HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-19-2001 Planning Commission Minutes PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE -/ /"C
❑ COUNCIL
1 PLANNING COMMISSION PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED
❑ PARK COMMISSION BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS.
❑ OTHER
PRESENT FOR (from agenda)
NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER
1. c K-y Atvb At/b Jo1w Nk 0Aftb)- z r 7 cA c o Oar kct
2.'_ ,L (AIL( 7 it 3 1,/
3. IV l i 4 r f'P;1�-✓�-- �1>y.:."`-G7
4. N A1"(_jk \J � oa • pcik Dr , c IZOivo
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
X:\APPS\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\FORMS\PUBLIC.ATT
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
ROLL
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present:
Chair Elizabeth Hawn, Commissioners Jeanne Mabusth, Sandra Smith, Janice Berg, and
Daniel Kluth. Commissioners Dale Lindquist and Bill Stoddard were absent. The following
represented City Staff Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron,Zoning Administrator Paul
Weinberger,Assistant Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, and Recorder Jackie Young.
Chair Hawn called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS
(#2) #2654 THE LION GROUP ON BEHALF OF JAMES BULL, 1330 CHERRY PLACE,
VARIANCES,6:30 p.m.—6:31 p.m.
Berg moved, Kluth seconded,to table Application#2654,the Lion Group on Behalf of
James Bull, 1330 Cherry Place, at the request of the Applicant. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
(#1) #2644 GARY AND JOAN MARQUARDT,2617 CASCO POINT ROAD,
VARIANCES, 6:31 p.m.—6:45 p.m.
Gary and Joan Marquardt,Applicants, were present.
The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted.
Weinberger stated the Planning Commission reviewed this application at their February 21s`
meeting where it was tabled to allow the Applicants time to make some revisions to their site plan
depicting the smaller-sized garage in its new location with a turnaround. The Applicants have
reduced the size of the garage from a 30' by 30' garage to a 24' by 26' structure to keep within the
existing structural coverage on the property.
Weinberger stated the Applicants have relocated the garage five feet off the property line where
previously it was located two and a half feet off the property line. Weinberger stated a small
turnaround and backout area has been added for safety purposes to eliminate the need to back out
onto Casco Point Road.
Weinberger indicated the revised plan does take into account all of the Planning Commission's
recommendations. City Staff is recommending approval of the application.
Weinberger stated the Applicants have hired a new surveyor,who will be inspecting the property
later this week. Weinberger stated if the survey meets all of the hardcover requirements,the site plan
will proceed to the City Council.
Gary Marquardt inquired whether their application could proceed forward to the City Council
next week. Marquardt indicated they have been informed it will take approximately one week for the
survey to be completed.
PAGE 1
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#2644 Gary and Joan Marquardt, Continued)
Weinberger recommended one of the conditions of approval on this application be that a building
permit not be issued until City Staff has had an opportunity to review and approve the updated
survey.
Hawn inquired whether the retaining wall has been included in the hardcover calculations.
Marquardt commented they would prefer to do landscaping rather than construct a retaining wall.
At the present time a gradual slope exists in this area. Marquardt stated it was recommended they
show the retaining wall in the event it is needed.
Weinberger stated the retaining wall has not been included in the hardcover calculations.
Kluth inquired what amount of hardcover the retaining wall would consist of.
Weinberger stated in his opinion it would amount to approximately 20 square feet.
Hawn commented she would prefer that a retaining wall not be constructed.
Marquardt stated it is their intention at this time not to construct the retaining wall.
Smith inquired whether the plastic underlayment would be removed.
Marquardt indicated they are willing to remove the plastic.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Kluth moved,Berg seconded,to recommend approval of Application#2644, Gary and
Joan Marquardt,2617 Casco Point Road,subject to an updated survey being submitted
for review and approval by City Staff, and further subject to the four conditions listed on
page two of the March 13, 2001 City Planner's Report. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
NEW BUSINESS
(#4) #01-2665 Y&A ARCHITECTURE ON BEHALF OF GLEN AND MARILYN C.
