HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/2006 Planning Commission Minutes . , �
MINUTES OF THE
• ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present:
Chair Cynthia Bremer, Commissioners Roland Jurgens,David Rahn,Ralph Kempf,and Dick Kroeger.
Representing Staff were Planning Director Mike Gaffron,Planners Melanie Curtis and Evelyn Turner,
and Recorder Jackie Young. Council Member Lili McMillan was present.
Chair Bremer called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS
1. #06-3224 MICHAEL SHARRATT OF SHARRATT DESIGN& COMPANY ON BEHALF
OF THOMAS AND REBECCA LOWE,3295 CARMAN ROAD,VARIANCE,6:03—6:42 P.M.
Thomas Lowe,Applicant, and Michael Sharratt,Architect,were present.
Curtis stated the applicant has provided revised hardcover and structural coverage calculations since the
Planner's report was prepared. The applicant is requesting lot area and 75-250' hardcover variances in
order to allow consiruction of a new home on a lot 0.45 acre in area where 1.0 acre is required and to
allow 4,005 square feet or 40.8 percent hardcover where 25 percent is normally allowed. The proposed
home exceeds the 15 percent limit; therefore, a structural coverage variance is requested as well. The
existing home encroaches into the required 10-foot required side setback and exceeds,the 15 percent
structural coverage limit.
The applicant is proposing to construct a new home in a similar location to the existing structure but will
remove a side setback encroachment and will be conforming with the structural coverage limit at 14.8
percent. The applicant is requesting the hardcover variance based on the unique shape of the lot,which is
a hardship in their opinion.
The City Engineer has not had an opportunity to review the revised plans but he has expressed concerns
to Staff regarding the lakeside patio and the lowest floor elevation at 945 feet. The proposed lakeside
grade elevation is 946.5 feet. The City Engineer feels the applicant should address the potential for water
to stand in this area without the potential to drain away from the house.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot area variance and approval of some level of hardcover
� variance as the Planning Commission deems appropriate, subject to a grading and drainage plan that
' meets the City Engineer's approvaL
Lowe stated he has resided in Orono for almost 50 years and that they would love to remain in the area.
Lowe stated they would like to construct a new residence and they have attempted to design a house that
will meet as many of Orono's codes as possible as well as create a structure that would be an
improvement to the neighborhood and the city. Due to the crumbling foundation,they have been advised -
it would be cost prohibitive to remodel the structure.
PAGE 1
MINUTES OF T�
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3224 Thomas and Rebecca Lowe, Continued)
Lowe indicated they are reducing the hardcover down to 41.8 percent,which is a reduction of almost 20�
percent,and eliminating all the hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone except for the stairway access down
to the lake. Lowe clarified they are not adding a deck onto the house as depicted on the plans but that
there is a deck within the existing footprint of the house.
Lowe stated the patio is being constructed 1.5 feet below grade to satisfy the City's requirement for a full
basement and that they would prefer not to construct it at that grade.
Shanatt stated they have worked extensively with Staff to design a residence that would comply as
much as possible with the City's codes and that they have been successful in reducing the hardcover in
the 75-250' setback zone from 60.5 percent down to 40.83 percent,with the hardcover in the 0-75 foot
setback also being reduced. The foundation is also in very poor condition and would require complete
replacement. The hardship that exists in this situation is the pie-shaped lot,which results in a substantial
amount of land within the 0-75 foot setback zone.
Sharratt requested they not be required to consiruct the residence 1.5 feet below grade to meet the City's
basement requirements.
Lowe distributed pictures of the residence to the Planning Commission.
Sharratt stated the house is proposed to be 63.2 feet long and they are proposing to retain the existing
grade as much as possible. Sharratt illustrated on the overhead the 0-75 foot setback zone and the grade
elevations. Shanatt indicated they are in agreement with the concerns of the City Engineer and would
prefer to leave the grade as is to allow a walkout on the residence.
Bremer pointed out the applicant would then be looking for a height variance since the house would be
two stories plus a walkout.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 6:14 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 6:14 p.m.
Bremer stated she is happy that the applicants have met the City's structural coverage limit and that the
Planning Commission has dealt with pie-shaped properties in the past and that the amount of hardcover
� being proposed may seem excessive but in reality, due to the configuration of the lot,may not be too
excessive. Bremer stated she would not be in favor of the height variance due to the massing and that the
applicant should bury the house 1.5 feet if the City Engineer feels the drainage issues can be resolved.
Rahn noted the land area within the 0-75 foot setback zone is almost the same as the land area in the 75-
250 foot zone. Rahn commented he is unsure how the 40 percent hardcover number was arrived at and
� PAGE 2
NIINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3224 Thomas and Rebecca Lowe,Continued)
that the Planning Staff typically does not approve hardcover in that amount. Rahn inquired whether the
proposed basement floor elevation is similar to what currently exists.
Sharratt stated they would like to raise the ceiling height of the basement in the new residence and that
they are being required to lower the house into the grade in order to meet the City's height restrictions.
Lowe stated due to the way the City's Code is written,the City does not give credit for the dirt that is in
front of the windows and that they are being penalized for the way the side yard was graded 30 years ago.
Lowe stated they should be given some credit for the dirt in front of the windows.
Bremer stated she understands what the applicant is saying but that the City's ordinance is rather specific
and does not allow that to be taken into account.
Kroeger stated based on the shape of the lot,the 40 percent hardcover is not excessive in his view.
Jurgens stated it comes down to what is reasonable use of the lot, and that the three-car garage could be
reduced to a two-car garage,which would result in the driveway being reduced and the hardcover being
decreased. Jurgens indicated he is not in support of a height variance and that the house could be
designed differently. Jurgens stated the storage under the garage is also a personal choice and results in
the grade being pushed further back on the lot.
Lowe stated the storage under the garage exists on the current house.
Rahn stated the ceiling height is driving the elevation of the house. Rahn stated it is difficult to make a
decision on a plan that has only been submitted to Staff on the day of the meeting and that the City
Engineer has not had an opportunity to review the plans.
Kempf indicated he is in agreement with what has already been expressed by the Planning Commission
and that it does come down to the design of the house. Kempf expressed concerns regarding a sunken
patio and the possibility of water problems and that he would like to see some changes made in the design
of the residence.
