HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/18/2005 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present:
Chair David Rahn, Commissioners Ralph Kempf,J.Marc Fritzler, Cynthia Bremer, Jim Leslie,Travis
Winkey, and Roland Jurgens. Representing Staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron,Planners
Melanie Curtis and Janice Gundlach, and Recorder Jackie Young. City Council Member Jim White was
present.
Chair Rahn called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m.
CONSENT
Items 4 and 5 were removed from the Consent Agenda.
There were no public comments on Items 1, 2, and 3.
*1. #05-3107 SCOTT BISSEN AND MICHELLE MOREY,825 TONKAWA ROAD,
VARIANCE,6:06 P.M.—6:07 P.M.
Rahn moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3107, Scott Bissen and
Michelle Morey,granting of a lot width variance subject to the applicants meeting all zoning
requirements with the construction of the new home for the property located at 825 Tonkawa
Road. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
*2. #05-3115 WJM PROPERTIES,LLC,2605 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,6:06 P.M.—6:07 P.M.
Rahn moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3115,WJM Properties,
granting of a conditional use permit and revisions to their Industrial Site Plan approval subject to:
one,siding materials of accessory building addition and existing accessory building shall be of
matching materials and colors; and two,final grading and drainage plans shall be submitted for
review and approval by City Engineer prior to Council action,for the property located at
2605 Wayzata Boulevard West. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
*3. #05-3127 JAMES AND MARGARET KELLY,4445 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,
VARIANCE,6:06 P.M.—6:07 P.M.
Rahn moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3127,James and
Margaret Kelly, granting of a lot area variance and lot width variance to permit construction of a
new residence on the property located at 4445 North Shore Drive,subject to the submittal of a
revised grading plan incorporating the City Engineer's recommendations and confirmation that the
corner lakeside deck is behind the average lakeshore setback prior to review by the City Council.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
PAGE 1
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
4. #05-3128 GREGORY O'CONNOR AND RICHARD FRUEN,400 AND 410 BIG ISLAND,
LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT,6:07 P.M.—6:07 p.m.
Gregory O'Connor,Applicant, was present.
Jurgens inquired why the encroachment is not being eliminated or reduced.
Gaffron stated the 1.4-foot encroachment goes back approximately 20 years but was never formally
approved by the City.
Rahn moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3128,Gregory
O'Connor and Richard Fruen,granting of a lot line rearrangement for the properties located at
400 and 410 Big Island. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
5. #05-3133 BRUCE AND ELIZABETH NUSBAUM,3480 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,
VARIANCE,6:08 P.M.—6:29 P.M.
Elizabeth and Bruce Nusbaum, Applicants,were present.
Rahn stated to his recollection he does not remember the Planning Commission ever approving a side
setback variance of 3.7 feet for a new accessory structure without there being some type of hardship being
demonstrated. Rahn noted this lot is already over in structural coverage and stated that he has concerns
with the proposed structure being a story and a half. Rahn indicated he would recommend that the
building meet the 10-foot side yard setback requirement if it is going to be a story and a half and that the
size of the structure be limited to 440 square feet.
Rahn stated he might be willing to approve a side setback variance if the garage were the standard height
but that he is not willing to approve the present proposal. Rahn stated in his opinion the driveway should
also be 20 feet in length from the curb to the garage door in order to allow a full-size vehicle to park in
that area.
Curtis pointed out there is 20 feet from the proposed garage to the curb cut.
Mr.Nusbaum indicated it is 18 feet to the property line from the proposed garage.
Rahn stated he had the understanding there was a 15-foot rear yard setback being requested.
Curtis indicated there is approximately 20 feet from the curb cut to the garage due to the angle of the
property.
Gaffron recommended making the 20-foot driveway from the edge of the roadway to the edge of the
garage a condition of approval.
PAGE 2
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3133 Bruce and Elizabeth Nusbaum, Continued)
Mrs.Nusbaum inquired what the issue is with the story and a half structure.
Rahn stated typically the side yard setback is 10-feet. Rahn inquired what hardship the applicants have
for constructing the accessory structure within the side yard setback.
Bremer stated due to the building being a story and a half,there would be more structure encroaching
within the side yard setback.
Rahn stated he would be more likely to allow a normal one-story garage within the side yard setback
rather than a story and a half structure.
Mrs.Nusbaum stated the Council had told them they could rebuild the garage with the same footprint as
the previous garage. Nusbaum indicated they had to correct a drainage problem prior to constructing the
garage and that they had the belief that the City would allow them to retain the garage in its original
location.
Rahn stated to his recollection the Planning Commission in the past has not permitted such a large
structure to encroach within the side yard setback. Rahn expressed concerns that the applicants would
have a difficult time maintaining the structure given the close proximity to the property line.
Fritzler concurred that the proposed structure should be located outside of the side yard setback and that
he does not see a hardship for the encroachment.
Mr. Nusbaum stated it is impossible to shift the garage over without blocking the front entrance of the
residence.
Fritzler pointed out a hardship needs to be inherent to the land and not to the design of the house. Fritzler
commented it does not appear that any effort has been taken to reduce the amount of hardcover on this lot.
Curtis stated it would be difficult to reduce the hardcover on this lot.
Winkey inquired whether a setback variance was granted in 1999 at the time that the Council approved
the hardcover variance.
Mrs.Nusbaum stated they were proposing to leave the original garage at the time they appeared before
the City Council.
Rahn inquired whether the applicants had intended to replace the original garage at the time the
application for the new residence was approved.
Mrs.Nusbaum stated the City Council had informed them that they could rebuild the garage if the same
footprint was used. Nusbaum indicated they had to wait for the City to complete the necessary drainage
work prior to constructing a garage.
PAGE 3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3133 Bruce and Elizabeth Nusbaum,Continued)
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Kempf inquired whether the applicants would prefer a one-story garage in the same location or a story
and a half in another location.
Mrs.Nusbaum stated they have no basement due to the high water table and that they would like the half
story for storage.
Mr.Nusbaum stated there is very minimal storage room available with a standard size garage and that it
would be difficult to make that choice at this time.
Jurgens stated in his view the garage should be moved five feet closer to the residence to accommodate
some off-street parking.
Leslie inquired whether there would still be sufficient room between the house and the garage if it were
located five feet closer.
Curtis confirmed there would not be a variance required to move the garage five feet closer to the
residence.
Winkey inquired whether the original garage was located 3.5 feet off the property line.
Mr.Nusbaum stated it was.
Rahn moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3133,Bruce and
Elizabeth Nusbaum,granting of a conditional use permit for a story and a half accessory structure
on a through-lot,subject to the structure meeting the 10-foot side setback and 30-foot rear yard
setback,or approval of a single-story garage with a maximum defined height of 12 feet with a five
foot setback variance,with the condition the length of the driveway from the edge of the roadway to
the edge of the garage be made 20 feet and with the understanding that neither garage can exceed
440 square feet, and the granting of hardcover variances for the 75'-250' and 250'-500' zones, and
the granting of a structural coverage variance for the property located at 3480 North Shore Drive.
Jurgens inquired whether the size of the garage could be reduced to decrease the hardcover.
Rahn noted a 22 by 22 foot garage is being proposed.
VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1,Fritzler Opposed.
Fritzler stated he would like to see the 10-foot setback adhered to regardless of the size of the garage.
PAGE 4
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
OLD BUSINESS
6. #05-3121 NARROWS SALOON,3382 SHORELINE DRIVE,CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT,6:29 p.m.—7:34 p.m.
Cindy Sudheimer and James Anderst, Applicants,were present.
Gaffron noted this application appeared before the Planning Commission at their June meeting, at which
time the application was tabled in order to allow the applicants time to revise their plans. The applicants
have submitted revised plans and have eliminated the proposed kitchen addition in the northeast corner of
the building and are now proposing a kitchen addition inside the building. In addition,the double-door
entrance extending into the sidewalk area has been eliminated and the applicants are now proposing an
interior access that will not encroach further than the main wall.
Gaffron indicated the outdoor seating in the front has been expanded by two additional seats and would
still encroach on the City's sidewalk easement. The applicants are proposing a slightly smaller outdoor
seating area at the rear of the building, with the bar station shown in the previous plans being eliminated.
