HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/16/2006 Planning Commission Minutes MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
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,Roland Jurgens,Dick Kroeger, and Cynthia
Bremer. Representing Staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron,Planners Melanie Curtis and Evelyn
Turner,and Recorder Jackie Young. Council Member Bob Sansevere was present.
Chair Rahn called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
1. #06-3183 PAUL THOMAS HOMES FOR GLENN SOLIE,1430 CHERRY PLACE,
VARIANCE,6:01-6:15 P.M.
Paul Vogstrom and Glenn Solie,Applicant,were present. '
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting lot area,lot width variances and a conditional use pemut for
land alterations within the 0-75' zone in order to construct a new single-family home. The conditional
use permit is to regrade the yard,reorient the steps,and remove a deck. The City Engineer has reviewed
the original plans and has provided a recommendation that this application be tabled to allow for more
detailed plans to be submitted.
Curtis indicated there are some unresolved issues regarding the height of the structure that the Planning
Commission may wish to address. Staff recommends tabling the application to allow for more detailed
information to be submitted.
Rahn inquired what the issue is with the height of the structure.
Curtis stated it is due to the number of stories of the proposed residence as well as the way the house is
placed on the lot.
Vogstrom stated his understanding is as long as less than 15 percent exposed,it would not be considered
an extra story. Vogstrom indicated the retaining walls could be moved closer to the building,which
would lessen the exposure on the basement. Vogstrom inquired from where the height is measured.
Curtis stated the highest adjacent grade of the building or ten feet above the lowest.
Vogstrom indicated his plan shows 35 feet and that his understanding is it would be measured ten feet
above that.
Curtis sated the number of stories was more the issue than the height of the structure.
Gaffron stated the applicant is allowed 30 feet of height starting at the highest existing grade touching
the house,and if that is higher than ten feet above the lowest grade against the house,they go to
PAGE 1
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
� Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3183 GLENN SOLIE,CONTINUED) '
the average of the highest gable. Gaffron stated less than 50 percent of the foundation was covered at
least six feet by existing grade around the perimeter of the house. Gaffron indicated the trend in the last
few years is people will not meet the 50 percent around the house and will instead put a retaining wall
five feet outside the foundation. Gaffron stated the City has not accepted that type of design since City
Code does not allow for topographical changes when determining height.
Rahn inquired whether there is only one side elevation that has been provided.
Vogstrom indicated there is only one.
Rahn commented from that elevation it appears to taper from a lookout to a walkout and that he would
like to see accurate floor elevations. Rahn inquired where the floor elevation of the proposed house
lines up with the existing house.
Vogstrom stated it is approximafely 18 inches higher than the existing basement due to the sloped
driveway and the steepness of the grade. Vogstrom indicated they are attempting to work with the land
to create a driveway that is not quite as steep as what currently exists.
Solie stated the current house is a one-story with a walkout and that the proposed house is two stories
from the front.
Rahn indicated he does not have a problem with the lot area variance and recommended the applicant
speak with Staff regarding the height of the structure.
Jurgens stated the grading in his view would not work.
Kempf stated he does not understand the grading plan and questioned why the grade could not flow out
to the edge of the lot. Kempf stated it appears that the house next door is approximately three feet
higher than this house and questioned the need for retaining walls.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 6:12 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 6:12 p.m.
Jurgens moved,Kempf seconded,to table Application#06-3183,Paul Thomas Homes for Glenn
Solie, 1430 Cherry Place,to allow the applicant time to revise his plans and to submit adequate
floor elevations. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PAGE 2
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
2. #06-3184 PAUL THOMAS FIOMES,2695 CASCO POINT ROAD,VARIANCE,6:15—
6:53 P.M.
Paul Vogstrom was present on behalf of the Applicant.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting lot width,lot area and 75-250' hardcover variances in order to
build a new single-family residence on a property with 19,572 square feet in area and 60 feet in width
where 21,780 square feet and 100 feet is required. A hardcover variance is requested the 75-250' zone
for 3,830 square feet or 36.2 percent is proposed and 25 percent is normally allowed. The applicant has
proposed a home and garage consisting of a 1,847 square foot footprint,with a 148 square foot deck,
1500 square of driveway within the 75-250' zone, 145 square feet of sidewalk, and 168 square feet of
retaining wall and window well.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot width and lot area variances and some level of hardcover
variance within the 75-250' zone as the Planning Commission determines appropriate. The proposed
home must meet the 30-foot and 2-1/2 story height limitation. Additionally, Staff would add a condition
that the property owners comply with the City Engineer's recommendations.
Vogstrom stated he does have an alternate plan that he did not submit to Staff. Vogstrom indicated the
grade on this lot adds approximately five percent hardcover to the driveway and that a turn-around was
added to address safety concerns.
Curtis inquired where the turn-around would be located.
Vogstrom stated the turn-around would be towards the bottom of the driveway. Vogstrom stated the
current catch basin drains to the lake and that they have attempted to contact the city engineer to obtain
his advice on what should be done to address water infiltration in the 0-75' zone.
Curtis stated it is her understanding the City Engineer did speak with the applicant's engineer and that
the City Engineer has recommended that all drainage and grading issues be resolved prior to this
application being placed on the Council agenda.
Rahn noted that there were no elevations provided with this plan. Rahn inquired whether the proposed
residence is a lookout and how the first floor differs from the existing home.
� Vogstrom indicated it is a lookout and that the main floor would be about four feet higher than the
existing main level.
Rahn inquired whether the basement floor would be three feet higher than what currently exists.
Vogstrom stated that is right.
Rahn commented in order to protect the views of the lake,he does not want to see the grade in this area
changed significantly.
PAGE 3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
- 6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3184 PAUL THOMAS HOMES,CONTINUED)
Vogstrom indicated he is only proposing to change the grade slightly around the front door.
Rahn inquired whether the driveway is what causes the hardcover to be exceeded on this lot.
Vogstrom indicated that it is. Vogstrom pointed out he did relocate the house closer to the road in an
� effort to reduce the hardcover created by the driveway.
Kempf noted that a letter was received from the neighbor to the north and inquired whether Vogstrom
has spoken with that person.
Vogstom indicated that he has.
Kempf stated filling up a portion of the valley seems like a good idea to help with the drainage and
would also make the need for a turn-around less necessary. Kempf noted there is a drop-off next to the
driveway. Kempf stated he would like the input of the City Engineer on this subject.
Vogstrom indicated that he was informed that he could not place any fill within five feet of the property
line but that he would be agreeable to filling in the ravine.
Kempf inquired whether the applicant could grade to the lot line if the neighbor is in agreement with the
work.
Curtis stated some work could be done within five feet of the property line if the City Engineer approves
the work. .
Vogstrom stated the existing home and garage is pushed more to the south of the lot line and that the
majority of the drainage goes into the ravine,which is the reason he is attempting to avoid constructing
anything in that area. . �
Kempf commented that the issue appears to be hardcover and that a long lot like this does create some
hardship and would require some additional hardcover. .
Rahn stated in his view the width of the driveway could be reduced slightly,which would allow for
some turn-around.
Jurgens inquired what portion of the driveway the contractor was attempting to make less steep.
Vogstrom stated approximately 30 feet from the road they are going to try to flatten it out somewhat.
Jurgens noted that work is not reflected on the grading plan. Jurgens indicated he would like that work
to be reflected on the plan.
Vogstrom stated he could reflect that.
PAGE 4
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 dclock p.m.
(#06-3184 PAUL THOMAS HOMES, CONTINUED)
Jurgens stated in his view the turn-around is necessary but that the driveway could be lessened
somewhat.
Bremer commented she is not sure that a turn-around is necessary,but that if the tum-around stays
within the same amount of hardcover currently reflected in the plans, she would be supportive of it.
Bremer stated in her view 32 percent hardcover is excessive and that the hardcover could be reduced to
30 percent.
Vogstrom stated he would be forced to bring the house even closer to the road if he is required to reduce
the hardcover any further. Vogstrom stated he is attempting to comply with the City's restrictions.
Jurgens stated he does feel a turn-around is necessary but that he is not in favor of additional hardcover.
Jurgens recommended the applicant reduce the hardcover on the lot somewhat.
Rahn noted the house is only at 10 percent structural coverage.
Kempf stated this house,compared to the house on Dunwoody,is in line with the two houses on each
side of it and still has a smaller driveway. Kempf concurred that the house is not out of character with
the other houses in the neighborhood.
Rahn suggested the applicant consider removing six feet of driveway up near the garage.
Curtis noted the neighboring homes do have detached garages.
Vogstrom indicated he did try a detached garage on this lot but that in his opinion an attached garage
would be a better option.
Kempf stated there is a considerable drop-off to the south.