Sharratt pointed out they are not requesting a height variance at this point but merely brought it up as an
option. Sharratt stated the patio could be engineered to handle the water runoff.
Lowe inquired what type of hardcover levels have been granted in the past for this type of a lot.
Gaffron stated the City's compilations make a clear comparison between the areas of the 75-250 foot zone
and the percentages of hardcover. Gaffron stated the City has granted hardcover in excess of 25 percent
in the past but that it depends on the uniqueness and size of the lot.
PAGE 3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3224 Thomas and Rebecca Lowe, Continued)
Bremer stated the applicant does have the option of taking their application before the City Council,but
' that it appears the Planning Commission is in favor of hardcover in an amount less than 40 percent.
Bremer inquired how many square feet of hardcover would constitute 1 percent.
Gaffron stated it would be roughly 100 square feet.
Lowe inquired whether they could move the house closer to the road.
Gaffron stated they would be able to relocate the house 3.9 feet closer to the road.
Lowe stated their original intent was to construct on the original footprint and to eliminate the side yard ,
setback. Lowe stated due to the poor condition of the foundation,they are considering constructing a new
residence but that they are being forced to reduce the size of their footprint.
Rahn stated if the amount of cubic feet is considered,they are increasing the size of the structure even
though the footprint is smaller.
Sharratt stated they are not able to increase the nonconfornuty under state statute.
Bremer commented the City generally does not give credit for removal of plastic and rock but that overall
the hardcover on the lot is being reduced with this proposal.
Lowe stated they are attempting to reduce the hardcover on the lot.
Bremer stated she would support the application since the proposal does meet the 15 percent structural
coverage,the proposal is consistent with the rest of the neighborhood, and that the lot is unique enough in
her view to warrant the 40.08 percent hardcover. Bremer indicated she is not in support of a height
variance.
Jurgens inquired what the exact hardcover is that is being requested.
Curtis stated it would be 40.08 percent.
Kroeger indicated he also is in support of the revised plan subject to City Engineer review and
recommendations.
Bremer encouraged the applicant to reduce the hardcover wherever possible to reduce the hardcover
below 40 percent.
Kroeger inquired whether relocating the house back 3.5 feet would create an issue with the side yard
setback. �
Sharratt indicated it does not.
PAGE 4
MINUTES OF TAE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3224 Thomas and Rebecca Lowe, Continued)
Jurgens stated he would be in support of 35 percent hardcover but would not be in support of a height
variance.
Sharratt stated they would review their plans to see if the hardcover can be further reduced.
Rahn moved,Kroeger seconded,to approve Application#06-3224,Michael Sharratt of Sharratt
Design and Company,on behalf of Thomas and Rebecca Lowe,3295 Carman Road,granting of a
lot area variance and granting of a hardcover variance for the 75-250 foot setback zone for
hardcover in an amount less than 40 percent,subject to the condition that the plan meets the
approval of the City Engineer and further subject to the conditions of Staff.
VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 0,Jurgens and Kempf opposed.
Kempf noted if the motion included the requirement of relocating the house 3.5 feet closer to the street,he
would have voted in favor of the motion.
2. #06-3227 LOREN BUTTERFIELD AND BRIAN McDONNELL,3940 WATERTOWN
ROAD,SKETCH PLAN,6:42—7:08 P.M.
Loren Butterfield,Applicant,was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a sketch plan review for a three lot residential plat of property
within the RR-lA district,which requires five acres of dry buildable area per lot and 300 feet of width per
lot. The proposal consists of a lot line rearrangement between 3940 and 3850 Watertown Road to add
acreage to 3940, followed by a split of the resulting enlarged 3940 into two�ve acre lots. The new
vacant northerly lot is proposed to use an existing undeveloped platted 33 feet wide right-of-way for
access.
No formal action is required by the Planning Commission at this stage of the application but the Planning
Commission should provide direction to the applicant on the issues outlined in Staff's report.
Butterfield distributed photographs of the property to the Planning Commissioners.
Bremer inquired whether the applicant had anything to add to Staff's report.
Butterfield stated they would like to develop these two lots for sale purposes. Butterfield requested the
five-acre lot not be considered a back lot.
Jurgens inquired whether there is a proposal to improve the road.
PAGE 5
. MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3227 Loren Butterfield and Brian McDonnell,Continued)
Curtis stated it currently is surveyed as a dirt driveway to that lot and that the applicant is not proposing at
this time to improve the driveway.
Jurgens stated if there is going to be a development in this area,the road should be improved.
Kempf inquired what the chances are that this road would be used to access more than two homes.
Curtis stated she is unsure how many larger lots there are to the north,but that there is a potential in the
future that this road would serve more than two homes.
Gaffron stated there is a subdivision called Jacobs Mill to the northeast and that it is not likely this road
would be used to access any of those lots. There is a potential that the property to the east could at some
point in the future be subdivided,which would create a third lot utilizing this corridor. Currently the road
is considered a private driveway in a public right-of-way and under the proposal it would serve two
homes,which is allowed under City code. Gaffron stated one a third house is added,the road would need
to be improved.
Jurgens inquired how wide the driveway currently is.
Butterfield stated approximately 12 feet wide.
Bremer stated one option at this point is to improve the road now in the event a third lot is created at some
point in the future.
Jurgens inquired what the exact size of Parcel A is proposed to be.
Curtis stated they do not know the exact size at this time because a wetland delineation and a survey have
not been completed.
Gaffron stated it is very close to five acres based on existing plats.
Jurgens stated one option would be to take 17 feet from Parcel A and 17 feet from the lot to the east at
some point in the future in order to improve the driveway.
Gaffron noted 33 feet came from the property to the north at the time it was platted.
Jurgens stated based on that history,it probably would not be fair to take an additional 17 feet from that
lot in the future,but that some planning for the improvement of the road should be done at this time.
Bremer inquired whether primary and alternate septic sites have been identified on both lots.
Butterfield stated to his lmowledge there are two septic sites on each lot.
PAGE 6
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3227 Loren Butterfield and Brian McDonnell,Continued)
Bremer recommended the applicant have someone inspect the lots to insure that there are two septic sites
on each lot.