In addition,the applicants are proposing a screened trash enclosure at the north end of the building.
Gaffron indicated it is unclear from the revised plans whether the planter boxes remain at the north end of
the outdoor seating in the rear. Gaffron stated these planter boxes caused the need for a rear yard variance
and are not permitted encroachments. Removal of bituminous so that the plant material can be placed
into the ground would eliminate the need for a rear yard variance.
Gaffron stated the revised plans show a minor increase in lot coverage,with the current lot coverage
being at 38 percent. Gaffron stated the proposed fence in the rear is depicted at 5.5 feet,which would not
be considered structural coverage. Gaffron noted the fence would be considered structural coverage if it
achieves a height of six feet.
Gaffron stated the outdoor seating area in the rear of the building has been reduced from 1,666 square feet
to 1,292 square feet, with the seating being decreased from 84 seats to 60 seats. The bar station in the
previous plans has also been eliminated. This area remains accessible only from within the restaurant.
Gaffron indicated the applicants have eliminated the kitchen addition,which required a side yard setback
variance and further closed in an already restrictive drive aisle. The revised plans show an area within the
building as an option for a kitchen expansion. This area is approximately 152 square feet,reducing the
public floor area within the building by 152 square feet. The applicants have also eliminated the exterior
vestibule and have incorporated an interior vestibule,half within the proposed main restaurant/bar area
and the other half within the banquet area at the western end of the building. Elimination of the vestibule
eliminated the need for a front yard setback variance. However,the revised plans note an option to
straighten out the front entry wall in the location of the previously requested exterior vestibule. If the
applicants pursue straightening out this wall, a front yard setback variance would be required; although
the encroachment would be no more than what exists today. Elimination of the kitchen and vestibule
additions and incorporation of them into the building subsequent reduced the number of seats proposed
within the interior by eight. Based on the public space reduction of 152 square feet,the required off-street
parking is reduced by two spaces.
PAGE 5
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3121 Narrows Saloon,Continued)
Gaffron indicated the discussion at the previous Planning Commission meeting demonstrated a need to
conduct a parking study for the City lot and the businesses using it. Gaffron recommended that a parking
study be completed by a consultant hired by the applicant, with an analysis of parking needs of all
commercial businesses that abut the public parking lot. Gaffron stated the applicant would need to review
the parking needs based on the square footages of all existing uses, including occupied and potentially
occupied interior spaces,the potential parking needs based on potential uses relating to permitted and
conditional uses allowed in the B-1 District, and a review of prior commitments concerning parking made
by the City to various business owners.
In addition,an analysis of parking needs for non-commercial uses of the parking lot, including the Park&
Ride,Navarre Park, and other unidentified uses not directly serving the surrounding businesses. The
parking study should also look at the relationship of peak parking need times and hours for various
businesses and other uses served by the lot and an analysis of parking provided and/or potentially
developable within the various private business properties abutting the public parking lot should be
completed. An estimate of parking stalls available in the public lot under current configuration and an
estimate of the maximum number of parking stalls that might be potentially available under various
reconfigurations need to be completed.
Gaffron recommended the traffic study also address the following:
-vehicle accessibility to surrounding roads
-traffic impacts on local city streets
-layout convenience related to the various users
-interior site circulation
- size and orientation of spaces and drive aisles
-ADA accessibility requirements
-stormwater management
-snow removal and storage; ease of maintenance
-pedestrian safety and security
-access for service vehicles, i.e.,trash hauling,business deliveries
Gaffron noted additional public comments have been received from concern residents following the June
Planning Commission meeting.
Gaffron recommended the applicant further reduce the outdoor seating areas and possibly the interior
expansion in order to reduce the amount of required parking.
Staff is recommending the application be tabled until a parking study is completed by the applicant.
Sudheimer indicated the number of tables in the front could be decreased by four,which would reduce it
from 32 tables to 28 tables.
Rahn inquired whether the applicant has pursued a parking study.
PAGE 6
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3121 Narrows Saloon, Continued)
Sudheimer stated Staff informed them that they could bring the revised plans back before the Planning
Commission prior to proceeding with the parking study.
Rahn inquired whether there were any public comments concerning this application.
Marcia Freese,2914 Casco Point Road,indicated she does reside in this area and raised a concern
regarding the safety of people in the area,the noise generated from the bar and traffic, and the hours of
operation for when alcohol would be served. Freese stated in her opinion the memorandum from Police
Chief Good should be given more consideration as part of this application.
Freese commented it is important that expansion of this business fits in with what the rest of the
community wants and not just the patrons of the business.
Lois Hudlow, 3438 Lyric Avenue, stated in her opinion the type of fence being proposed for the rear
seating area does not adequately deal with her concerns regarding the noise. Hudlow stated she would
like to see fewer seating areas in the back patio area,which could perhaps be increased over time.
Sam Marfield,2455 North Shore Drive, indicated he is a long-time resident of Navarre and encouraged
the Planning Commission not to miss an opportunity to invest in the commercial district of Navarre.
Marfield noted this business has existed in this area for a substantial number of years and should not be
required to meet all the zoning requirements that now exist since it existed prior to those requirements
being in effect.
Austin Evans,2497 Kelly Avenue, stated he resides in the house that is located the closest to this
business,and pointed out that this area is zoned as retail/service business and not commercial. Evans
stated the businesses in this area should be businesses primarily that provide services to the surrounding
area.
Evans noted a conditional use permit could be granted but that the following findings must be made:
One, that it is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the surrounding residents. Evans
stated the report from the police chief shows that the business is detrimental to the residents around it.
Two, it is not materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Evans indicated he is
unable to open his windows during the summertime due to the noise from motorcycles and other vehicles
that patronize this business.
Evans stated the Planning Commission should examine the overall intent of this district,noting that the
proposed bowling alley for this area had been denied. Evans stated in his view what is best for Navarre is
a comprehensive plan and that approval of this application may impede future development in Navarre.
Evans pointed out the issues relating to the need for a comprehensive plan and inadequate parking were
previously discussed in 2003.
PAGE 7
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3121 Narrows Saloon, Continued)
Evans stated this expansion is not necessary as an amenity to the community and that it is possible a large
number of patrons to this business do not reside in Navarre.
Evans stated there is an organization called Neighbors for a Better Navarre that would like to see a
moratorium for this area and a comprehensive plan created that would allow for development that is more
amenable to Navarre. Evans requested the Planning Commission deny this application.
Sylvia Bertagnoli, 2499 Kelly Avenue, stated she is in support of what Evans is attempting to accomplish.
Bertagnoli raised concerns regarding the safety of children and other citizens in the vicinity of the
Narrows Saloon, especially with the proposed outdoor seating in the front.
Rebecca Lowe, 3295 Carman Road, stated currently the area is not pedestrian friendly and expressed
concern that the expansion of the business is not kid friendly. Lowe encouraged the City to make this
area more pedestrian friendly.
Valerie Coykendall, 2344 Olive Avenue, echoed the concerns raised regarding the noise and safety of
children in the area.
Brad Hoyt,2507 Kelly Avenue, indicated he sent a letter to the City and thanked Mike Gaffron for
responding to the issues he raised in his letter. Hoyt expressed a concern that this project may negatively
impact the other development in the area. Hoyt stated the seating in the front may not be possible given
the close proximity of the street and that it may be difficult, if not impossible,to grow trees along the
front of the building.
Phyllis O'Malley, 2740 Kelly Avenue, indicated she has resided in this area for a number of years and
relocated here from New York. O'Malley stated the owners of this business do have a right to expand but
that there needs to be some type of cap on the expansion. O'Malley stated the environment of this area
was more conducive to raising children than what currently exists and will be further impacted negatively
by this expansion.
Charles Nadler, 2509 Kelly Avenue, indicated he has already submitted several letters regarding this
project,but noted he is here to present a petition to the Planning Commission opposing this expansion
project of the applicants.
