HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/19/2008 Planning Commission Minutes . . �'
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL
The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members
� present: Chair Ralph Kempf, Commissioners Dick Kroeger,Tess Rice,Kim Kang, and Loren
Schoenzeit. Representing Staff were Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategy Mike
Gaffron,Planner Evelyn Turner, and Recorder Jackie Young. Commissioner Jon Schwingler arrived at
6:15 p.m., and Commissioner Jaye Ann Zullo arrived at 6:20 p.m. Council Member Cynthia Bremer
arrived at 6:47 p.m.
Chair Kempf called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA
Item No. 1 was removed from the Consent Agenda and Item No. 7A was added to the Consent Agenda.
Kroeger moved, Schoenzeit seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: 5,
Nays 0.
. Chair Kempf opened the public hearing at 6:10 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding Item Nos. 2, 3, and 4 on the Consent Agenda.
Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 6:10 p.m. �
1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NIINUTES OF JANUARY 22,
2008 �
Rice moved,Kang seconded,to approve the minutes of the January 22,2008 Commission meeting
as amended on Page 15. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*2. #07-3297 CITY OF ORONO,ZONING CODE AMENDMENT, SECTION 78-1405, .
NON-ENCROACHMENTS
Kroeger moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend approval of ORDINANCE NO. ,Third
Series,An Ordinance Amending Chapter 78-1405,Non-encroachments Regarding Eaves, Gutters
and Off Street Parking. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*3 #08-3345 CITY OF ORONO,ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT
Kroeger moved, Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend approval of ORDINANCE NO.,An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 78,Article N., of the Orono City Code Concerning Permitted Uses
and Conditional Uses and ORDINANCE NO.,An Ordinance Amending Chapter 78,Article IV
and Article X,of the Orono City Code Concerning Conditional and Accessory Uses. VOTE: Ayes
5,Nays 0.
PAGE 1
� .
MIN�UTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
4. #08-3349 ORONO SCHOOLS,765 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH, '
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT .
Kroeger moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend approval of Application#08-3349, Orono ,
Schools,765 Old Crystal Bay Road North,granting of a conditional use permit. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0. �
NEW BUSINESS
5. #07-3330 DENNIS &AMANDA WALSH, 1354 REST POINT CIRCLE,VARIANCE,
, 6:11 P.M.—6:38 P.M. �
Dennis Walsh,Applicant,was present.
Turner stated the applicant is requesting a setback variance to allow construction of new steps to the
lake over the existing steps to the lake,with a 0-foot setback from the southwesterly side property line
when a 10-foot setback is required and a hardcover variance to have landings in the stairs larger than 32
square feet.
The applicants'property drops 26 feet to the lake in a distance of about 35 feet. Access to the lakeshore
is by means of a stairway that is cut into the slope. It was constructed over the prior stairway. The
bottom of the stairway is one to two inches from the side property line. The landing at the bottom of the �
stairs extends into the adjacent property.
The applicants propose to leave the existing stairways and bottom landings in place and consiruct a new '
above grade stairway over the top of the stairs. To meet code,the stairs will be less steep than the
existing stairs. To fit in the additional steps,the stairs are proposed to wind around the existing landings
at the bottom of the stairs. The code requires a 10-foot setback from a properiy line for accessory
structures. The majority of the proposed stairs would be within this setback. �
The City Engineer feels this proposal is the best option for replacement of the stairs. If the stairs were
relocated,the existing.stairs would need to be removed and this would leave a steep slope that would
need to be stabilized and revegetated.
Turner noted that the proposed work has the potential for impacting the adjacent property and Staff is
recommending the applicants have an agreement with that property owner to address this issue and any
others that may arise during construction.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the setback and hardcover variance subj ect to the following
conditions:
1. The applicants obtaining a"construction easement"from the adjacent property owner to address
encroachments during construction and to allow removal of a portion of the existing stair
system that is on the adjacent property. .
2. The survey being updated to include the information reported by the applicants concerning the
location of the existing stairs.
PAGE 2
c '
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
3. Removal of the upper portion of the landing at the bottom of the existing stairs(including the
railing) as well as the rear portion of the lower portion of this landing and revegetation of this
area with appropriate native plant material.
