Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/18/2011 Planning Commission Minutes , . � . • MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONIlVIISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 ' 6:30 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Chair Loren Schoenzeit, Commissioners Denise Leskinen,John Thiesse,Jon Schwingler,Linda Feuss, and Elizabeth Levang. Representing Staff were Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic - Planning Mike Gaffron,Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, and Recorder Jackie Young. City Council Member Aaron Printup was present. Chair Schoenzeit called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Feuss moved,Leskinen seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6, Nays 0. *1. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 20,2011 Feuss moved,Leskinen seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Commission meeting of June 20,2011,as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. � NEW BUSINESS 2. #11-3513 RYAN COMPAIVIES US,INC.,450 and 550 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ' NORTH,SUBDIVISION,PRELIMINARY PLAT,6:33 P.M.-6:43 P.M. Chris Brink, Civil Engineer representing Ryan Companies,was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting preliminary plat and final plat approval for properties located at 450 and 550 Old Crystal Bay Road known as the Crystal Bay Business Center 2nd Addition. Vacation of drainage and utility easements are also requested. The re-plat contemplates moving the common lot line between Lots l and 2,Block 2,to the south 164 feet. Vacation of the existing perimeter drainage and utility easements along the common lot line is also proposed. New easements along the new lot line are proposed in conjunction with the plat. The basis for the request to re-plat the two parcels is to leave room for a potential future expansion to the existing new building on Lot 2,Block 2(550 OCB Road I�. The applicant has requested review of the preliminary plat and vacation by the Planning Commission and simultaneous review of the preliminary plat and final plat by the City Council. Currently both lots meet the area and width requirements required within the Industrial Zoning District. Both lots will remain confornung following the re-plat. Additionally,there will be confornung buildable areas on both lots after the re-plat. All of the other requirements of the Crystal Bay Business Center remain in effect. Staff recommends approval of plat and vacation of easements as proposed. Since this re-plat results in no additional lots,no park fee or storm water trunk fee will be required. Page 1 , i MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Brink displayed a conceptual site plan for 450 Old Crystal Bay Road and noted that this plan would meet all of the City's requirements. � Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 6:40 p.m. Feuss noted Staff had no objections to the vacation of the utilities. Feuss moved,Levang seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3513,Ryan Companies US,Inc.,450 and 550 Old Crystal Bay Road North,Subdivision,Preliminary Plat,subject to Staffs recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. � 3. #11-3514 BRIAN PETERS, 1978 SHADYWOOD ROAD,VARIANCES,6:43 P.M.-7:13 P.M. Brian Peters,Applicant,was present. � Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a structural coverage variance,a rear yard setback variance, and a hardcover variance in order to construct a detached garage on the subject property. The applicant's property is a 100-foot plus wide lot which is approximately 145 feet deep. The home is situated behind the average lakeshore setback. The 75 foot lake setback cuts through the center of the home. The property currently exceeds hardcover limitations within both the 0-75 foot and 75-250 foot zones. The applicant would like to replace the existing 18'x 22'garage with a more functional,larger 24' � x 24'garage. Construction of new lakeside decks and a patio are also part of this approval. Hardcover, setback, and structural coverage variances are necessary in order to grant this request. The applicant's proposal includes both additions and removals of hardcover in both zones. The survey submitted by the applicant is difficult to distinguish between what is existing,what is proposed to be removed, and what is proposed to remain. Staff has attempted to clarify the existing and proposed hardcover on the survey using different colors as depicted in Exhibits E and F. It appears the applicant is request a variance to allow 25.5 percent hardcover within the 0-75 foot zone and 62.2 percent hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone where 0 percent and 25 percent are allowed. The proposal appears to include a rearrangement of patios and decks on the lakeside of the home. A larger 40 plus foot wide deck currently exists on the south 2/3rds of the home,with a 20-foot wide patio on the north side. The applicant is proposing to reduce the deck on the south to 20 plus feet and add another 20 plus foot wide deck on the north side with a new patio in between. The applicant's property currently has 2,350 square feet of structural coverage, or 16.9 percent where 15 percent or 2,077 square feet is normally allowed. The proposal contemplates an increase of 51 square feet or 17 percent structural coverage in order to construct a 24'x 24'garage