Herb Baldwin, Landscape Architect, and Mr. Jack Taylor, Attorney. Gaffron explained the MacMillan's subdivision proposal. Mr. Baldwin stated that the main objective of this entire procedure is to build a house for the MacMillan's, not to subdivide property. Mr. Baldwin indicated the approximate location >..f tne new residence. He stated that the subdivision is necessary to facilitate the sale of the MacMillan's existing home. Mr. Baldwin said, "The Macflillan's wish to maintain as much of the existing character as possible. The intent is to preserve the land." Larry Hanson stated that they would prefer to use the existing driveway alignment for Outlot C. He said, "The alignment proposed by the Orono City Engineer may cause problems due to the steep grade. If the road were constructed as we are proposing, a two-acre parcel would remain on the lake side of the outlot. It would allow extra land on the other side to be combined and added with another site if that were the case. The platting of this property will help to simplify the legal descriptions of the parcels. The site contains 50 acres which is fairly low density for the number of houses located in this area." Gaffron noted that each of the new proposed lots that are less than 5 acres do have tested drainfield sites. Gaffron also noted that the existing house that is shown with the property line of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, through the center will be removed. Gaffron asked if the MacMillan's intended to remove the other structures (the caretaker homes). Larry Hanson replied that is correct. - 1 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1516-MACMILLAN CONTINUED ^ ^ Gaffron located an existing tennis court and stated that it is between 15' and 2'i' from the lot line. Bellows observed that once the house (1620 Fox Street) is removed there will be no principle structure as required if the tennis court is to remain. In regard to the proposed alignment for Outlot C, Gaffron said, "The City Engineer prefers not to have the Outlot dead end in the middle of someone's lot. However, the proposed outlot follows the logical progression along the existing driveway and from a topography standpoint, it may be the best location. The City Engineer did not like the idea of ending the road against a prooerty line of a fully developed lot. The point is well taken that further development of that lot could occur if it is combined with property to the north." Kelley asked Gaffron what the City Engineer is recommending to address c’ne slopes if his alignment is used. Gaffron replied that the City Engineer has not commented about the feasibility of putting the road in that location. Mr. Taylor said, "The MacMillans and the property owners to the rear are concerned about upgrading the road between the MacMillan's driveway and the back end. This plat is not increasing any use at all in that area. They would like the gravel road to remain as is.** Kelley asked how many houses will exist on the road when this proposal is completed. Gaffron counted 6 houses that will be served by this road. Bellows asked Gaffron what the is the status of the existing driveway from Fox Street to the entrance of the MacMillan subdivision. Gaffron replied that the entire private road system is \^ithin private easements rather than on a platted outlot. Bellows said, "Given that the proposed subdivision does abut a public roadway, the subdivision could achieve access from a public road. Why is the driveway being used as an alternative. I think that should be clarified for the record. Baldwin explained that the use of the private road is only being increased by the addition of one house. He said. The MacMillan's have a strong desire to maintain the high degree of privacy. Also, with the wetland and the slopes and the limited area we have for on-site septic systems, we would make a mess of - 2 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1516-MACMILLAN CONTINUED the existing maple woods if we tried to put a road through to the public road. The-e is also the fact that other parties, other than the MacMillans are involved with the ownership of these properties." Bellows asked how access to Outlot A will be achieved. Larry Hanson stated that Outlot A does not meet standards for a buildable lot at this time, which is whv it has been designated as an outlot. Johnson observed that Lot 1, Block 1, appears to be a buildable lot and asked what purpose it will serve. Larry Hanson replied, "Though that lot is large enough, there is no intention to build there. That parcel was brought into the subdivision because part of it was needed to enlarge Lot 2." Bellows asked why it could not be combined with Lot 2. Mr. Taylor explained that there are different entities involved. Kelley stated that though the City Engineer may have good reasons for his alignment of Outlot C, it did not make