HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/19/2004 Planning Commission Minutes PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE `,751-)i--1 i Ck ) 2--(;151
El COUNCIL
12r-PLANNING COMMISSION PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED
0 PARK COMMISSION BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS.
1.:3 OTHER
PRESENT FOR(from agenda)
NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER
i C-,.1---,.---c----:-..4-
1. --)1`4---i--- '
f _
/31/2 Xvit.'y C 1 &k Al, .-s--5,/-.7 /, -,it.,...ti,., IN--5eari
2. (7a,\‘; ' L\ PA■4' V\ i .C. 57 / Cip.,,i1lAjj 5.__'31-40k 4,Pc/ I, ,r_ 1 _i ., i
3. Tak
4. i •: , 6 1, 1 . t .. dtir (a ' 1 --
5. btfifiz,-,_ )0 /e ,--21-----7,..---/( c_ovy . ,z.i t(f" /1147-&4- - /M/c.-.._-7
6.
t--
7. --&4 X ,,,
Qz..,)(5
8. - L'2--4.- ,4l.Otlt.7
..,—.?, 61s- Ni ' ky ..J,Lk CA
9.
i
4-2 C •e-C
Ltk(c*
1 1. I e<
„v...
■(
--r2.1 i -s-1- t-7- -Lo- ?
12. g,,,,,havy 5,&-a,,,z,4 ev 1 7vivA4,,,,a_ ,,,,, evezaey 0 Dig s21 "kmierg
13. fit../ 7-2 A-I Z„:: v t,-1->r," f Iti-f 7 in-24 it il-vc-v,,,z 04 - 7
14. 9eT i pi'// /I 0 l'i(--1 Co i‘i 'r cY7 t(/. i•L. -1,i/? ,,,,dri 13/1, _1 el9- —36,--7C7
15.
WAAdmInIstratave Support\(Forms)\PublIc Attendance wpd
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL
The Commission met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Chair David
Rahn; Commissioners Jim Leslie, Cynthia Bremer, Ralph Kempf, Roland Jurgens III, J. Marc Fritzler
and Alternate Janice Berg; City Council Liaison Bob Sansevere; Representing staff were Planner
Melanie Curtis, Planner Janice Gundlach and Recorder Glenda D. Spiotta.
Chair David Rahn called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m.
*CONSENT
Chair Rahn recommended adding Item#12, Application#04-3038, Darrell and Karin Anderson and
Bruce Dayton, 900/925/965 Old Long Lake Road, Subdivision to the Consent Agenda. Chair Rahn
indicated there was a consensus to add Application#04-3038 to the Consent Agenda.
*1. 04-3032 CHARLES AND ROSEANNE SIMPSON,2695 KELLY AVENUE, VARIANCE,
PUBLIC HEARING (6:01-6:04 p.m.)
Charles Simpson, applicant, was present.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Rahn moved,Fritzler seconded,to recommend approval of Application #04-3032, Charles and
Roseanne Simpson, 2695 Kelly Avenue, granting the following variances in order to construct a
new residence on an existing lot:
1. Lot area variance to permit construction of a new residence on a lot that is 0.61 acres in
area when 1.0 acres is normally required.
2. Lot width variance to permit construction of a new residence on a lot that is 67.5 feet in
width at the shoreline and 107.5 feet in width at the 75 foot setback when 140 feet is
normally required;
and, stipulating implementation of the recommendations of the City Engineer letter dated
July 6,2004.
VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
*2. #04-3034 ROBERT P. MACK, 1580 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, PUBLIC HEARING (6:01-6:04 p.m.)
Curtis advised that applicant, Robert P. Mack, 1580 Sixth Avenue North, requested Application
#04-3034, for a Conditional Use Permit be removed from the Consent Agenda and tabled pending
further engineering work.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments regarding tabling of Application#04-3034. There were none.
Rahn moved,Fritzler seconded,to table Application#04-3034, Robert P. Mack, 1580 Sixth
Avenue North, Conditional Use Permit.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
Page 1 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
*3. #04-3035 MARK D. STROBEL,525 HUNTER PASS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
PUBLIC HEARING (6:01-6:04 p.m.)