Butterfield noted the older barn would be removed but the storage building would remain.
Bremer stated it appears that both structures are over 2000 square feet,which may be an issue and require
the removal of the structures.
Jurgens stated he would not be opposed to granting a variance to preserve the old barn given its historical
significance and to help preserve the rural character of Orono.
Bremer inquired how structurally sound the old barn is.
Butterfield stated it is structurally sound and has been maintained over the years. Butterfield noted that it
does not have a concrete floor.
Kempf stated in his view the two barn structures would probably be removed once plans are drawn up for
a new house.
Rahn stated removal of the barn structure would probably be up to the property owner.
Bremer noted there would be an eight percent park dedication fee.
Gaffron stated the eight percent is of the fair market value of the real estate and that there is a cap on the
amount of park dedication fee that would need to be paid on a five-acre lot.
Bremer noted the stormwater and drainage trunk fee is currently at$2,280 percent acre for the five-acre
lot. Bremer stated there is a question on whether the fee should be based on the two new lots or the 30
acres involved in the proposal. Bremer stated she would be inclined to only apply those fees to the two
new lots.
Jurgens stated if additional lots are going to be created,the stormwater and drainage trunk fees would be
paid at the time those lots are created.
Bremer noted that a more detailed survey would need to be completed on the lots.
Butterfield submitted a survey of the lots. Butterfield stated he also has received approval from the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Bremer inquired whether the applicant has the approval from the MCWD in writing.
Butterfield stated he does not have it personally but would be able to submit it to the City.
PAGE 7
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m. �
(#06-3227 Loren Butterfield and Brian McDonnell,Continued)
Bremer opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m.
There were no public comments relating to this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 7:05 p.m.
Bremer encouraged the applicant to continue to work with Staff on his application.
The Planning Commission took no formal action on this item.
(Recess taken from 7:08—7:10 p.m.)
3. #06-3228 RICK AND KRISTINE STERLING, 1300 VINE PLACE,VARIANCE,7:10—
7:30 P.M.
Rick Sterling,Applicant,was present.
Turner stated the applicants are requesting an average lakeshore setback variance to construct an addition
to the street side of the house that is forward of the average lakeshore setback; a variance to construct a
garage addition 25 feet from the right of way of Vine Place when a 30-foot setback is required; a variance
to construct the garage an additiona19.1 feet from the side property line when a 10-foot setback is
required; and a hardcover variance to allow 28 percent hardcover in the 75-250 foot zone when 25 percent
is permitted.
The addition would have a stepped front. The west two stalls would be extended forward 18 feet. The
east stall would be extended forward only seven feet. The east front corner of the two-stall portion of the
addition would create 5.48 feet into the 30-foot street setback. The east front corner of the third stall
addition would encroach 0.9 percent feet into the 10-foot side setback.
The addition would be mostly over existing hardcover and would add an additiona136 square feet of
hardcover to the site. Hardcover calculations submitted with the application indicated existing hardcover
was 28 percent and would be increased slightly.
Planning Staff explained to the applicant that the front and side setback variances could be eliminated if
eight feet were added to the rear of the garage and the front addition was reduced from 18 to 10 feet.
Planning Staff recommends denial of the side and front setback variances, denial of the hardcover
variance, and conditional approval of an average lakeshore setback variance.
Sterling stated he did receive Planner Turner's letter on Saturday and that he has not had time to really
prepare anything in response,but that it is likely they would prefer to do what Staff is proposing. Sterling
inquired whether the third garage stall could be extended out somewhat.
PAGE 8
NIINUTES OF TIIiE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3228 Rick and Kristine Sterling,Continued)
Turner stated the applicant could do that but that it would not be able to extend more than a couple of feet.
Sterling stated they would be in favor of doing what Staff has proposed with the addition of extending the
one garage stall out slightly.
Rahn inquired whether the hardcover would be increased.
Turner stated they would need to remove some hardcover.
Sterling stated they would be able to reduce the hardcover on the lot if necessary.
Rahn stated he also is in agreement with Staff's recommendation and that he would like to see a revised
plan.
Sterling inquired whether he could proceed forward to the Council.
Jurgens and Rahn stated they would like to see the revised plan prior to this application moving forward.
Jurgens indicated he would like to see the hardcover reduced down to 25 percent.
Sterling noted he has 440 feet of lakeshore that is in the 0-75 foot setback, and that he is unsure whether
they would be able to reduce the hardcover down to 25 percent. Sterling stated he also has removed some
additional hardcover that is not depicted on this survey.
Bremer recommended the applicant work with Staff to reduce the hardcover as much as possible. '
Sterling questioned whether the portion of his driveway that is located within City property would count
as hardcover.
Bremer stated it would not be included in the calculation.
Turner inquired whether this application would need to reappear before the Planning Commission if the
hardcover is reduced to 25 percent.
Bremer stated she personally would be okay with forwarding the application to Council if the hardcover is
reduced to 25 percent.
Sterling inquired whether a reduction in the stairway would also be included in the hardcover reduction.
Turner stated it would.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 7:24 p.m.
PAGE 9
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3228 Rick and Kristine Sterling, Continued)
There were no public comments relating to this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 7:24 p.m.
Jurgens inquired whether there is a variance for the boathouse.
Turner stated the boathouse is a legal nonconforming structure.
Rahn noted this is not a rebuild.
Turner stated the City Attorney has advised Staff that a person cannot be required to remove a structure as
a condition for something else.
Sterling stated he is not in favor of removing the boathouse.
Bremer commented the Planning Commission looks at all aspects of a lot to see where hardcover can be
reduced and that they are not requiring removal of the boathouse at this time.
Rahn moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3228,Rick and Kristine
Sterling, 1300 Vine Place,granting of an average lakeshore setback variance,subject to the
hardcover being reduced to 25 percent hardcover,with the understanding that if the 25 percent
hardcover is not met,the application would come back before the Planning Commission for further
review. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Kempf inquired whether the applicant would require a conditional use permit in connection with the
removal of the stairway.
Sterling stated to his understanding they would not need to change the grade.
Bremer recommended the applicant notify Staff of his plans regarding the stairway.