4. Removal of a portion of the lower landing,railing and lattice that are on the adjacent property.
Walsh indicated he is willing to remove a portion of the landing at the bottom of the stairway and a
portion of the decking if that is deemed possible. Walsh questioned the recommendation requiring the
removal of a portion of the railing,noting that removal of that portion of the railing would result in the
posts being visible and that removal of the posts could cause an erosion issue.
. Walsh noted his neighbor does not have any issues with the project and that he is willing to enter into an
agreement.
Schoenzeit asked what type of materials would be utilized for the stairway.
Walsh indicated they are considering using plastic timbers to help ensure that the stairway will not need
. to be removed in the future due to deteriorating wood. Walsh stated the current stairs are very steep and
narrow and pose a safety hazard for his children. Walsh indicated he is willing to reduce the landings
wherever possible.
�hair Kempf opened the public hearing at 6:22 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 6:22 p.m.
Rice asked what materials the City Engineer reviewed.
Turner stated the City Engineer reviewed the engineered plans,the report describing the location of the
sta.irway in relation to the property line,and the existing sta.irway depicted in some photographs. Turner
noted the City Eng-ineer did not personally visit the site.
Rice questioned what the Planning Commission could approve this application based on the lack of a
formal plan and the uncertainty of what portions of the deck can be removed.
Turner suggested the Planning Commission consider including language in their motion requiring
removal as much as possible of the decking subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
Turner indicated part of the problem is that the ground is frozen at the present time and that there is
some uncertainty what portions can be removed.
Turner stated in order for Staff to draft the resolution, some definite numbers would need to be
provided. Turner indicated the lower landing is approximately 8' x 18' and that a quarter of the landing
would be approximately 32 square feet.
Kroeger asked whether a survey showing the hardcover on the property has been completed.
PAGE 3
� 3
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
. 6:00 o'clock p.m.
Turner stated since only the stairs are in question, a new survey was not required. A survey completed
in 2004 does show some retaining walls, and that based upon a recent review of the site by Staff, there
does not appear to be an increase in the hardcover.
Zullo asked whether the neighbor is okay with a portion of the deck being located on his property.
Turner stated one of the recommendations of Staff is that the applicant obtain formal pernussion from
the adjacent property owner concerning the deck but noted that the neighbor is aware of the
encroachment.
Walsh indicated the stairway and deck has been in existence for at least 20 years and that his neighbor
does not have a problem with the project. •
Zullo commented she has some difficulty approving an application without lmowing the full extent of
the work.
Kroeger commented given the snow cover it is difficult to determine what work will need to be done but
expressed a concern that animals may take shelter between the two sets of stairs. Kroeger
recommended the motion be subject to review by the City Attorney. .
Turner indicated the applicant is proposing lattice.on the left-hand side above the railing,which does not
appeaz to serve a structural purpose, and that the lattice located between the old stairs and the new steps
. is not an issue and would help to keep animals out. �
Rice moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#07-3330,Dennis and
Amanda Wa1sh, 1354 Rest Point Circle,granting of setback and hardcover variances,
subject to the applicants obtaining a construction easement from the adjacent neighbor, and also
subject to the other conditions outlined in Staffls memorandum dated February 19,2008.
Turner stated if there are portions of the deck and/or stairway that are left on the adjoining property,
they would need to be addressed somehow.
VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
6. #08-3344 CITY OF ORONO,BIG ISLAND PARK pROPERTY, 100 BIG ISLAND,
VARIANCE,6:38 P.M.—7:10 P.M.
Gaffron stated the City of Orono is requesting approvals to construct four 10' by 20' concrete dock
gangway landing pads adjacent to the shoreline at the City's Big Island Park property. The intent is to
provide a suitable permanent landing area where the gangways from the proposed floating docks will
discharge passengers. The concrete pads will also incorporate hardware necessary for the aitachment of
the gangway to the pads. The docks are intended to be seasonal floating docks and will be removed
during the winter season.
The project also includes a series of 4'-6' sidewalks connecting the four pads,as well as rip-rapping the
shoreline in the area of the pads to eliminate the potential for erosion and undermining of the pads.
PAGE 4
•
MINUTES OE THE
ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron stated the total width along the shore of the pads and sidewalks will be approximately 200 feet,
comprising approximately 1400 square foot of hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone. The 75-foot zone is
approximately 562,500 square feet in area for this property and the proposed hardcover would be
approximately one-quarter of one percent. .