Nadler indicated the petition states that no outdoor seating should be approved by the city. The June 20,
2005 memo from Police Chief Good is ample evidence that the owner has been unable to contain either
the noise inside the restaurant or the noises made by the motorcycles of the customers as well as his
inability to keep motorcycles from parking on the sidewalk. The memo goes on to raise additional public
safety issues with regards to the outdoor seating. Any outdoor seating would require many conditions,
such as if and when liquor would be permitted outside,what hours the patio would be closed, and others,
just to name a few. Nadler stated the owner has a poor track record regarding his ability to abide by the
laws and restrictions and that enforcement problems will increase. Nadler stated it is poor public policy
to allow any outdoor seating under any circumstances.
PAGE 8
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3121 Narrows Saloon, Continued)
Nadler stated any proposed expansion should be approved only after a parking study has been completed.
Nadler stated this petition has been signed by 53 residents of the City of Orono,the bulk of whom reside
on Kelly Avenue,Lyric Avenue,Livingston, Carman Street, Shadywood Wood Road, and Casco Point
Road.
The public comment section of the application hearing was closed at 7:02 p.m.
Leslie commented it is important to recognize that investment in a community comes in a number of
different forms and that any investment that makes Navarre functional and vibrant and economically
sound is in the interests of the residents. Leslie stated the goal is to find a way to balance the type of
investment and to find a way for the community to be developed in a way that serves the residents at
large.
Leslie stated he is unsure whether a moratorium is necessary but that development of a comprehensive
plan for this area would be a prudent step. Leslie indicated he understands the concerns of the residents
and that those concerns do need to be addressed. Leslie pointed out the applicants have done a sound job
of revising their application to address some of the concerns raised at the prior Planning Commission
meeting but that in his view the applicants need to go further to address those concerns.
Leslie stated in his opinion the outdoor seating in the front should be eliminated and that the outdoor
seating in the back should be reduced by half as a way to see how well that can be managed and
controlled. Leslie stated a taller, solid fence would be beneficial to the residents to help reduce the noise
but would increase the hardcover on the lot.
Leslie concurred a parking study does need to be conducted prior to approval of any expansion.
Kempf stated he concurs regarding the necessity for a comprehensive plan for the Navarre area but that a
moratorium is not appropriate at this point in time. Kempf stated in his view the applicants are doing a
good job at making their business something that is beneficial to the area but that further steps need to be
taken to address the noise issues. Kempf stated he would like to see the outdoor seating reduced with
restricted hours.
Kempf indicated he has little objection to the expansion within the envelope of the existing structure but
that it comes down to whether the parking study will illustrate the availability of additional parking to
accommodate the expansion.
Winkey indicated he does have some concerns regarding the safety of the people in the area and the
ability to police and protect this area. Winkey stated in his opinion the outdoor seating area needs to be
reduced and done on a trial basis.
Jurgens stated he would like to see a report from Police Chief Good on dates and the number of
enforcement problems that are directly related to the Narrows Saloon. Jurgens stated he would like to see
PAGE 9
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3121 Narrows Saloon, Continued)
Police Chief Good present at the next hearing to answer some questions regarding the safety concerns
being raised.
Jurgens indicated he is in agreement with the recommendations of Staff and that a parking study is
paramount for this area prior to any approval.
Rahn stated he is in agreement with the comments made by Commission Leslie. Rahn indicated he has
changed his mind concerning the seating in the front of the building and that it should probably be
eliminated due to the close proximity of the street.
Rahn stated he would like the applicant to proceed forward with a traffic and parking study,which would
be a good starting point to determine how much expansion is realistic for this establishment. Rahn stated
in his opinion discussion on the design details of the expansion at this stage is premature. Rahn concurred
that a smaller outdoor seating area should be considered and given a trial period.
Bremer stated she would like to see the outdoor seating area reduced from what is currently being
proposed. Bremer stated in her view a number of the issues raised can be dealt with by the applicants but
that the outdoor seating really needs to be reduced. Bremer stated she is not opposed to a solid fence for
the outdoor patio area to help reduce the noise for the neighbors.
Bremer stated she is not opposed to the increased hardcover and structure due to the double vestibules and
that the inside layout is well thought out and should work well.
Rahn inquired whether there are other issues that need to be discussed by the Planning Commission at this
time.
Gaffron stated there are approximately 12 items that have been raised as issues, with a large number of
those issues having been discussed to some degree at tonight's meeting and the previous meeting.
Gaffron recommended the total area for the outdoor patio be firmly defined and discussed rather than
having the applicant possibly expand that area in the future.
Jurgens agreed that a solid wall would be more beneficial for the neighbors.
Leslie stated he would prefer the fence follow the footprint of the smaller patio area and possibly
expanded in the future. Leslie indicated he also is in favor of a solid fence.
Rahn stated he also would like to see the area kept smaller in the beginning and possibly expanded in the
future.
Sudheimer stated they are attempting to expand their business to accommodate the restaurant portion of
their business and that a large number of their patrons are local residents. Sudheimer indicated the
vestibules are designed to help reduce the noise. Sudheimer noted live music does not play during the
day.
PAGE 10
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3121 Narrows Saloon,Continued)
Sudheimer pointed out the big condominiums being constructed down the road are going to increase the
traffic in the area significantly more than what their expansion project would.
Sudheimer noted they have passed all of their compliance checks in the past and that they have received
letters from the police chief thanking them for doing a good job.
Sudheimer indicated they have experienced an increase in food sales and a decrease in liquor sales since
the smoking ordinance went into effect and that they are attempting to expand their business to meet that
increase. Sudheimer noted Caribou Coffee located across the street has an outdoor seating area that is not
enclosed.
Leslie stated he would like to table the application to allow a parking study to be undertaken. Leslie
stated additional discussion should be had in the future regarding the hours of operation and the other
issues raised.
Leslie moved to table Application#05-3121,Narrows Saloon,3382 Shoreline Drive,to allow the
applicants time to have a traffic/parking study conducted as recommended by Staff.
Anderst stated in his opinion the Planning Commission has changed their thinking from the last meeting
and are now requiring them to comply with additional items that have not been previously discussed.
Leslie stated in his opinion the comments are consistent from last month and that the restrictions on the
hours of operation were discussed last month.
Marcia Freese inquired whether a traffic study is the same as a parking study.
Rahn stated the Parking Commission would like to see a parking study.
Kempf seconded the above motion.
Rahn stated the parking study should follow what Staff has recommended.
Anderst inquired what other issues would need to be addressed if the parking study demonstrates that the
expansion is viable. Anderst requested they be provided with a list of items that need to be addressed.
Rahn stated the applicants' study would need to be reviewed by the City's consultants.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
Bremer suggested the applicants follow the list of items outlined on page four of Staff's report.
PAGE 11
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
7. #05-3095 MINNETONKA PORTABLE DREDGING ON BEHALF OF GREGG
STEINHAFEL,2265 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
7:36 p.m.—7:49 p.m.
Tom Niccum, 5526 Tonkaview Road,Mound,was present.
Gaffron stated the applicants are requesting a conditional use permit to allow construction of a permanent
piling dock in the bed of Lake Minnetonka. This requires a conditional use permit under the Flood Plain
Ordinance. Since the dock would be extending through approximately 100 feet of wetland,review has
been suspended since March because of the wetland moratorium. Gaffron noted the moratorium is in
effect until August 23rd. Gaffron stated a copy of the proposed Wetland Ordinance has been included in
the Planning Commission packets.
The Wetland Ordinance,if approved, would allow a dock up to four feet in width to provide reasonable
access to the lake through a wetland. Gaffron stated under the proposed but not yet adopted wetland
ordinance, docks not exceeding four feet in width providing reasonable access to the lakeshore would be a
permitted wetland use not requiring special approvals. The applicants are proposing a dock that is six feet
in width. The draft Wetland Ordinance also requires that wetland buffers will be required when a wetland
is altered. Staff is reviewing whether the construction of a permanent dock in a wetland should be
considered a wetland alteration. If it is determined that the dock is a wetland alteration, a buffer of 35 feet
would need to be established and maintained.