in place of the existing 18'x 22' garage. Page 2 � , , , � MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONINNIISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. The applicant requests a setback variance from the rear lot line to allow a 9.7 foot setback where a 10-foot � setback is required. The proposed garage will meet the 10-foot side yard setback and the 10-foot setback required between structures. Staff finds practical difficulties with respect to the rear or street yard setback variance. The shallowness of the property combined with the location of the existing home results in a practical difficulty not created by the applicant. T he properties immediately adjacent to the applicant's property have detached garages. The applicant's proposal appears to be in harmony with the neighborhood. The nature of the street/road situation for these six lots is a private,dead-end frontage road which runs parallel to Shadywood Road/CSAH 19. The access is nearly across from Sunset Drive. The applicant's request for a setback variance does not appear to have a negative effect on light, air and open space enjoyed by the adjacent property owner,nor does it appear to create a safety issue with the frontage road. � , As it relates to the hardcover variance requests, Staff finds that although the property currently exceeds allowed hardcover levels and reductions are proposed,further reductions could be found. Staff suggests the applicant's request for the reorganization of lakeside decks and patios be revised to accommodate additional hardcover removals. Areas shown on the survey and hardcover worksheets as landscaping to remain should be evaluated and possibly further reduced or removed. Removal of the decks and/or patios from the lake yard would reduce the 0-75 foot hardcover by 615 square feet. Removal of the landscaping in the 0-75 foot zone reduces it 350 square feet further for a total of 13 percent hardcover versus 25.5 percent as proposed. Minimal landings are required outside of each exterior door. Additionally,the applicant continues to propose 1,150 square feet of landscape hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone. It remains unclear to Staff is this landscape area is lined with plastic or fabric,but it should be removed. Removal of the landscape areas will bring the 75-250 foot zone hardcover level to 43.5 percent as opposed to 62.2 percent as proposed. The applicant's proposal exceeds the 15 percent structural coverage allowance by 324 square feet. The existing level exceeds this allowance by 183 square feet. It is possible the proposed garage could be reduced and still result in a functional garage for the property owner. A 24'x 24'garage is a reasonably sized garage which can accommodate two vehicles plus miscellaneous storage. Reducing the garage to 22'x 22'reduces functionality, only saves 92 square feet,and still results in a 1.6 percent overage on structural coverage. Due to the property's size, Staff finds practical difficulties with respect to the level of structural coverage allowed. Because the setback from the side lot line and home are met,the additional square footage requested do not appear to limit the light, air and open space afforded to the adjacent property owner. Issues for consideration: 1. Does the Planning Commission find that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an of�cial control? 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood? � 3. Does the Planning Commission find it necessary to impose conditions to order to mitigate the impacts created by the granting of the requested variances? Page 3 1 t MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMIVIISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Staff recommends the Planning Commission review the application focusing on determining an appropriate level of hardcover to remain on the property if the setback and lot coverage variances are found to be acceptable. The applicant must also comply with the recommendations of the City Engineer. Levang asked if the Planning Commission is looking at three separate variances. Curtis indicated that is correct and would consist of a hardcover variance,a structural Feuss asked if they are talking about approximately three inches on the rear setback variances. Curtis indicated that is correct. � Feuss asked if the applicant meets all of the other requirements for the rear setback. Curtis indicated he does. Brian Peters,Applicant, stated the project was done in two phases,with the first phase consisting of a remodel and then the second phase consisting of the garage. The sandy area depicted on the survey has been replaced with grass. The concrete patio and deck were existing,with the patio being replaced with pavers. The deck on the north side was a lower level tile patio,which has subsequently been replaced and brought up to a slightly higher level. . Peters indicated that throughout this project they have attempted to reduce the overall hardcover on the lot and that they were successful in accomplishing an overall reduction in the hardcover on the lot. Peters stated they are asking for a slightly bigger garage but have attempted to accommodate the larger structure with hardcover reductions in the driveway. Leskinen stated as it relates to the reductions in the driveway and the sandy area,whether those numbers are reflected in Staff s hardcover figures. Peters indicated they are and that the