The following variances are required for this project:
1. A variance to Section 78-1282 to allow a"landing"to be constructed in excess of the 32 square •
feet maximum area normally allowed. Each proposed landing is 200 square feet in area in
order to accommodate groups of persons as they disembark, as well as to provide for ADA
accommodations.
2. A variance to Section 78-1286(b)to allow grading and�lling of more than 10 cubic yards
within 75 feet of the shoreline. The amount of earth movement and subsequent sand base fill
associated with each pad could be up to 10-15 yards, for a potential total of 40-60 cubic yards.
3. A variance to Section 78-1288(a)to allow hardcover of approximately 1400 square feet within
the 0-75 feet lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover is normally allowed.
Gaffron noted additional survey work is required to confirm the actual site-specific topography for each
of the four pad locations,which has not yet been done. Without the topographic information,it is
unclear whether filling within the flood fringe is required. If so,the MCVJD likely will require a
mitigation plan. Staff has contacted and is awaiting word from the State Building Code Division as to
specific ADA standards for accessibility to which this dock system is subject.
Gaffron stated it would appear that reasonable use of the Big Island Park properly for its intended public
purposes relies on establishing a safe and functional dock landing system which would meet the relevant
ADA and other applicable standards, and that the variances being requested for the platforms and
walkways are necessary to allow such use.
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances subject to the following conditions:
1. Submittal of detailed survey work,including one-foot contours for the area of the proposed
construction, and placement of the pads and sidewalks on that survey to confirm whether there
will be any filling of the floodway or flood fringe areas.
2. If there will be floodway or flood fringe impacts,provision of a mitigation plan meeting
MCWD and other agency requirements.
3. Establishment of runoff quality management measures such as vegetated swales or rain gardens
as part of the construction plan.
4. Adherence to applicable ADA design requirements.
5. A land alteration permit must be obtained from the City before commencing construction. The
appropriate permits from other agencies (MCWD,LMCD) shall be obtained before
commencing construction.
PAGE 5
C �
NIINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMiVIISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
6. Hardcover within 75 feet of the shoreline shall be limited to the 1400 square feet approved via
this variance process.
Kang asked whether the docks would be stored during the winter.
Gaffron indicated the intent is to float the docks over to a little cove rather than store them on ground.
Schoenzeit asked how the proposed location compares to the historical location of the original docks on
the island.
Gaffron stated the new location is in the same approximate area as the original docks.
Chair Kempf opened the public hearing at 6:47 p.m.
Dr.John Eiden,330 Big Island, asked exactly how big the dock is and commented that in his view the
dock is large enough to handle cruise ships. Eiden indicated he currently experiences erosion problems
and that it was his understanding the park was going to be a passive park. Eiden stated in his view the
cruise ships should pay for the work.
Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 6:48 p.m.
Gaffron stated the�City of Orono has created a Big Island Committee to address issues relating to Big
Island and the types of activities that should happen or not happen on the island. The dock is 80 feet in �
length and the gangway is 25 feet to 30 feet. The intent is to allow the Minnehaha Steamboat to dock at
this location and that the potential for four additional docks is up for discussion. It is the feeling of the
committee that large group activities should not be happening on Big Island. Gaffron stated the
committee would like to pursue approval of as many docks as permitted in the event they should be
needed for maintenance or other reasons.
Eiden stated in his view the survey will sliow that the water is a lot shallower than what the committee
may think it.
Gaffron stated the committee is also looking at the issue of securing the bathroom structure and that
there are a number of issues that will need to be considered and discussed. Gaffron indicated it is the
committee's intent to proceed slowly with the work on Big Island.
Eiden stated as it concerns maintenance, a barge would pull right up on shore.
Gaffron stated the riprap would allow for a solid place for the barge to land.
. Eiden stated constructing a dock of this size would be expensive and that the City will face a number of
problems relating to policing of the island, fire protection, and other issues in the future with increased
use of the island. Eiden stated the more accessible the island becomes,the more problems that will
arise. Eiden indicated there currently is a wake problem and that the added traffic by the larger boats
will only increase the problem and that steps should be taken to address traffic control on the lake.
Gaffron noted the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District is a parhner in this effort and that they are
financing a portion of the work.