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Rahn moved, Fritzler seconded,to recommend approval of Application#04-3035, Mark D.
Strobel, 525 Hunter Pass, granting a conditional use permit to allow plumbing in an accessory
building in order to construct a bathroom consisting of a toilet, sink and shower within the
existing pool cabana, and stipulating the applicant executes the covenant provided within the
Zoning Ordinance stating the use will not be used for a home occupation, dwelling unit or
rented/leased.
VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
OLD BUSINESS
4. #04-3007 HAROLD AND MILDRED BOWER, 1925 LAKEVIEW TERRACE,
VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING (6:05-6:18 p.m.)
Marc Brickman, Coldwell Banker/Burnet Realty, 19400 Hwy. 7, Excelsior, MN,representing the
applicants, was present.
Gundlach referred to new information received since the last staff reports were provided to the
Planning Commission, as outlined on Page 2 of the July 15, 2004 Staff Report:
• MCWD approved the wetland delineation as presented by the applicants.
• City Engineer provided comments regarding stormwater management implications of
amending the wetland map and allowing the lot to be buildable.
• City Attorney provided an opinion regarding the City's obligation to amend the City's
wetland map.
• City wetlands consultant, John Smyth, indicated there is currently no wetland basis to
deny buildability of the site.
Gundlach advised there is no basis to deny the buildability of the lot but if the City's wetland map is
amended and the applicant is allowed to construct a home on the lot, staff recommended ten
conditions, as listed on Page 3 of the July 15, 2004 Staff Report, that need to be met.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Bremer asked Mr. Brickman what his role was in this matter. Mr. Brickman explained that he is the
listing agent for the Bower's and had facilitated in providing the required information from the
Bower's. He stated the Bower's had diligently complied with requests from the City, MCWD and
Hennepin County.
Bremer asked Mr. Brickman if the applicants had any problems with the ten proposed conditions.
Mr. Brickman indicated the applicants' understand the proposed conditions and that he was
authorized to speak on behalf of the applicants.
Gundlach illustrated the subject property location and the implications of the proposed conditions.
Page 2 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(4. #04-3007 HAROLD AND MILDRED BOWER, 1925 LAKEVIEW TERRACE,
VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING- Continued)
Chair Rahn commented that in the original 1961 plat this property was not meant to be an outlet but
had the same value as the other platted lots and it is sized similarly to others in the plat. He stated
that with those observations and staff's recommendation,he supported the applicants' requests.
Leslie moved,Rahn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#04-3007,Harold and
Mildred Bower, owners of 1925 Lakeview Terrace, requesting revision of the City's June 1975
Wetlands Inventory and Classification to exclude the portions of this vacant lot that are not
wetland under the recent delineation, and granting a lot area variance to allow the lot to be sold
as a building site,with the following conditions:
1. The delineated wetland and a 26' buffer around its perimeter shall be subject to a
Conservation and Flowage Easement,which will disallow any filling or structures within the
wetland and buffer area.
2. An additional drainage easement shall be required along the route of the ditch,to the
1012' elevation contour. No filling, structures or obstructions may be allowed within the
drainage easement.
3. All structures shall be set back a minimum of 10' from the drainage easement, to
allow for protection of the structures and to allow access to the rear of the house.
4. The lot shall also be subject to the standard LR-1A setbacks of 50' front and rear,30'
on the sides. The various setback requirements noted here and above result in a buildable
envelope approximately 50' deep by 75' wide.
5. A driveway to access the site shall be located so that it meets the required wetland
setbacks and does not encroach the drainage easements.
6. Lowest habitable floor elevation shall be no lower than elevation 1014'.
7. Prior to Council action on the variance application, applicant shall provide for City
Engineer approval a schematic house design and grading plan showing how all of the above
conditions can be satisfied.
8. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide sufficient
soils/geotechnical and design information to establish that the proposed improvements will be
structurally stable.