hardcover was reduced froxn 73.8 to 62.2 square feet. Curtis noted that the area in the 0-75 foot zone and the 75-250 foot zone also included some landscaping which was originally believed to have plastic or landscape fabric underneath but only consists of mulch. Curtis indicated those numbers were included in the hardcover figures and would need to be subtracted out from there,which would reduce it by 1150 square feet in the 75-250 foot zone and result in 43.5 percent hardcover for that zone. Feuss noted the hardcover would then be reduced from 62 percent down to 43.5 percent. Curtis noted the hardcover in the 0-75 foot zone would be reduced to 20.9 percent rather than the 25.5 percent shown in Staffs report. Levang asked what the plastic pad is that is depicted on the survey. Peters indicated that was overgrown with vegetation and that they have since cleaned up that area. Curtis asked if that entire area is now permeable. Page 4 t NIINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. � Peters stated it is with the exception of a small walkway that leads to a door. Curtis asked what the walkway is constructed out o£ Peters indicated it is a stone walkway. Levang asked whether there could be further reductions made in the driveway. Peters stated he would not be opposed to looking at further reductions in the driveway. Curtis pointed out that typically a 20-foot wide curb cut is permitted and that she is unsure whether the driveway could be reduced further and still be functional. Thiesse asked which direction the runoff from the driveway is directed. Peters indicated it is to the north. Levang asked what the length is from the corner of the garage to the end of the driveway. Peters stated it is approximately 52 feet. Schwingler noted the house is 62 feet. Gaffron stated the issue would become how the person can back up or turnaround in their driveway. � Thiesse stated there is also some parking for guests and storage and that it would be difficult to reduce the driveway any further. Thiesse asked whether there is any swale on the lot. Tom Stokes, Contractor,indicated there is a swale and drain tile to help with the drainage on the lot. Schoenzeit asked whether a variance is being requested for the tip of the deck. Peters indicated it is his belief that a variance was granted for the deck and that the dimensions of the deck were not changed when it was raised. Thiesse asked if the hardcover on the lakeside of the home is simply replacing what was there originally. Peters stated previously the upper deck was a lower level tiled patio and has been converted into a deck. Curtis noted the hardcover did not change when that improvement was made. Thiesse asked if the concrete area in between is a deck. Peters indicated it was an existing concrete patio that was covered with some Astroturf that has since been covered with stone. Gaffron asked if there is parking for the neighborhood along the road. Page 5 , . MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING CONINIISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Peters indicated at times there is some parking on the roadway but that his fi-iends park in his driveway or on the other side of the road. Levang asked what the neighbors think of this project. Peters indicated the neighbor to the north is in favor of the property and that he has not spoken to the neighbor to the south. The garage is very consistent with the other houses in the neighborhood. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 7:02 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:02 p.m. Schoenzeit stated the issue that he has is the 17 percent structural coverage being proposed and that it is the Planning Commiss.ion's job to make sure that structures are not constructed over the limit when there is not a hardship or a practical difficulty demonstrated. Schoenzeit stated he cannot support increasing the structural coverage. Feuss noted the existing structural coverage is 16.9 percent. Schoenzeit stated the applicant is tearing down the existing garage and that it should not exceed the 15 percent siructural coverage given the size of the house. Schoenzeit noted the house is 375 square feet over on the structural coverage. Thiesse asked how wide the existing garage is. Peters indicated it is approximately 18'x 22'or 23'. Thiesse stated an 18 foot wide garage in Minnesota is really not a functional garage. The applicant is not looking to add on to the house and should be entitled to have a garage that is useful and functional. Feuss noted Staff has raised that point in that report and that in her mind there are practical difficulties with respect to the garage. Schoenzeit asked whether a precedent would be set if they grant the additional structural coverage. Curtis stated with every variance the Planning Commission looks specifically at the challenges presented with each individual lot and that the Planning Commission makes variances specific to the property based on its own merits. Gaffron indicated he is in agreement with that but that there will always be someone who will look at this application and say that he also is entitled to a variance. Gaffron stated the findings by the Planning Commission will need to be specific and based on this lot. Schoenzeit commented the Planning Commission could say you are getting the variance based on circumstances associated with the lot. Page 6 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. Curtis