sense. Gaffron asked for the Planning Commission's opinion regarding the cul-de-sac. Kelley stated that the cul-de-sac will run by the front of the Norton house. Bellows asked if it would be possible to locate the cul- de-sac further south where the grade is more flat. Baldwin stated that the MacMillans have a large garden in that area. Mrs. MacMillan asked why the cul-de-sac could not be located in Outlot B. Kelley stated that there are steep slopes in that area. Gaffron informed Bellows that placing the cul-de-sac more to the south may interfere with drainfield sites. Kelley asked if it would be sensible to take half of the cul de-sac from the Nortons and the other half from the MacMillans. Bellows interpreted the City Engineer's recommendation to - 3 - ; I MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1516-MACMILLAN CONTINUED include only the dedication of the cul-de-sac at this time. Gaffron’s interpretation is that the cul-de-sac be constructed at this time. Gaffron stated that clarification will be necessary. Larry Hanson said, "I have a strong suspicion that no matter where the cul-de-sac is located, once future development occurs, it will be in the wrong place." Kelley stated that it would not make sense to move the cul“ de-sac down toward to Fox Street. Bellows stated that perhaps the cul-de-sac does not make sense. Gaffron stated that from a safety aspect and the requirements of the Building Code, a cul-de-sac should be included. Gaffron asked Larry Hanson how wide the gravel portion of the road is. Larry Hanson replied that the gravel portion is 16' w,le. Kelley quickly reviewed the issues involved with this application. The Planning Commission agreed that the grade is too steep to realign the Outlot as proposed by the City Engineer. Kelley observed that the existing 16* paved portion of the driveway will serve more houses than the gravel portion of the road. The City is asking that the gravel portion be constructed to meet City standards which require a 24' or 26' paved width. In regard to the tennis court, Kelley stated that it should be removed. Moos, Cohen, Kelley, Bellows and Johnson agreed that the cul de-sac is not necessary. Kelley stated that Outlot C should be aligned along the entrance of the new lot. Johnson suggested that Outlot C not be upgraded until Outlot B is developed. Bellows, Kelley, Hanson, and Moos agreed with Johnson. Cohen favored upgrading Outlot C to a 24 foot width. Johnson stated that Lot 1, Block 1, still c.-i-jented ? problem because of the fact that it is a buildable Iwt. - 4 - II I I i . .P»IL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING minutes of APRIL ior ZONING FILE #1516-MACMILLAN CONTINUED achieved from the Bellows said, "The within this subdivision, west, rather than being served y ^ buildable site, If it is the intention -oj: ,, an outlot7" then why cannot the lot oe aes ywny - - . . 1 H Mr. Taylor rrfaen*':^ -l“s"etaA;o. - a^n^'^Jarlarion ol LHar »ouia require their approval. - . ait-oadv served by a driveway Kelley stated "hat Lot 1 i ^ approval from the west. «« developed that it continue to be t^rvtd ?;irthe exVstfn, driveway to the west. Mabusth asked what purpose Outlot A serves.MaDUSun -- - - Taylor explained ^^^^/iTnT tbt'" lakeshM^ The °""S” ^roSurt^r-ce^rthriaXesLre and the portion to the west of lake . 4. A ?«“uGh sr^rclf “o^"s -rVted^Tinruuyii — With respect -. ^ combined with the adjacent property common ownership. • „ woaiiv no need to do that. Larry Hanson said that ^g^e created so MacMillans foutrrate‘?t^ti°e“^i“^th^ -ropertr«rti ?he caretaKer structure. . . — __ _«.;ocion that uarw^ — ^ - 4-Uo c *.v,ro Planning Commission that tne It was the consensus °£ ^ sjg9ested allowing a tennis „^™?tructurrto be removed, a realignment of the iirirne^^or'rhe^cJnftructfo: of a principal structure. _ _ujorc XH0 $ to de^/ermLf its" " be given the opportunityven cne -- - -- Gaffron ^^aflt'tould'L^a^ accesso?r°trScture wi^h^no^'priJcipa^^ s^'tructure. ^ vear for the accessoryBellows suggested allowing one year f strucfuie to con^rm or be removed.ture CO princfpai"Lr"u«u “1hfu!5 ^""r^mS^^d^rtiS't^ "t£r!ss«ncrof a - 5 - f 1 I , \ A ' 0. ifi 1990 planning: rOMMISSIOW MEETING minutes of APRIL 16, 193U f schadu^ri" .V.V.elfT.l appUcii«'s mother is being settled. Taylor stated that it he have to rreaulJed^oTes" ve th^ho^s^ and the tennis court. Cohen said that Mr.. Taylor's statement put new light on the information presented this evening. T • «-hP,i- there are other heirs involved and ti:rde?ffioi^to%\^mo%rthe"^^ is not solely his to mahe. Bellows suggested tabling this_^ allows said information Pt®®®"hed a P probably be amenable to that the of time to remove the principal recommending an extension structure. ir ,4 ^n see the house removed prior to the Johnson preferred to s®® indicated that such a -rorrrmanf is^^ciifis?ah^po\Vcy of the City and there should be no exception. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was continue . It was Motion, Planning Commissioner Hanson, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passec. #1517 WHITNEY MACMILLAN 1560 FOX STREET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT __ o aq P M ‘’“®“5he^fidaviro£'p^bUca;ion Ini certificate of Mailing were duly noted. the information pertaining to the MacMi^tf^s^-ap/ucluo^n ^''^hlarge an existing pond. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. hv Planning Commissioner Cohen,It was moved by Pla 9 recommend approval of the Planning Commissioner ' reconstruction of an existing conditional use graff's conditions 1 through 6.artificial pond, subDect to statt - 6 - 11 1 MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1517-MACMILLAN CONTINUED Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1502 MICHAEL HILBELINK 2180 PROSPECT AVENUE VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:10 P.M. TO 8:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Hilbelink was present for this matter. Mr. and Mrs. Jentilucci and their Attorney, Neil Heikkila, were also present. Mabusth briefly reviewed the information and recommendations from the City Engineer resulting from the March 19 Public Hearing. Mabusth referred to a letter that she had sent the Jentiluccis. Mr. Jentilucci had not received the letter due to an incorrect address. Mr. Heikkila explained the specific concerns of his clients. These concerns are also addressed in Mr. Heikkila's April 12, 1990 letter to the City of Orono. Mrs. Jentilucci stated that Mr. Hilbelink is going to build the new house and sell it. She questioned how the new property owners will be notified of their drainage concerns. Mabusth stated that if the lot area variance is granted, it would be subject to certain conditions. Mabusth said that a permit is required for any type of land alteration. The City will now be aware of the drainage concerns and will carefully review any land alteration applications to assure that those concerns are addressed. Kelley suggested that the Planning Commission only address the lot area variance due to the uncertainty of the house that is to be constructed. Kelley said that the City can require that the drainage requirements and setbacks be met as part of the building permit process. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the puoiic hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commissioner Cohen, to recommend approval of the lot area variance for 2180 Prospect Avenue. The hardship is that the lot has been assessed for sanitary sewer and was previously a buildable lot. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. - 7 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING #1508 DONALD OLSON 4590 NORTH ARM DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE pUBLIChBEARINGJ = 26J.«.JOc8 = 30^P.H. duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Olson were present. Gaffron reviewed the information presented in his April 12, 1990 memo. MS. Barbara Dunsmore, 420 North Arm Drive, expressed concern regarding the possibility of the horses being housed in front of the Olson's house. object to a condition that the horses and pasture area be located behind Olson's house. Mr. Olson stated that he had no intentions of housing the horses in front of his house. He said that he was taking this step first to see whether he could have horses on the property before he invested in the construction of a barn. had any standardsBellows questioned whether the City pertaining to proper sheltering of animals. Gaffron stated that the City did not have such standards. Bellows asked whether a requirement that the shelter be suitable for all seasons could be incorporated into the provisions of the conditional use permit. Kelley opined that such regulating was beyond the Planning Commission's realm of responsibility. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recommend approJal of the conditional use permit for Donald Olson to keep up to 2 horses on his property provided the a^ new, all season structure meeting proposed hope shelpr Standards and that both the animal enclosure and pasture be behJnr?^ Une of the ekisting house. Hanson questioned whether Staff had the proper knowledge regarding the housing of hopes zo Jnforce such provision. Oaffron stated that do some research. Motion, Ayes-3, Johnson, Hanson and Kel y. Nay, Motion failed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to recommend - 8 - ■l MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1508-DONALD OLSON CONTINUED approval of the conditional use permit for Donald Olson to keep up to 2 horses on his property provided that both the animal housing structure and pasture be kept behind the line of the existing house. Motion, Ayes-4, Bellows and Moos Nay, Motion passed. 