Jurgens stated he would like the hardcover reduced to 30 percent.
Rahn recommended the applicant make the driveway comply with the City's minimum standards to see
what the hardcover can be reduced to.
Rahn moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3184,Paul Thomas
Homes,2695 Casco Point Road,subject to the driveway being reduced to the City's minimum
standards,with a minimum turn-around being allowed,and further subject to the City Engineer's
recommendations.
Chair Rahn opened the public hearing at 6:38 p.m.
PAGE 5 '
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006 -
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3184 PAUL THOMAS FIOMES,CONTINUED)
Anthony Kane indicated he is here on behalf of his father who resides at 2697 Casco Point Road. Kane
stated when his father purchased his lot,this lot was vacant and it was supposed to be a nonbuildable
lot. Kane noted there are significant drainage problems in that area and that if the ravine is filled in,it
would cause more water to go to the south since his father's property is located lower than this property.
Kane reiterated that the drainage has been a major issue and that he has concerns that the water runoff
will be worsened with this proposal.
Rahn stated the Planning Commission did not address the drainage fully tonight because they typically
follow the City Engineer's recommendations and they do not have a report from the City Engineer at
this time. -
Kane stated he would like some attention paid to the change in the drainage towards his father's house.
Larry Kane stated there is a minimal gutter proposed on the house,with a steep pitched roof,which in
his opinion will create additional runoff to his property.
Rahn reiterated the Planning Commission relies on the recommendations of the City Engineer and
suggested Mr. Kane contact Staff prior to the Council meeting regarding the recomxnendations that are
made by the City Engineer.
Kane stated in his view since this was originally a nonbuildable lot,the City is allowing a further
expansion.
Rahn stated the house being proposed is below the structural coverage amount allowed by the City and
that the applicant would be allowed to construct a larger residence on the lot. Rahn pointed out
numerous lots in Orono along the lake are nonconforming.
Kane stated a variance had to be granted to construct the existing house.
Bill Miller,2691 Casco Circle,stated he lives to the north of this property and that the issue is the
drainage in this area. Miller stated the Planning Commission has approved hardcover in excess of 36
percent on numerous occasions in the past and that the issue with this application deals more with the
water runoff than the amount of hardcover. Miller commented the present house has deteriorated to the
point where it needs to be replaced.
Miller stated in his opinion there is a safety issue with the driveway and that he would encourage the
Planning Commission to allow a wider driveway. Miller stated he has witnessed a number of cazs over
the years go off the present driveway.
Bremer commented this is a good opportunity to look at the drainage in this area and perhaps correct
some of the problems being experienced in this area.
PAGE 6
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3184 PAUL THOMAS HOMES, CONTINUED)
Miller stated the engineer needs to be aware of the problems the neighbor to the south experiences and
that the runoff should not be increased with this application.
Vogstrom indicated he is willing to work with the neighbors on the drainage issue.
Curtis pointed out a significant amount of information would have to be submitted by the applicant in
order for the City Engineer to make a recommendation.
Bremer stated if this is going to involve the three properties,it might be wise to table the application to
allow for a complete review of the drainage in this area.
Rahn concurred that it is a different situation if the neighbors are going to be involved with resolving the
drainage in this area and that he also would not be opposed to tabling the application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 6:52 p.m.
Rahn withdrew his motion. �
Kempf moved,Jurgens seconded,to table Application#06-3184,Paul Thomas Homes,2695 Casco
Point Road,to allow the applicant time to revise his plans to reflect a reduction in the hardcover
and to obtain the City Engineer's recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
3. #06-3192 WILLIAM AND MARY TITLER,4209 NORTH SHORE DRNE,VARIANCE,
6:53 P.M.—7:15 P.M.
William and Mary Titler,Applicants,were present.
Turner stated the applicants are requesting lot width and lot area variances to construct a new house on a
lot that is 55 feet wide when 140 feet is required and has an area of.58 acre when one acre is required.
The applicants are proposing a house consisting of two stories with a lakeside walkout and an attached
four-car garage. The substandard area and width requires variance approval in order to rebuild.
Turner indicated the applicants are not requesting a structural coverage variance but noted that the house
is currently 35 square feet over the limit. Turner stated the applicants have indicated the size of the
house and/or garage would be reduced to meet the structural coverage limit.
Staff recommends approval of the lot width and area variances subject to the applicant submitting
revised plans reducing the lot coverage to the maximum allowed,placing the backup area at the east end
� of the driveway,and satisfying the hardcover maximums.
PAGE 7
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3192 WILLIAM AND MARY TITLER,CONTINUED)
Mr. Titler indicated they have a large number of family members who routinely visit them on the
weekends. They placed the turn-around neaz the street so visitors can turn around and back down the
driveway. If they placed it where Staff recommended,visitors would have to back into North Shore
Drive. Title indicated they plan to use the stall closest to the house for the lawn mower,bikes, etc., and
they will use the apron in front of that stall as a back-up area.
Titler indicated they have taken great care to study the previous minutes of the Planning Commission
and that they did conduct research prior to purchasing the property to ascertain what would be required
on this property.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
There were no public comments.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
Bremer commented she is in favor of the proposal.
Kempf noted the neighbor to the east is going to have essentially a view of a very long,unbroken wall.
Titler stated they have designed a number of jogs in the house.
Kempf stated he would like to see a landscaping plan submitted illustrating the use of plantings to help
break up that wall.
Mr.Titler stated there are actually some very large trees near the property line and that they are
planning on doing some landscaping.
Kempf inquired whether the applicants would be willing to submit a landscape plan.
Mrs.Titler inquired whether they could also change the type of siding in certain areas to also break up
the wall.
Titler indicated they are working with an architect and that they are willing to take steps to help break
up that wall. Titler requested they not be required to submit a formal landscape plan due to the expense
involved. Titler indicated they are willing to do some landscaping but that they would prefer not to
spend the money to have a formal landscaping plan drawn up and instead they would have the
landscaper pick materials just before planting after the house was constructed. Titler stated they are
working with the architect to help soften the structure all the way around.
Jurgens stated in his view the applicants are changing the essential character of the area by creating this
long wall and that screening of the wall is necessary. Jurgens stated in his mind different types of siding �
do not negate the need for landscaping and that he would also like to see a landscape plan submitted.
PAGE 8
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3192 WII,LIAM AND MARY TITLER,CONTINUED)
Titler pointed out the neighbor to the north also has a similar long wall and has no screening.
Bremer stated in her view a compromise can be reached on this and that it is reasonable to require the
applicants to have landscaping. Bremer suggested that landscaping be required to sufficiently soften the
side of the house but that a professional landscape plan not be required. Bremer expressed concern that
the City is starting to require applicants to hire a large number of professional people to comply with
various recommendations.
Jurgens stated the wall would have a visual impact on the neighbor.
Kempf pointed out the proposed wall is 138 feet long and that in his xnind this is an exceptional
situation and calls for some type of guarantee that it will be dealt with.
Titler pointed out the 20-foot utility easement does not exist and that the City may want to obtain one.
Rahn noted a letter was received from Mary Peterson,4205 North Shore Drive, expressing her
opposition to the current proposal.
Titler indicated that is the neighbor to the east.
Kempf commented in his mind the neighbor probably has the same concern with the long wall.
Bremer pointed out that this is not an issue of the house being too large for the lot but that the issue
deals with the substandard lot.
Kempf commented the variance is to allow the lot to be buildable.
Titler stated the current house is basically inhabitable.
Jurgens stated in his mind the view of the house should be mitigated in some fashion.
Bremer moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3192,William and
Mary Titler,4209 North Shore Drive,subject to the City Engineer's recommendations to include
a rain garden; subject to landscaping acceptable to staff being required to mitigate the visual
impact of the northeast wall,with the applicants submitting a letter noting their intent to do this
landscaping; and further subject to the applicants granting to the City a 20-foot easement for the
resolution of issues regarding the sewer easement. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Jurgens opposed.
PAGE 9
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
4. #06-3193 MARK FINNEY,3210 NORTH SHORE DRIVE,RENEWAL VARIANCE,
7:15 P.M.—7:19 P.M.
Mark Finney,Applicant,was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a 75-250' zone hardcover variance in order to remove an
existing detached garage and construct a new two-story 24' x 30' detached garage. The property
owners received variance approval in 2002 in order to construct an addition to their existing home and
add a detached garage. The owners had issues with their contractor and the detached garage was not
constructed prior to the expiration of the variance approval. Therefore,the applicants require a renewal
of their original variance approval in order to continue with their project.
Curtis stated during review of this application it became apparent that the variance review in 2002 did
not correctly note the hardcover zones due to a small inlet to the west of the property. This inlet causes
a change in the location of the 75' setback,with the majority of the property being located within the
75-250' zone rather than also containing a 250-500' zone.