indicated it does not present a legal precedent but that there will likely be others who will look at it and say that they should also be granted a similar variance. Curtis stated the City Attorney has indicated that does not make it a legal precedent. Thiesse commented he would hope the Planning Commission would be consistent on the applications. Schoenzeit stated what he is hearing is that the functionality of the garage and the difficulties of not . having it is sufficient to trump the code or structural coverage numbers in this case. Leskinen stated it is the basis for a variance since practical difficulties have been presented. Feuss noted the proposal is a significant improvement what over currently exists. Thiesse asked if the drain tile goes to the lake. Peters indicated it does not and that the flat lot left them with few options in regards to the runoff. Feuss moved,Schoenzeit seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3514, 1978 Shadywood Road,granting of a hardcover variance of 43.5 percent in the 75-250 foot range since it is a significant reduction over eacisting hardcover; the granting of a structural coverage variance to � 17 percent due to the practical difficulties of the lot size to allow for the building of a functional garage with adequate turnaround; and the granting of a rear yard setback variance subject to the applicant providing Staff with an updated survey prior to going before the City Council showing what is proposed,what is existing,and what is being removed; and further subject to Planning Staff recommendations. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. 4. #11-3515 KEENAN AND SVEIVEN ON BEHALF OF GINA PAULUCCI,320 ' WOODHII..L ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,7:13 P.M.—7:17 P.M. Keenan Paulucci,Applicant,was present. Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit in order to conduct approximately 1,000 cubic yards of earth movement on the property to re-grade the driveway circle area and resolve a drainage issue near the home. Approximately 400 cubic yards of material will be removed from the property. The subject property contains three separate parcels: 320 Woodhill Drive,which contains the home and . the circle portion of the driveway; 322 Wood hill Drive,which contains a portion of the driveway accessing Woodhill Drive; and 325 Woodhill Drive,which fronts on Edgewood Hills Road and is vacant. Due to the amount of total earth movement proposed, a conditional use permit is required. The applicant has proposed approximately 1,000 cubic yards of total earth movement on site with approximately 400 cubic yards of soil material to be exported out of the property. The area of disturbance has been calculated by the applicant as 0.97 acre. Therefore, an MPCA issued National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System pernut is not required. Staff recommends approval of the CUP in conjunction with the City Engineer's recommendations. Page 7 , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. � Schoenzeit asked whether there has been any communication with the neighbors or a schedule submitted regarding the trucking. � Curtis indicated the Council will issue the conditional use permit and then an administrative permit will be applied for which requires the applicants to submit a irucking schedule. Thiesse asked if this is a private road. ' Curtis indicated it is a private road. Leskinen noted the engineer's report indicates the applicant will need a NPDS pernut. Curtis indicated the engineer's report came out prior to the applicant calculating the area to be disturbed and that it is the responsibility of the applicant to obtain that pernut. Curtis noted there is quite a steep penalty for working without a permit if the area is larger than one acre. The applicant has demonstrated that the area is 1.7 acres,which will require a permit. , Keenan Paulucci stated he had nothing to add. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. Thiesse moved,Levang seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3515,Keenan& Sveiven on behalf of Gina Paulucci,320 Woodhill Road,subject to the City Engineer's recommendations. VOTE; Ayes 6,Nays 0. 5. #11-3516 ROBERT SNYDER, 1513 BAY RIDGE ROAD,VARIANCE,7:17 P.M.—7:36 P.M. . Tripp and Pam Snyder,Applicants,were present Curtis stated the applicant is requesting a side setback variance to allow a garage addition to the home. The addition consists of 966 square feet and is propo9sed to be located eight feet from the south lot line where a 30-foot setback is required. The existing home is set back eight from the south lot line so it does not meet the 30-foot principal structure side setback required within the LR-lA zoning district. The addition to the home in the proposed location within the substandard setback is considered an expansion of an existing nonconformity. A side yard setback is required in order to do the project as proposed. Additionally,the applicant is proposing reductions in hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone in order to accommodate the addition and remain at 25 percent. The applicant's property is nonconforming with respect to area and width. The existing home does not meet the required 30-foot side setback on either side lot line. The applicant is proposing a 26-foot deep garage addition to the home in order to achieve additional living space. The proposed