Staff recommends that the application be reviewed to determine whether there are any potential negative
impacts associated with the dock and then tabled pending completion of the wetland moratorium and/or
adoption of a new wetland ordinance. Gaffron indicated the proposed dock will be located in a very
protected area and the potential for ice damage appears to be minimal. Due to its location largely within a
wetland, Staff would recommend against any future request for de-icing around this dock.
The applicant had nothing to add to Staff's report.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn questioned why the Planning Commission is hearing this application prior to the moratorium being
lifted.
Gaffron stated one reason this application is before the City Council is because it was anticipated that the
City Council would have passed the Wetland Ordinance at one of their prior meetings but that questions
have since been raised at the last two city council work sessions regarding the amount of buffer that
should be required. Gaffron stated currently there is no minimum buffer required and no wetland
ordinance.
Rahn inquired whether the Planning Commission has any authority lakeward over 929'.
PAGE 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3095 Minnetonka Portable Dredging, Continued)
Gaffron stated the DNR has defined that the City has control and jurisdiction over wetlands below 929' if
they are lake perimeter wetlands.
Rahn inquired whether the DNR and LMCD have adopted a four-foot width on docks.
Niccum stated the LMCD and DNR have adopted eight feet.
Gaffron stated outside of the City's proposed Wetland Ordinance,they do not have any ordinance that
would limit the width of docks. Gaffron indicated the City relies on the LMCD for the width of docks
that should be allowed. Gaffron stated the intent of the Wetland Ordinance is to limit the impact on
wetlands and that this application falls under the Wetland Ordinance since the dock would be located in a
wetland.
Fritzler inquired whether this dock would only serve this one resident.
Gaffron stated it would. Gaffron indicated the property owner is in the process of remodeling the existing
residence.
Leslie stated it is difficult to discuss the width of the dock without knowing what the Council may or may
not approve with the wetland ordinance.
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission could give some guidance to the Council on what they feel
would be appropriate for dock width.
Rahn stated he would like the width of the dock kept consistent and that the Council should address
whether the width of the dock can change at a certain point.
Jurgens stated it is his understanding that the intent of the wetland ordinance is to minimize the impact on
the wetlands and that a smaller width would accomplish that. Jurgens noted the current proposed
language is to allow reasonable access to the lakeshore, which can be accomplished with a four-foot wide
deck.
Leslie moved,Jurgens seconded,to table Application#05-3095,Minnetonka Portable Dredging on
behalf of Gregg Steinhafel, 2265 North Shore Drive. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
8. #05-3124 WILLIAM AND RHONDA OMLIE, 1860 SHADYWOOD ROAD,VARIANCE
7:50 P.M.-8:07 P.M.
Bill Omlie, Applicant,and Roland Toenges, Edina,were present.
PAGE 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3124 William and Rhonda Omlie, Continued)
Curtis stated the applicants are proposing to change the pitch of the roof of their existing detached garage
from a 4/12 roof to a 10/12 roof to match the home and for additional storage. The increase in roof
volume within the substandard setback requires a variance review. The existing garage is located three
feet from the property line.
The applicants are requesting, one, a 75'-250' hardcover variance for 29.5 percent where 26 percent was
approved in a 1993 variance approval; two, a hardcover variance within the 250'-500' zone to allow 37.2
percent hardcover where 30 percent is normally allowed and 37.2 percent currently exists; and three, a
rear yard street setback of 3.0 feet where 10 feet is normally required and 3.0 feet currently exists.
Staff recommends approval of the rear yard setback variance for the garage roof subject to the removal of
excess hardcover to achieve the levels approved in 1993.
Omlie stated the garage has existed in this location since they purchased the house in the 1970s and that
the roof on the existing garage needs to be replaced due to its sagging, deteriorating condition. Omlie
stated they are attempting to match the house that they remodeled back in 1993. Omlie indicated they
were unable to improve the garage back in 1993 due to finances.
Rahn inquired whether the hardcover could be reduced to what was approved back in 1993.
Toenges indicated there is a small retaining wall around the garage, which probably accounts for the
difference.
Bremer noted there is a big percentage increase in the hardcover and that the retaining wall probably does
not account for the entire increase. Bremer stated she is speaking about the 75'-250' area and that the
hardcover at 29 percent in this area is higher than the 26 percent that was approved in 1993.
Omlie stated he is unsure where the difference comes from and that they followed the plans that were
approved.
Curtis stated the difference amounts to 834 square feet.
Bremer pointed out the retaining walls are not located within the 75'-250' zone.
Omlie stated the overhang on the garage would be reduced with the change in the pitch of the roof.
Omlie stated the driveway was proposed to be slightly different in 1993 but was disapproved by the
Council.
Kempf inquired whether the sidewalk around the lakeside of the house or the deck have appeared
since 1993.
Curtis stated the sidewalk and deck could account for some of the difference.
PAGE 14
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
' Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3124 William and Rhonda Omlie, Continued)
Jurgens stated the hardcover that was approved was 26 percent and not 29 percent and that the hardcover
needs to be reduced.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn indicated he is in agreement with Staff's recommendations and that the hardcover needs to be
reduced to the 26 percent that was previously approved in 1993. Rahn stated the applicant would need to
decide where the additional hardcover would be removed.
Winkey commented there is not an issue with what is being proposed with the garage but that the
hardcover needs to be reduced by three percent in the 75'-250' zone. Winkey stated it appears to
primarily be the lakeside sidewalk that has increased the hardcover.
Leslie inquired whether the Planning Commission should specify where the hardcover should be reduced.
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission could simply give direction to the applicant that the hardcover
be reduced by three percent prior to this application appearing before the City Council.
Leslie indicated he would prefer the applicant determine where the hardcover should be reduced. Leslie
stated 834 square feet would need to be removed in the 75'-250' zone in order to comply with what was
approved in 1993.
Curtis stated 177 square feet would also need to be removed in the 250'-500' zone. Curtis noted the
zones appear to have changed somewhat in size since 1993. Curtis stated she does not have anything to
compare the accuracy of the measurements of the zones.
Rahn pointed out the new survey shows both zones being over what was approved.
Bremer inquired whether the hardcover could have been affected by the lot line rearrangement.
Curtis stated the survey depicts the same setback for the garage.
Gaffron stated because the size of the zones have been reported differently,he would prefer to use a
square footage number rather than a percentage.
Leslie inquired what the 78 feet of hardcover consists of in the 0-75' zone.
Toenges noted a different surveyor was used to calculate the hardcover. Toenges stated the first surveyor
probably did not count the retaining wall in the 0-75'zone. Toenges stated at the time of the remodeling
project they did work closely with the building inspector and that they believed they were in compliance
with what was approved.
PAGE 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3124 William and Rhonda Omlie,Continued)
Leslie stated it is the intent of the Planning Commission to gain compliance with what was approved in
1993.
Leslie moved,Rahn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3124,William and
Rhonda Omlie, 1860 Shadywood Road,granting of a rear yard street setback of 3.0 feet,subject to
the amount of hardcover on the property being made consistent with Resolution No.3236.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
9. #05-3126 TODD AND MYSTI COURNEYA,4620 TONKAVIEW LANE,VARIANCE
The applicants were not present.
This item follows Item#12.
10. #05-3129 ASCENT INVESTMENTS,INC.,ON BEHALF OF DOUGLAS'CLINT, 1345
REST POINT LANE,VARIANCE,8:08 P.M.—8:13 P.M.
Kimberly Klint,Applicant,was present.
Gundlach stated the applicant is requesting lot area, lot width,and side street setback variances to allow
the construction of a new residence. Gundlach stated the lot is approximately one-half acre in size in a
one-acre zone and is 76 feet in width at the 75-foot setback. The side street setback variance is being
requested to permit a setback of 23 feet when 35 feet is normally required and three feet currently exists.
Staff recommends approval of the request for the lot area and lot width variances,but recommends denial
of the side street setback variance. Gundlach noted the existing residence does not meet the required
setback but that there is adequate building area within the required setbacks to construct a reasonably
sized residence but would require a redesign of the house.
Mrs.Klint had nothing to add to Staff's report.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn stated in his view there is an adequate building pad and that the lot is more suitable for a longer
shaped house. Rahn stated there does not appear to be a hardship inherent with the land.