9. The City will concurrently with the resolution of variance approval adopt an
ordinance amending the City's wetland map.
10. Applicant shall grant an easement and construct stormwater rate and quality
control ponding in the area west of the existing ditch.Applicant shall participate in the costs of
replacement of the culvert under Lakeview Terrace.
VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
5. #04-3026 David Pomije, 801 Tonkawa Road,Variance, Public Hearing(6:18-6:28 p.m.)
Anthony Sequira, Rightway General Contractor, Inc., representing the applicant, was present.
Curtis explained the applicant request for after-the-fact lake setback and 0-75' hardcover variances in
order to reconstruct(and reconfigure) a deck, consisting of the following:
a. Hardcover within 0-75' of 11%or 3,464.3 s.f.
Page 3 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(5. #04-3026 David Pomije, 801 Tonkawa Road,Variance, Public Hearing-Continued)
b. Lake set back variance to allow a deck setback of 39' where 75' is required and 49'
currently exists (house).
c. Bluff impact zone encroachment of 25'.
Curtis referred to the 1992 variance approval for this property resulted in hardcover removal. Since
that time, the existing path to the lake had been upgraded to a 4' stone paver path with stairs, which
provide a safer path down the steep slope. She indicated staff determined that the hardcover
calculated in 1992 did not include this existing path and now makes it appear that the 2004 hardcover
calculation is 2%higher than in 1992. The path hardcover accounts for the additional 2%,not an
increase in the size of the deck. Curtis stated staff found that due to the existing location of the home
there may be a hardship to allow the deck to be rebuilt. Additionally, the deck provides a safe "yard"
area for the applicants to enjoy the lakeside of their property from the home.
Curtis recommended approval of the after-the-fact lake setback and hardcover variances as the
location of the existing home and replacement nearly in-kind of a pre-existing deteriorated non-
conforming deck constitute hardship in this situation.
Mr. Sequira pointed out the proposed deck portion to the south eliminates the 18"drop to existing
pavers at the doorway that exists the dining area. He stated their goal is to create a level area as it is
close to the bluff to make it safer when stepping from the house. Chair Rahn asked Mr. Sequira if the
submitted hardcover calculations reflect this deck portion. Mr. Sequira indicated that the hardcover
calculations do include this deck area, and referred to Exhibit E. for clarification.
There followed a discussion that clarified exactly what hardcover calculations had been approved in
1992 and what was included or excluded from the 2004 hardcover calculations. Chair Rahn
summarized that the rebuilding of the existing deck has no further encroachment into the 0-75'
setback.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Jurgens asked for further clarification of the proposed hardcover calculations,referring to Page 3 of
the June 15, 2004 Staff Report. Chair Rahn requested the record to indicate that the hardcover
calculation increase from 11.1%to 13.2% results from the allowed path/access to the lake and not
from any additional deck hardcover.
Bremer moved, Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application #04-3026, David
Pomije, 801 Tonkawa Road, granting after-the-fact lake setback and 0-75' hardcover variances
in order to reconstruct (and reconfigure) a deck, consisting of the following:
a. Hardcover within 0-75' of 11% or 3,464.3 s.f.
b. Lake set back variance to allow a deck setback of 39' where 75' is required and 49'
currently exists (house).
c. Bluff impact zone encroachment of 25'.
VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
Page 4 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
6. #04-3029 MICHAEL KEAVENY,3423/3425 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL SITE
PLAN REVIEW, PUBLIC HEARING (6:29-6:45 p.m.)
Michael Keaveny, applicant, was present.
Gundlach introduced the application for commercial site plan review in order to conduct
improvements to the existing building. The applicant requested the following:
1) Commercial site plan review in order to obtain a building permit to construct a new entrance
at the rear of the building and to convert an existing garage area into a game room (Section
78-642).
2) Hardcover variance to allow 90%hardcover on the site. The improvements associated with
this application will not increase the hardcover above what currently exists(Section 78-1288).