11509 EARL FREEMAN 4545 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:37 P.M. TO 8:39 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing ware duly noted. Mr. Freeman was not. present for this matter, nor was there a representative on his behalf. Mabusth reviewed the information in her April 11, 1990 memo regarding this application for variances for an existing accessory structure. Mr. Thomas Hallquist, 415 Deborah Drive, stated that he was concerned about public safety due to the condition of the accessory structure, well and storm cellar. Mr. Hallquist stated that the structure could remain if it was cleaned up. Hanson concurred with Mr. Hallquist and said that he would be willing to give Mr. Freeman a limited amount of time to entirely clean up the site. He suggested June 30, 1990. Johnson asked if it was Mr. Freeman's intention to sell the property. Mabusth stated that she understood that to be his intention. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Johnson, to recommend approval of the variances to maintain the accessory structure, conditioned on the following: That the site be completely cleaned, all debris and safety hazards removed by June 30, 1990. If this condition is met, the structure may remain with no principal structure until June 30, 1991. Bellows asked why Hanson was providing such an extended period of time. Hanson stated that Mr. Freeman resides out of State and that may cause more delays than if he resided close by. Motion, Ayes-2, Nays-4, Motion failed. Hanson suggested that staff inspect the site and make a list of all the items on the site that pose a safety hazard and should be removed. - 9 - . ! i< l ! f ! I \ If MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 70NING FILE #1509“FREEMAN , Cohen stated that Mr. Freeman should be asked to verify that he has insurance coverage for the property. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recommend aooroval of the variance to maintain the accessory structure orovided that the lot is cleaned up and all items within the structure removed by June 15, 1990. If this condition is met, the structure may remain until December 31, 1990, subject to conditions 1 and 4 of staff's memo and that the structure remain emotv at all times. Proof of insurance and the name of a local aqent must be provided by June 15, 1990. Motion, Ayes-4, Hanson, Johnson, Nay. Hanson vo‘-ed nay due to the time frame. Johnson voted nay due to the time frame and his preference to allow the structure to be used for reasonable storage. #1510 RICHARD W. BROWN 2685 SHADYWOOD ROAD GUEST APARTMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:45 P.M. TO 8:55 *» M. r « -i- The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Richard E. Brown, son of the applicant and purchaser of this property, was present. Gaffron explained the applicant's proposal and the facts regarding the property. Kelley said there is not much that can be done to correct the encroachment into the average lakeshore setback area. Kelley objected to the removal of non-structural hardcover in exchange for structural hardcover. Cohen, Johnson, and Bellows concurred. Mr. Brown stated that he did not understand the issue of hardcover. Gaffron stated that more than likely the applicant will opt to remove hardcover from the driveway and/or sidewalks in order to maintain the 25% allowed. Bellows stated that there is no access to the apartment through the primary residence as required. Gaffron showed where the apartment accesses are located. Gaffron suggested giving the applicant an opportunity to provi e an interior access. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was continued. - 10 - # HINUTES or APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING “Jdey Lo table this. „own stated that be .ould URe tbe matter tabled It was moved Motion, #1511 CITY OF ORONO ^“®“5b"oai?i'o£'puWicatiin and Certificate of MarUn, were Tere'were no coMMents frob tbe public reGardln, tbis batter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by rtco^e^f "approv\\^ th^ -;:Srtrona^Tsr P^r“t /nd"r,. setbacR variance. Motron. Ares- 4, Nays-0, Motion passed. II512 STEVEN RUCE Jf^Ir-?h 14^?^co SS??ional use pe^it P«®^"5hfJ?fidaviro^PubUca;ion ;nd Certificate of MaiUng were duly noted. «e,i- for this public hearing.Mr. Ruce was present for tnis p Mabusth “p"^r?c/a’HobVoccrp«ion License. Kelley asRed «r if ^^e «»ercial^use of ^tbrs proper^^ rrJenbou^%-«^^^ntAn?sued. ^ “a r^a ir^u^^id"1or ;rwin\“p^Untno;se “uJf|s% ?Flrder Vo" :^^e" ^Oe^'^rusH^ss prom ,'^r ' T^be" s°e"co1.'’d" r“a ”on'1oJ"tbe 3«0en is that^I^ab^lntereste^ irVVowibG PlAb-I jan ^^rVaVdVn aestbetica^^^^^ ^pleasins • ^h^onl^‘"intake I^made^.jl^s^th^ Iji Jp^^ed. It was due to my ow^ignorance more than anything." - 11 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1515-RUCE CONTINUED Kelley asked Mr. Ruce if he employs persons and if so, if they leave their vehicles at