Kempf stated he has seen more difficult building pads than this one and that some consideration should be
given to a different design.
PAGE 16
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3129 Ascent Investments,Inc., Continued)
Fritzler stated he would like to see the house be compliant with the setback.
Kempf moved,Rahn seconded,to recommend approval of a lot width and lot area variance and
denial of a side street setback variance for Application#05-3129,Ascent Investments,Inc.,on
behalf of Douglas and Kimberly Klint, 1345 Rest Point Lane. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1,Bremer
opposed.
Bremer stated she is opposed because of the unique shape of the lot.
11. #05-3130 STEPHEN AND JEAN SKORO,2428 CASCO POINT ROAD,VARIANCE,
8:13 P.M.—8:22 P.M.
Stephen and Jean Skoro,Applicants,were present.
Curtis stated the applicants are requesting a 250'-500' zone hardcover variance to allow 38.9 percent
hardcover where 30 percent is normally allowed and 40.2 percent currently exists in order to construct a
242 square foot screen porch.
Staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance in conjunction with hardcover removals should the
Planning Commission deem additional removals appropriate.
Mr. Skoro pointed out the gravel driveway constitutes approximately 20 percent of the lot. Skoro stated
the area labeled blacktop next the garage is actually gravel and that they are proposing to return that area
to sod to reduce the hardcover. Skoro noted they are below the 15 percent structural coverage limit.
Rahn inquired whether the gravel driveway loops around to the concrete area.
Skoro stated it does. Skoro indicated they have a tuck-under garage,with the structure having been built
in 1939.
Rahn noted the U-shaped gravel driveway services the lower garage. Rahn stated the Planning
Commission likes to see reductions in hardcover wherever possible.
Skoro stated they are also removing the sandbox. Skoro indicated the concrete pad next to the house is
used quite frequently.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Jurgens stated in his opinion there is room for further reductions in hardcover.
Leslie concurred with Jurgens and that the driveway could be reduced in width somewhat near the garage.
PAGE 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18, 2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3130 Stephen and Jean Skoro, Continued)
Skoro stated that is possible. Skoro stated the only issue he has with reducing the width of the driveway
is for aesthetic reasons. Skoro indicated there is a retaining wall that is abutted by the driveway.
Mrs. Skoro stated they would like to retain some area for a turnaround.
Skoro stated he is willing to reduce the hardcover as much as possible. Skoro indicated there are a couple
of concrete pads that could also be removed but that he is unable to commit at this time to a certain
percentage. Skoro stated they would like to retain some of the driveway to help accommodate his elderly
parents.
Kempf moved,Winkey seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3130, Stephen and
Jean Skoro,granting of a 250'-500' zone hardcover variance to allow 38.9 percent hardcover where
40.2 percent currently exists in order to construct a 242 square foot screen porch,subject to the
removal of the sandbox and a portion of the driveway located near the garage.
Jurgens stated he would like the retaining wall also removed.
Skoro indicated there would be considerable expense associated with removing the retaining wall.
Kempf indicated he would like to leave his motion as stated.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 2,Jurgens and Fritzler Opposed.
Fritzler stated he would like to see the retaining wall also removed.
Mrs. Skoro pointed out there is a significant drop by the retaining wall.
Fritzler stated he does not want to see the hardcover reappear on this lot in the future.
Jurgens stated he would like to see further reductions in hardcover.
(Recess taken at 8:22 p.m.—8:30 p.m.)
12. #05-3131 STEVE BOHL OF BOHLAND DEVELOPMENT,INC., 190 WILLOW DRIVE
NORTH AND 177 GLENDALE DRIVE,PRELIMINARY PLAT,8:30 P.M.—9:24 P.M.
Mark Gronberg, Gronberg&Associates, appeared on behalf of the Applicant.
Gaffron stated the applicants are in the process of purchasing a portion of the Calvin Presbyterian Church
property at 177 Glendale Drive and a portion of the Keith Williamson property at 190 Willow Drive
North. The applicants are proposing a plat to create nine new 1/3-acre single-family residential building
PAGE 18
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued)
lots served by a new cul-de-sac road accessing to Willow Drive directly across from Elm Lane. Gaffron
noted a portion of the church property is located in the City of Long Lake but that all new residential lots
would be located in Orono.
This area is guided in the Orono 2000-2020 Community Management Plan for single-family residential
housing at a density of two to three units per acre. The area has never been rezoned to match the
Community Management Plan guided density and the application includes a request for rezoning. The
property is currently zoned RR-1B Single Family Rural Residential District,requiring a 2.0 dry buildable
acres per lot and a 200' lot width.
Gaffron indicated the proposed SFR development for nine new homes has an average dry buildable lot
area of slightly over 15,000 square feet,with no new building lots less than 14,000 square feet as
recommended by the Planning Commission at the sketch plan stage. This fits into the general range of lot
sizes in the surrounding neighborhood.
The property contains wetlands at the south end,which would have to be protected by a Conservation and
Flowage Easement. Lot 9 and a small sliver of Lot 10 contain a small wetland that the developer
proposes to fill,with mitigation to occur on Lots 3, 9, 10, and 11 in order for Lot 9 to be viable. Gaffron
stated the City's current wetland moratorium, which expires in approximately one month, and in-process
ordinance changes may have some impact on how this wetland will be treated. The applicant is
investigating whether this fill/mitigation will be possible with the MCWD. Staff does have a concern
regarding the location of homes so near the proposed stormwater ponding on Lots 10 and 11.
Gaffron stated the proposed development is required to provide stormwater management systems
including ponding. Easements for the natural drainageway along the south end of the site will be
required. The entire property, including wetlands and the Williamson resident lot,will be subject to the
Storm Water and Drainage Trunk Fee established for 2005. The Planning Commission should decide
whether the church parcel and Lot 3 should be exempt from the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee.
If this site is developed under the RPUD standards, and depending on whether the road becomes public or
private, it may be appropriate to place the wetlands and ponds into a community owned outlot,which
would have an impact on the gross lot area for Lots 9, 10, and 11.
Gaffron stated at the sketch plan review the Planning Commission concluded that the RPUD standards for
SFR development are generally appropriate for this site, with a few minor revisions. The RPUD
standards are summarized as follows:
1. A 15,000 square foot minimum dry buildable lot area. The Planning Commission had indicated
that a 14,000 square foot minimum was acceptable.
2. A 90-foot minimum lot width at the setback line. All nine new lots do meet this using a 30-foot
street setback.
PAGE 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued)
3. A 125-foot minimum lot depth. All lots but Lots 2,4, and 5 meet this when measured from the
new road to the midpoint of the opposite lot line.
4. A 40-foot rear yard or 20 percent of lot depth, whichever is less. Lots 2 and 6 do not meet this
standard but will not be affected if it is required.
5. A 25-foot front setback on internal streets.
6. A 50-foot setback on collector or arterial streets. The existing Williamson house at 40 feet will
remain nonconforming.
7. A 10-foot side yard on interior lot lines, 15-foot side yard at exterior of RPUD.
8. Side yards abutting street must meet front setback requirement. Gaffron noted all lots do meet
this requirement.
9. A 30-foot maximum building height.
Gaffron stated the 15 percent limit applies to all zoning districts and does not make an exception for a
RPUD. However, the RPUD District does not specifically establish a"Lot Coverage by Structures"limit.
Instead,the RPUD standards limit individual lots to 50 percent hardcover and an individual lot Floor Area
Ratio. The nine proposed homes range from as low as 10 percent lot coverage to as much as 25 percent
lot coverage. Gaffron stated the Planning Commission should make a recommendation as to whether
both the 15 percent limit and the Floor Area Ratio should apply to this development or just the Floor Area
Ratio.
Gaffron stated the proposed road layout meets the corridor standards of a 50-foot right-of-way and
100-foot cul-de-sac diameter and the radius appears to meet the 275' standard for a 30 mile per hour road.
The access location onto Willow Drive is directly across Elm Lane. The only lots proposed to access
other than from the proposed new road are the existing church and the Williamson property. It would not
be appropriate to require the church to access onto this new residential street and the Williamson home is
oriented such that redirecting its access off of Willow Drive would be unreasonable and serve no real
purpose.