Curtis noted the City Engineer would need to make recommendations on the grading and drainage plan
prior to the City Council meeting.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the application in conjunction with site grading as previously
approved by Building Department Staff.
Finney stated he has reduced hardcover on the lot through this process and has also taken steps to reduce
the runoff into the lake. • -
Rahn inquired whether this was originally proposed as a two-story garage.
Finney stated that it was and that his plans have not changed.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
Jurgens inquired whether there would be plumbing in this structure. ,
Curtis stated the applicant is proposing a sink inside the structure.
Gaffron inquired whether the house is two stories.
Finney stated it is.
PAGE 10
. MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3193 MARK FINNEY,CONTINUED)
Rahn moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-06-3193,
Mark Finney,3210 North Shore Drive,subject to compliance with the City Engineer's
. recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
5. #06-3194 DAVID EISS, 1760 SHADYWOOD ROAD,VARIANCE,7:19—7:35 P.M.
David Eiss,Applicant,was present.
Turner stated the applicant is requesting a 75-250'hardcover variance to permit 53.5 percent hardcover
where 55.8 percent currently exists and 25 percent is allowed, a rear yard setback variance to allow a
six-foot setback from Shadywood Road when a 10-foot setback is required,a side yard variance to
allow a six-foot side yard setback when a 10-foot setback is required,and a house-garage setback
variance to place the garage 5.32 feet from the house when a 10-foot setback is required. The applicant
is also requesting a lot coverage variance to allow structures to cover 20 percent of the lot when 20
percent currently exists and only 15 percent is allowed.
Turner stated the house sits on the top of a hill,about seven feet above the street. The existing garage is
at the same level as Shadywood Road and faces the street. The proposed garage would be in the same
location but would face the side property line. The floor of the proposed garage would be about four
feet higher than the floor of the existing garage. There is a tunnel from the existing garage into the
basement of the house. The tunnel would remain with steps inside the proposed garage down to the
tunnel.
Turner noted street and side setback variances were approved for the existing garage when it was
constructed in 1968. A side setback variance was granted in 1970 to allow construction of the front
wing on the house and the tunnel to the garage.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the setback and lot coverage variances as requested and
approval of the hardcover variance as modified by Staff, including reducing the garage to 24 feet wide
and 22 feet deep.
Eiss stated it was his understanding that if the building hardcover remained the same,then that
percentage would be allowed. Eiss indicated he has attempted to reduce hardcover in other areas of the
lot. Eiss noted the driveway has been reduced.
Eiss stated if he is required to reduce the size of the garage,he would remodel the structure rather than
rebuild. Eiss stated the lot is very small.
Rahn stated the reductions being proposed by Staff in hardcover are probably due to the overage in
structural coverage.
PAGE 11
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING �
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3194 DAVID EISS,CONTIN�U�D)
Rahn stated raising the level of the garage floor is a bigger issue and could be corrected by changing the
design. Rahn suggested the applicant consider not raising the level of the garage floor so much.
Eiss stated it was to help accommodate a wheelchair. Eiss stated his calculation of the driveway grade
was 10.5 percent and not the 15 percent determined by the City Engineer,which he is unclear how that
figure was arrived at. Eiss reiterated if he is forced to reduce the size of the garage,he would remodel
the existing one instead.
Eiss stated the retaining wall on the south side in his view is not necessary and that he would prefer to
remove that retaining wall.
Rahn stated those issues should have been discussed with the City Engineer prior to reaching the
Planning Commission. Rahn reiterated his concem with the change in the level of the garage floor.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 7:28 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 7:28 p.m.
Jurgens stated he is in agreement with Chair Rahn regarding the increase in elevation and that in his
opinion the review by the Planning Commission may be premature due to the lack of a City Engineer's
report.
Eiss inquired what issues remain to be resolved.
Jurgens inquired whether the applicant is willing to lower the garage floor.
Eiss stated he is.
Jurgens inquired whether the applicant is willing to change the driveway.
Eiss indicated he is.
Jurgens inquired whether the applicant is willing to reduce the size of the garage.
' Eiss stated he is not.
Bremer inquired whether the applicant is still proposing the 22' x 26.66' garage.
Eiss indicated that he is.
PAGE 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3194 DAVID EISS,CONTINLTED)
Turner stated the proposed garage is 14 square feet larger than the current garage and that the Planning
Commission in the past in this neighborhood has required 20' x 20' garages.
Bremer stated there really is only one location for a garage on this lot and recommended that the garage
be side loading to help address safety concerns. Bremer stated given the other reductions in hardcover,
she would be willing to allow the slightly higher amount of structural coverage. In the other situation in
the neighborhood,there was also an attached garage.
Kroeger stated he is in agreement with Commission Bremer and that there are safety concems with
exiting and entering this property.
Rahn concurred with the advantage of a side-loading garage and that he would like to see the elevation
lowered somewhat.
Bremer moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application 06-3194,David Eiss,
1760 Shadywood Road,for a 26.66 foot wide by 22 foot deep garage,subject to the driveway and
the sidewalk being located and sized according to Staff s recommendation,and subject to the
applicant submitting,prior to the City Council meeting,final plans depicting the changes
discussed tonight,and further subject to approval by the City Engineer of all changes. VOTE:
Ayes 4,Nays 1,Jurgens opposed.
6. #06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/EDWARD HAMM, 1391 FOX STREET/1401
SHORELINE DRIVE,SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE,7:35 —8:40 P.M.
Pat McNaughton,Applicant,was present. �
Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting a lot line rearrangement between these two uniquely
configured properties,with the goal of separating the 33 feet wide lake access strip from 1391 Fox
Street and attaching that strip to 1401 Shoreline Drive. The application requires lot area variances to
allow each of the reconfigured lots to be less than two acres and will result in extinguishing the special
lot combination that gave 1391 Fox Street access to the lake.
In 1980, municipal sewer was provided to the Minnetonka Bluffs area,including Orono Lane. The
property at the west end of Orono Lane, on the southeast side of the curve,was provided with a sewer
stub and assessed for sewer. That property in 1982 was replatted as Lot 1,Block 2,and has remained
vacant to this day,owned by Edward Hamm as a separate lakeshore tax parcel of approximately 39,000
square feet or.89 acre. This parcel was not part of the Hamm agreement that limited his holdings north
of CR 15 to three dwelling units.
Gaffron indicated the plat of Blue Hill was approved in 1994, and that approval included a Special Lot
Combination Agreement requiring that Lot 1,Block 1,Blue Hill(1391 Fox Street)and Outlot A,Blue
PAGE 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3196 PAT MCNAUGHTON,CONTINUED)
Hill remain in common ownership,with Outlot A providing lake access for Lot l,as well as completing
its 2-acre requirement. The Agreement established conditions under which Outlot A could be used. A
1999 amendment to the Agreement allowed for a parking area to be established in Outlot A. The
property at 1391 Fox Street has also remained vacant,and its owner,Mr.McNaughton,has concluded
that due to having to cross County Road 15,use of the lake access for 1391 Fox is unsafe,impractical,
and ultimately not marketable. At some point in time after 1994,Hennepin County combined the two
parcels for tax purposes, so they currently exist as one tax parcel. While Lot 1 has not been assessed for
sewer, it is in the MUSA and a sewer connection can be made within a reasonable distance to the east
on Fox Street.
Gaffron noted the applicants have reached an agreement whereby Outlot A of Blue Hill would be
combined with 1401 Shoreline,making a more buildable lakeshore lot and leaving 1391 Fox without
lake access.
The shape of the buildable lot due to the location of County Road 15 is perhaps the most limiting factor
in developing this site. Topography also will play a role in determining house location. The driveway
access must be to Orono Lane per Hennepin County,which adds length to the driveway and potentially
limits house size based on hardcover limits. The applicant has provided a schematic drawing for a -
proposed house to illustrate the potential limitations for building on this site. The applicant suggests
that a 20-foot east side setback for the attached garage in this scheme would fit the site better than if the
standard 30-foot setback is required. .
Gaffron indicated the shape and topography of the lot may present some limitations or challenges in
terms of house footprint size and shape,orientation and height of house and garage. However, Staff
believes that an architect could come up with a number of house plans for this site that could meet the
required setbacks,height,and hardcover standards. The stxuctural coverage allotment is more than
adequate for a substantial footprint.
Gaffron stated there is no adjacent developed lot to the immediate west and as a result average setback
would be most appropriately determined by the setback from the lake of the only existing adjacent
home. The home to the east is located approximately 140 feet from the shoreline. Staff would therefore
recommend that an average setback variance be granted as part of this lot line rearrangement approval,
allowing an average setback line to be established from the southwest corner of the neighboring home to
the shoreline at the southwest comer of applicant's property.