NELSON,500 TONKAWA ROAD,VARIANCE,6:46 p.m.—6:50 p.m.
Todd Hanson,Y&A Architecture, appeared on behalf of the Applicants.
The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted.
Bottenberg stated the Applicants are proposing to construct an addition to the north side of the
residence consisting of approximately 1,600 square feet. It will include a basement,two stories
plus an attic. The basement level will be used as a storage area. The first story level will contain
garage stalls. The garage stalls will be at the same elevation of the tuck-under garages that currently
exist on the residence. The main level (second story)will consist of living space with a
PAGE 2
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#01-2665 Y&A Architecture,Continued)
master bedroom/master bath/closet suite. This will be a continuation of the main floor of the existing
house. The attic will be used for additional storage space.
Bottenberg noted a small portion of the existing residence and approximately one-half of the new
addition is located lakeward of the average lakeshore setback line as drawn between the two
adjacent residences. The adjacent residence to the north is on higher ground, and may currently
enjoy minimal views over the existing residence, which may be reduced by the second story addition.
However,the main views of the lake for that house are to the east and are not affected.
Existing mature vegetation and the change in grade already act to limit the neighbors' views, so it
is unlikely that the average lakeshore setback is a significant issue for this property. No neighbors
have indicated a problem to Staff with this application.
Bottenberg stated a hardcover variance is not required for the addition, which lies in the
250-500' setback zone. Even though the proposed hardcover in the 250-500' setback zone is
34.3 percent of the allowed 30 percent,the Applicant has not used all of the 25 percent in the
75-250' setback zone. The City does allow credit for unused hardcover allotment to be
transferred to zones further from the lake.
Bottenberg noted this lot is a lakeshore lot and is sewered. Bottenberg indicated other improvements
have been made on this lot since 1970,which have required different variances over the years.
City Staff recommends approval of the variance to the average lakeshore setback to allow the
addition to encroach 20 feet into the average lakeshore setback.
Hanson indicated he did submit a letter of hardship. Hanson stated if they would be required to move
this addition further to the west to avoid encroaching into the average lakeshore setback,
access to the existing lower level garage and auto-court would be eliminated. Hanson stated they
would be forced to move the driveway to the west as well,which would necessitate major excavation
and construction of retaining walls,which would add to the hardcover.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Hawn moved, Smith seconded,to recommend approval of Application#01-2665,
Y&A Architecture on behalf of Glen and Marilyn C. Nelson,500 Tonkawa Road,
granting of a variance to the average lakeshore setback. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
(#5) #01-2664 MITCH AND KIM OLSON,3265 CARMAN ROAD, VARIANCES,
6:51 p.m.—6:51 p.m.
Kluth moved, Mabusth seconded,to table Application#01-2664,Mitch and Kim Olson,
3265 Carman Road, at the request of the Applicants. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PAGE 3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
(#7) REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING
COUNCIL MEETINGS FEBRUARY 26,2001 AND MARCH 12,2001
This item was not discussed.
(#8) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Hawn indicated some training seminars have been scheduled and if anyone is interested in
attending,they are to let Staff know as soon as possible.
Gaffron stated the seminars have been approved for continuing education credits in real estate.
Kluth inquired whether the classes are also approved for engineering.
Gaffron stated he can check on that.
Gaffron indicated a City Council work session has been scheduled for Thursday, March 22,2001,
at 3:30 p.m.,to discuss a number of topics, including the proposed stormwater management plan.
Gaffron stated the Council will be discussing financing of the plan at that work session. Gaffron
invited the Planning Commission members to attend this work session.
The Planning Commission chose Wednesdays at 8:00 a.m.,to schedule their monthly work session.
(#9) PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 21,2001
Hawn requested the minutes be corrected to read that she was present at the February 21'meeting
rather than Smith.