Gaffron requested the Planning Commission consider the following items:
1. Determine whether the RPUD is the appropriate rezoning option for this development. The
Planning Commission may also wish to discuss whether rezoning proposed Lot 3 to RPUD is
appropriate or whether it should remain as a conditional use in the RR-1B zone.
2. The applicant must provide a suitable plans and elevation views showing how development of the
site can meet the City's Conservation Design goals.
PAGE 20
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued)
3. Under Orono's pending wetland ordinance revisions, if the wetland basin is between 2.5 and 5
acres as anticipated,the City would require a 25 foot buffer and additional 20 foot buffer setback
for structures from the wetland,which would have potential significant impacts on house
placement and buildability for Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11.
4. If this site is developed via the RPUD standards,and depending on whether the road becomes
public or private, it may be appropriate to place the wetlands and ponds into a commonly owned
outlot.
5. The Planning Commission should review the conformity with lot standards as noted on the table
on Page 2.
6. The Planning Commission should discuss and make a recommendation as to whether both the 15
percent limit and the FAR should apply to this development, or just the FAR.
Gronberg stated the lot line between Lots 1 and 2 is located in its proposed location due to a row of
evergreen trees that currently exist. Gronberg stated wetland mitigation for the wetland located near Lot
9 is being discussed with the Watershed District and if wetland mitigation is not allowed,Lot 9 would be
eliminated. Gronberg stated if Lot 9 is eliminated, some of the area could be dedicated for park.
Gronberg noted he was not aware of the ten percent recreation area requirement until tonight.
Gaffron indicated the RPUD standards require that each RPUD development dedicate a minimum of ten
percent of the gross project area in private recreational uses for project residences.
Lee Aschenbeck, 131 Glendale Drive, stated he would like to see the amount of housing reduced in this
area given the number of variances that appear to be necessary.
Gaffron stated each specific lot should be looked at in terms of variances and whether any hardship exists.
There were no additional public comments.
Winkey inquired whether this plan would need to be revised if the Wetland Ordinance applies in this area.
Gaffron stated the property does contain wetlands at the south end,which would need to be protected by a
Conservation and Flowage Easement. The wetland near Lots 9 and 10 may be impacted by the draft
Wetland Ordinance and the applicant is currently exploring with the MCWD whether fill/mitigation of
this area is possible. Gaffron stated it is possible that a 25-foot buffer and an additional 20-foot buffer
setback would be required,which could have a significant impact on house placement and buildability for
Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11.
Winkey stated it appears that a majority of the lots would require variances and that it appears a large
number of houses are being proposed for this area,which may not be realistic. Winkey inquired whether
PAGE 21
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued)
wetlands have ever been used as passive or active recreational use in order to qualify for the 10 percent
clause.
Gaffron stated the City has only one other RPUD,which is Stone Bay, and that the wetlands on that site
were not used as passive recreation in that situation. Gaffron noted there is a city park located across the
street from this proposed development.
Jurgens inquired whether some type of fee could be imposed to help improve the park located across the
street in lieu of the 10 percent of land dedication.
Gaffron stated the RPUD standards do not contemplate a fee.
Jurgens stated he would like construction limits demonstrated on the plans,noting that in his view this
site is going to be completely cleared to allow for construction. Jurgens stated he would like to see what
is being proposed for the land to the south and the impact it would have on the roads in this area.
Rahn inquired whether there are any lots that are less than 14,000 square feet. Rahn stated it is his
understanding that the 14,000 square feet was agreed to in order to allow more affordable housing in this
area.
Gaffron stated one of the goals in the changes in the Comprehensive Plan was to allow for densities
greater than two units per acre, which is a huge change from what it is currently zoned for. Gaffron stated
the lower square footage allows for higher density in this area but does not guarantee that the housing
being proposed for this area would be affordable.
Rahn inquired whether the 15 percent would be more restrictive than the floor area ratio.
Gaffron stated it would be difficult for the developer to adhere to the 15 percent limit given the type of
housing being proposed for this area. Gaffron stated the City's code does not say that an RPUD is subject
to the 15 percent.
Jurgens stated in his view this development will end up being a number of large houses on small lots and
gives the appearance of a large amount of massing.
Winkey stated in his view the 15 percent is too restrictive.
Gaffron stated if the developer is required to adhere to the 15 percent, it is likely that tuck-under garages
would be constructed,which would have a negative impact on the marketability of the project. Gaffron
stated the question is whether this development would be viable if held to the 15 percent.
Rahn questioned whether rezoning of Lot 3 is necessary at this point.
PAGE 22
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3131 Steve Bohl,Continued)
Gaffron stated the RPUD District does not allow churches and would remain as a conditional use.
Gronberg indicated a lot line rearrangement could be done removing the church and Long Lake from this
project.
Gaffron stated he is unsure what would be gained by a lot line rearrangement.
Rahn stated in his opinion the zoning of Lot 3 could remain as is for the time being. Rahn questioned
whether the Planning Commission should discuss the wetland buffers at this time.
Gaffron stated due to the wetland moratorium,this application would need to be tabled. Gaffron noted
the moratorium expires August 23rd.
Rahn commented it is difficult to come up with some designs when the Planning Commission does not
know what requirements will be implemented.
Gaffron stated another issue for consideration is the close proximity of a residential house to a stormwater
pond. Gaffron inquired whether the Planning Commission would be agreeable to granting any variances
on any of the lots.
Leslie stated the Planning Commission has tried to discourage allowing developments that require a
number of variances.
Bremer indicated she would not be opposed to granting some variances given the nature of the zoning for
this area. Bremer stated in her view the 15 percent limit should not be required given the type of density
being proposed.
Rahn stated in his opinion the City and developer should address the 10 percent recreation area. Rahn
questioned whether there should be a homeowners association for this development to deal with the
maintenance issues.
Gaffron stated the road could be a public roadway but that the pond would be a maintenance issue for a
homeowners association. Gaffron stated in his opinion ultimately the City would take over maintenance
of stormwater ponds throughout the city.
Winkey inquired why the roadway should be a city roadway.
Gaffron stated it is a matter of urban density that determines whether it is a public roadway versus a
private roadway.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to recommend that the Floor Area Ratio should apply to
this development and not the 15 percent.
Rahn inquired whether this site would have city water.
PAGE 23
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3131 Steve Bohl, Continued)
Gronberg stated the developer is pursuing city water from Long Lake,which would be the better option.
Rahn noted a letter dated July 8, 2005,has been received from Jim Dillman indicating he would not be
opposed to the development if streetlights are not permitted.
Bremer moved,Fritzler seconded,to table Application#05-3131, Steve Bohl of Bohland
Development,Inc., 190 Willow Drive North and 177 Glendale Drive. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
9. #05-3126 TODD AND MYSTI COURNEYA,4620 TONKAVIEW LANE,VARIANCE,
9:24 P.M.—9:35 P.M.
Todd Courneya,Applicant,was present.
Gundlach stated the applicant is requesting a front yard setback variance to permit garage additions with
living space above the existing two-stall attached garage for the property located at 4620 Tonkaview
Lane. The front yard setback variance is needed to permit a front yard setback of 20 feet when 35 feet is
normally required, 25 feet currently exists, and 25 feet was approved by variance in 1995. The applicant
is proposing a 5' by 25' addition to the front end of the existing attached garage and a 10' by 23' addition
attached to the north side of the attached garage. The proposal also includes incorporating living space
above the new three-stall attached garage. The application includes a request to extend the existing
attached garage five feet forward and constructing an additional stall to the north,which requires an
additional five-foot encroachment on the 25-foot setback.
Staff recommends denial of the request. In Staff's opinion, adequate hardship has not been demonstrated
to allow a further encroachment on the previously approved front yard setback of 25 feet. Staff suggests
the Planning Commission discuss the reasonableness of granting variances to allow for three-stall
garages.
Courneya had nothing to add to Staff's report.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn stated he is in agreement with Staff's recommendation and that it is difficult to approve the
additional encroachment and living space. Rahn indicated he would be more receptive to the proposal if
there were not a further encroachment to the front.