PAGE 6
� �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Kempf stated if the Planning Commission has concerns regarding the size of dock, the dock could
perhaps be constructed in phases.
Zullo indicated she would like to see reports on the types of problems that have occurred on the island .
and whether there are erosion problems. .
Gaffron asked whether efforts have ever been taken to make the bay wake-free.
Eiden indicated there have not been any efforts taken to make the bay wake-free to his lrnowledge and
that it only seems like it has become a problem in the past couple of years with the larger boats.
Kempf questioned why this application is before the Planning Commission prior to any surveys being
done since the size of the dock would depend largely on the depth of the water.
Gaffron stated the 100-foot length of the dock would allow the entire Minnehaha to dock without
encountering problems with the depth of the water. Gaffron stated the depth of the water is not part of
the variance for the hardcover that would be located on the shoreline but that he could provide that
information at some point in the future. Gaffron stated the City is not intending to request a dock longer
than 100 feet and there would not be any dredging work done.
Gaffron stated it is the committee's intent to propose four docks but only construct two docks and to
� monitor the situation before any decision is made to construct the additional two docks.
Kroeger noted since this is City-owned property,the City would have the right to restrict certain types
of boats.
Kempf commented it has been suggested to tip the concrete landward and have the water diverted
around the concrete to help slow it down. Kempf stated in his view if the concrete is tipped,he would
tip it towards the riprap.
Schoenzeit moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#08-3344,City of
� Orono,Big Island Park Property, 100 Big Island, granting of hardcover and structure variances
for the construction of two pads and one dock.
Kempf stated if the Planning Commission approves two pads,they should approve two docks.
Schoenzeit amended his motion to recommend approval of construction of two adjacent concrete
pads and two docks,subject to Staff recommendations,with vegetation being planted as deemed
appropriate. Kroeger seconded the motion. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
7. #08-3347 BRENT TEELE AND AMY SULLIVAN-TEELE,577 PARK LANE,
VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,7:10 P.M.—7:39 P.M.
Brent Teele,Applicant,was present.
Gaffron stated the applicants are proposing to remove the existing cut-into-the-slope railroad tie stair
system and replace this stair with a durable and less visible 4-foot wide limestone stair system with a
PAGE 7
. �
NIINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
re-graded slope and low walls. These low walls are proposed to have significant vegetative screening,
which will reduce the visual appearance of the stair system and create a more natural looking slope from
` the lake.
The applicants are requesting the following:
1. A conditional use permit in order to replace a wooden stair system with low walls,vegetation,
• re-grading the slope and the installation of a limestone stair system.
2. A hardcover variance is also requested due to the change in the hardcover percentage proposed.
The proposed increase is from 4.8 percent to 8.8 percent within the 0-75 foot zone.
Staff recommends the following conditions if the Plaruiing Commission finds the request reasonable:
1. The crushed rock landing must be unlined.
2. The proposed walls must be screened year-round with vegetation.
3. Walls are to be constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications provided.
4. Landscape plan to be implemented in accordance with the plans and specifications provided.
5. Double,heavy-duty silt fence with steel t-posts must be installed along the shoreline throughout
the duration of the construction process and remain in place until the slope is stabilized and
vegetation is established.
6. The proposed retaining wall shown adjacent to the patio and house must be removed or moved
to meet a 5-foot side setback.
Kroeger asked whether the existing stairs could be rebuilt in the same location.
Gaffron noted that Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission determine whether this work is
necessary and reasonable.
Kroeger asked whether all of the work is within the 0-75 foot zone.
Gaffron indicated it is. �
Kang asked if the new sidewalk would be wider than the existing sidewalk.
Teele indicated it is the same width. The primary reason for the variance is not just due to the current
unsafe railroad ties but also to the steepness of the slope and the fact that there currently is no landing.
Teele indicated it may be necessary to extend the stairway closer to the lake in order to increase the rise
of the stairs if the stairway is rebuilt in its current configuration. The maj ority of the increase in
hardcover is a result of a retaining wall and crushed rock landing in the middle of the slope and the
actual stairs only account for a very small increase in the hardcover. Teele noted that four steps are
being added.
PAGE 8
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Teele commented that their landscaping plan will help to make the stairway more obscure and would
consist of more native vegetation rather than invasive species. Teele stated the main reason for the
request is to make the stairway safer and to allow them access to the lake.