3) Structural coverage variance to allow 23% structural coverage when 15%is allowed and 20%
currently exists. It is not unusual for commercial properties to require a variance to this
requirement, and variances have been approved for structural coverage at 16%to 26%in the
past(Section 78-1403).
4) A parking stall variance to allow 104 parking stalls when 133 stalls are required and 72 stalls
currently exist(Section 78-1516).
5) Parking setback variance to allow the existing gravel lot(to be converted to formalized paved
parking) to maintain a 10' front yard setback from Shoreline Drive (Co. Rd. 15) when 20' is
normally required(Section 78-646 (c)).
Gundlach referred to significant points in the Background (Page 2) and Issues for Discussion(Pages
2- 3) sections of the July 19, 2004 Staff Report. She emphasized there were a number of issues with
the application beyond the structural coverage,parking and hardcover variance requests. These
issues pertain specifically to the uses existing and proposed and whether those uses, such as a game
room, are permitted under the current Zoning Ordinance. Gundlach recommended it should be first
determined whether the uses should be permitted prior to further consideration of structural or
hardcover requirements. Also, if the proposed addition is an expansion of an existing non-
conforming use.
Mr. Keaveny corrected staff's introduction of his application by explaining that he did not plan to
remove beams along one main wall of the building or opening up an interior area. He stated there
were no plans to change the existing building except for the one door that goes into the crib.
Berg asked about a potential loss of parking spaces. Gundlach replied the applicant indicated he was
willing to shorten the addition to 14' to save parking spaces. Mr. Keaveny stated he had no problem
with shortening the addition to 14'.
Chair Rahn asked for any public comments.
Austin Evans, 2497 Kelly Avenue, identified himself as the representative of Neighbors for a Better
Navarre. Mr. Evans stated their group's intent is to expand its representation with more people from
Navarre. He referred to the Issues for Consideration, itemized in the July 19, 2004 Staff Report,
citing Issue#2 which points out the game room proposed is not a permitted, accessory or conditional
Page 5 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(6. #04-3029 MICHAEL KEAVENY,3423/3425 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW, PUBLIC HEARING- Continued)
use within the B-1 zoning district or in any other zoning district throughout the City. Mr. Evans
summarized that the games use should not be in a B-1 District and if allowed by Ordinance, it should
be in a separate district.
Mr. Evans referred to Issue#3, asking if the games room use is one deemed similar to the permitted
uses in a B-1 retail sales business district. He quoted from Section 78-643 of the Zoning Ordinance
for use permitted, such as neighborhood retail sales and commodities, neighborhood service business.
He stated that a games room does not come within the existing Ordinance definitions. It is
entertainment different enough to require its own criteria. Mr. Evans pointed out the subject property
is as close to the residential neighborhood as the distance between a pitcher's mound and home plate.
Referring to Issue #1, Mr. Evans asked how the bowling alley could still be a non-conforming use
since it had been closed for over one year. He suggested that there an effort is underway with the
City Council to find a non-conforming use that would be feasible on the site, noting the staffs
statement about the applicant working with the City to develop a plan for the use of the property and
based on his attendance at city meetings.
Citing from paragraph 1, on page 3, under Issue#1, Mr. Evans asked what is `strict enforcement of
this section' (of City Code), indicating he believed a use either is or is not a legal non-conforming
use. He concluded that the bowling alley is no longer a permitted, legal non-conforming use as it has
been closed for over one year and the Code does not allow for exceptions.
Mr. Evans read into the record from Section 78-71 of Orono's Zoning Code, Item#8, emphasizing
language regarding allowing no expansion or intensification of a non-conforming use.
Mr. Evans observed that the notice posted by the City regarding the planning application is not
visible to the public road but to read it one must go over private property to see it. He asked the City
and its staff to review the matter of assuring the posted notices are visible to the public.
Finally, on behalf of Neighbors for a Better Navarre, Mr. Evans requested the Zoning Ordinance be
enforced. He advised their organization feels strongly that the City should develop a short-term and a
long-term plan for Navarre, and during the plan preparation, a moratorium should be placed on all
planning applications.