4. #06-3229 TIMOTHY V.AND C�RRIE PETERSON,560 BIG ISLAND,VARIANCE
7:30—7:42 P.M.
Timothy Peterson,Applicant,was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting renewal of a lot area variance to permit development of a lot 3.33
acres in size, of which 1.1 acres is dry and where 5.0 acres of dry buildable is normally required in order
to construct a seasonal cabin on an existing vacant lot. The previous property owner had received a lot
area variance for this property in November 2004. The property has remained vacant since prior to
adoption of the current Seasonal Recreation District standards.
PAGE 10
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3229 Timothy and Cherrie Peterson,Continued)
The current property owner has provided a proposed house footprint on the survey and building plans
showing all setbacks and other requirements will be met. Staff finds that a hardship exists to renew the
approval of the lot area variance.
City Code requires that 5-bedroom septic sites be required for all new development and the Code does not
distinguish a different standard for lots on Big Island. Because only 3-bedroom primary and alternate
sites are available,the septic inspector has the authority to grant approval of the smaller sites. However,
the septic sites as designed are for a"Type II"residence,which limits the structure to two water use
appliances. The proposed home will have three water use appliances and the septic tank capacity should
be increased to two 1000-gallon tanks.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot area variance in conjunction with the approved site plan
subject to revising the design to match the capabilities of the septic system and documenting these
conditions via covenants. -
Bremer inquired whether the Planning Commission would be approving any house plans tonight.
Curtis stated the approval of the Planning Commission does not need to include approval of the house
plans.
Peterson stated they have a very narrow footprint to construct on and that they are requesting a few exira
feet on one side. Peterson stated due to the configuration of the lot,they located the house as far north as
possible to avoid the need for other variances.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 7:33 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 7:33 p.m.
Bremer noted there were some comments from one neighbor and the septic inspector that were received.
Bremer inquired what water producing appliances the applicant currently has.
Peterson stated he has a dishwasher and a garbage disposal and that he is not aware of what the third
appliance would be.
Curtis inquired whether the applicant has a washing machine.
Peterson stated he does and that he can remove either the dishwasher or the garbage disposal.
Rahn inquired whether the septic could be designed to meet a 3-bedroom home rather than a 5-bedroom
home.
PAGE 11
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3229 Timothy and Cherrie Peterson,Continued)
Gaffron stated according to the septic inspector,the approval that was granted last time did not take into
account the characteristics of a Type I versus a Type II house and that what was approved last time should
have been restricted further. In comparing Exhibit A,which shows the proposed building from a couple
of years ago, and Exhibit D,which shows the proposed new house, Gaffron pointed out there are some
discrepancies and tliat the survey may not show the exact location of the septic site. Gaffron stated he is
uncomfortable with saying that this exact house plan is okay without further review by Staff.
Bremer noted there has been a change from a Type I to a Type II house and that she is in agreement with
the septic inspector.
Peterson stated he does not have a problem with reducing the number of water producing appliances in
the residence.
Bremer stated the City received a letter from Gerald Erickson,who has indicated he is opposed to the
application.
Peterson indicated he is unsure what the neighbor's objection is to the project,noting that he personally
has not met with him.
Bremer stated given the similar approval that was granted on this property a couple of years ago, she
would not be opposed to the application. Bremer encouraged the applicant to continue to work with Staff
on his application.
Rahn stated the Planning Commission would only be approving the lot area variance.
Kempf stated it should be understood that this is only a three-season structure.
Bremer moved,Rahn seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3229,Timothy and .
Cherri Peterson,560 Big Island,granting of a lot area variance,subject to the recommendations of
the City Engineer.
Kempf inquired whether a conditional use permit would be necessary in connection with this application.
Curtis stated year-round use of a structure on Big Island would be a conditional use and that it would be a
permitted use if the structure were only used 180 days.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PAGE 12
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
5. #06-3230 SUPERIOR DESIGN LANDSCAPES,INC.,ON BEHALF OF BOB AND
LAURIE EMFIELD,4203 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, CONDITIONAL USE PERNIIT,7:43-7:54
P.M.
Christopher Wagner, Superior Design Landscapes,was present.
Curtis stated earlier this summer the applicant and the builder met with Staff regarding the grading and
drainage issues on this property to finalize approvals for the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for
the new home. At that meeting the applicant discussed the requirements for constructing a lake access
stair within the 0-75 foot zone. The applicant was told that Staff could approve a wooden stair or other
type of stair merely"set into"the slope. However,the type of stair the applicant proposed at the meeting
required grading of an area to result in a landing break,which the applicant was advised needed a
conditional use permit.
Following the meeting,an access stair was installed without proper permits. The stairway that was
consiructed requires Planning Commission and Council review as land alterations were conducted.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting the following:
1. An after-the-fact conditional use permit in order to replace an existing concrete stairway system
with a"cut into the slope"granite stair system.
� 2. An after-the-fact hardcover variance is also necessary due to the change in the hardcover
percentage proposed.
Staff recommends approval of the after-the-fact hardcover variance and after-the-fact conditional use
permit subject to the City Engineer's recommendations.
The applicant should provide new hardcover calculations prior to the application being placed on the City
Council agenda.
Wagner stated following the meeting with Staff,he apparently had a misunderstanding and he thought
that he could construct two four-foot landings,which was considerably less than what had originally been
proposed. Wagner stated the hardcover has been reduced from 150 feet to 50 feet. Wagner stated the
retaining wall consists of approximately three boulders and very minimal grading was done.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m.
Bremer stated she would have voted in favor of the project as completed and that she is fine with
approving the after-the-fact variances.
PAGE 13
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3230 Superior Design,Continued)
Kempf questioned whether the wood chips would be replaced with another type of material in the years to
come.
Curtis stated the property owners could place small pea gravel or another similar substance in that area as
long as it is not lined with plastic.
Wagner indicated he prefers the wood chips.
Kempf moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3230 Superior
Design Landscapes on behalf of Bob and Laurie Emfield,4203 North Shore Drive,granting of an
after-the-fact conditional use permit in order to replace an existing concrete stairway system with a
"cut into the slope"granite stair system; and two,an after-the-fact hardcover variance,subject to
the City Engineer's recommendations.