Zullo asked what the side setback is from the steps.
Teele indicated he does not have the exact figure but that his estimate would be five to seven feet.
Gaffron stated it is probably closer to three to four feet.
Zullo asked what type of access the adjoining properties have. .
Teele indicated one of the neighbors has an above-ground wooden stairway and the other house has
what he believes are stone tiered retaining walls within the 0-75 foot zone.
Schoenzeit asked whether the applicant has a lighting plan for this project.
Teele indicated the lighting they are proposing is low voltage lighting and would basically light the
steps up at night. "
Zullo asked what the wood wall is located down by the lake.
. Teele indicated it is a railroad tie that is located before the riprap that runs along both of his neighbors'
property and his property and that he is unsure what the exact purpose of the wall is.
• Kempf asked how tall the retaining wall is proposed to be.
Teele stated the height of the proposed wall varies but that it does not exceed three feet. Teele indicated
it is his understanding the majority of the wall is two feet in height. Teele indicated they are considering
erecting a three-foot wrought iron fence that would prevent his kids from accessing the lakeshore and
that the original wall depicted on the survey within the 0-75 foot zone is to help make the fence easier to
install.
Chair Kempf opened the public hearing at 7:22 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 7:22 p.m.
Kempf stated in his opinion to have a stairway of that length without a landing is a hardship and that a
landing offers a place to stop and rest on the way down to the lakeshore. Kempf noted Staff's
recommendation concerning the retaining wall is that it should have year-round vegetation,which is not
depicted on the applicant's plan.
Teele stated they have not decided on the exact vegetation to be planted and that they are willing to
comply with Staffls recommendation.
Gaffron stated another option would be to plant evergreen trees on the lakeside of the landing.
PAGE 9
. �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
' Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 dclock p.m.
Kempf expressed a concern with the amount of hardcover being requested in the 0-75 foot zone and
asked whether the crushed rock would be considered hardcover.
Gaffron stated technically if the crushed rock is not driven on,has no underlayment and is there for ,
decorative purposes,it would not be considered hardcover. Gaffron stated in his view there would be �
some infiltration capability.
Kroeger asked if the 173 square feet of hardcover includes the existing stairs.
Gaffron stated that would include the existing stairway.
Kroeger noted a property owner is allowed a set of stairs down to the lake.
Gaffron stated the hardcover consisting of the stairs would be allowed hardcover but that any hardcover
in excess of what is required for the stairway would need to be approved. .
Kroeger asked whether a side setback variance is being requested.
Gaffron stated there is not a side setback variance being requested and that the Planning Commission
could make the recommendation for approval subject to the stairs meeting a five-foot setback.
� � Teele stated there is a potential issue with a large oak tree that may influence the placement of the stairs.
Kempf commented that issue should have been resolved prior to appearing before the Planning
Commission.
Teele indicated he was unaware of the side yard setback requirement.
Zullo stated given the fact that the applicant is proposing lighting on the stairway,in her view the
stairway should meet the side setback.
Gaffron noted that a fence would not be allowed in the 0-75 foot zone.
Kempf suggested this application be tabled to deternune the exact location of the new stairway.
Kang stated she is in agreement with Commissioner Kempf given the discussion regarding the tree and
the possible relocation of the stairway.
Zullo recommended that all existing trees within close proximity of the stairway be depicted on the
plan.
Teele indicated that the trees are indicated on the plan and that he is willing to relocate the stairs to meet
the side setback.
Kempf stated the Planning Commission could also vote on the application and make it subject to the
stairway meeting the side setback. Kempf stated one option would be to decrease the width of the stairs
to three feet if necessary to meet the side setback.
PAGE 10
„ �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron noted the Code allows for a four-foot wide stair,which allows for two people to walk down the
stairs at a time.
Teele stated to his knowledge the material that he is proposing to construct the stairway out of comes in .
four-foot lengths.
Kempf moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#08-3347,Brent and
Amy Teele,577 Park Lane,granting of a conditional use permit and hardcover variance in order
to replace a wooden stair system,subject to the conditions outlined in Staff s report,subject to the
lighting consisting of low voltage lighting with the lighting being directed downward, and to make
every attempt possible to preserve the existing trees. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 2,Kroeger and Zullo
opposed. �
Kroeger stated he voted in opposition to the motion because in his opinion there is not a hardship.