Hawn moved,Mabusth seconded,to approve the minutes of the February 21,2001 Planning
Commission meeting, as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
(#10) SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON
MARCH 26,2001 AND APRIL 9,2001
March 26—Kluth
April 9—Smith
Hawn indicated Staff would call the alternates if the number of Planning Commission members will
be under five for any one meeting. Hawn encouraged the commissioners to notify Staff as soon as
possible if they will be unable to attend a meeting.
PAGE 4
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#8) OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION,CONTINUED
Gaffron addressed the Planning Commission regarding the Long Lake Task Force. Gaffron
indicated the City of Long Lake, in conjunction with the process of redesigning Highway 12,has
been meeting with a consultant to conduct a study of the downtown area in order to create a long-term
vision for the Long Lake downtown area. Gaffron stated they are considering a mix of residential and
commercial uses for the downtown area.
The Planning Commission reviewed a map of the proposed improvements. Gaffron noted the
red triangles indicate commercial while the yellow/green triangles indicate residential.
Gaffron stated the City of Long Lake is looking at commercial buildings which could range between
5,000 to 20,000 square feet, and residential which could range between two,three, and
four stories. Gaffron stated they are attempting to focus on the lake and are contemplating
construction of a bandshell and expansion of the park area.
Gaffron stated the consultant feels the commuter traffic will utilize the new Highway 12, and the
majority of traffic utilizing the old Highway 12 corridor will be going into Long Lake as their
destination. Gaffron indicated this is a different concept than what was discussed in the 1989
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Gaffron stated the City in the past had considered utilizing Kelly
Parkway as a service road and not having direct connections to Highway 12. Gaffron commented the
City of Orono should perhaps re-examine that concept since the new Highway 12 will be on a
separate corridor.
Kiuth commented he has heard concerns from some of the residents relating to how the proposed
improvements to downtown will be paid for and how it will affect their standard of living.
Hawn stated the developer, in order to help offset the costs, discussed the possibility of increasing the
price of rent in the downtown area as well as bringing in more restaurants. Hawn stated the
developer also indicated the residential component to this concept was also important in making the
entire project work.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING
(#6) #01-2663 CRAIG ALSHOUSE,HAVING AN INTEREST IN 4100 WATERTOWN
ROAD AND 5405 ORCHARD PARK ROAD, CLASS III SUBDIVISION, 7:15 p.m.—
8:18 p.m.
Craig Alshouse, Applicant, and Ed Otto, Surveyor,were present.
The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted.
Weinberger stated the Applicants are requesting a Class III subdivision of property located at
4100 Watertown Road. The property consists of approximately 37 acres, with approximately two
acres being classified as Orono Wetlands. The Applicant is proposing a six lot residential
development, with four lots being served by a private road shown as Outlot A. Lot 5 as proposed
would consist of 8.4 acres and contains a house,horse barn, and riding arena, with direct access to
Watertown Road. Lot 6 has a house located on the front property line and has access to
PAGE 5
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#01-2663 Craig Alshouse, Continued)
Orchard Park Road.
Weinberger stated this property lies within the RR-1A zoning district,which has a five acre minimum
lot size. The proposed lots all consist of a minimum of five acres. Weinberger
noted Lot 6 has a total of five acres but less than five acres is dry buildable and would require a
variance to lot area if approved. Weinberger stated the Applicant could consider a possible lot line
rearrangement to increase the lot area to five acres. Staff does not feel that granting a variance to the
dry buildable lot area is an option and recommends the Applicant pursue revising the lots somewhat
in order to comply with the five acre dry buildable requirement.
Weinberger stated in December of 1985,the City Council adopted a resolution which allows the
keeping of domestic animals for commercial purposes on this property and to allow the continued use
of the property for a public riding stable based on certain conditions. This proposed development is
surrounded by properties that have been developed as low density residential and small horse farms.
The two oversized accessory buildings that are located on the property consist of a pole shed or
arena consisting of 10,267 square feet and a barn consisting of 4,230 square feet. In all"R"
Districts,no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of footprint area unless a variance is
granted or the oversized accessory structure requirements are met. Weinberger stated a variance
would be required to permit two oversized accessory buildings on one lot where one is allowed. A
second variance would be needed to permit two oversized accessory buildings larger than the 3,000
square feet maximum allowed for oversized accessory structures. The Applicant has indicated they
would like to maintain the two oversized accessory structures at the present time. The other
accessory buildings located on the property would be removed to accommodate the road and building
sites.