Wagner inquired whether he could get a refund on his after-the-fact variance fee.
Bremer stated the applicant should address that question to the City Council.
Rahn questioned the need for another survey and hardcover calculations since the City allows a three-foot
wide stairway.
Kempf moved,Kroeger seconded,to amend the above motion to not require the applicant to submit
additional hardcover calculations. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Jurgens Opposed.
Jurgens stated he would prefer hardcover calculations be submitted.
6. #06-3231 WILLIAM S.DAMPIER,3550 IVI'PLACE,VARIANCE,7:54—8:32 P.M.
William Dampier,Applicant,was present.
Turner stated the applicant is requesting a side setback variance to construct an addition to the lakeside of
the house to be located 3.4 feet from the south property line when a 10-foot setback is required,and a lot
coverage variance to allow 17.4 percent of the lot covered by buildings when the maximum is 15 percent.
In 2000,the applicant was granted hardcover and side setback variances for construction of an addition to
the street side of the house and reconstruction of the second story. The original house was constructed
with a north side setback of 2.9 feet to 3.4 feet. The current request would allow construction of a semi-
circular room on the second floor on the lakeside of the property and a one-foot cantilevered extension of
the first floor on the lakeside of the property. The applicant constructed the first floor cantilevered
extension and two feet of the second story addition in 2005 not in compliance with the prior approvals.
PAGE 14
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3231 William Dampier, Continued)
The 326 square foot addition would place the property 306 square feet over the structural lot coverage
maximum.
Turner noted the applicant has aclrnowledged in writing that the cantilevered areas are in violation of the
code and variance approvals.
Planning Staff recommends denial of the application based on the amount of structural lot coverage.
Dampier distributed pictures of his residence to the Planning Commission. Dampier indicated his view of
the lake to the north consists of 100 percent of his neighbor's house,which was constructed in the 0-75
foot setback. Dampier stated he has no lakeshore view to the north and his view to the south is of his
other adjacent neighbor. Both of the neighbors encroach on the 10-foot setback,which makes all three
houses nonconforming structures. Dampier stated the three houses are very similar in size and are all on
50-foot lots,with the prime difference being that the neighbors to the north and south have been granted
variances to construct garages,with the neighbor to the south also having a boathouse and playhouse that
encroaches on the lake setback.
Dampier stated apparently there is some confusion in what he is proposing and that he has permission to
construct a 16-foot by 30-foot deck on the front of his deck,which consists of 480 square feet of
structural coverage. Dampier stated he would like to trade the 480 square feet of structural coverage in
return for 154 square feet of structural coverage.
Dampier stated he is not requesting a side setback variance and that he would like to bring the front of his
house up to the average setback line. Dampier reiterated he would like to trade 480 square feet of deck
for 154 square feet of structure. Dampier indicated he is in need of the extra space to construct a bedroom
for his daughter,who is expecting a child in the near future.
Rahn inquired what plan reflects the figures that Dampier has utilized tonight.
Dampier stated they are not reflected on the plan before the Planning Commission tonight and that he just
made the recalculation last night.
Bremer noted the amount of the lot coverage variance would need to be amended.
Turner noted there are also two cantilevered areas that would need to be included in the calculation.
Dampier indicated he did include those in his calculations.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.
PAGE 15
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3231 William Dampier,Continued)
Dampier stated he would like the addition centered as much as possible and he would also like to achieve
a view of the lake.
Rahn stated he is not in support of anything over the 15 percent structural coverage, especially given the
fact that this is a recently constructed residence. There are lots of houses that are not up to the average
lakeshore setback. The primary lake view they are concerned with is forward,which is fine for this
property.
Bremer commented this wasn't a new home.
Rahn noted that it was recently redone.
Dampier stated this was an existing nonconforming structure and that he attempted to bring this property
into compliance as much as possible. Dampier stated he did meet with Gaffron and {Building Official}
Lyle Oman regarding expanding the house toward the lake when he was preparing to reconstruct the
lakeside of the house. Dampier thought he would be allowed to expand toward the lake, although not as
far as he initially wanted. He submitted his plans in February 2005. At the end of March he asked if his
permit was ready. Oman told him he had not yet had the time to review the plans but to go ahead and
start the work. Dampier stated he had gotten to the point it is now when Oman and Gaffron told him he
had to stop as they did not have the authority to approve the expansion. He would need to obtain a
variance. Dampier indicated he got permission from Oman to leave what was constructed of the
expansion in place while he applied for a variance and to continue working on the portion that was above
the existing foundation.
Turner stated with a new radius of nine feet and the addition of the cantilevered areas consisting of 60
square feet, structural coverage would be at 187 square feet.
Dampier stated the first floor cantilever is 15 inches and the second floor cantilever is eight inches.
Bremer inquired how that would impact the 17.4 percent structural coverage.
Dampier stated he was at 14.8 percent previously.
Turner stated the applicant would.only be allowed 20 square feet of structural lot coverage before he
would exceed the 15 percent. Tumer indicated 218 square feet would constitute one percent.
Damper stated the structural coverage would be approximately 15.8 percent.
Turner noted the addition would be less than 218 square feet.
Bremer stated this is an example of an application where the Planning Commission should see the revised
plan prior to recommending approval. Bremer inquired whether there is any structural coverage that
could be removed.
PAGE 16
MINUTES OF Tl�
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3231 William Dampier,Continued)
Dampier indicated he could remove his doghouse.
Gaffron stated the lot area is 13,030 square feet and one percent would be 130 square feet. Gaffron stated
the addition would consist of approximately 1.5 percent additional structural coverage so the end result
would be about 16.3 percent. Gaffron stated at the time of the original approval,the deck was changed
for two reasons: One,to meet a side setback and,two,because of the slope of the grade,the north side of
the deck would have required a railing and would have been over six feet of grade and would have been
considered structural lot coverage. In order for that portion of the deck not to be considered structural
coverage, some terracing was then required. Gaffron stated at the time of the original variance approval,
the applicant was being limited to 15 percent structural coverage.
Dampier stated he understands the purpose of structural limitations,which are designed to help limit
shoreline massing. Dampier indicated the height of the building is already established and would not be
increased with this proposal. Only from the air could you tell the house extended closer to the lake.