7A. #08-3343 STRONG ARM CONSTRUCTION SERVICES,LCC,ON BEHALF OF AMIT
SELA HOLDINGS,INC.,460 EAST LONG LAKE ROAD,7:39 P.M.
Amit Sela,Applicant; Gregory Miller,Attorney-at-Law; and Dan Richmann,Builder,were present on
behalf of the Applicant.
” Kempf noted the Planning Commission has not had the opportunity to review this application prior to �
tonight and that they are reserving the right to table the application.
Turner noted this is a two-part application. The applicant is requesting a lot line rearrangement to '
resolve issues concerning the location of the common lot line with 450 East Long Lake Road. The
house at 460 was constructed in 1953. The house at 450 was constructed in 1959. Its lot was split off
from 460. Because of a surveying error,the common property line was marked about 50 feet north of
its actual location. This line was observed as the property line by the current owner of 450 and the
former owner of 460. Amit Sela Holdings,Inc.,purchased 460 in July 2007. In August 2007, a survey
of the two lots showed the house at 450 was 21 feet onto Sela's property.
The lot line rearrangement would relocate the common lot line between 450 and 460 to where it had
been thought to be before the properly was surveyed last August. No hardcover information is available
for 450. If 460 were reconstructed, it would be in compliance with hardcover regulations. Turner noted
that both properties are served by city sewer.
After the lot line rearrangement,460 would be 0.88 acres,0.63 acre non-wetland. The setback from the
south property line is proposed to be 10.81 feet when 30 feet is required. The front setback is proposed
to be 43.5 feet when 50 feet is required. The proposed house is a partial two-story with a walkout
basement. Although the house appears to be a story and a half because of the dimensions of the house,
the peak height will be about the same as a two-story house.
Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot line rearrangement conditioned on dedication of a road
easement for East Long Lake Road over the west 19.58 of the property to reflect the historic right-of-
way for the road.
PAGE 11
�.� , ,
1VIIlVUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
� Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
In addition,the applicant is also requesting a lot area variance to construct a house on it with a defined
lot area of 0.63 acre when two acres is required as well as setback variances to construct the house with
a 43-foot front setback with a 50-foot setback is required and a 10-foot south side setback when a 30-
, foot setback is required. .
The Planning Commission should consider the following:
1. Is there land that can be purchased to enlarge the parcel; •
2. Is the situation self-created. Although the owner is reducing the size of the property by a lot
line rearrangement,the lot would have required a variance regardless. The applicant initially
thought to relocate the lot line to be 10 feet from the house at 450 but apparently has been �
advised differently by his attorney.
3. Will the proposed house and setbacks be compatible with surrounding area. There are 13
properties along Old Long Lake Road and East Long Lake Road between Long Lake and Wood
Hill SNA. All are zoned LR-lA,which has a two acre minimum lot size. Only four are two
acres or more in area. Five are between one and two acres. Four are less than one acre. This is
an area that is not clearly in transition. Only four of the 13 properties have been redeveloped or
extensively remodeled. The proposed redevelopment is the first to occur on one of the four
smallest lots. The houses on the other three lots are modest, all built before 1960. If the other ,
lots redevelop what is approved on this lot will set the tone for the other three lots. All would
� require lot area variances. All would appear to be at least 160 feet wide and would not require
lot width variances. They could accommodate the proposed house without setback variances.
• Planning Staff recommends approval of the lot area and front setback variances, conditioned on
approval of the grading plan by the City Engineer and the applicant providing corrected hardcover
calculations,both to occur before the application is considered by Council. If the Commission
determines the side setback variance and the proposed house are appropriate,the Commission should set
out clearly the reasons for granting the variance to establish a record if similar variances are requested
for adjacent properties.
Kempf asked whether the land to the east of the subject properly is available for sale.
Turner noted 900 East Long Lake Road is a large lot that possibly could be available for purchase.
Turner pointed out the wetland on the applicant's property extends to the east,and if a portion of the
land to the east were purchased,the lot would wind up being approximately 1000 feet deep.
Zullo asked why just 10 feet on the side and not 20 feet. Zullo raised a concem regarding a potential
precedent as it relates to setbacks if the arrangement is approved.