Councilmember Sansevere responded to Mr. Evans reference regarding Mr. Keaveny working with
the City Council, and as a member of the City Council, Sansevere stated he had no knowledge of the
City Council working with Mr. Keaveny. Mr. Evans apologized and clarified that he meant to refer
to the City,not specifically to the City Council.
Mr. Keaveny explained he would be increasing green spaces and was trying to improve the building
appearance and to make the building more user friendly to the bowlers. His plans are only to
improve the entry, stairs, repair crumbling walls and a retaining wall, all to make the building a nicer,
neater place. Mr. Keaveny commented he may need other things along with the bowling and pinball
machines.
Page 6 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(6. #04-3029 MICHAEL KEAVENY, 3423/3425 SHORELINE DRIVE, COMMERCIAL
SITE PLAN REVIEW, PUBLIC HEARING-Continued)
Kempf asked Mr. Keaveny specifically what is a game room. Mr. Keaveny responded that the game
room could have video games, electronic games or a pool table.
Gundlach referred to the legal issue of trying to close a non-conforming use, and that the City was
unable to legally close a non-conforming use in the past due to an applicants efforts of working with
the City to get a particular application approved. Gundlach indicated the City had been to court on a
similar situation and lost. She indicated staff was advised that since Mr. Keaveny had been working
with staff, i.e. the City, no efforts should be taken at this time to close the non-conforming use.
Chair Rahn recommended concentrating on the issue of the non-conforming use. He observed that
the application is showing an additional 2000 s.f. which is an expansion of use, and he was not in
favor on supporting an expansion nor supporting a Zoning Code change for permitting a game room
in the B-1 zoning district. Chair Rahn concluded that any expansion of a non-conforming use is
against the Zoning Code.
Bremer remarked that she appreciated Mr. Keaveny's efforts to improve the building appearances.
Leslie observed that the fundamental issue is how to make the bowling alley a feasible business at its
current location, and that it may not be feasible there any longer.
Berg indicated she did not support any effort to rezone the location to allow the game room use.
Mr. Evans reiterated the position of Neighbors for a Better Navarre that the bowling alley is no
longer a non-conforming use as it has been closed for over one year. He advised their group will
consult with their attorney for possible future action.
Leslie moved, Fritzler seconded,to recommend denial of Application #04-3029, Michael
Keaveny,3423/3425 Shoreline Drive, for a commercial site plan review with variances in order
to conduct improvements to the existing building.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
7. #04-3030 MARTHA A.L. SPENCER, 1005 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH,VARIANCE,
PUBLIC HEARING(6:45-6:50 p.m.)
Craig Lagorio, JLM Design/Build, 7155 Cahill Road, Edina, representing the applicant, was present.
Curtis introduced the applicant's request for a lake setback variance to allow grade level decks within
150' of the OHWL on French Lake, a natural environment lake, and a hardcover variance within the
0-75' setback zone in order to construct lakeside decks over existing patios. She recommended
approval of the variances as requested as the existing home is located entirely within the required
150' lake setback and half is located within 75' of the OHWL, with the stipulation that the applicant
remove all fabric and plastic liners on the property.
Page 7 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(7. #04-3030 MARTHA A.L. SPENCER, 1005 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH, VARIANCE,
PUBLIC HEARING-Continued)
Mr. Lagorio advised that the applicant had given him the authority to agree to whatever conditions
are required with the variances. He indicated that Dr. Spencer would prefer not to have the expense
of removal of fabric and plastic landscape liners, but would comply if this were a condition of
approval. Chair Rahn indicated that condition is consistent with prior Planning Commission
recommendations.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Chair Rahn pointed out the application would result in a proposed reduction from 9.2%hardcover to
8%hardcover within the 0-75' setback zone. Fritzler cautioned the applicant's representative to not
reinstall any landscape fabric or plastic liners in the future, following their removal with this project.