City ordinances do not allow the use of an outlot for building purposes, so the proposed combining of
Lot 1,Block 2,Dragonfly Hill and Outlot A,Blue Hill,will require that the property be platted.
Further,the provisions of the Special Lot Combination include a clause stating that the terms and
conditions can be modified only in conjunction with a subdivision in accordance with the platting code.
Gaffron noted the 1994 Special Lot Combination Agreement and its 1999 amendment would be
formally extinguished as part of this proposal. The original agreement limited use of the Outlot to a
dock, a lockbox, and a stairway/boat lift/boat landing, and disallowed parking on the site. The
amendment later allowed a limited parking area to be established.
PAGE 14
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HAMM,CONTINUED)
Gaffron recommended the Planning Commission consider the following issues:
1. Is there any basis for granting a side or side street setback variance for development of the
lakeshore lot(1401 Shoreline)once the combination occurs?
2. Given the background on 1401 Shoreline,the City concluded in 1980 that the lot was likely
buildable and assessed it for sewer,noting that variances would be necessary. Does the
Planning Commission agree with Staff that adding Outlot A enhances the buildability and
supports the granting of the lot area variance?
3. Does the Planning Comxnission have any problem with reducing the area of 1391 Fox Street to
1.82 acres,given that the buildable area north of CR 15 is not changing,that the neighborhood
density will not change, and that the land south of CR 15 that made it a fu112-acre lot was
remote from the actual building site?
4. Does the Planning Commission have any concerns about the average setback line proposed by
Staff?
5. Does the Planning Commission have any other concerns about the buildability of either of the
lots in the post-rearrangement condition?
Staff recommends approval of the lot line rearrangement and area variances as discussed,with the
stipulation that the appropriate deeds be exchanged and parcels recombined per the legal descriptions on
the survey. Staff recommends approval of the revised average setback line for 1401 Shoreline that
protects the existing lake views enjoyed by the adjacent property owners. Staff fmds no compelling
reason for a side setback variance for 1401,but would note that a much more detailed submittal would
be required for the City to consider such a variance,which may be left up to a future buyer of the
property. Staff fmds that there is insufficient information to approve a berm or screening plan at this
time.
The following conditions should be included if the application is recommended for approval:
1. The combination of 1401 and Outlot A must be a plat. It should be left to the City Council to
determine whether the required platting triggers a storm water and drainage trunk fee.
2. The City will take the appropriate steps to extinguish the existing special lot combination
agreements.
McNaughton stated there are some options for constructing a house on this lot but that the topography
of the lot needs to be taken into consideration.
Rahn inquired whether this lot less this strip of land would be a buildable lot.
PAGE 15
MINUTES OF TI3E
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
� .
(#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HAMM,CONTINUED)
Gaffron stated the original agreement does not specify what type of variances would be granted and that
the removal of that portion of land in his opinion would make the lot barely buildable.
McNaughton stated Hennepin County has indicated that the strip of land makes this lot safer to access.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 7:48 p.m.
Edward Callahan,Orono, stated he is appearing here as a representative of Mrs. Goetten,the previous
owner of the property. Callahan noted he was the mayor at the time that the agreement combining this
strip of land to the land to the north was entered into.
Callahan stated they are opposed to the combination of this property due to public policy matters and
that the Planning Commission should follow the general rules and policies that have been set forth by
the City governing zoning matters,and if those policies are changed,the Planning Commission should
give the reasons for why they should be changed.
Callahan stated there were a number of reasons why the lots were combined,with one reason being to
be able to sell the lots to Mr.McNaughton. Callahan stated it was essential that this 33-foot strip of land
be combined in order to sell the property. Callahan stated it was the policy of the City at the time it was
combined that it was required to occur and that now there is another policy that allows for the 33-feet of
land to be combined someplace else. Callahan pointed out the 33-foot strip of land would only be used
for parking.
Callahan stated the other lot will more than likely need that strip of land to make it a buildable lot and
questioned what policy change has occurred or what facts exist to allow for this lot line rearrangement.
Callahan inquired where the problem with the parking arose. Callahan stated the road being suggested
as the exit for this property is a road that the homeowners do not welcome and that the residents of the
area should be given an opportunity to have their views heard.
Kevin Kokesh, 1399 Orono Lane,recommended the Planning Commission paid heed to the noise
concerns of the neighbors regarding Orono Lane. Kokesh noted that the City has not enforced the
previous restrictions. Kokesh indicated McNaughton has stripped the land next to his property line and
that he has a concem about more trees being removed. Kokesh stating he would also like the buffers to
the setbacks maintained.
Dana Wells, 1397 Orono Lane, stated the Kokesh house is located higher than the McNaughton
property and that McNaughton had a specific permit that he had to build a house before he could
improve the lakeshore. Wells stated the hill was removed that protected the property from the road as
well as a forest of trees. Wells stated she has a clear view of what is now a very unkempt property
rather than a forest of trees.
PAGE 16
MINUTES OF THE
- ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HAlVIM,CONTINUED)
Wells stated her drainage and sight lines have been affected because of these changes on this lot and that
over the years there have been loads of gravel that have been periodically dumped on this property.
Wells stated in her view the purpose is to allow for parking in that area,which will also impact her sight
line. Wells stated she would like to see the property restored.
Huntsberg,Willow Drive, stated he has spoken with the County and that there is access to this lot for
the people down near the shore. Huntsberg inquired why Orono allows access to the lake if access to
this property is not allowed. Huntsberg stated it is a buildable lot without the 33 feet strip of land.
Wells stated the house would need to be built further back on the lot.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.
McNaughton stated there is a lot of old stuff that does not pertain to the application tonight and that he
understands and respects the neighbors' views but that they also had the opportunity to purchase this lot.
McNaughton stated his original intent was to build on the lot across the lake,but that given his concerns
regarding the safety of crossing the road,he is pursuing the lot line rearrangement. McNaughton stated
the availability of utilities to this location also changes his plans.
McNaughton noted access is not being added to Orono Lane and that Mr.Hamm has had access to the
road for a number of years. McNaughton stated the combination makes it a safe,buildable lot, and that
the house will help to shelter the neighbors from the noise of the road.
McNaughton pointed out any work done on the property over the years has been done with a permit.
Jurgens commented he does not like the idea of taking a conforming lot and making two nonconforming
lots. Jurgens stated there should be some discussion regarding the average lakeshore setback and the
impact to the neighbors due to the orientation of the house. Jurgens stated there might be a possibility
that the house should be further back.
Rahn stated he does not feel it is necessary to discuss the house at this time since the footprint is visible
and the lot is buildable. Rahn stated without a formal plan in front of him,he would prefer not to
discuss the house.
Rahn stated if that strip of land were not attached to the other lot,he would attach it to the existing
lakeshore lot.Rahn stated if this strip of land were abutting the lot across the street,he would not be in
favor of this. Rahn stated this is not an adjacent property and that the combination would benefit the
� McNaughton property when the time comes to construct a structure on the lot.
Kempf stated there is some di�cult history to contend with,but that he is in favor of the combination.
Kempf noted the proposed house does sit in front of the other houses and that the lakeshore setback is
designed to protect views of the lake. Kempf stated the proposed house would not obstruct the views of
the lake in this situation.
PAGE 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006 �
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HANIM,CONTINUED)
Bremer noted Orono Lane is a very busy, loud road and that she would like to take this opportunity to
provide for some kind of protective screening. Bremer stated it sounds like someone has been taking
advantage of the previous agreement and that it is not likely she would not have supported the original
agreement.
Bremer commented this is a unique situation and that there is now an opportunity to do some restoration
to the outlot and to screen the road. Bremer stated she would recommend the inclusion of some type of
covenant or some type of statement that the applicant is agreeable to providing some landscaping.
McNaughton stated he also would like to see the lake and pointed out that the highest part of the hill is
located on the neighbor's property. McNaughton noted the work was completed with the proper permit
from the city. McNaughton commented there also is some arborvitae between his property and the
neighbors.
Wells stated a drainage issue has been created in her yard because of the work done on the McNaughton
property. Wells stated she now has a lake on her property.
McNaughton requested the City Engineer review the property because in his view the Kokesh property
is higher than his.
Jurgens inquired whether this is required to be platted.
Gaffron stated this is required to be a plat. �
Jurgens inquired what the Planning Commission should be approving tonight. Jurgens stated he is
unclear what should be approved since there is not a preliminary plat that has been submitted.
Gaffron stated the applicants are proposing no changes to grade and that the Planning Commission
technically does have a preliminary plat in front of them but it is called a lot line rearrangement rather
than a plat.