Courneya stated in 1995,they did not realize how far the house was physically located from the road.
Courneya stated the 22-foot garage is not functional and that he would have asked for an additional five
feet at the time the garage was originally proposed had he realized how the garage would be limited in
space.
PAGE 24
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3126 Todd and Mysti Courneya, Continued)
Fritzler stated he also is in agreement with Staff's recommendation. Fritzler stated this garage addition
should have been given more thought at the time the residence was constructed in 1995.
Bremer stated she would be willing to add a garage stall if there was no further encroachment. Bremer
stated in her view the minimum size of a garage should be 24' by 24'.
Gundlach stated a variance is required to add living space above the attached garage as it exists today.
Jurgens stated there is always the possibility that the road could be reconfigured and that he is not in favor
of constructing closer to the road.
Rahn stated the applicant could have his application tabled to allow him time to revise his plans or agree
to not encroach further into the front or side setbacks.
Courneya indicated he would look at no further encroachment.
Rahn moved,Leslie seconded,to recommend denial of the front yard variance for Application
#05-3126,Todd and Mysti Courneya,4620 Tonkaview Lane,but with the understanding that the
Planning Commission would be receptive to a side addition that encroaches no further than what
currently exists in the front yard,with no encroachment into the side yard setback, and to allow
living space above the existing garage and new addition. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
13. #05-3132 PETER ESKUCHE ON BEHALF OF BRAD AND CHERYL JONES,2545
NORTH SHORE DRIVE,VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,9:35 P.M.—
9:50 P.M.
Bradley Jones, 1245 Woodhill Avenue, Sven Gustafson, Stonewood,Peter Eskuche,Architect,were
present.
Gundlach stated the applicant is requesting a lot area variance to permit construction of a new residence
on an existing lot 1.5 acres in total area with .92 acres considered dry buildable,where 2.0 acres is
normally required. In addition, a conditional use permit is being requested to allow 900 cubic yards of fill
outside the 75-foot setback when 500 cubic yards or less is permitted without conditional use approval.
The property is located in the LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential District,which has a two-acre
minimum,and consists of 1.5 acres.
Staff recommends approval of the lot area variance with the stipulation that the deck on the lake side of
the home be confirmed to meet a 30-foot setback from the side lot line,as no side yard setback variance
would be granted, and also that the chain link fence shown within 75 feet of the lake on the applicant's
property be removed.
PAGE 25
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
• Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3132 Peter Eskuche,Continued)
Gundlach stated a computer-generated image of the fill has been submitted by the applicant and
distributed to the Planning Commission. Gundlach noted the grading and drainage plan has been revised
from the plan before the Planning Commission tonight and addresses some of the recommendations of the
City Engineer.
Gundlach noted a letter from the property owner at 2565 North Shore Drive was received after the report
was prepared.
Jones stated the former house was located closer to the lake than what is being proposed for the footprint
and that they are attempting to meet as many of the building code requirements as possible. Jones
indicated placement of the dirt in front of the house eliminates the need to access the residence via a
number of stairs and allows for easier access by people confined to wheelchairs. Jones stated the amount
of dirt in that area would not affect the neighbors' drainage. Jones noted the neighbors are in agreement
with the project.
Rahn opened the public hearing.
Jeff Martineau, 2565 North Shore Drive, indicated he has seen the plans and he is not opposed to the
project. Martineau indicated he also is not opposed to the fill being placed on the property line.
There were no additional public comments regarding this application.
Rahn stated he does not have any issues with the fill as long as the City Engineer approves it. Rahn
inquired who determined the amount of fill.
Eskuche stated that number comes directly from the city engineer.
Gundlach stated the applicant's surveyor came up with the 900 cubic yard number. Gundlach stated she
has reviewed the property and believes the number is fairly accurate.
Bremer inquired whether the deck is located 30 feet from the property line.
Eskuche stated the deck does not encroach.
Jurgens inquired about the elevation of the garage and whether that could be lowered to reduce the
amount of fill required. Jurgens stated the access door could be eliminated, which would allow the garage
to be lowered.
Eskuche stated they would like to retain that access to the garage. Eskuche pointed there are two lines
missing on the survey.
Jones stated they are not seeking a variance to the side yard setback.
PAGE 26
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3132 Peter Eskuche,Continued)
Jurgens pointed out some of the extra fill is necessary to accommodate otherwise lower garages.
Jones stated the elevation of the garage was one factor but that the primary reason for the fill is to allow
walk-in access to the residence.
Rahn moved,Leslie seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3132,Peter Eskuche on
behalf of Brad and Cheryl Jones,2545 North Shore Drive,granting of a lot area variance to permit
construction of a new residence on an existing lot,and granting of a conditional use permit to allow
900 cubic yards of fill outside the 75' setback when 500 cubic yards or less is permitted,subject to
the recommendations of Staff, and further subject to the stipulation that the amount of fill does not
exceed 900 cubic yards. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 2,Jurgens and Fritzler Opposed.
14. #05-3134 DAVID PARK OF DURABILT ON BEHALF OF RICHARD AND PATRICIA
CROSBY,2705 WALTERS PORT LANE,VARIANCE,9:50 P.M.—10:12 P.M.
Richard Crosby, Applicant, and David Park,Durabilt, and Tom Kaspers,were present.
Curtis stated the applicant is proposing to construct a 272 square foot attached garage onto the existing
home. The property is currently has nonconforming hardcover within 75 feet of the lake and within the
75'-250' zone. Hardcover variances are being requested for both the 0-75' zone and the 75'-250' zone.
The applicants are proposing 4.2 percent hardcover for the 0-75' zone and 55 percent hardcover for the
75'-250' zone. The total proposed amount of hardcover on the lot would amount to 57 percent where 56
percent totally exists. Curtis noted the calculations do reflect removal of all fabric and plastic liner from
the landscape areas.
Planning Staff recommends approval of a hardcover variance to allow the construction of a 272 square
foot garage addition to the home consistent with hardcover removals resulting in levels that the Planning
Commission deems appropriate. Curtis illustrated on the overhead the area the applicants are proposing
to remove.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Crosby stated he would like to point out that the narrowness of the road in front of his residence only
allows one car to traverse down the road and that it is difficult for any large truck to access the lot.
Crosby indicated the previous owners constructed the driveway to allow for vehicles to turn around as
well as parking.
Fritzler stated in his opinion the amount of hardcover on this lot needs to be significantly reduced.
Fritzler pointed out that normally the City only allows 25 percent and noted that 54 percent currently
exists.
PAGE 27
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3134 David Park,Continued)
Rahn stated in his view a large portion of the driveway could be reduced.
Crosby stated it would be difficult for a vehicle to turn around without the horseshoe. Crosby stated he
could possibly reduce the width of the driveway somewhat.
Rahn stated the driveway could be reduced with one area possibly being widened to accommodate
parking. Rahn indicated the Planning Commission typically reviews hardcover to see whether any
nonessential hardcover could be removed.
Fritzler pointed out there are also two curb cuts,which is nonconforming.
Jurgens inquired whether both garages would remain.
Crosby stated both garages would remain.
Rahn noted structural coverage is not an issue.
Jurgens commented more hardcover is necessary to service two garages rather than one garage and that it
becomes a design issue.
Park stated the applicant is willing to remove approximately 1,000 square feet off of the driveway. Park
stated it is currently very difficult to get a large vehicle around the horseshoe.
Crosby stated he is willing to reduce some of the width of the horseshoe but that it is difficult to
maneuver a vehicle out of the property without the horseshoe.
Rahn stated he does not believe the entire horseshoe is necessary.
Leslie stated in his opinion it is possible to have only one driveway access this property.
Crosby stated if the width of the driveway is reduced on the one side, it would not leave any room for
parking. Crosby stated there is no room on the street to accommodate parking.
Rahn stated it would be easier to determine how much driveway is necessary if there were dimensions
given on the drawing. Rahn stated the Planning Commission does not design driveways and inquired
whether the applicant would like to have his application tabled in order to revise his plans.