Berg moved, Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#04-3030, Craig Lagorio
for Dr. Martha Spencer, 1005 Willow Drive South, granting a lake setback variance to allow
grade level decks within 150' of the OHWL on a natural environment lake and a hardcover
variance within the 0-75' setback zone in order to construct lakeside decks over existing patios,
with the following provision:
• Removal of all fabric and plastic landscape liners.
VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
8. #04-3031 ANDREW AND SARA TURNER, 645 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH,
VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING(6:50-7:10 p.m.)
Andrew Turner, applicant,was present, as well as Mark Hoiseth, Stonehouse Designs,420 East Rice
Street, Wayzata, representative for the applicant.
Curtis reported that in conjunction with an interior remodel and garage addition, the applicants
requested a side setback variance for a living space addition 10.9' from the side lot line where a
30'setback is required and a 21.6' setback currently exists. A unique jog in the northern property line
creates a nonconforming setback for their existing home. The proposed addition would encroach into
the side lot line shared with the neighboring tennis court, rather than adding bulk and mass to the
property on the south side.
Curtis informed the Planning Commission that though the Staff Report, dated July 6, 2004,
recommended approval of the variance as submitted, after further consideration, Curtis recommended
the Planning Commission should consider whether or not the addition is necessary in a substandard
setback. She referred to an overhead projection to illustrate that adding an equal square footage to
the opposite side of the house would meet side setback requirements on that side of the property.
Chair Rahn asked for clarification of the ownership and relationship of the adjacent triangular-shaped
property parcel to the north of the subject parcel. Gundlach explained that the applicant owns the
triangle-shaped parcel but the two lots are not combined at this time. She pointed out that the
Page 8 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(8. #04-3031 ANDREW AND SARA TURNER, 645 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH,
VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING-Continued)
existing house does not meet the side yard setback and the proposed addition would extend further
into the side yard setback.
Mr. Hoiseth explained the reason for placing of the addition in its proposed location, referring to
design and cost considerations, as well as the fact that other location(s) would require removal of a
lot of mature trees, and would put the kitchen on the opposite side of the home from the garage,
creating an situation where the homeowners would have to go through the formal spaces to get from
the garage to the kitchen. He stated that a logical location for the addition was to come through the
family room side, noting they tried to keep it as close as possible from the side yard.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Chair Rahn expressed his opinion that this matter is more of a design issue than a hardship issue as
there appears to be areas to consider other options, which would not become setback encroachments.
Leslie asked for clarification if the application includes the garage. Curtis responded that the
application is for the house addition.
Chair Rahn stated that he did not favor any further encroachment beyond the existing 21.6' setback,
looking at the project as a whole, including the house addition and the garage. Gundlach confirmed
the proposed garage setback would be 25.5' not 30' but it would be no further encroachment than the
existing house setback.
Mr. Hoiseth explained that because of the classical/colonial architectural of the house their design
wanted to retain the circular driveway and not to create an appearance of all garage with a house
attached to it. He believed that if the garage is moved more forward, the openness and the circular
driveway would be lost. He mentioned that the neighbors are in favor of the addition/garage design
as proposed, noting that it provides more screening and creates a courtyard.
Chair Rahn asked if there is a different location that would not require a setback variance.
Jurgens questioned what is the hardship, based on the information provided.
Mr. Turner remarked that the hardship is the irregular shape of the lot. Jurgens pointed out the
applicant purchased the property, as is, i.e., an irregular shaped lot.
Bremer stated she assumed the two parcels, including the triangular-shaper parcel, would be
combined by the owner. Curtis indicated the lot combination request had been sent for processing to
Hennepin County.
Fritzler commented that until the parcels are combined, he found no hardship when there is an option
of moving the garage. Leslie concurred,noting an addition on the north side of the house is
additional encroachment into the setback.
Page 9 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(8. #04-3031 ANDREW AND SARA TURNER, 645 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH,
VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING- Continued)
After a brief review of procedural options, staff summarized that staff recommended denial of the
variance, approval of a not-to-be-exceeded setback variance dimension correlated to the existing
21.6'setback, or tabling of the matter.