garage addition within the substandard side setback area will not encroach closer than the existing home to the adjacent Page 8 , MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. property,but the length of the encroachment will nearly double. An existing shed set back five feet from the side lot line along the existing garage is proposed to be removed as part of this project. The applicant's variance may be reasonable considering the location of the existing home on the property. The proposed addition will result in 26 feet of additional massing along the south lot line. There are a number of trees along the south side of the property which may afford adequate screening of the addition from the adjacent property. Staff finds the location of the existing home and the width of the applicant's property creates a unique circumstance not created by the applicant and that granting the applicant's request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. In order to construct the addition,hardcover removals are necessary. The applicant has provided a hardcover plan which results in a conforming level of hardcover. However,while the proposed driveway meets the City's minimum standards,the configuration appears to be difficult to maneuver. The applicant should address the proposed driveway configuration. Issues for consideration: 1. A 10-foot setback is the minimum principal structure side setback permitted in any zoning district. Should the addition be redesigned and constructed to meet a 10-foot side setback? 2. The applicant is proposing a driveway configuration which technically meets the City's driveway hardcover minimum. However,there appears to be maneuverability difficulties. Staff recommends approval of a side setback variance in order to construct the garage addition and conduct hardcover removals as proposed. The Planning Commission should consider and make a recommendation on whether an 8-foot setback is acceptable or if a 10-foot setback should be required. Tripp Snyder,Applicant,indicated they purchased the house approximately four years ago. Shortly after the purchase the interior of the house was rewired to bring it up to code. As part of that renovation,the hardcover was reduced on the property from approximately 35 percent in the 75-250 foot zone to approximately 31.7 percent. They are further proposing to reduce it down to just under 25 percent. The garage that is being proposed sits on what is now 100 percent hardcover. The portico would also sit on 100 percent hardcover. Snyder indicated the structures they are proposing will not add any hardcover whatsoever to the property. Along the south side of the property there is concrete along with a shed that is approximately three feet wide. That will be removed as part of the construction. Snyder indicated they have attempted to get under the 25 percent hardcover requirement,which is accomplished with this proposaL Snyder stated they are removing all of the hardcover that is currently used for excess parldng. That area could also be used as a turnaround. Bayridge Road is a private road with seven houses on the road. Their house is next to the last house on the road and is located approximately 60 feet from the end of the road. The two spaces in the proposed garage that are to the south are the ones that will be primarily used. Snyder stated in his view due to the configuration that their builder and surveyor have proposed they feel that both cars can be turned around adequately in that portion of the driveway or they could back down ' the driveway. At the far north portion of the driveway you will not be able to turn around. Snyder stated Page 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMNIISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. they plan on using the third space as ldnd of an overflow parking when they have guests at the house and also to store the riding lawn mower and snow blower. Snyder noted there is very little traffic on the road. The house next to this house is for sale so there are some prospective people coming to look at it but there are perhaps four to five cars every day that go past their house. Every lot on the road is 100 feet wide lots. ' Schoenzeit asked whether he has discussed this project with the neighbors. Snyder indicated he has spoken to one of the neighbors but that the other neighbor is seldom at the property. The fence that is located on the neighbor's property line is in a state of disintegration and should be taken down. They are proposing to replace that fence with a series of shrubs that would grow to a height of eight or nine feet and provide screening between the two houses. Snyder indicated they have not discussed that proposal with the neighbor. Leskinen asked whether any attempt was made to comply with the encroachment. Snyder stated technically they are in the two acre zone so the side setback requirement is 30 feet. Physically it is possible to move the garage over a foot and a half,which would put it at the 10 foot line, but where it comes into the existing house is into the kitchen. If it is moved over another foot and a half, they would be infringing up a bay window,which would require a redesign of the whole front side of the house. Thiesse asked if someone would come to visit the property if the expectation is that they would completely back out of the driveway. Snyder pointed out the road and the edge of the road. Snyder