his house to go to various work sites. Mr. Ruce replied, *'I have employees tuat come to the site and we take vehicles from the site. I have hired a person to work on the garden itself, but he is not an employee of my business and does not work for my clients. Hanson stated that he views the construction of the additional garage as an intensification of the site and that concerns him. He said that the expansion of the garden does not trouble him, but rather it is an appropriate use of the land. Hanson said that the Code does not work well if it makes no provision for addressing the issue of vehicles being left at the site by employees. Mabusth stated that vehicles are not to be parked on the site. Mabusth suggested that the Home Occupation may be more acceptable if the company vehicles were taken home by the employees rather than stored on this lot. She said that it is the way the applicant's home occupation is conducted that violates the intent of the Ordinance. Mabusth suggested that staff could work with Mr. Ruce to make revisions in the way the business is run. Mr. Laverne Dunsmore, a neighbor, stated that Mr. Ruce's property is beautiful and has been enhanced tremendously. Mr. Jim Steffinson, a neighbor to the west, sa..d, "Steve's business is unlike any other. He is not a landscaper, he is a gardner and is very low key. You can talk to any of the neighbors and they will all agree that Mr. Ruce has very little impact on the neighborhood. It is a beautiful area and we would like it to remain." There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was continued. Bellows indicated that she was only concerned with the trucks and the employees. Kelley indicated that he is concc'rned about employees going to work at a residential site. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Cohen, to table this to allow time for staff to work with the applicant. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. - 12 - minutes op APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING #1513 WALTER KRAHL 4775 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCES « « «PUBLIC HEARING 9:15 P.M. TO 9:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Gaffron reviewed the information and issues pertaining to this application for hardcover and street setback variances. Hanson asked what the hardship is. Gaffron said that the lot is just under 1/2 an acre and is located in the 1 aero zone. He also stated that there are steep slopes on either side of the house. iiaSliiiSllfll the lake if the rock and plastic was allowed to remain. Mrs. Krahl added that they have a very tiny kitchen and dining room. They have been trying to plan this addition over the course of 5 years. Mr. Krahl noted that they are adding 4* to the bedroom addition on the other end of the house because there f:urrently no alternate way to exit that room. He said that windows are very small as the house was constructed prior t Building Code requiring them to be larger. Johnson asked if the house existed prior to the platting of County Road 19. Gaffron showed that at one time the Krahl's property extended to the middle of County Road 19 of-wav was less. When the road was platted Krahl s lost approximately 5 to 10 additional feet of their property. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was continued. Johnson stated that this lot is unique because of the steep slopes and the shared driveway arrangement. he believed that runoff would occur rapidly regardless of whether there is g or structural hardcover. Kelley stated that he would not be in favor of such addition. He said that he might look favorably upon an addition that equals the size of the concrete patio. - 13 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1513-KRAHL CONTINUE Bellows concurred with Kelley in that the addition is ambitious for the size of the lot. Johnson asked how many square feet the addition will add to the house. Gaffron calculated that the addition will add approximately 900 s.f. to the size of the house. Kelley s fifty percent. .. ..••t the footprint of the house would increase Hanson stated that this is one of those sites that probably should not be improved. The lot is developed to its capacity. Cohen stated that he would have difficulty approving this because it is trading non-structural hardcover that could be removed for permanent hardcover. Johnson agreed that the addition is ambitious. It was moved by Bellows to recommend denial of the lardcover and street setback variances for Walter Krahl to construct an addition. Gaffron suggested asking the applicant if he would prefer to table this and bring back a less ambitious plan. Mr. Krahl requested tabling and Bellows withdrew her motion. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Cohen, to tc'ble this application. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1514 RONALD HILLER 270 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:35 P.M. TO 9:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Miller was present for this public hearing. Gaffron reviewed the facts and issues involved with this application for a height variance for an accessory barn. Gaffron noted that it is the applicant's intention to move a barn onto his property from the Panuska property. Kelley asked Gaffron if he had heard anything further from the property owners on Harrington Circle. Gaffron stated that he had received several acknowledgment forms from residents on Harrington Circle. The owners of 253 Harrington Circle indicated that they object to a barn in a residential neighborhood because it will be higher than the - 14 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1514-HILLER CONTINUED There were no conunents from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Hanson asked how much fill Mr. Miller intends to bring onto the property. Mr. Miller did not know. Kelley stated that if this application is approved Mr. Miller should have these specifications prior to Council revie . "iuej slid thal he would like Hr. Miller to submit site elevations depicting the floor level of the barn. whether the floor level is going to be above or below street level. Mr. Miller replied, "It is going to be 18" above the level of the road." Bellows agreed with Kelley. She said that a height variance cannot be ^determined without topographical information specifically showing the elevation of the barn floor compared t the house. Johnson suggested that the Planning Commission require that the floor level of the barn be the same as the house. Bellows suggested tabling this. appiiJItir. "“^rl ilStllfed lLr“br%'arr mV^lo “bl a?aUable to him if this is tabled. Hanson withdrew his motion. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Hanson, to recommend approval of the height variance for an accessory barn thlt the applicant submit a topographic survey placing the barn on the lot one week prior to Council review. The height of the barn shall be no more than 4' above the height of the * Councilmember Callahan stated that it may be appropriate to gr a height variance for an existing barn He questioned, however, whether it was the intention of the Planning Commission to allow the height Miller construct a barn structure. Kelley stated that the h g vlrillcl wm only apply to the existing structure being moved from the Panuska property. Any ®®* Kellev may construct, must conform to the height asked if the Planning Commission would give Mr. Miller a variance - 15 - .5 i MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE 11514-RONALD MILLER CONTINUED if more than 100 cubic yards of fill is needed to maintain the height. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that such a variance would be granted. Johnson amended his motion to include those provisions, Hanson seconded. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. (Bellows departed at this point) Gaffron noted that the applicant had submitted a letter which made reference to the potential need to construct a barn structure should the Panuska barn be unavailable. Gaffron stated that he had not addressed that issue with the applicant. He asked that Mr. Miller be given the right to come back to the Planning Commission with the same application if the Panuska barn is not available. Kelley stated that he would not object if the City Administrator agrees. Kelley noted however, that he will not recommend approval for a variance for a new structure. #1515 JEFFREY JOHNSON 3825 CHERRY AVENUE CONDITION USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:54 P.M. TO 9:58 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Johnson removed himself from any discussion or voting of this matter in the capacity of a Planning Commissioner. Mabusth reviewed the information contained in her memo dated 4/12/90. She noted that the Hennepin County Property Description office has confirmed that they will approve the legal combination of these parcels. Mabusth stated that the property is divided by an unimproved platted right-of-way. She said that vacating the right-of-way would not be beneficial to the applicant. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Hanson, to recommend approval of the variances reguested to provide riparian access and a dock for 3825 Cherry Avenue based on the hardships set forth by the applicant and subject to conditions 1 through 4 in staff's memo dated 4/14/90. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Johnson abstained. Motion passed. #1518 BIG ISLAND VETERAN'S CAMP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 10:00 P.M. TO 10:02 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. - 16 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ZONING FILE #1518-BIG ISLAND CONTINUED Mr. Alan Wisdorf, a member of the Board of Governors, was present. Mabusth referred to her 4/12/90 memo regarding information and staff's concerns regarding this application. Mr. Wisdorf explained that the cabins will not be accessible to the handicapped. The plan is to construct the basic cabins at this point and add the water and kitchen facilities at a later time. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for expansion of the overnight camping use, allowing 5 cabins to be included in the overnight tent camping area based on site plan included as Exhibit "J". Approval is also recommended for the variance allowing pier foundations instead of standard block foundations. Approval is based on conditions 1 through 10 of staff's memo dated 4/12/90. Kelley asked if the applicants have met all requirements set forth in previous resolutions. Mabusth replied that they have. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1520 GERRY ft DIANE CARLSON 3165 CASCO CIRCLE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 10:03 P.M. TO 10:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Gaffron reviewed the information and issues involved with this application. Kelley asked if the hardcover calculations included only the area around the pool, not the water surface. Gaffron stated that is correct. It was increase of acceptable. the consensus of the Planning Commission that an 6% hardcover in the 75-250' setback area is not Kelley stated that the Planning Commission has consistently denied requests to encroach beyond the average lakeshore setback line. Hanson noted that in this case, the encroachment occurs with a grade level structure. - 17 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING set.ac. was not a concern. Mr Jeffrey Anderson, Architect, explained that the increase in the 75-?50' hardcover occurs mainly because of the garage and driveway. He said, "We feel w? have improved the situation. VJe eUmtna^'til'nT^^he "need'’^^^ onto Ca^sco^. we^Tavl^improved the safety factors. However, we had to increase the hardcover in order to do that." Kelley agreed that the safety conditions would improve. Kelley stated that he would approve the new garage provided that hardcover is maintained at 25%. Kelley stated that this is an intensification of the property. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Hanson asked the Carlsons if they would prefer to have this matter tabled to allow them to revise their plan. Ms. Carlson stated that she would prefer to proceed to Council. Gaffron noted that should the Carlsons proceed only with the proposal for the garage and driveway, they will still exceed 25 hardcover. He asked the Planning Commission for direction. Kelley said if the old garage is torn down, the new garage must conform to the standards. Kelley suggested constructing a two-car garaga rather than a three-car garage. Mr. Carlson stated that he had received a letter from the City at the time they obtained the permit for the addition. e said that the letter offered the opinion that a request for a three-car garage and 27% - 28% hardcover would appear to be reasonable. Gaffron stated that the City would not have made such statements without a disclaimer. Mr. Carlson said that there were full disclaimers, but that for the pool. 25%. Kelley reiterated his position that hardcover not exceed was moved by Cohen, seconded oy Kelley, to recommend - 18 - . -- -- .mam minutes of APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING EONING .1520. Motion, ty2s-4, Nay-0, Hanson abstained. (Cohen departed at this point) SKETCH PLAN REVIEW #1519 FULLERTON PROPERTIES "^•■“L““«TraTs'"3af“elent tor this review, as was Mart Gronberg# Surveyor. M- Pr.nks stated that it was not appropriate for staff to request-that r'oadToThe "00'^. said”\hat loSnp'preferred that there access Comity «^°adj ,^^«r. SinTthrstuthern pJlperty at the ti.e it is subdivided. 11 oi-rai-orf hhat if a loop road were constructed to County H the City would probably, at some point, maintain it. Ke?tey asked Franks hoS that would affect the homeowners association• Franks replied that the homeowners could vote to disband the association. Hanson asked if the private road would be constructed to City standards. Franks replied that it would be constructed to City standards. road to the south. , a-eiki ♦-hin- hhe existinq out-buildings located on the lot with" the"°original homestead will be remov^^^^^^ 'corfor"2irh''\\“l ho.es that will be constructed in this subdivision. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 19, 1990 to approve the Mlnuti^ “o7 199T"tfahSLr “ol'ission-«eetinq. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. PLANNING^C0MMISSIJ9N would attend the May 14, 1990 Council Meeting. - 19 - MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING I ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Johnson, to adjourn the meeting. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.