Mr. Turner and Mr. Hoiseth suggested the design could be changed to move the mudroom to the front
and also move the garage.
Chair Rahn moved, Fritzler seconded,to table Application #04-3031,Andrew W. and Sara S.
Turner, 645 Ferndale Road North, for side yard setback variance to allow the applicant the
opportunity to redesign the proposed house addition.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
9. #04-3033 THOMAS R.ADAMS AND JANETTE L. WEAVER, 500 ORCHARD PARK
ROAD, RENEWAL VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING
Thomas Adams, applicant was present.
Mr. Adams stated that he would withdraw Application#04-3033 at this time. Gundlach asked the
applicant to provide a written statement indicating his withdrawal of the application. Mr. Adams
agreed to provide a written statement.
10. #04-3036 DURABILT ASSOCIATES,INC. ON BEHALF OF JAMES BROOKS,3785
WATERTOWN ROAD, SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING
(7:12-7:27 p.m.)
James Brooks, 3785 Watertown Road, applicant, was present. David Park and Tom Kasprzah,
Durabilt Associates, Inc. 6318 Cambridge St., St. Louis Park, representatives for the applicant were
present.
Gundlach presented the application requesting a side yard setback to allow an eastern side yard
setback of 10' when 14.4' currently exists and 50' is normally required in order to construct an
attached two-stall garage in front of the existing one stall garage. She explained the applicant has
proposed to construct an attached, 24'x 24',two-stall garage by encroaching an additional 4' into the
side yard setback in an effort to not block an existing window, which would be located less than 1'
from the proposed location of the garage addition.
Gundlach indicated that staff found there is a hardship to warrant variance approval due to the
extremely narrow but substantially deep lot. If the 50' setbacks were strictly obeyed, only 10' of
width would be allowed for a building,which is not reasonable for residential construction.
However, she stated staff did not find a valid hardship to warrant approval of the requested variance
to encroach an additional 4' on the already non-conforming 14.4' side yard setback. Gundlach
indicated staff would support approval of a side yard setback variance where the existing setbacks
would be maintained.
Page 10 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(10. #04-3036DURABILT ASSOCIATES,INC. ON BEHALF OF JAMES BROOKS,3785
WATERTOWN ROAD, SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING-
Continued)
Mr. Brooks commented that it is important to enhance their garage space from a one-stall garage but
it is impossible to move the proposed garage any further as it would then cover the existing kitchen
window. Mr. Kasprzah explained the garage dimensions would be 24' x 24' and they had tried to
generally meet a 10' side yard setback. They wanted to avoid a detached garage and the garage
placement was determined, in part, due to the lot's steepness in the center, driveway location and
wanting to limit hardcover.
Discussion followed on other potential garage locations and their effects on loss of more trees, the
need for a retaining wall if the 6' side space would shift to the rear wall, and impacts of the
turnaround area size and orientation to the garage's location and increases in hardcover.
Bremer stated she disagreed with staff's recommendation for denial as she believed the narrowness of
the lot is a valid hardship.
Kempf asked the applicant if the existing garage was planned to be removed. Mr. Brooks replied the
existing garage would be retained for additional storage area. He indicated he wanted to get rid of the
other two existing accessory buildings.
Leslie concurred with Bremer that the long, narrow lot is a hardship and suggested the applicant
consider a garage width of 22' not 24' to minimize the side yard setback encroachment. Kempf
agreed with Leslie and Bremer regarding the lot shape being a hardship and indicated he would
support approval of a compromise garage size. Mr. Brooks indicated that a 22' width would be better
than a 20' width.
Fritzler asked the applicant how long the property was owned by him, and Mr. Brooks replied the
property was purchased in 1983. Fritzler commented that he thought the kitchen window could be
shifted or a skylight added to accommodate moving the garage away from the side yard setback
encroachment. He mentioned that redesigning the garage to have the storage on the rear wall would
allow the garage width to be narrower.