Gaffron stated it is difficult to look at the grading and drainage at this time without a plan for a proposed
house being in front of them and that if the Planning Commission would like to see some improvements
to the subdivision,the Planning Commission could request those.
Jurgens stated in his view this should be looked at as a preliminary plat,especially given all the issues
raised tonight.
Jurgens moved to table Application#06-3196,Pat McNaughton/Edward Hamm, 1391 Fox
Street/1401 Shoreline Drive,to allow the applicant time to submit a preliminary plat and to obtain
City Engineer review.
Kempf inquired whether a grading plan would be done prior to a house plan being proposed.
PAGE 18
. MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HAMM,CONTINUED)
Jurgens stated the underlying issues would be addressed in more detail with a preliminary plat. Jurgens
stated he would like to see the setbacks and the location of the house.
Kroeger inquired.whether this proposal would give the strip of land to Mr.Hamm.
McNaughton stated it would not. McNaughton stated the transaction to acquire that land is contingent
upon the lot line rearrangement.
Motion failed due to lack of second.
Rahn moved to recommend approval of Application#06-3196,Pat McNaughton/Edward Hamm,
1391 Fox Street/1401 Shoreline Drive,granting of a lot line rearrangement.
Kempf inquired whether the average lakeshore setback issue should be addressed.
Rahn stated in his view it is premature to address that at this time and that it would be more appropriate
to discuss it at the time a house is proposed for this lot.
Gaffron noted as part of the application and approval process,variances are being granted to lot area for
this lot. Gaf&on pointed out that the applicant may not need to reappear before the Planning
Commission if a house is designed that is in conformance with City regulations. Gaffron stated he
would use the average setback line as currently defined in his report if someone submits a proposal for
this lot.
Gaffron stated there is some merit in the discussion on whether the provisions to allow the parking area
go away, and that the restoration of the property may be addressed as part of this process in addition to
the other items raised tonight.
Bremer stated those conditions are normally required with a preliminary plat but that it is a little more
difficult with this application since a house is not being proposed at the present time.
McNaughton stated it is not his intent to have parking in that area in the future and that this lot will
become a benefit to the neighborhood.
Kempf concurred that it is likely this lot will become a benefit but that he has a concern with some of
these issues not being addressed tonight.
Jurgens stated the Planning Commission does not have the discretion to require screening and land
alterations as part of a conditional use permit. Jurgens reiterated that the applicant should submit
additional information prior to a recommendation by the Planning Commission.
Bremer inquired whether the owner of the property would be required to remove the parking area.
PAGE 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3196 PAT McNAUGHTON/ED HAMM, CONTINUED)
Rahn stated he would be agreeable to including that in his motion. Rahn stated in his view the screening
should be addressed at the time the lot is developed. Rahn inquired whether the Plann.ing Commission
would like to establish a buffer at this time.
McNaughton inquired whether the Planning Commission is in favor of a buffer.
Rahn stated they are.
McNaughton stated he is in favor of a buffer.
Bremer stated the concern of the Planning Commission is that this application might not appear before
the Planning Commission again.
McNaughton inquired whether that issue could be discussed at the time he applies for a building pernut.
Gaffron stated it would require some language to be included in the resolution.
Rahn stated that language could be presented to the City Council.
Rahn amended his motion to include a recommendation of approval for lot area variances and to
require the submittal of a buffering/landscaping/berming plan that meets Planning Commission
or City Council approval at the time a building permit is applied for. Bremer seconded the
amended motion.
Gaffron inquired whether the average lakeshore setback is included in the motion.
Rahn stated it is not.
VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 2,Jurgens and Kempf opposed.
Kempf indicated he would prefer to address the average lakeshore setback issue tonight and to have a
review by the Planning Commission of a landscape plan.
Jurgens concurred with Coxnxnissioner Kempf.
PAGE 20 �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING,8:00 P.M.
13. CITY OF ORONO,BUILDING HEIGHT,LOT WIDTH,AGGREGATE SETBACKS,
ORDINANCE,8:41—8:55 P.M.
Gaffron stated the application by the City of Orono deals with a zoning amendment regarding building
height limitation relative to lot width and aggregate setbacks.
The Planning Comm.ission,at its April work session,indicated support for the following zoning code
amendments to address the issues of building height and massing:
1. In addition to the current 30-foot height limit,limit peak height to 75 percent of lot width,
where peak height is measured from pre-existing high side grade(or 10' above low side,
whichever is lower)to the highest roof peak. The intent is to reduce the visual impact of height
on very narrow lots.
For lots wider than 60',the defined building height limit of 30 feet would likely be the limiting
factor for height.
2. In conjunction with the current minimum side setback requirement for each zoning district, add
an aggregate side setback requirement for all residential lots(lakeshore and non-lakeshore)by
establishing that the width of a house can be no more than 70 percent of the lot width.
Gaffron stated this zoning amendment will impact a large number of properties and will also create a '
significant number of nonconforming lots.
In addition,at its April work session the Planning Commission expressed general support for revising
the defined height definition to exclude gable-end windows from defining the"median height of the
highest gable",such that only when there are dormers would we use the top of the windows and the
peak to define the upper measuring point. Gaffron stated the theory is that a window in a gable end
does not add actual volume or mass to a building,nor does it add to the visual impression of height
within the roof system,whereas dormers do add to the perception of height and do add to the volume
and massing in a roof system. This revision would potentially allow people to maximize the livable area
within a more restricted 3-dimentional buildable envelope.
� Gaffron pointed out the code amendment does not apply to commercial or industrial districts.
Rahn opened the pubic hearing at 8:48 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 8:48 p.m.
Rahn stated the amendment is consistent with what was discussed at the Planning Commission
workshop and that he is in favor of the amendment.
PAGE 21
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(CITY OF ORONO ORDINANCE,CONTINUED)
Kempf commented he feels this zoning amendment is a good change and would allow the homeowner
the complete use of the building envelope. _
Bremer stated she does not agree with the aggregate side setback requirement because it is too
restrictive but that she is supportive of the remainder of the amendment.
Jurgens stated in regards to the aggregate setback,it does allow some flexibility with the setbacks and
also adds some restrictions on lots.
Kroeger noted a variance could be granted to the aggregate setback.
Gaffron stated if the Planning Commission feels the numbers should be reviewed,this item could be
tabled.
Rahn moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of the Ordinance for the City of Orono
regarding Building Height,Lot Width,and Aggregate Setbacks. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Bremer
opposed.
7. #06-3197 SUNCREST BUILDERS FOR GRANT AND JULIE JOHNSON,2445
DUNWOODY AVENUE,VARIANCE,8:55—9:08 P.M.
Grant Johnson,Applicant,was present.
Turner stated the applicants are requesting lot width and lot area variances to construct a new house on a
lot that is 62.5 feet wide when 100 feet is required and has an area of.38 acre when.5 acre is required.
The applicants are also requesting a variance to have 29.4 percent hardcover in the 75-250' zone when
25 percent would be allowed.
The proposed house would be two stories with a lakeside walkout and an attached two-car garage. A
basement below the garage would be used for storage. This area would be accessed through an
overhead door on the north side of the garage.
The City Engineer is recommending that the retaining wall be relocated five feet off the property line.
Tumer indicated there would be swales along the property lines to direct drainage from the portion of
the lot that drains toward the lake around the house. Because the slope runs diagonally through the lot,
the part of the lot to the south drains across this lot and part of this lot rains across the lot to the north.
This drainage pattern would continue,but the drainage to the north would be diverted so it would cross
less of the neighboring lot and cross farther from the house on that lot.
PAGE 22
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3197 GRANT AND JULIE JOHNSON,CONTINUED)
Turner stated the amount of hardcover proposed is more than the average of 27.9 percent hardcover
allowed for lots with 10,000 to 15,000 square feet within the 75-250' foot hardcover zone. This average
includes properties with part of the hardcover within the 250-500' zone,which is allowed more
hardcover.
Planni.ng Staff recommends approval of the lot area and lot width variances as requested,subject to the
retaining wall being placed at least five feet from the adj acent property line. If the Planning
Commission finds the proposed hardcover acceptable,the Planning Staff recomxnends approval of the
hardcover variance.
Planning Staff also recommends approval of the conditional use permit for land alteration within the
75-foot shoreland zone.
Johnson noted the driveway has been reduced to the minimum standards of the City but that they would
like to perhaps increase the width of the driveway to nine feet up by the garage. Johnson inquired
whether they could be granted a hardcover variance for an amount under 30 percent rather than a
specified amount. �
� Rahn questioned whether it is necessary to have storage under the garage and that perhaps that area
should be utilized for drainage. Rahn stated in his view there should be a minimum of five feet between
the retaining wall and the property line. Rahn stated he does not have any other issues with this
application.