Weinberger stated the keeping of domestic animals for non-commercial purposes is a permitted use,
including horses for the use of the occupants of the premises. A minimum of one acre in
aggregate, exclusive of one acre for the principal building, must be available for each animal unit
unless otherwise permitted. The use of an accessory building for keeping animals for non-
commercial purposes is a permitted use provided it is for the non-commercial use of the property
owner or resident and meets the available area standards. In addition, no such structure shall be
located less than 150 feet from the nearest adjacent residence and no closer than 75 feet from the
nearest lot line.
Weinberger stated use of the accessory buildings or land for the storage or rearing of animals not
owned by the property owner or resident would require a conditional use permit.
Weinberger indicated Lot 2 would also require a variance to lot width since this lot is located at the
end of a cul-de-sac and is 200' wide at the structure setback. A 300' width is required. Weinberger
indicated the Council has routinely approved variances for lot width for lots fronting on a cul-de-sac
that demonstrate a suitable building site and a lot similar in dimension to lots
surrounding the property.
City Staff can recommend conceptual approve of the plan subject to each lot meeting the minimum
standards for lot area and further subject to the ten conditions outlined on page six of
PAGE 6
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#01-2663 Craig Alshouse,Continued)
the Planner's Report dated March 13, 2001.
Hawn inquired whether the Park Commission has reviewed this application.
Weinberger stated the Park Commission has had an opportunity to review the application and is
recommending a park dedication fee be paid in lieu of a land donation.
Alshouse commented he is attempting to develop this property in the right way by being
a responsible and good steward of the land. Alshouse stated they have redrawn the lot lines in order
to meet the requirements of the City. Alshouse stated they are open for questions of the
Planning Commission.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Hawn stated she has a concern regarding Lot 5, which has the two oversized accessory structures
located on it. Hawn inquired how much land behind the barn would be acceptable as pasture land.
Alshouse stated there currently is pasture north of the arena.
Smith noted the City requires one acre per horse, and inquired how many horses would be boarded in
the barn and whether there would be sufficient pasture available.
Alshouse stated he expects the number of horses to be housed in the barn to be less than what the
property owners have had in the past. Alshouse stated he feels the future owner of this property will
comply with the City's ordinances,which would allow five to six horses based on the amount of land
available. Alshouse stated one option available to the owner of Lot 5, if he should wish to
board additional horses,would be to purchase Lot 4, which consists of five acres, or Lot 6, which
also consists of approximately five acres. Alshouse stated they are not requesting a variance to board
any horses in addition to what the City's ordinances currently allow.
Weinberger stated the conditional use permit does allow riding lessons and boarding of horses at the
present time.
Kluth commented the future owner of this property could utilize the oversized accessory structures
for a different use.
Smith commented the buildings could be utilized for the storage of boats.
Kluth inquired whether the conditional use permit restricts the use of these buildings to just
horses.
Weinberger stated it does not, but that the City's other ordinances would prohibit other types of uses
for these accessory structures. Weinberger stated the property owner would be able to store
items in the sheds but would not be able to lease the space for the storing of boats and other things
legally. Weinberger stated the storage of boats for money would constitute a commercial use.
PAGE 7
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#01-2663 Craig Alshouse, Continued)
Kluth inquired whether the lot containing the two oversized accessory buildings was still being
considered as a commons area.
Alshouse stated they did initially look at that concept,but ran into a number of problems. Alshouse
stated the owner of that lot would be forced to take care of everyone else's horses under that concept,
which was not feasible.
Kluth stated he would be in favor of continuing the present use of the two structures.
Mabusth stated commercial use of the structures would need to be limited in her view.
Alshouse stated he would like the future owner of this lot to have the right to continue to utilize the
barn for the housing of horses as currently allowed.