indicated they do have an area where guests can park. Feuss asked if there would be any additional hardcover in the area for the guests. Snyder indicated that area would be grass. Thiesse stated as it relates to moving the garage over another foot and a half,in his view it would really not serve any purpose since the house is akeady there. Schoenzeit asked if they are restricted from putting a jog in the structure. Curtis indicated they are not. Schoenzeit asked if the exterior of the garage would be compatible with what currently exists. Thiesse asked how much of the concrete located on the south side will be removed. Snyder indicated they will be removing 100 percent of that. There currently is brick pavement and plantings with plastic and rock,which will also be removed. Schoenzeit asked whether there will be gutters or drain spouts on the garage. � Page 10 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 , � 6:30 o'clock p.m. Snyder indicated there are gutters all the way along the house. It currently is a fairly gradual slope but they will be making the area a little bit flatter or perhaps swale it. Schoenzeit stated in his view it is important that the runoff from the garage stay on the applicant's property. , Snyder concurred. � Curtis indicated the City Engineer will be reviewing that. Levang noted the area was very wet when she visited the site. , Snyder stated they have a sprinkler system that comes on twice a week and that it may have been on yesterday morning. With the high humidity,nothing dried out. Snyder indicated there will be gutters all the way along the entire house. Snyder pointed out the area on the property where the swale is currently located and stated that can be extended if necessary. Curtis noted the City Engineer will look at the drainage and will make recommendations on how to mitigate any adverse impacts to the neighbor. Chair Schoenzeit opened the public hearing at 7:32 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. � Chair Schoenzeit closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m. Feuss stated she likes the reduction in the hardcover. The applicant already has the existing nonconformity and that there are practical difficulties given the small lot size. Schwingler commented this proposal would also clean up the concrete and the little shed. Thiesse noted the only affected property would be the property that is up for sale and that to his lrnowledge the seller is not aware of the proposal. � Curtis stated the owner was notified. Snyder stated the property has been for sale for the past three years. Schoenzeit moved,Feuss seconded,to recommend approval of Application#11-3516, 1513 Bay Ridge Road,granting of a side setback variance to allow a garage addition to the home subject to Staff s recommendations. Schoenzeit encouraged the applicant to construct an appropriate sized turnaround. Snyder indicated if they add more to the turnaround,they would be over the 25 percent hardcover. Feuss commented that would then require them to come back for a hardcover variance. Page 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 � 6:30 o'clock p.m. Thiesse stated the hardcover requirements are primarily to protect the lake and that the water in this area will not be going into the lake.Thiesse stated he would understand if they had to come back for a hardcover variance. Feuss stated that ultimately is their choice. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS 6. REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES ATTENDING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JUNE 27,2011,AND JULY 11,2011 Feuss noted she attended the June 27`"City Council meeting and all items were placed on the Consent Agenda. � Levang stated she attended the July 11°i meeting and reported that the Whipple application that was approved by the Planning Commission variance was not approved by the City Council. The Whipple property is located on Casco Point Road. Curtis displayed the proposed garage. Levang stated the issue with the Council was what the garage would be used for and that the Planning , Commission did not explore that at all with the application. � Thiesse noted he did ask what the garage would be used for and that in his view there was no practical difficulty to ask for a garage of that size. Thiesse stated the Planning Commission did not discuss it beyond that. Curtis stated the conversation of the Planning Commission centered more around the level of hardcover. s Levang stated the garage would be used to store antique cars and as such would be a luxury. The City Council did not feel the hardcover was reduced enough. The City Council also talked about a deck located out front but was not discussed in great detail. Curtis noted the deck was on the lakeshore side of the home in the 0-75 foot zone. Levang stated she would like to use this as a learning tool in the future so the City Council does not overrule the Planning Commission on other similar applications. Levang noted the application was eventually tabled. Curtis stated that applicant has submitted a revised plan today requesting 30 percent hardcover. There was a significant in the driveway and a slight reduction in the size of the garage. As it relates to the issues with the 0-75 foot zone and the nonconforming structure,Council Member Rahn had served on the Planning Commission before the statutes were changed. If the City requires the removal of a