Bremer commented she feels this house will be a good improvement to the neighborhood.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 9:04 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 9:04 p.m.
Jurgens inquired about the average setback line.
Gaffron stated the points of the neighboring houses that place the average setback line closest to the lake
would be used.
Jurgens concurred that the retaining wall should be relocated five feet off the property line.
Rahn inquired whether the applicant is okay with relocating the retaining wall.
Johnson stated he is willing to relocate the retaining wall five feet off the property line.
PAGE 23
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3197 GRANT AND JULIE JOHNSON,CONTINUED)
Rahn moved,Jurgens seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3197,Grant and Julie
Johnson,2445 Dunwoody Avenue,with the stipulation that the retaining wall be relocated five
feet from the adjoining property line and with the level of hardcover as proposed. VOTE: Ayes
5,Nays 0.
(Recess taken from 9:08 p.m.—9:14 p.m.)
8. #06-3198 GREG AND CINDY HAUGEN,3320 FOX STREET,VARIANCE, 9:14—9:33
P.M.
Rick Carlson,Waterstreet Homes,was present on behalf of the Applicants.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting an average lakeshore setback variance in order to construct an
in-ground pool ahead of the average lakeshore setback. The applicants received approval to build a new
home on the property in late 2005,prior to the adoption of the City's new wetland regulations. The
applicants would now like to install a pool on the lakeside of the proposed home. They have proposed a
plan for the wetland buffer area in order to mitigate the affects of the additional hardcover proposal.
Staff finds that there are hardships in order to grant the average lakeshore setback variance. The
primary intent with the average lakeshore setback requirement is to protect any views of the lake that
neighboring properties may have. In the past,variances have been granted to this requirement when it
can be demonstrated that views will not be impacted. The uniqueness of this property is that the
applicants' home and the neighboring homes are over 250' from the shoreline. The topography and the
vegetation likely do not allow a view of the lake over the proposed pool location.
Curtis noted the neighbor to the west has submitted a letter of objection to the average lakeshore setback
variance and has an existing pool in the lake yard which is much closer to the lake than the applicant's
proposed pool.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback should the Planning Commission
deternune that it does not negatively impact the neighbori.ng property owner's existing views of the
lake. Regarding the wetland buffer requirement,prior to review by the City Council,the applicants
should submit a revised, detailed plan for the wetland buffer for John Smyth's review and approval.
Carlson stated this property is a unique property and is set back far from the lake. Carlson indicated the
pool is outside the 75-250' zone. Carlson stated originally there was a different setback line established
by a subdivision,and when the house next door was built with a pool,a domino effect was created and
the houses on the other lots have been further set back.
Carlson stated at the time the subdivision was done,no wetland was delineated on this property. The
property was subsequently remapped and a wetland was delineated,with buffers being established.
PAGE 24
MINUTES OF TAE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 dclock p.m.
(#06-3198 GREG AND CINDY HAUGEN,CONTINUED)
Carlson stated the concern of Mr. Smyth dealt with drainage and that he was pleased with the pool being
located away from the wetland. Carlson stated the runoff would be treated prior to it reaching the
wetland.
Carlson stated the pool has been designed to fit the natural topography as much as possible. Carlson
stated he does not like to locate pools near wetlands due to the pressure underground created by the
wetland.
Carlson stated the site is heavily wooded,which creates a very private setting. Carlson stated there is a
15-foot setback only at the front corner,which helps to create more symmetry with the house.
Rahn inquired whether the pool is accessible from the first floor rather than the lower floor.
Carlson stated additional land alteration would be necessary if the pool were located more centrally as
well as raise concerns regarding the water table.
Rahn inquired what the basement foundation elevation is.
Carlson stated walkup grade is at 947' and the wetland is at 944'. Carlson indicated the proposed
location of the pool is at 956',which creates a very natural site for the pool.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 9:24 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 9:24 p.m.
Kempf stated his perception of the natural screening is that it is pretty much dead the first six feet off the
ground and does not provide effective screening of a pool. Kempf noted that the neighbor to the west is
not in support of this project and that perhaps more screening might be in order. Kempf commented the
majority of the noise from the pool is generated around the pool and that if the pool were lowered a
couple of feet,it would help to reduce the noise.
Carlson stated they are already stepping down with the grade and that from a noise point of view,it is an
extremely long ways to the Fullerton home and that the noise would have to be of such a level as to be
considered a nuisance. Carlson stated in his opinion relocating the pool 20 feet over would not make
much difference on the noise impact to the neighbor.
Jurgens stated in a situation like this,it is the responsibility of the property owner to propose screening
if the neighbors are opposed to it.
Kroeger commented he did visit the site and that he was not able to see the neighbor's house from
where the pool is to be situated.
PAGE 25
MINUTES OF TIIE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
, Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3198 GREG AND CINDY HAUGEN,CONTINUED)
Bremer noted the neighbor's letter does reflect her desire to have additional screening provided. Bremer
stated the topography supports the proposed location of the pool and that she would recommend that
additional screening be provided.
Carlson stated the Haugens have discussed screening and would prefer not to make an artificial
landscape barrier.
Jurgens commented in his opinion screening is important and that the proposed location of the pool
limits the type of landscaping that could be planted. �
Carlson stated the property owners are willing to do whatever is reasonably required of them concerning
the screening.
Kempf moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3198, Greg and
Cindy Haugen,3320 Fox Street,subject to John Smyth's recommendations,with the hope that
some additional landscaping be provided. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
9. #06-3200 HICKORY FINE HOMES, 1374 REST POINT ROAD,VARIANCE,9:33—
10:09 P.M.
Steve Bohl,Hickory Fine Homes,and Jim Moze,Hickory Fine Homes,were present.
Gaffron stated the applicants are proposing to do a rebuild on a.65-acre lot.The applicants are
requesting the following variances in order to replace the existing residence structure with a new home.
l. A lot area variance.
2. A 0-75' hardcover of 814 square feet where no hardcover is allowed.
3. Retain nonconforming accessory structures in 0-75' zone and lakeward of average setback.
4. 75-250' hardcover of 32.9 percent where only 25 percent is allowed.
Gaffron noted the majority of the hardcover in this zone consists of the pool.
Gaffron noted the applicant has submitted a revised plan that is different than the plan that is included in
the Planning Commission packets. Gaffron stated the lowering of the house has resolved the height
issues. �
Gaffron stated the City Engineer has some concerns regarding the grading and drainage,which still need
to be addressed by the applicant.
PAGE 26
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3200 HICKORY FINE HOMES,CONTINUED)
Issues for consideration include the following:
1. Should the pool be allowed to remain in conjunction with the rebuild?
2. Is there any justification for a hardcover variance in either zone?
3. Is there any justification to consider a variance to height limitations?
Gaffron stated in his opinion the unresolved issues can be resolved. Gaffron stated without the pool,the
hardcover would be reduced to less than 25 percent.
Bohl stated they wanted.to design a home that was comparable to the existing house and garage. Bohl
indicated the current home sits approximately 15 feet from the road and the proposed home is being
pushed back further away from the road. Bohl stated the pool has existed for approximately 20 years
and was an important factor for the Gangstees in deciding to purchase this property.
Bohl stated apparently the shoreline has eroded over the years,which has caused a portion of the pool to
be located in the 0-75' zone.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 9:45 p.m.
Jim Langhans, 1366 Rest Point Road,inquired what the existing hardcover is. Langhans inquired
whether the plans are typically available prior to the meeting,noting that they were not able to look at
the plans prior to tonight's meeting.
Peter Lanpher, 1380 Rest Point Road,noted the proposed hardcover has been reduced from what was
originally proposed,but that he has a concern regarding the drainage. Lanpher stated the property
currently is flat and that he does not have a problem with water runoff onto his property. Lanpher stated
he has a concem with potential water problems if the land is sloped towards his property.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 9:47 p.m.
Rahn stated he has a number of issues with this application. Rahn pointed out the first floor elevation is
going to be considerably higher than the existing house.
Gaffron stated the recent revisions have brought the elevation from 958' down to 955'. Gaffron stated it
is his assumption that the applicants are very close to meeting the standard for having that lower level be
considered a basement and not a story. Gaffron stated the issues relating to height have been resolved
with the house being lowered three feet into the ground.
Bohl indicated a walkout currently exists behind the garage.
Bremer inquired what the current hardcover is in the 75-250'.
PAGE 27
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3200 ffiCKORY FINE HOMES,CONTINUED)
Bohl stated in 1992 the hardcover showed 6062 square feet.
Bremer stated that does not address what the hardcover is currently and that the neighbors have
expressed a concern regarding the size of the structure.
Bohl stated they are within 140 feet of the existing hardcover.