Hawn commented the only reason she can see for maintaining the two oversized accessory structures
would be to continue the tradition of horse farms in Orono. Hawn stated in her view the
Planning Commission needs to restrict the future use of these structures. Hawn inquired whether the
Planning Commission could put a time limit on the life on these buildings where they would need to
be removed within a certain period of time if a conditional use permit is not applied for.
Gaffron stated the City has allowed accessory buildings to remain on a vacant lot for a short period of
time until the principal structure is constructed.
Hawn stated she has concerns that someone with a business will buy the property and attempt to
operate a commercial business out of these structures. Hawn indicated she would like to see private
or commercial storage in these buildings restricted.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they would be opposed to any private or
commercial use of the two oversized accessory structures other than for horses.
Alshouse stated he does not have a problem with restricting these buildings for the use of livestock.
Alshouse stated the new property owner would need to meet Orono's ordinances for
whatever use he intends for the structures.
Kluth stated a restrictive covenant could be placed on the land.
Alshouse stated he would be agreeable to a restrictive covenant on the land restricting the barns for
livestock use or some other use that is permitted under Orono's ordinances.
Smith commented in her view the Planning Commission cannot say the buildings need to be
removed in one to two years simply because the structures are not being used. Smith stated the
new property owner could elect not to use the structures and leave them empty, with a future buyer
electing five or ten years from now to utilize them for the housing of animals.
Hawn stated in her view if the buildings are to be used at all,they should be restricted to livestock.
Smith stated if the future owner decides to use the buildings for a commercial use,they would be
PAGE 8
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#01-2663 Craig Alshouse, Continued)
required to appear before the Planning Commission.
Alshouse stated in his opinion the Planning Commission has the power in the future to restrict the use
of these structures.
Hawn inquired whether the Applicant would be willing to work with the City Attorney in order to
come up with some acceptable language restricting the use of these structures to livestock.
Alshouse stated he would be agreeable to that.
Kluth stated the restrictive covenant could be added as an additional condition of approval. Kluth
stated the original conditional use permit was probably granted because the buildings were located on
a large parcel of land.
Alshouse indicated the house with the two oversized accessory structures was originally located on
seven acres of land at the time the conditional use permit was granted.
Weinberger stated one of the accessory structures was constructed in approximately 1970.
Mabusth commented a variance would be required if the property owner wished to house additional
horses in excess of what the ordinances allow. Mabusth stated there appears to be a
pathway that currently exists.
Weinberger stated the areas used for traveling purposes would be deducted from the buildable area of
the lot. Weinberger stated they are considering locating the pathway along the property lines.
Weinberger indicated these trails would not be heavily used and would principally be a dirt path for
use by the horses. Weinberger stated Staff is aware that there will be a trail easement in the future,
but at this time the exact location of the trail has not been determined.
Hawn inquired whether the discussion by the Planning Commission has prompted any public
comments regarding this application.
Greg Kellenberger, 4045 Watertown Road, stated the neighbors in this area have been allowed the
use of the indoor arena in the past and they would be in support of having these buildings remain.
Kellenberger stated, if possible,they would like to continue to utilize the indoor riding arena.
Anita Lang, 615 Orchard Park Road, commented that Orchard Park Road at the present time is in
poor condition and inquired whether it would be improved with this development.
Gaffron stated a cloverleaf type intersection would be constructed at the intersection of County
Road 6 and Highway 12 as part of the Highway 12 re-route project. Gaffron indicated the
intersection of Orchard Park and County Road 6 is located further west than the cloverleaf. Gaffron
stated the four proposed new lots are expected to add approximately ten cars per day each to the
amount of traffic on Orchard Park Road, which is fairly insignificant for this road. Gaffron stated he
is not able to address the condition of Orchard Park Road at this time and would need to discuss with
the Public Works Department whether any possible improvements for Orchard Park
Road are scheduled in the near future.