nonconfornung structure,the City would be required to compensate the property owner. At Page 12 � MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 • 6:30 o'clock p.m. the present time the City acknowledges the existence of the hardcover and asks for mitigation,which is how they handled the case. Levang asked whether a rain garden is included. � Curtis indicated a rain garden is included in the revised plan. ' Schwingler stated that is a case in point where the Planning Commission is a recommending body and the City Council has the final authority. Curtis commented that it has been a year since the Council and Planning Commission have had an opportunity to review variances of that nature given the Supreme Court ruling. Curtis stated in her opinion it was a good discussion and that Staff can learn from it. Levang noted the City Council has three members who previously served on the Planning Commission and that the applications do not get rubber stamped. Schoenzeit asked whether that application would come back before the Planning Commission. , Curtis indicated it would not. Levang stated there was also an LMCD report about how the government shutdown has affected the milfoil harvesting and the chemical treatment due to the DNR not being able to review the permits. All of � the other variances were placed on the consent agenda. There was also a lengthy discussion regarding the pavement management plan. . 7. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Curtis noted typically the Planning Commission takes a tour of the City and visit some of the proj ects that have been completed. Curtis indicated she can send out an e-mail to check on everyone's availability. Schwingler indicated he would be fine to chauffeur the group on his boat and requested that an e-mail be sent out asking for available dates. 8. SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES TO ATTEND CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ON JULY 25,2011 AND AUGUST 8,2011 July 25,2011 -Levang August 8,2011 —Leskinen , 7. OTHER ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION,CONTINUED Schoenzeit reported the hardcover task force had a pretty good discussion about the goals and the priorities of the City's regulations regarding hardcover. Schoenzeit indicated the group talked about the reasons for looking at the regulations and whether they should be amended because the language is Page 13 4 MINUTES OF THE � ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18,2011 6:30 o'clock p.m. confusing or whether the regulations should be loosened or all-inclusive. One of the action items the group decided upon was to get some historical graphical perspectives so the task force will know what has been done in the past. If the City is granting similar variances over and over,it may suggest a problem with the code. Schoenzeit stated another issue is that there really is no allowance for technology or higher performance on the part of the applicant to achieve a desired water quality standard,percolation,etc.,and the group is interested in finding levels that Staff can incorporate into the code. Schoenzeit stated developing that type of technical data is clearly outside the budget of Orono and that they may need to wait for the state to produce some of those guidelines. Schoenzeit noted they may have difficulty with the time line and being able to complete the assignment without the state's supporting technical data. Thiesse asked if one of the goals was to simplify the code. Schoenzeit stated it is more than simplification. Thiesse asked whether a person would still be able to get a variance without hiring an engineer. Curtis stated it would be unlikely. � ' Schoenzeit indicated the task force is looking at different levels of regulations depending on different circumstances and that different levels would require an engineer. Curtis stated one of the goals is to have the ternunology simplified as well as incorporating incentives to utilize new technology. . Schoenzeit stated the task force hopes to clearly document the different levels and requirements that the applicant has to meet before the application comes to the Planning Commission and/or the City Council leveL . Schwingler asked whether the Planning Commission should offer suggestions on applications like Commissioner Thiesse did earlier, such as increasing the size of the turnaround. Curtis stated as it relates to the driveway discussed earlier tonight, Staff will include language in the . resolution that the applicant has acknowledged this configuration. Curtis indicated it is a driveway that a person will have to back out of. Feuss committed in her view if the applicant is not asking for a variance,it really is not the business of the Planning Commission to make suggestions on other aspects not being impacted by the proposal. Gaffron stated over time additional hardcover tends to get added on the property and it is not discovered until it comes back before the Planning Commission Curtis introduced Kevin Landgraver,the newest Planning Commission member. Page • • 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Monday,July 18, 2011 6:30 o'dock p.m. ADJOURNMENT Feuss moved, Schoenzeit seconded,to adjourn the Orono Planning Commission meeting at 8:00 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 6,Nays 0. , �ta'4� �v ,. t,�' I � �RJ, �`�� I � Loren Schoenzeit, Chair _ _ _._...._ Page __.... .. _. .. 15 _ _._