Rahn commented he would be hard pressed to consider a pool a hardship,especially given the size of
the house and garage. Rahn noted the Planning Commission has required numerous residents to reduce
driveways and remove decks in order to comply with the hardcover standards.
Bremer pointed out this is a rebuild and that what was originally approved no longer applies. Bremer
stated she does not have a concern with the pool if the size of the house is reduced. Bremer stated given
the size and width of the lot,25 percent hardcover would be a great deal.
Rahn stated if the applicants would like to have the pool remain,the size of the house would need to be
reduced.
Bremer stated normally no hardcover is allowed within the 0-75',and since this is a rebuild,that .
hardcover would need to be removed.
Jurgens inquired what was previously approved for the 0-75' zone.
Rahn stated the building permit application and the plans say that no hardcover is allowed in the 0-75'
zone. '
Gaffron stated he would not rely on what was approved in the past given the survey that is in the file.
Jurgens commented he is not in favor of this proposal and that the hardcover on the lot should be
reduced. Jurgens stated it does not appear that the lakeshore has eroded in the past 17 years. Jurgens
stated it is the applicant's responsibility to prove that a hardship e�sts and that he does not see a
hardship.
Bohl inquired what the objection is to the plan.
Jurgens stated there is too much hardcover on the lot.
Rahn stated in his view this lot is big enough to support a large home without the need for a variance.
Bohl stated the existing home is not in conformance with today's zoning codes and that this plan is an
improvement over what currently exists.
PAGE 28
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3200 HICKORY FINE HOMES,CONTINUED)
Rahn stated whether the pool remains is a choice the applicants would need to make.
Jurgens stated the concerns of the City Engineer would also have to be addressed.
Gaffron inquired whether the retaining wall is located on the neighbor's property.
Langhans stated he is unsure who owns the retaining wall but that it appears from the stakes that the
retaining wall is on their side and that the fence is located on the Gangstee property.
Gaffron noted this property did receive a variance for a fence a number of years ago. Gaffron inquired
whether the fence would be removed.
Bohl indicated it would be. Bohl stated they would meet with the neighbors and address the concems of
the City Engineer.
Bohl inquired whether the neighbors are opposed to the pool.
Langhans and Lanpher indicated they are not opposed to the pool or to the project but have concems
regarding the drainage.
Jurgens moved,Kempf seconded,to table Application#06-3200,Hickory Fine Homes, 1374 Rest
Point Road,to allow the Applicant time to revise his plans. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Bohl requested the Planning Commission vote on the matter rather than tabling the application.
Bremer moved,Kroeger seconded,to reconsider the motion. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Jurgens
opposed.
Bremer moved,at the request of Steve Bohl,Kroeger seconded,to recommend denial of
Application#06-3200,Hickory Fine Homes, 1374 Rest Point Road. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
10. #06-3201 DAVID CARLSON OF WILSON MANAGEMENT FOR CIiARLIE
THOMPSON,875 WAYZATA BOULEVARD,COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT,
10:09 p.m.—11:09 P.M.
David Carlson,Wilson Management; Charlie Thompson,owner; and Steve Johnston were present.
Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting an amendment of the comprehensive plan to allow
development of this site at an urban residential density of two units per acre,to accommodate six 2-unit
townhomes. The property is currently guided for rural residential use at a density of one unit per two
acres.
' PAGE 29
" MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006 '
6:00 dclock p.m.
(#06-3201 CHARLIE THOMPSON,CONTINUED)
Gaffron noted this property is located within the MUSA boundary. It has not been determined at this
time whether the Long Lake sewer and water systems have capacity for residential uses of this site at the
densities requested.
The applicant proposes to remove the day care use and construct a 12-unit townhome development at a
density of two units per acre. The proposed use would require the following actions by the City:
1. Amendment of the 2000-2020 Community Management Plan to convert the status of the
property from rural to urban.
2. Establishment of standards within the CMP for future use and development of this property.
3. Rezoning to allow a multi-family development.
4. Approval of a RPUD development plan, subdivision and development agreement.
Gaffron recommended the Planning Commission should review the application and determine whether
there are sufficient and compelling reasons to re-guide the property to allow for urban density
development, and if such reasons are present,consider what goals or standards should be established to
minimize any negative impacts of the urban density within the defined rural area.
Gaffron recommended the Planning Commission consider the following:
1. The basic characteristics used to establish the areas recently re-guided higher density residential
use are not present at this site. Primarily,the site is not near a commercial area that can provide
the urban services,nearby shopping,public transportation,walkability,etc.,that were
compelling reasons for the recent re-guidings near downtown Long Lake.
2. Insertion of higher density housing into the defined Rural Area for a property that the owner
finds difficult to develop,does not necessarily promote or advance the City's housing goals of
providing life-cycle housing where appropriate urban services can be provided.
3. The property does have a variety of potential uses under the current rural status and RR-1B
zoning,and the fact that the property will now have a freeway that its southwest boundary does
not in itself suggest that those uses are no longer viable. If the site is acceptable for upper-
bracket twinhomes proposed,why isn't it acceptable for single-family units as currently guided?
4. Development of housing at a density of two units per acre on this site would be inconsistent
with most of the surrounding development.
5. Potential negative visual and related activity impacts associated with urban-density residential
development abutting the Luce Line Trail would be inconsistent with the City's vision for the
Rural Area.
PAGE 30
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m. �
(#06-3201 CHARLIE THOMPSON,CONTINUED)
6. Areas re-guided for higher density housing in the 2000-2020 CMP have yet to be developed,
and it may be premature to consider additional areas until those initial areas are developed.
David Carlson illustrated the layout of the units on the site on the overhead and the proposed exterior
design for the units. Carlson noted there are two different garages with varying roof elevations and two
separate entrances. Carlson stated the majority of the living would be done on the main level,with the
units being geared towards empty-nesters. Carlson displayed the interior layout of the units. Carlson
pointed out that it would not be possible to construct three two-acre,2200 square foot single-family
homes on this site due to septic issues.
Carlson noted a neighborhood meeting was held earlier this month,with the maj ority of the neighbors in
support of the project. Carlson indicated the neighbors also expressed a desire that the developer work
with them and MnDot to obtain some type of screening from the new Highway 12 corridor.
Rahn commented he would like to know why the city should change the density to four times what is
currently allowed.
Johnston stated the project site more closely relates to what is happening in Long Lake and that the
density is approximately the same as the adjoining area. Johnston stated other uses envisioned for the
site would require a conditional use permit and that in his opinion the other uses are not economically
viable and would create higher traffic levels.
Johnston stated in his view this is a better use from a transportation standpoint than some of the
conditional use permits that would be allowed on this lot.
Johnston illustrated the existing driveway into the property. Johnston expressed a coricern that there are
not three septic sites available on the property. Johnston stated the access roadway under their proposal
remains essentially the same as what exists,with the majority of the buildings being pulled away from
old Highway 12. Johnston indicated clustering would allow them to retain the row of trees that exist
and that they are planning on supplementing those trees.
Johnston stated there is sewer hookup available from the City of Long Lake,the cul-de-sac, and one
other location. Johnston pointed out there is also a water main to the site. Johnston stated a lift station
constructed in this area would allow the sewer to be metered by Long Lake.
Johnston stated the densities proposed for this site are comparable to the densities in Long Lake.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 10:39 p.m.
Alfred Bronte, 925 West Wayzata Boulevard, indicated he is totally opposed to this project. Bronte
stated it was originally designed for single-family residential and not town homes.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 10:40 p.m.
PAGE 31
MINUTES OF THE �
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3201 CIiARLIE THOMPSON,CONTINLTED)
Kempf noted Long Lake would need to agree to both water and sewer hookup.
Bronte stated they would only have to agree with one building. Bronte stated he would contact the City
of Long Lake and tell them that he is opposed to it.
Kempf concurred that this property does have limited uses and that the town home concept is appealing.
Kempf expressed doubt that the single-family residences would be workable in this area. Kempf stated
he does not like the lack of a 20-foot buffer.
Gaffron stated there would need to be a 20-foot structural setback to the wetland.
Kempf stated he would like to see that buffer and that in his opinion this is a good use for this property.
Rahn stated he would not be opposed to town homes but that he has a concem with the proposed
density. Rahn noted this area was not changed in the City's Comprehensive Plan and that he generally
is in agreement with Staff's report.
Kroeger stated he is unsure what the level of traffic will be on Highway 12 once the overpass is
completed but that the traffic will have an impact on what type of development would be viable in that
area.
Bremer indicated she is not opposed to the town homes but that she personally would be interested in a
commercial use for this site.