Dampier stated he would like to trade 480 square feet of hardcover(the approved deck)for 180 square
feet of structural coverage. Dampier indicated the benefits to him are sunlight,a better view of the lake,
and another bedroom. The benefits to the City are that the hardcover would be reduced so pollution of the
lake would be reduced and an aesthetically pleasing house would be constructed. He wanted to make
something he and future generations would be proud of.
Bremer stated she assumed the maj ority of the Planning Commission would not be in favor of the
increase in structural coverage but that she personally would be supportive of the proposal given the
previously approved hardcover number—realizing that hardcover and structural coverage are completely
different,the uniquely designed house, and the fact that the revised proposal is the least intrusive option
possible. �
Kroeger stated he is sympathetic to the applicant's case given the location of the two adjoining neighbors'
houses and the fact that the view from the lake would not change.
Kempf stated he would be inclined to leave the structural coverage at 15 percent given it was the
applicant's past addition to the house that brought it to the size it is and the past efforts to limit this house
to 15 percent structural coverage. The applicant chose to construct the addition to the street side of the
house.
Dampier stated the reason for the addition to the rear of the house is that {then Planner} Wendy
Bottenberg informed him that he could not go forward of the existing deck. He had wanted to put an
addition on the lakeside so he could move his great room there from the street side of the house. Dampier
stated he was granted a variance because every spring he dealt with a substantial amount of water runoff
from the property to the south that ruined his steps and flooded his garage and basement and the addition
allowed him to redirect the runoff so it drained away from the garage and basement. Dampier indicated if
he had to redo his house,he would have constructed it differently and that he is attempting to comply with
the directions he has been given over the years.
Rahn pointed out a bedroom requires minimum dimensions of seven feet by ten feet.
PAGE 17
MINUTES OF TI�
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3231 William Dampier, Continued)
Dampier indicated he does have some space in the current house to convert into a bedroom.
Rahn wondered how this would be possible since Dampier had implied it would be difficult to remove
what was already constructed.
Dampier explained the picture shows an easily removed temporary wall put in place to close in the
upstairs when he had to stop construction. It is the in-place timber framing that would be difficult to
remove.
Rahn stated he would not be in favor of anything over 15 percent structural coverage.
Jurgens commented he might be supportive of some amount structural coverage in excess of the 15
percent. The location of the two adjoining properties created some hardship.
Bremer moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#06-3231,William
Dampier,3550 Ivy Place,to approve a radius structure projecting from the center of the house
toward the lakeshore,with the understanding the north lot line would not be impacted,subject to
the structure being constructed at the ten foot point or closer, and further subject to the radius
extending approximately nine feet in a symmetrical pattern across the front of the house,with the
existing cantilevers being part of the approval, and with the requirement that the new semi-circular
portion meet the 10-foot setback.
Jurgens stated inquired whether the dormers on the house on the property to the north were required to be
behind the setback when they raised the roof to add a half-story.
Dampier indicated they were. �
Turner stated they did have to step the dormers in.
Jurgens stated in his opinion that would be the basis for requiring this addition to be moved in further.
VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Rahn Opposed.
Jurgens stated he would have had an easier time approving the application had there been more detailed
information submitted by the applicant.
PAGE 18
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
7. #06-3232 MICHAEL SHARRATT OF SHARRATT DESIGN& COMPANY ON BEIiALF
OF MICIiAEL AND MARY DRAZAN,3546 IVY PLACE,VARIANCE,8:32-9:22 P.M.
Michael Sharratt,Architect,and Michael and Mary Drazan,Applicants,were present.
Curtis stated the applicants are requesting a conditional use pernut for fill in excess of 500 cubic yards
and 0-75 foot and 75-250 foot hardcover variances to allow 7.1 percent where 0 percent is normally
allowed and 13.9 currently exists and 32.5 percent where 25 percent is normally allowed and 35 percent
currently exists in order to build a new single family residence on a property. The applicants are
proposing a driveway that will function as a parking area as well as access to the property. I�y Place is
quite narrow and does not allow for any guest parking or turn around.
Planning Staff recommends approval of some level of hardcover variance as the Planning Commission
determines appropriate. The proposed home must meet the 30-foot and 2.5 story height limitations.
Curtis noted the survey she received today from the applicant was in e-mail form and was not to scale.
Mary Drazan distributed a revised survey to the Planning Commission. Mary Drazan stated they
attempted to educate themselves through this process on how to comply as best as possible with the City's
codes and thanked Melanie Curtis for her assistance.
Drazan stated they would like to construct a house that fits in with the neighborhood and complies with
the City's 15 percent structural coverage limit and setback regulations. Drazan stated they have spoken
with Ted Capra,their neighbor, about doing a joint swale along the mutual property line,which he is in
agreement with.
Drazan stated one issue they have had to deal with is that Ivy Place is a very narrow street that ends at the
lake,which does not allow on-street parking. Drazan stated if two cars are parked opposite each other on
the street, a car is not able to traverse down the street,which necessitates off street parking.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 8:43 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 8:43 p.m.
Drazan indicated she would prefer not to construct as high of a retaining wall as being propos�d and that
they have revised their grading plan to address the City Engineer's comments. Drazan stated the existing
retaining wall is approximately four to five blocks high.
Michael Drazan indicated they would prefer to save the trees and not construct a retaining wall in that
area. Drazan stated they are attempting to make the grading work without the need to construct a
retaining wall.
PAGE 19
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3232 Michael and Mary Drazan, Continued)
Rahn stated it is difficult to comment on an application when there have been changes made to a plan and
the plan does not reflect those changes.
Michael Drazan stated the original plan contained the retaining wall,which was not their intent,and that
they submitted the revised plan to show the elimination of the retaining wall.
Rahn noted the Planning Commission is also lacking the comments of the City Engineer.
Kroeger inquired whether the retaining walls consist of the 13.9 percent hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone.
Michael.Drazan indicated that consists of the deck and the retaining wall.
Curtis noted a portion of the residence is also within the 0-75 foot zone.
Jurgens inquired whether the lakeside deck would be removed.
