HomeMy WebLinkAboutP.C. minutes-5-19-2014/variance application MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, May 19,2014
6:30 dclock p.m.
Schoenzeit stated what is be e the Planning Commission is incomplete at this poi and that it appears
this is headed towards a transiti al sub-district.
Schwingler stated the rezoning is i tn h est interests of the City sinc�f will help clean up this site but
that the Planning Commission does need t closely look at the u ' tended consequences.
Leskinen stated the Planning Commission can eit de further into the details or direct Staff to look
into the creation of a sub-district and discuss that f at a work session.
Gaffron stated in his view it would make se to discuss the dvantages and disadvantages of a sub-
district at a work session. Gaffron sta if the City desires that ub-district should be created,there
would be additional public hearin eld.
Leskinen stated in her vi that is the logical way to go and that the appli tion should be tabled.
Schoenzeit mov , Lemke seconded,to table Application No. 14-3666, Luke ujawa on behalf of
EOF Invest nts,LLC, 1440-1442 Shoreline Drive,and recommend that Staf ' vestigate
develop t of a sub-district and to discuss it at a future Planning Commission wo ession.
VOT . Ayes 6, Nays 0.
5. 14-3667 TAMMY MADDREY& STEVEN SABES,3435 EASTLAKE STREET,
VARIANCES,8:45 P.M.—9:36 P.M.
` Tammy Maddrey, Applicant, was present.
Gaffron stated the applicants are requesting rear/street, lake and side yard setback variance approvals in
order to construct a second story over the existing home 13.9 feet from the east side and 15.7 feet from
the west side lot lines where 30 feet setbacks are required. Also being requested is a setback 52 feet from
the OHWI where a 75-foot setback is required; and 19.8 feet from the street where a 50-foot setback is
required.
The existing residence has existed on the site for a number of years. The lot is very small, consisting of
approximately 4,975 square feet and 50 feet in width. The existing structure is a 20' x 28' one-story with
some attic space and no basement. Gaffron stated the second story would be consistent with a number of
other additions approved for home expansions on the south side of Eastlake Street in the past.
Because the lake OHWL contour extends a few hundred feet up the creek based on surveys on file,the
majority of the subject property is unbuildable as all but the front 25 feet is located within 75 feet of the
OHWL. This creates a practical difficulty for additional development of the property. The applicants do
have the right to replace the existing structures in-kind if they choose to do so but they are proposing to
add a second story.
The applicant's submitted information correctly indicates that because the required side, front and
rear/lake setbacks overlap,the site has no functional buildable envelope. The only opportunity they have
for expansion without additional footprint encroachments would be above the existing structure. The
applicant's proposal will not increase hardcover but it will increase the visual bulk and massing within the
substandard setbacks but not to the extent that it will be out of character with the neighborhood.
Page 24 of 31
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, May 19,2014
6:30 dclock p.m.
Gaffron stated one of the concerns is that the foundation was originally constructed in 1981 and may not
support a second story. The applicant has been asked to provide certification from a structural engineer
that the foundation will support a second story but that information has yet to be submitted.
The applicant has indicated they have removed a small shed from the property and at this time do not plan
to remove the garage, patio, deck, or driveway. The garage, deck, and driveway appear to constitute legal
nonconforming hardcover and/or structure. [n other similar situations,the City has encouraged the
owners to consider building tuck-under garages and removing the lengthy driveways and backyard
detached garages that are near the creek. [n this case, the existing home is barely larger than a typical
tuck-under garage and the second story addition may be more appropriate than a total tear-down/rebuild
that likely would result in a larger footprint. Gaffron stated one of the issues involved in this situation is
that the survey indicates the neighboring home to the immediate west is encroaching on the applicants'
property by as much as 1.7 feet.
Gaffron noted the property owner across the road to the north has submitted comments in opposition to
the variances that is included in the Planning Commission's packets. The neighbor has expressed
concerns regarding the house being too close to the power lines and the impacts a second story blocking
their lake view. Gaffron noted City Code does not protect the views of that neighbor.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed setback variances for addition of a second story on
the basis that hardcover and structural lot coverage will not increase,the second story will maintain the
existing first story setbacks, and the proposed addition will not be out of character with other homes in the
neighborhood.
Schoenzeit asked if this house has an average lakeshore setback.
Gaffron indicated it does and that it meets the average lakeshore setback. The detached garage does not
meet the average lakeshore setback.
Thiesse asked if it should be conforming.
Gaffron stated since it is existing, it is not an issue for consideration.
Schoenzeit stated the issue is whether the second story encroaches into the average lakeshore setback and
impacts the neighbors' views, which it does not appear to do.