Thompson indicated they have looked hard at different uses for this site over the past few years and
have arrived at the conclusion that town homes would be a good fit for this property. Thompson stated
they have incorporated soundproofing elements into the design of the town homes and that this is a very
appealing structure. �
Kempf commented he does not have an issue with the density as he did originally given the open space
that is being proposed. Kempf stated if the 20-foot setback is complied with,the number of units would `
be decreased.
Kroeger pointed out the open space is mainly wetland.
Johnston stated there is some open space,with approximately one-third of the site being wetland.
Johnston illustrated the areas of open space that would exist with this proposal. Johnston stated with the
20-foot setback,the units would be closer together but that they should still be able to fit 12 units on this
site. '
Johnston noted the last time the City updated their Comprehensive Plan was at a time when the daycare
business was operating and that a decision was probably made that this area did not need to be looked
PAGE 32
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3201 CHARLIE THOMPSON,CONTINUED)
at. Johnston stated the amount of traffic generated by the daycare is probably slightly higher or the
same as what would be generated by the town homes.
Johnston stated the cost to provide city sewer to three single-family homes would make it cost
prohibitive and that the three single-family homes would need to be located closer to the old Highway
12 corridor in order to provide septic sites.
Rahn reiterated that in his opinion the density is too high for this site and is not in align with the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Jurgens stated this type of development has not been highly successful in this city in the past and that he
is having a difficult time understanding why the density for this area should be changed. Jurgens stated
in his opinion the density is too high and that single-family homes would not be cost prohibitive.
Rahn inquired whether the Planning Commission should vote on this application.
Gaffron stated because this is a comprehensive plan amendment,a public hearing is required and that
the Planning Commission should make a recommendation to the Council. Gaffron stated once it passes
the City Council,it would be brought before the Metropolitan Council.
Rahn commented that there are other areas within the city that are currently guided for this use.
Jurgens inquired whether a PUD would be allowed on this site.
Gaffron stated the only way a higher density would be allowed under current City Code would be to do
an RPUD,which is not logical in this situation.
Kroeger questioned whether there is a market for this type of housing at the price that is being proposed.
Carlson indicated he developed the Litsen project in Wayzata and that the value of that project has more
. than tripled in the past few years.
Johnston noted these units have approximately 2200 square feet on the main level and that this is a
different market than Stone Bay.
Kroeger inquired what the risk is to the City if this development does not work.
Jurgens stated there is probably not a monumental risk to the City if this development is constructed but
in the event that this development does not work,then the City is in the position of trying to redevelop
this property.
PAGE 33
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3201 CHARLIE THOMPS09N,CONTINUED)
Bremer moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3201,David Carlson
of Wilson Management for Charlie Thompson,875 Wayzata Boulevard,comprehensive plan
amendment,to allow development of the site at urban residential density given the unique
nature of the property and subject to compliance with the City's wetland buffers.
VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 2,Rahn and Jurgens opposed.
#06-3202 TENII'LE ISRAEL,CAMP TEKO,645 TONKAWA ROAD,CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, 11:09 p.m.—11:11 p.m.
Bob Shiff,Temple Israel,was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit in order to stabilize the existing
swimming beach and a hardcover variance within the 0-75' zone due to the change in the hardcover
percentage.
Staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance and conditional use permit subj ect to the City
Engineer's recommendations.
Shiff had nothing to add to Staff's report.
Chair Rahn opened the public hearing at 11:10 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Rahn closed the public hearing at 11:10 p.m.
Rahn moved,Bremer seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3202,Temple Israel,
Camp Teko,645 Tonkawa Road,condiHonal use permit,subject to Staff s and the City
Engineer's recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
12. #06-3203 PETER JOHIVSON FOR JAMIE WII,SON,745 SPRING HII.,L ROAD,
VARIANCE, 11:11 p.m.—11:26 p.m.
Peter Johnson,Attorney-at-Law,and David Erickson,husband of Jamie Wilson,were present.
Gaffron stated the applicants are requesting a lakeshore setback variance in order to construct an
, addition to the existing garage and guest house structure,which was constxucted nearer than 150 feet to
Lydiard Lake prior to the Natural Environment Lake status and 150' setback requirement coming into
effect.
PAGE 34
�
MINUTES OF THE �
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3203 JAMIE WII,SON,CONTINUED) .
Staff fmds that the existing location of the building is a hardship,and expansion of the structure in the
proposed location and style will not be detrimental to the lake nor be out of character with the
neighborhood. The building more than meets other setback requirements and is located to have no
. impact on views of the lake enjoyed by the neighboring property owners. The existing building is
connected to a septic system that was new in 2005, and the proposed addition does not increase the
expected water use of the building. The proposed expansion and remodeling will enclose a sport court.
The additions will be in the same faced style of the existing building and the proposed expansion does
not violate any conditions of the existing guest house conditional use pernut.
Staff recommends approval, subject to the applicants executing the standard covenant for oversized
accessory structures based on the expanded building.
Johnson stated they are proposing minimal ground cover with this application and that the site overall
will be just over 10 percent hardcover. Johnson stated the property owners have worked hard to come
up with a design that maintains the character of the neighborhood.
Rahn inquired what the length of the building is currently.
Erickson stated it is 50 feet long.
Rahn inquired what is being added to the building.
Erickson stated 22 feet.
Rahn opened the public hearing at 11:15 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Rahn closed the public hearing at 11:15 p.m. .
Kempf stated the addition is located within 150 feet of an environxnental lake and would be expanding a
nonconformity. Kempf stated this property has a number of alternative locations that would not expand
a nonconformity.
Jurgens stated he also had a difficult time understanding the hardship and that the City in the past has
denied similar applications.
Kroegers stated in his opinion it would be difficult to ascertain that this building has been expanded and
that another 1000 square feet building would be much more noticeable.
Erickson indicated the building is screened from the lake and the adjoining properties. Erickson stated
they would prefer not to have another freestanding building.
PAGE 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3203 JAMIE WILSON,CONTINLTED)
Johnson stated with regard to the hardship,the Planning Commission should look at how to preserve the
character of the area. Johnson noted the residence on the property is historic and that they would like to
maintain the current character of the neighborhood. Johnson stated this is the alternative to creating
another accessory structure.
Johnson noted the neighbors have not expressed any opposition to this proposal.
Johnson stated there is approximately 2.5 acres of the lot that is located within that 150' setback and that
the overall hardcover for this lot is well below the amount allowed by the City. Johnson stated there is
not a negative environmental impact that exists with this proposal.
Rahn stated in his opinion it would be more intrusive if another freestanding building were constructed.
Erickson commented they have looked at a number of different options and that this one is the cheapest
and less obtrusive alternative.
Bremer noted that former Planning Commissioner Liz Hawn and her husband have voiced their support
for this application.
Kempf acknowledged that adding another building to the site has a downside.
Bremer moved,Rahn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3203,Jamie Wilson,
745 Spring Hill Road,lakeshore setback variance,subject to the applicants executing the standard
covenant for accessory structures based on the expanded building. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,
Kempf opposed.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
14. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING
COUNCIL MEETINGS APRIL 24 AND MAY 22,2006
Gaffron stated the Broitzman application was tabled at the Apri124`h meeting.
Kempf reported on the May 22 City Council meeting,noting that the City Council requested Broitzman
relocate the driveway out the front and to reduce the massing on the lot,which resulted in the Broitzman
application being tabled. Kempf stated the Radke application was approved. Kempf stated the Council
expressed the same concerns as the Planning Comxnission on the Morries application and that a tour of
the property was scheduled with the Council.
PAGE 36
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
15. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Rahn inquired why there was not a more finalized city engineer report on the applications.
Gaffron stated many times the applicant has not submitted sufficient information to allow for a full
review by the City Engineer.
Rahn noted many of the neighbors' concerns relate to drainage.
Jurgens inquired whether the City should review its requirements for required information on
applications. Jurgens noted that a number of other cities require quite a bit more information to be
submitted prior to the application being placed on the Planning Commission agenda. Jurgens inquired
whether the City's requirements are on the City's web site.
Gaffron stated for a subdivision the City's code is very detailed but for a variance the code is less
specifia
Kroeger stated there is basic information that should be submitted prior to the application being heard
by the Planning Commission.
Bremer expressed concern that the city is requiring too many professionals on an application and that
there are a number of people who come before the City who cannot afford that added cost.
Jurgens stated one reason why a professional signs a plan is to ensure that the plan is viable.
16. PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2006
Rahn moved,Kroeger seconded,to approve the minutes of the Apri117,2006 Planning
Commission meeting as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
17. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON �
MAY 22 AND JiTNE 12,2006
May 22—Kroeger
June 12—Kempf
PAGE 37
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,May 15,2006 '
6:00 o'clock p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Bremer moved,Rahn seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 11: 54
p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
� �--� �Y l__./~
David Rahn,Chair
PAGE 38