Michael.Drazan indicated the deck is embedded in the stairs and that they were not planning on removing
the deck.
Jurgens stated the rock walkway,the timber planters,and other nonessential hardcover should be
removed.
Mary Drazan stated they have not addressed the 0-75 foot setback zone at this time due to a couple of
issues. Drazan noted they have lost approximately two feet of lakeshore and that they are planning to put
better rip-rap in that area to prevent further erosion. Drazan stated they did not include that in their plans
because they were not informed on the City's position regarding that aspect and that they would prefer to
address that in the future.
Bremer stated the Planning Commission likes to look at properties as a whole and that all nonessential
hardcover within the 0-75 foot setback would be required to be removed. Bremer recommended the
applicant look at the 0-75 foot setback zone to deternune what is essential hardcover.
Michael Drazan stated the deck attaches to a retaining wall underneath and that the timbers have started to
rot and need to be replaced.
Rahn stated the City Engineer could deternune whether the retaining walls within the 0-75 foot zone are
necessary for erosion control.
Jurgens stated the 0-75 foot zone should be addressed at this time rather than at some point in the future.
Curtis noted she did advise the applicants to wait on the work in the 0-75 foot setback and that it is the
intent of the applicants to come back sometime in the spring with a proposal.
PAGE 20
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3232 Michael and Mary Drazan,Continued)
Bremer stated architecturally the house is very attractive but that given the size of the lot, she would not
be in favor of 32.5 percent hardcover. Bremer noted structural coverage is at 13.9 percent.
Michael Drazan indicated they have explored a number of options in designing their house.
Sharratt indicated they did submit a plan for 29 percent hardcover,which did not allow for a turn-around
or offstreet parking.
Rahn stated the parking spaces are typically in front of the garage and that the driveway could be reduced
somewhat.
Mary Drazan inquired what the hardcover would be reduced to if the jut-out were removed.
Jurgens inquired whether the applicant should be directed to submit a revised plan or whether the
application can proceed forward to the Council. Jurgens concurred the driveway could be reduced to the
minimum guidelines.
Michael Drazan to his knowledge the driveway is at the minimum.
Curtis stated if the jut-out were eliminated,the hardcover would be reduced by approximately 300 square
feet.
Rahn inquired what amount of fill is being proposed.
Curtis stated it would be 640 cubic square yards of fill.
Bremer inquired whether Staff has sufficient information to move the application forward to the City
Council.
Curtis stated she would not take this application to the City Council until she receives the comments from
the City Engineer.
Bremer inquired whether the Planning Commission would be supportive of 30 percent hardcover.
Kempf commented that 30 percent seems to be fairly common on ivy Place.
Rahn stated if the house is relocated further back, a tunnel vision affect would be created,which could
constitute a hardship.
Jurgens stated the house could also be redesigned.
Rahn inquired how far forward the house is.
PAGE 21
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COD�IlVIISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3232 Michael and Mary Drazan, Continued)
Sharratt stated it is approximately 34 feet.
Michael Drazan stated they did relocate the house further back to get out of the setback and reduce
hardcover but it was pointed out by Staff that they would lose their view of the lake if the house were
moved further back.
Ted Capra, 3546 Ivy Place, stated he also moved his house further back to try to help with the hardcover
and to gain some off street parking.
Rahn inquired what the current survey lists the hardcover at.
Michael Drazan stated it is at 32.5 percent.
Capra commented it is difficult to turn into the driveway.
Jeff Danberry, 3545 Ivy Place, commented it is necessary for some cars to back into his driveway to gain
access to their driveway.
Bremer stated she would be in support of 30 percent hardcover given the restrictions of the lot and the
narrowness of Ivy Place Road. Bremer stated her biggest concern is moving this application forward to
the City Council without the Planning Commission reviewing the revised plans.
Mary Drazan indicated they would probably not start construction until the spring or summer of next
year.
Curtis commented the applicants would then also have time to address the 0-75 foot zone.
Bremer stated the applicants have the option of having the Planning Commission vote on the application
that is before them tonight or tabling the application to allow them time to submit revised plans and to
obtain the City Engineer's comments.
Mary Drazan stated they would like their application tabled.
Kroeger moved,Kempf seconded,to table Application#06-3232, Sharratt Design on behalf of •
Michael and Mary Drazan,3546 Ivy Place, at the request of the applicants. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
(Recess was taken from 9:22—9:28 p.m.)
PAGE 22
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION '
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
8. #06-3211 TED CAPRA,3534 IVY PLACE,VARIANCE,9:28—9:41 P.M.
Ted Capra,Applicant,and Jeff Danberry,Builder,was present.
Curtis stated in April of 2005,the applicants received a variance in order to construct a new home on their
property to allow 30 percent hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone where 25 percent hardcover is
normally allowed. In the time necessary to finalize the home design and prepare the buildings plans for a
building permit,the hardcover variance expired. The applicant is now requesting a renewal of variances
granted in 2005 in order to construct a new residence on an existing lot. The proposed house has an
expanded footprint compared to that approved in 2005,but remains within the hardcover and lot coverage
parameters approved. The following items are included in this renewal request:
1. Hardcover variance to permit 30 percent hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone where 25 percent
is normally allowed.
2. Conditional use permit to allow land alterations within the 0-75 foot zone.
Curtis stated the applicant has indicated the proposed driveway is necessary for him to pull in and out of
his property with a truck and boat,and recommended the Planning Commission discuss that issue.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the hardcover variance. Staff also recommends approval of the
conditional use pernut to allow minimal grading within 75 feet of the lake in accordance with the City
Engineer's recommendations. The applicant would still be able to achieve a walk-out style home without
the extensive grading.
, Capra indicated he was not able to commence construction on the house due to health problems
experienced by his wife. Since that time he has attempted to redesign the house to a one-story,walk-out
house to meet their needs. Capra stated he has not been able to design a one-story house within the 30
percent hardcover that was previously approved.
Capra stated it would be easier to design a reasonable house if permeable pavers were allowed in Orono,
noting that there are other ways to handle water runoff without being so restrictive on the hardcover.
Capra stated it is necessary for him to back up into the neighbor's driveway with his boat because his own
driveway cannot accommodate it.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 9:35 p.m.