Turner stated the lot line arrangement was agreed to between the two property owners with their
attorneys involved and that they have drawn the property line on the line of occupation and is the line
where the surveyor had incorrectly marked.
Gaffron asked whether Zullo is suggesting that the line be moved closer to Hamman's house.
Zullo indicated that she is.
PAGE 12
.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Gaffron noted there is a 30-foot setback.
Turner stated that Mrs. Hamman's attorney has filed papers to take title to that property by adverse
possession. , _
Schoenzeit asked what the other side setbacks are in the rest of the neighborhood.
Turner indicated the houses in this area are small and the setbacks are large.
Schoenzeit expressed a concern that in the event of a rebuild on one of the area properties that the
neighbors will request a similar 10-foot side setback.
Miller stated the reason they are seeking the ten foot setback is that this is the result of a seven-month
negotiation process and is an amicable solution between the parties to a difficult situation. Miller
explained that when the 460 house was built,the surveyor measured off the north line and when the 450
house was built,the surveyor measured off the south line. The surveyor placed irons in the locations of
where he had determined the lot lines were. The applicant then purchased what they thought was the
full amount of Parcel A and Parcel B as drawn. The line of occupancy is where the edge of Parcel B is,
and after surveying Parcel B,the error was discovered. An agreement was reached on the line of
occupation and it only leaves ten feet for a side yard setback.
Miller noted the existing house encroaches substantially�into the wetland setback and into the wetlands
themselves. Mr.Richmond came up with a design of a house that does fit appropriately and is out of the
wetlands and the buffer. Miller indicated the design satisfies as many of the wetland concerns as
possible and is a settlement to a very difficult lot line situation that would otherwise have ended up in
litigation. •
Miller requested the Planning Commission approve the lot line arrangement tonight,noting that this is a
negotiated final execution of a lot line problem and is contingent upon the variances being granted.
Miller stated the vote of the Planning Commission would resolve a difficult situation.
Sela stated they did attempt to purchase additional land but that no one wanted to sell a portion of their
land.
Richmond stated they did approach Mr. Dayton three times in an attempt to purchase additional land.
Richmond noted the existing garage is located within the wetlands and that the design they have arrived
at eliminates that encroachment.
Schoenzeit asked whether the settlement is subject to the applicant receiving a 10-foot setback.
Miller indicated it is.
Turner stated Staff does have a copy of the deeds and other documents in the agreement.
Miller stated he has worked with both City Staff and with City Attorney Mattick regarding this
application.
PAGE 13
�� � �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Richmond stated in his view the 10-foot setback would not be setting a precedent since this is a very
unique situation given the mistake by the surveyor.
Miller noted there is sti1140 feet between the two houses and that 50 feet has actually been added to .
Mrs.Hamman's property. Miller commented it is unlikely that she would request a 10-foot setback.
Gaffron expressed a concern that the other house in the neighborhood may contend that their property
lines were incorrectly measured. •
Miller stated this is a unique situation because there has been occupation of this area for so many and
that no one occupied that other strip so they have no claim for adverse possession. The other property
owner has indicated they are not making a claim for adverse possession and that they have not occupied
that land.
Schoenzeit asked whether Parcel B would agree to a 29-foot setback.
Miller stated in his view they would have to comply with a 30-foot setback since it is akeady part of
Orono's codes.
Schoenzeit asked whether Mrs.Hamman would agree to a 30-foot setback.
Miller stated he cannot speak for her.
Turner noted Mrs.Hamman is not here tonight and neither is her attorney.
Miller stated he negotiated for everything that he could and that he was unable to get a substantive �
movement in that regard. Miller indicated they are attempting to avoid the cost of litigation with this
agreement.
Rice asked how big the house could be if they complied with the setbacks.
Miller stated they did comply with what they thought were the setbacks and that they did not discover
the encroachment until after closing. They have looked at a number of options to financially resolve the
situation and yet construct a house that fits the lot given the price.
Sela stated they did obtain title insurance prior to purchase and were under the belief they purchased 1.1
acres. Richmond noted that his note is due March 20`�'and that he has been paying interest on the loan
all this time. Richmond stated this is a very unfortunate situation.
Sela indicated there were a number of mistakes made by a number of people and that this is the best
solution they could arrive at.
Zullo inquired whether there are any drainage or grading issues.