Crosby noted he is removing four times the amount of hardcover that is being proposed.
Rahn noted this property has approximately double the amount of hardcover that is normally allowed.
Fritzler reiterated that the City only allows one curb cut.
PAGE 28
MINUTES OF THE
•
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3134 David Park,Continued)
Jurgens suggested the applicant speak with Staff to determine the minimum driveway that would be
allowed for this property.
Leslie stated it would be difficult to give the applicant a specific amount of hardcover that should be
removed without designing the driveway.
Crosby inquired whether he could simply reduce the width of the driveway.
Bremer suggested the applicant do the calculations on how much hardcover would remain if the width is
reduced and also hardcover calculations if one side of the horseshoe is eliminated.
Leslie stated he would like to see hardcover calculations for both types of driveways.
Bremer indicated she is basically looking for a net reduction in hardcover.
Curtis stated one 20-foot curb cut is normally allowed.
Jurgens moved,Fritzler seconded,to table Application#05-3134,David Park of Durabilt on behalf
of Richard and Patricia Crosby,2705 Walters Port Lane,to allow the applicants time to revise their
plans and consider their options for reducing hardcover.
Rahn noted there is a lakeside deck.
Curtis stated there is a brick patio and a second floor deck.
Rahn inquired whether there is a deck down by the lake.
Curtis stated the deck is used to access the dock.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
Curtis inquired what the Planning Commission would like to see for removals.
Rahn stated the Planning Commission reviews the property as a whole and that any nonessential
hardcover should be removed if it is above the 25 percent limit.
Crosby inquired whether elimination of the right side of the horseshoe would be looked upon favorably.
Leslie indicated he would look at it favorably.
PAGE 29
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
15. #05-3137 ROBERT AND VICTORIA JAFFRAY,540 BARRETT AVENUE,VARIANCES,
10:12 P.M.— 10:20 P.M.
Robert Jaffray,Applicant,was present.
Gundlach stated the applicant is requesting a front yard setback variance to permit an attached garage
addition and a covered entry addition. The applicant is requesting a front yard setback of 23 feet where
50 feet is normally required, 23 feet currently exists, and 25 feet was previously approved.
Staff has discovered that the previously approved 1992 and 1999 variances required a 25-foot setback
from Barrett Avenue and the survey submitted with this request shows the setback to be 23 feet from
Barrett Avenue at the most northwestern point. Staff concludes that the previously approved variances
did not take into consideration that the house does not sit square on the lot and is angled north-northwest.
Staff finds that the placement of the existing house from the front lot line and topography calling for a
tuck-under style garage creates a hardship to warrant approval of a front yard setback. Staff feels,
however,that the applicant should be held to the 25-foot setback previously approved as the proposed
plans can be shifted two feet to the east without changing the design.
Jaffray stated the current garage is 19.3' deep,with a service door in one corner,which makes it difficult
to park a vehicle in there. Jaffray stated he would like to bump the garage out an additional five feet to
allow for a more functional garage.
Rahn inquired whether the service door would be eliminated if the addition is moved two feet.
Jaffray stated he could eliminate the door but design-wise it does not make much sense.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn stated he does not have any issues with the recommendation of Staff.
Bremer inquired how the setback differs from what was originally approved.
Jaffray stated the house is slightly off from being parallel to the road and that could have resulted in the
house being constructed 23 feet from the road rather than 25 feet.
Bremer moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3137,Robert and
Victoria Jaffray,granting of a front yard setback variance at 22.8' in order to construct a garage
addition onto the existing home,including a screen porch above the easterly 20' by 15.5' of the
addition,for the property located at 540 Barrett Avenue.
Leslie inquired how the City can be assured that this addition will not also encroach more than 22.8'
given the placement of the house.
Jaffray stated he is assuming the new survey completed by Gronberg is accurate.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
PAGE 30
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
16. #05-3138 DAN LARKIN ON BEHALF OF SANDRA BENSON, 1376 BALDUR PARK
ROAD,VARIANCE, 10:20 P.M.—10:35 P.M.
Sandra Benson,Applicant, and Dan Larkin and Harry Winger, DBH Larkin Construction, were present.
Curtis stated the applicant's property is located almost at the end of the Baldur Park Road. There is a 75'
setback requirement from the ordinary high water level on two sides of the property,resulting in a very
limited buildable area. The existing home is located almost entirely within the north 75-foot setback of
the property, causing the property to be considerably out of conformance with zoning regulations. The
applicant is proposing to remove her existing detached garage and attach a slightly smaller garage to the
home with living space above.
The applicant is requesting the following variances:
1. A 0-75'zone hardcover variance for 32.9 percent hardcover where 0 percent is normally allowed
and 32.6 percent currently exists.
2. A 75'-250' setback hardcover variance for 29.5 percent hardcover where 25 percent is normally
allowed and 31.4 percent currently exists.
3. A lake setback variance.
4. A structural coverage variance for 21 percent structural coverage where 15 percent is allowed and
21.5 percent currently exists.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the lake setback variance and approval of some level of
hardcover and structural coverage variances as the Planning Commission deems appropriate.
Dan Larkin stated there will be some further hardcover reductions that are not depicted on the survey,
including removal of a brick sidewalk and two retaining walls.
Larkin stated he did speak with one of the adjoining neighbors regarding the impact on his view to the
lake, and after showing him the plans,he has indicated that he is not opposed to the project.
Larkin stated the boulder wall could also be removed, which is not depicted on the survey.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Fritzler stated he would like to see some more consideration given to reducing the hardcover. Fritzler
inquired whether the hardcover in the 75'-250' zone could be reduced further.
Curtis stated the brick walk would also be removed.
Larkin concurred that the brick walk would be removed and the garage door would be offset,which
would reduce the driveway somewhat.
PAGE 31
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#05-3138 Dan Larkin, Continued)
Rahn inquired whether the dormer depicted in the proposal would be living space.
Larkin stated that would be living space.
Rahn inquired whether there are any setback variances being requested.
Curtis stated they are requesting a 10-foot lake setback variance.
Winkey stated aside from the retaining walls and the brick walk,there does not appear to be any other
hardcover that could be removed. Winkey noted the overall structural coverage is being reduced on this
lot with the new proposal.
Jurgens inquired whether all of the decks have been approved.
Curtis stated the decks have not changed and were reviewed as part of a different application in 2003.
Jurgens inquired whether the decks were approved in 2003.
Gaffron stated the decks were the subject of a variance application a number of years ago.
Bremer moved,Winkey seconded,to recommend approval of Application#05-3138,Dan Larkin of
DBH Larkin Construction on behalf of Sandra Benson, 1376 Baldur Park Road,granting of
hardcover variances in the 0-75' zone and 75'-250',a lake setback variance,and a structural
coverage variance in order to remove an existing detached garage and construct an attached garage
to the existing home,with the condition that the brick walk and decorative stones be removed.
VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1,Jurgens Opposed.
Jurgens stated he does not feel there has been a complete submittal of the hardcover on this property.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
17. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING
COUNCIL MEETINGS JUNE 27 AND JULY 11,2005
Jurgens gave a brief update on the June 27th Council meeting. Jurgens stated the Palm application was
approved subject to review of the drainage and grading plan by the city engineer. Jurgens stated Valerius
was directed by the Council to eliminate the exterior stairway and construct an interior stairway.
Leslie gave a brief update on the July 11th Council meeting and noted there was some discussion
regarding the development of a comprehensive plan for Navarre.
PAGE 32
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,July 18,2005
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(Planning Commission Comments,Continued)
Gaffron stated the City Council at its last workshop discussed a moratorium for Navarre and that a
one-year moratorium is likely to be passed at the next City Council meeting.
18. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Gaffron noted a Planning Commission work session has been scheduled for the first Wednesday of
August.
19. PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 20,2005
Bremer moved,Rahn seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission
meeting of June 20,2005,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
20. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JULY 25
AND AUGUST 8,2005
July 25—Kempf
August 8—Fritzler
ADJOURNMENT
Bremer moved,Leslie seconded,to adjourn th rono Planning Commission meeting at 10:45 p.m.
David Rahn, Chair
PAGE 33