Mary Drazan, 3546 Ivy Place, stated she would be in support of 35 percent hardcover.
Jeff Danberry requested the Planning Commission allow additional hardcover to enable the applicant to
turn around in his own driveway.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 9:36 p.m.
. PAGE 23
MINUTES OF T1�E
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3211 Ted Capra, Continued)
Capra noted a retaining wall was also necessary to help with the drainage,which has added to the
hardcover.
Rahn suggested Mr. Capra request the City Council consider a higher amount of hardcover,but that what
is before the Planning Commission at this time is renewal of the variance for 30 percent hardcover.
Kempf inquired whether there is a possibility of sharing the driveway.
Capra stated there is a telephone pole in the center but that it is an option he can consider.
Rahn moved,Kempf seconded,to recommend approval of Application#'06-3211,Theodore
and Nancy Capra,3534 Ivy Place,renewal of a hardcover variance and conditional use permit,
subject to the stipulation that the proposal meets City Engineer's and Staff s recommendations.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0. -
9. #06-3233 EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF MINNESOTA,ST.EDWARDS CHURCH,865
FERNDALE ROAD NORTH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,9:42- 10:03 P.M.
Fritz Wright,Reverend Janet Wheelock, and Roland Aberg were present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a conditional use pernut to conduct land alterations in excess of
500 cubic yards in the area between the church building and County Road 6,to allow construction of a
columbarium,memorial garden,a 12' x 24' shed and a new monument sign. A variance is also required
due to the size of the sign proposed.
Curtis recommended the Planning Commission discuss the issues outlined in her planner's report.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and variance subject to the
recommendations of the City Engineer and the sign being reduced by six inches to meet the City's
monument sign ordinance.
Wheelock noted the church experienced a fire approximately four years ago and that they have been
involved in the process since then to reconstruct the church.
Aberg stated they are in agreement with the recommendations regarding the landscaping and the
recommendations of the City Engineer. Aberg stated they would like to extend the�11 from the right-of-
way to the embankment to help diminish the drop-off and address access issues. Aberg indicated they
would be meeting on site with the City Engineer to discuss that further.
Curtis noted Staff would need a revised plan showing that change.
PAGE 24
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
(#06-3233 St.Edward Church,Continued) ,
Aberg displayed a colored photocopy depicting the current sign and the surrounding area and a sketch of
the proposed sign. Aberg stated they are proposing a 10'/6"monument to enable them to construct a
better looking monument given the proportions of the roof and the fact that the actual area of the sign
would be smaller but more visual than the existing sign.
Bremer opened the public hearing at 9:50 p.m.
There were no public comments relating to this application.
Bremer closed the public hearing at 9:50 p.m.
Bremer requested the applicant submit the revised plans showing the proposed changes near County
Road 6. Bremer stated given the speed of traffic that goes past the church,the fact that the sign helps
draw people to the church and the minimal amount of variance being requested, she would not be opposed
to the request.
Jurgens stated he does not see a hardship for the variance.
Aberg stated the landscaping is designed to create a woodland area surrounding the church and that the
sign will be one of the only visible markers denoting the church. Aberg stated the sign would also seem
smaller given its location within the landscaping.
Kroeger suggested the sign be measured halfway up the gable.
Jurgens stated the City has a very specific sign ordinance that spells out how a sign should be measured
and that measuring it halfway up the gable is not one of them.
Kempf concurred the sign should be designed to meet the City's sign requirements.
Aberg stated they would be raising the grade around the sign and that they would be agreeable to raising
the grade another six inches around the base of the sign to make the sign appear smaller.
Jurgens inquired how the grading work would impact the City's wetland buffers.
Curtis stated John Smythe has reviewed that aspect of the application and has recommended some
substitutions in their planting proposal to help provide buffers that would meet the City's code.
Kempf inquired whether there are any elevation drawings available.
Aberg stated they do not have an elevation drawing available tonight.
PAGE 25
MINUTES OF T�
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
)
(#06-3233 St.Edward Church,Continued) �
Jurgens moved to recommend approval of Application#06-3233,Episcopal Diocese,St.Edward
Church,865 Ferndale Road North,granting of a conditional use permit subject to the
recommendations of the City Engineer and the wetland consultant.
Curtis stated the applicant would need a variance to place a sign in excess of 12 feet.
Jurgens inquired whether the proposed monument sign other than height meets all of the City's sign
requirements.
Curtis stated they require a variance because of the zoning district the church is located in.
Jurgens stated his motion would also include a recommendation of denial of the additional suc
inches for the monument sign but would recommend approval of the sign variance.
Kempf seconded. VOTE: Ayes 3,Nays 2,Bremer and Rahn opposed.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
10. REPORT OF PLANI�TING COMNIISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING
COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 28 AND SEPTEMBER 11,2006
Rahn reported on the August 28 meeting,noting that a large number of applications were placed on the
Consent Agenda. Rahn stated the Council approved the 17-foot road for the Spring Hill Road
application.
Kroeger stated the Jule Hannaford application was approved.
•Bremer reported on the September 11 Council meeting,noting that a number of the applications were
placed on the Consent Agenda. Bremer stated the Anderson application was approved with the
requirement that the deck be reduced to 18 feet.
The Planning Commission discussed the Hempel application.
Gaffron stated Troy Broitzman has sent an e-mail to the City indicating that he has a potential buyer for
the property who would like to construct a smaller sized house on the lot.
11. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
Gaffron recommended a work session be scheduled for the beginning of October.
Bremer scheduled a work session for October 4`"at 5:30 p.m.
PAGE 26
NIINUTES OF TAE
ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION
Monday, September 18,2006
6:00 o'clock p.m.
12. PLANNING CONIMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR AUGUST 21,2006
Jurgens moved,Rahn seconded,to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of
August 21,2006,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
13. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON
SEPTEMBER 25 AND OCTOBER 9,2006
September 25—Dick Kroeger
October 9—Ralph Kempf
ADJOURNMENT
Bremer moved,Rahn seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 10:26 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
There being no further business to di cuss,the meeting was adjourned at 10:26 p.m.
Cynthia Bremer, Chair
PAGE 27