PAGE 9
•
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
(#01-2663 Craig Alshouse, Continued)
Hawn requested that Lang be apprised of what improvements, if any, are being planned for this
road. Hawn commented in her opinion Orchard Park Road will become busier,not necessarily as a
result of this development,but due to the new Highway 12 corridor and that the concerns of the
resident are valid.
Mabusth inquired whether the Applicant has a problem with the neighbors continuing to use the
indoor riding arena.
Alshouse stated it would be up to the new property owners.
Hawn inquired how many of the other accessory structures would be removed.
Alshouse stated they are planning to remove six to eight of the other buildings.
Hawn stated one of the structures lies within the roadway,which is not being proposed to be
removed.
Gaffron stated that issue would need to be addressed.
Alshouse stated he does intend to remove the structures on Lots 1 through 4.
Mabusth commented there would be a principal structure remaining on Lots 5 and 6.
Hawn stated she would like to see the structure located within the right-of-way removed since this
is a new development.
Alshouse stated the structure is now in the right-of-way because the right-of-way has been moved.
Gaffron stated in the past the City at the time a principal structure is removed and an accessory
structure is to remain on the property,the City requires that any non-conforming accessory structures
be made conforming. Gaffron stated he is not aware of any situation where a principal
structure has been located in the right-of-way.
Hawn encouraged the Applicant to consider removing the structure.
Kluth stated he would like some direction from the City Council on how to proceed in the future on
structures located within the right-of-way.
Hawn moved, Kluth seconded,to recommend approval of Application #01-2663, Craig
Alshouse,4100 Watertown Road and 505 Orchard Park Road, granting of a Class III
Subdivision, subject to the ten conditions outlined on page six of the March 13, 2001
Planner's Report, and further subject to the restrictive covenant to run with the land being
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney limiting the use of the two oversized accessory
structures to livestock. In addition, a park dedication fee is to be paid on this development, and
if a trail easement is to be granted,the developer be required to depict the exact location of the
trail easement prior to the time of final plat approval. Further, approval is made contingent
on all buildings being removed on Lots 1 through 4 and Outlot A. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PAGE 10
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 19,2001
NEW BUSINESS
(#3) #01-2666 GREGG AND JEWEL VITAS,2800 COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT,8:18 p.m.—8:25 p.m.
Jewel Vitas,Applicant, was present.
The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted.
Bottenberg stated the Applicants are proposing to construct an accessory storage building
consisting of 280 square feet behind their residence. The Applicants are proposing to locate the
accessory building approximately 15 feet from the side property line.
Bottenberg stated a conditional use permit is required because this lot is considered a"through"
lot. By Zoning Code definition, a"through"lot is a lot which has a pair of opposite lot lines
abutting two substantially parallel streets and which is not a corner lot. On a through lot, both street
lines shall be front lines for applying the Zoning Chapter. The lot abuts streets on three
sides. Although the Zoning Code definition of"through lot"appears to exclude corner lots,this
lot is both a corner lot and a through lot, and a conditional use permit is required. The intent of the
ordinance is to have control over the placement of accessory structures within street yards.
Bottenberg stated the property contains a private sewage treatment system. The proposed accessory
structure will not interfere with the primary or alternate septic sites.
Bottenberg stated the Applicants are requesting a conditional use permit to allow an accessory
building.
City Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit to construct an accessory building
on the property as proposed, which meets all required setbacks.
Vitas stated in her view it should not be considered a through lot because Countryside Drive
West is a private road.
Bottenberg stated Staff would still consider that a through lot. Bottenberg stated this is possibly
one Zoning Code definition that could perhaps be reviewed.
Hawn moved,Mabusth seconded,to recommend approval of Application#01-2666,
Gregg and Jewel Vitas,2800 Countryside Drive, granting of a conditional use permit to
allow the construction of an accessory building. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
ADJOURNMENT
Berg moved, Kluth seconded,to adjourn the meeting at 8:28 p.m.
There being no further business to discuss,the meeting was adjourned at 8:28 p.m.
7/l a'- l
Elizabeth Hawn, hair
PAGE 11