Commissioner Kempf remarked that he thought the kitchen was valuable and should be retained for
lighting and safety purposes.
Chair Rahn pointed out that he thought the matter was more of a design issue and agreed with staff's
recommendation.
Jurgens concurred that it was a design issue and initiated discussion of the rationale for the 50' side
yard setback in the five-acre zone, asking if emergency vehicles could move through the 10' setback.
Mr. Brooks replied the side yard area was level and there is an open field adjacent to the property.
Berg agreed that this is a hardship lot due to its extreme length and narrow width and preferred to
recommend approval of a compromise setback, but would support the variance request as is. Leslie
indicated that he concurred with Berg's comment.
Page 11 of 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(10. #04-3036DURABILT ASSOCIATES,INC. ON BEHALF OF JAMES BROOKS, 3785
WATERTOWN ROAD, SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, PUBLIC HEARING-
Continued)
Bremer moved,Berg seconded,to recommend approval of Application#04-3036, Durabilt
Associates, Inc. on behalf of James Brooks,3785 Watertown Road, granting a side yard setback
variance to allow an eastern side yard setback of 10' when 14.4' currently exists and 50' is
normally required in order to construct an attached two stall garage in front of the existing one
stall garage, due to the extreme hardship of the lot size and shape in its Zoning District and due
to its topography.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 1,Abstain 1.
11. #04-3037 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB,430 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD,VARIANCE,
PUBLIC HEARING
The applicant was not present.
Chair Rahn moved,Kempf seconded,to table Application #04-3037,Wayzata Country Club,
430 Old Long Lake Road, Luce Line Setback Variance. VOTE: Ayes 7, Nays 0.
*12. #04-3038 DARRELL AND KARIN ANDERSON AND BRUCE DAYTON,900/925/965
OLD LONG LAKE ROAD, SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT, PUBLIC
HEARING(6:01-6:04 p.m.)
Darrell Anderson, applicant, was present.
Chair Rahn asked for public comments. There were none.
Chair Rahn moved, Fritzler seconded,to recommend approval of Application #04-3038,
Darrell and Karin Anderson and Bruce Dayton, 900,925, 965 Old Long Lake Road, granting a
lot line rearrangement for 900,925 and 965 Old Long Lake Road and lot area variances to
allow 925 and 965 Old Long Lake Road to remain less than two acres, with the following
stipulations:
1. The portion of property labeled on the survey as "to be deeded to Dayton" shall be
legally combined with the property at 900 Old Long Lake Road, and
2. The portion labeled on the survey as "to be deeded to Anderson" shall be legally
combined with the property at 925 Old Long Lake Road.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
Curtis advised Application#04-3038 was scheduled for the July 26, 2004 City Council meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
Page 12 of 13
•
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MONDAY, JULY 19, 2004
6:00 o'clock p.m.
13. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS JUNE 28, 2004 AND JULY 12, 2004.
Jurgens reported that he did not attend the June 28, 2004 City Council meeting. However, he
informally asked about the Veterans Park at Big Island potential abandonment issue. Gundlach
pointed out that City Council made it clear that the City's interests were in keeping the property as a
Veterans Park.
Rahn reported that at its July 12, 2004 City Council meeting, the City Council did not appear to
support the Sketch Plan for the 50 unit proposal on the SW corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and
Highway 12. The applicants did not present their Sketch Plan after hearing some City Council
comments. Rahn and Gundlach relayed that the City may look at unguiding the location during the
current development moratorium and leave it at the current 2-acre zoning.
14. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
There were no other issues for discussion.
15. APPROVAL OF JUNE 21, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Fritzler moved, Leslie seconded,to approve the Minutes of the June 21, 2004 Planning
Commission meeting. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0,Abstain 1.
16. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON
JULY 26,2004 AND AUGUST 9, 2004.
July 26, 2004 - J. Marc Fritzler August 9, 2004 - Roland Jurgens
ADJOURNMENT
Berg moved, Bremer seconded,to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 7:55 p.m.
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
David ahn, Chair
Page 13 of 13