Richmond stated they are simply asking for the variances at this time and that those issues would be
addressed later on by the City Engineer.
Sela indicated they are willing to comply with the recommendations of City Staff and the City Engineer.
PAGE 14
, �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COIVIMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Turner noted this lot does not have any drainage problems
Rice asked what the square footage of the house would be.
Richmond indicated it would be about 5700 square feet.
Kroeger commented it would have to be larger than that and that it appears the square footage of the
house is approximately 10,000 square feet.
Miller directed the Planning Commission to the elevation drawing and that the square feet listed there is
approximately 5900 square feet,which is the square footage of all the floors.
Turner noted the walkout on the rear is not a total walkout and basically starts at bedroom number five
and extends across the back toward the game/billiards room.
Sela commented in his view the proposed house is not overbearing for this lot and helps to improve the
lot.
Chair Kempf opened the public hearing at 8:25 p.m.
Dan Hamman,Maple Plain, son of Mrs.Hamman provided a brief history of the two lots,noting at the
ti.me the two lots were developed, a surveying mistake was made. His parents purchased the home in
1966 and his mother has resided there since that time. The lot line was never contested during the time
of her occupancy of that house and was never a problem until the sale recently of 460.
Greg Hamman,Minnetonka, son of Mrs.Hamman noted that the property to the east has been deeded to
the DNR and that it will not be developed in the future.
Dan Hamman commented it is doubtful that there is any additional land to purchase.
Chair Kempf closed the public hearing at 8:29 p.m.
Zullo stated in her view the size of the house is not overly large for the lot and that she would be in
favor of the variance.
Kroeger commented this appears to be a reasonable solution and that the applicants were unaware of the
lot line at the time they purchased the property.
Kempf concurred that this is an unfortunate situation and that the applicant was unaware of it at the time
of purchase.
Rice stated the Planning Commission is supposed to enforce the City's codes and that a hardship has not
been demonstrated for the variance to construct this large of a house. Rice stated in her view the
applicant would still have reasonable use of the property with a smaller house.
Kang stated she is in agreement with Commissioner Rice and that she does not see the hardship for the
variance.
PAGE 15
+ , .
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
Kroeger stated if the applicant thought the lot was larger than it turned out after the purchase,he sees
that as a hardship. .
Zullo stated this is a set of unfortunate circumstances. .
Kempf indicated he is in agreement with Commissioner Kroeger and that a hardship was placed upon
the applicant without his lrnowledge at the time of purchase of the property. Kempf stated there is not
an issue with massing. •
Gaffron stated in his view there is an adequate basis for granting the variance that would not set a
precedent. Gaffron stated in his view the house is reasonable for the neighborhood, does not change the
character of the neighborhood, and resolves the situation. �
Schwingler stated the Planning Commission has the ability to resolve this situation in a reasonable
manner.
Zullo moved,Kroeger seconded,to recommend approval of Application#08-3343,460 East Long
Lake Road,granting of a side yard setback of 10 feet as depicted on the plan and granting of a
front setback variance,lot area variance and the lot line rearrangement between 450 and 460
. based upon the very unique circumstances surrounding the lot line rearrangement.
VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 1,Rice Opposed.
PLANNING COMMISSION CONiMENTS
8. REPORT OF PLANNING COMNIISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING
COUNCIL MEETINGS JANUARY 28,2008,AND FEBRUARY 11,2008 ,
Kroeger reported on the January 28`�'meeting,noting that the Council tabled the amendments to the
Ordinance and that the Stonebay application was on the Consent Agenda.
Gaffron reported that the City Council did adopt the Ordinance amendment at the February 11`"
meeting.
Rice reported on the February 1 l,2008 Council meeting,noting that the City Council approved the
Berg application subject to the shed being removed. The City Council also approved the Ziegler
application.
9. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION
None
PAGE 16
^ �
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday,February 19,2008
6:00 o'clock p.m.
10. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND CITY COUNCII,MEETINGS
ON FEBRUARY 25, 2008,AND MARCH 10,2008
. February 25—Ralph Kempf
March 10—Jon Schwingler
ADJOURNMENT
Zullo moved,Rice seconded,to adjourn the meeting at 8:47 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
There being no further business to discuss,the meeting was adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
Ralph Kempf,Chair
PAGE 17