Gaffron recommended the Planning Commission discuss the issues for consideration outlined in Staff's
report.
Gaffron stated any approval should be subject to the following conditions:
�� 1. Prior to Council review,the applicants shall provide a corrected survey showing the correct lot
dimensions and showing the accurately depicted average lakeshore setback line. The applicant
should also provide corrected hardcover calculations to confirm to Staffls calculations.
2. The approval is based on the preliminary floor plans and elevation view submitted, which depict a
second-story home of approximately 26 feet in peak height. Gaffron noted the existing garage
floor is at the 931.5 floodplain elevation and the main floor of the house is at 933.5, which is two
Page 25 of 31
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 19,2014
6:30 dclock p.m.
feet above the OHWL. Gaffron stated as long as just a second story is being added,the
floodplain is a non-issue,but if they were to expand the house footprint,there will likely be
some filling of the floodplain that will need to be mitigated.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit,the applicants shall provide certification from a structural
engineer that the foundation can support a second story or provide plans for a suitable foundation.
Leskinen asked whether the applicants would need to come back to the Planning Commission if the
foundation is not certified.
Gaffron stated they would not and that the Planning Commission should address what is being proposed
tonight.
Schoenzeit stated if the foundation needs to be rebuilt, it will likely result in the house being torn down.
Schoenzeit asked if the variances would apply to any new residence.
Gaffron stated if there are any changes to the plan, it would need to be a separate application and come
back before the Planning Commission unless they rebuild the house in-kind. Gaffron stated the Planning
Commission is only being asked to approve a second story above the existing house.
Schoenzeit stated the applicants will probably find that constructing a new residence will cost
significantly less than replacing the foundation and building a second story.
Tammara Maddrey, Applicant, stated she had nothing to add to Staff's report.
Chair Leskinen opened the public hearing at 9:28 p.m.
Amy Sullivan-Teele, 3515 Eastlake Street, asked for clarification regarding the 1912 survey indicating
that the property does not go across the creek.
Gaffron stated in 1912 the plat showed there was 100 feet of depth from Eastlake Street. Gaffron
indicated every survey for the last 50 years along Eastlake Street have shown the lots at 100 feet deep.
Based on that information, Gaffron stated in his view this current survey is incorrect since the legal
description talks about the west X feet of the east X feet of Lot 1 from the original plat. Gaffron noted
Lot 1 did not extend past the creek by 30 feet in any manner on the plat.
Teele asked who owns the land on the other side of the creek.
Gaffron indicated it would be the person on Oxford Road.
Teele stated there are metal stakes staking out the up-pass on the other side of the creek.
Gaffron stated those metal stakes do not mean much and that legally and technically there is no ownership
by this property owner across more than the 102 feet of depth from Eastlake Street for any of the
properties on that side of the road.
Teele asked if the 102-foot depth would go to the creek.
Page 26 of 31
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING �
Monday, May 19,2014
6:30 dclock p.m.
Gaffron stated it appears to go to the center of the creek.
Teele indicated her survey looks like the applicant's.
Maddrey stated this is the first time she has heard of this.
Gaffron stated there is nothing in the legal description that is shown on the survey that matches the
original plat lines.
Teele asked why the 1912 survey is correct and not the more recent one.
Gaffron indicated there have not been any changes to the plat other than the lots were split off, which was
done without including any property past the 102 feet Gaffron stated there is no evidence in the record
that shows those properties extend past the creek.
Thiesse noted the stakes were placed by the surveyor according to the survey.
Curtis stated the aerial photo does not appear to directly match up but it represents the dimensions of each
of the properties.
Teele asked why so many surveys are incorrect.
Curtis stated the City is only aware of two incorrect surveys, which were done more recently.
Gaffron stated all the other surveys show the depth of the lots as 102 feet and not 132 feet.
Teele asked how much higher the new structure would be versus the existing structure.
Gaffron indicated it would be 26 feet to the peak and would be perhaps 50 percent higher than the current
structure.
Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 9:35 p.m.
Leskinen stated it is pretty clear that there is a practical difficulty and that constructing a second story is a
reasonable request. Leskinen stated if the foundation becomes an issue,that will be something the
applicants will need to deal with.
Landgraver moved, Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 14-3667,
Tammara Maddrey and Steven Sabes,3435 Eastlake Street,granting of rear/street, lake,and side
yard setback variances. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
6. 14-3668 CHARLES CUDD DENOVO ON BEHALF OF THE MARY J. BOWMAN
TRUST, ll65 FERNDALE ROAD WEST, RENEWAL OF VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT,9:36 P.M.—9:39 P.M.
Mary Bowman Rae, the Owner, was present.
Page 27 of 31