1
00:00:03,830 --> 00:00:03,830
>> welcome, everybody to the november 17th meeting of the orono planning commission.

2
00:00:08,660 --> 00:00:11,200
we'd like to start each meeting with the pledge of allegiance. Ask that you please join us.

3
00:00:28,835 --> 00:00:28,835
>>

4
00:00:34,490 --> 00:00:34,490
>> first item on the agenda tonight is the approval of the agenda.

5
00:00:39,860 --> 00:00:42,310
>> motion to approve the agenda. >> welcome, everybody to the november 17 meeting of the orono planning commission.

6
00:00:46,500 --> 00:00:48,910
I'd like to start each meeting with the pledge of allegiance. Ask you, please join us.

7
00:00:52,850 --> 00:00:56,140
>> mr. Chair, operating in proxy tonight. [laughter] >> there you go.

8
00:00:57,610 --> 00:01:01,510
we have a motion to approve the agenda by commission resler. Do I have a second? >> second.

9
00:01:03,270 --> 00:01:05,440
>> second by commissioner tiff. Any further discussion?

10
00:01:07,460 --> 00:01:10,240
all in favor, say aye. >> aye. >> any opposed? Hearing none motion carries.

11
00:01:12,880 --> 00:01:12,880
first item on the agenda tonight is the approval of the agenda. [laughter]

12
00:01:17,630 --> 00:01:20,300
>> motion to approve the agenda. >> welcome, everybody to the november 17th meeting

13
00:01:22,920 --> 00:01:26,780
of the orono planning commission. To start each meeting. Anyone with allegiance? Ask you please join us.

14
00:01:32,810 --> 00:01:34,785
>> we're just getting some feedback. >> we have a motion to approve the agenda by commission resler.

15
00:01:37,810 --> 00:01:37,810
do I have a second? Second by commissioner tiff.

16
00:01:43,230 --> 00:01:45,230
any further discussion? All in favor, say aye.

17
00:01:47,435 --> 00:01:48,050
>> aye. >> any opposed? Hearing none motion carries.

18
00:02:00,750 --> 00:02:04,170
we're going to move to the next item on the agenda, approval of the minutes from october 20th meeting.

19
00:02:07,865 --> 00:02:07,865
>> I actually had one point of discussion.

20
00:02:12,155 --> 00:02:15,200
>> we have to approve the agenda. >> in reading the minutes in particular around the language changes that we made in what,

21
00:02:21,070 --> 00:02:24,250
I think was the final agenda item. We were very thoughtful and careful of the language changes that we wanted to include,

22
00:02:29,630 --> 00:02:33,150
and we stated that it would be approved with those changes, and I would've liked to have seen those changes documented on the record.

23
00:02:37,330 --> 00:02:39,380
that something that we can. >> we're going to move to the next item on the agenda,

24
00:02:41,970 --> 00:02:45,400
approval of the minutes from october 20th? Fading. >> I actually had one [inaudible]

25
00:02:51,430 --> 00:02:54,610
>> in reading the minutes. [inaudible] >> this is a new error in our system that happening.

26
00:03:00,670 --> 00:03:04,540
>> I'm sorry. We were very thoughtful and careful of the language not that it would be approved with those changes,

27
00:03:10,940 --> 00:03:13,200
and I would've liked to have seen those changes. >> I don't know where that feedback is coming from.

28
00:03:15,255 --> 00:03:16,770
>> that's something that we can. >> we're going to move to the next the agenda, approval of the minutes.

29
00:03:24,560 --> 00:03:27,370
>> thank you, commissioner perkel, for your questions and comments.

30
00:03:29,125 --> 00:03:32,620
that was summarized or it was summarized in how it went to planning or went to the city council,

31
00:03:37,250 --> 00:03:39,250
and it was identified in the memo and presented that way when it was presented to city council.

32
00:03:41,970 --> 00:03:41,970
minutes are a point of a summary of motions and actions.

33
00:03:46,310 --> 00:03:49,990
but as amended, I'd be happy to bring additional clarification or language into

34
00:03:52,630 --> 00:03:56,100
those minutes if that's the direction of the commission. >> especially when we're

35
00:04:02,480 --> 00:04:02,480
approving the text amendments with some clarifications to them.

36
00:04:09,690 --> 00:04:09,690
I feel like those clarifications should be included in the minutes.

37
00:04:16,010 --> 00:04:19,385
otherwise, it's not clear what we actually approved. >> commissioner perkle, for the record,

38
00:04:21,750 --> 00:04:25,225
you're referring to the text amendment regarding retaining walls? >> yes. Thank you. >> just for the commissioners that don't have the minutes in front of them,

39
00:04:28,230 --> 00:04:32,110
we had a lot of discussion on that point, and the minutes,

40
00:04:33,730 --> 00:04:36,825
they just say the planning commission discussed the item. It sounds like it was moved forward with our comments, but I get,

41
00:04:40,610 --> 00:04:43,730
if people look at the minutes online and want to see what we discussed, there's no reference there.

42
00:04:45,970 --> 00:04:45,970
we could put that to a vote to change the minutes so that there's reference

43
00:04:50,650 --> 00:04:50,650
of what we spoke about. Is that what you're requesting?

44
00:04:54,870 --> 00:04:57,910
>> yeah, I think some documentation added to the minutes regarding what that discussion entailed and what we actually approved would be helpful.

45
00:05:06,070 --> 00:05:08,040
>> sounds like you have a motion. >> yes, I'd like to make a motion to amend the minutes to

46
00:05:12,260 --> 00:05:12,260
clarify the text amendment changes that we asked for to be included.

47
00:05:20,795 --> 00:05:23,265
>> I'll second that. >> a motion by commissioner perkle,

48
00:05:25,380 --> 00:05:29,280
a second by commission resler. Any further discussion? >> if I can. I think that leaves it a little bit ambiguous,

49
00:05:31,720 --> 00:05:31,720
and maybe not necessarily for this motion.

50
00:05:36,520 --> 00:05:39,100
when we have these in the future, maybe we just want to call out what

51
00:05:40,960 --> 00:05:40,960
our bullet points are because there is a lot of conjecture in there.

52
00:05:45,030 --> 00:05:47,420
that maybe something for us to learn from. If we're going to nail something down as a point of change,

53
00:05:50,520 --> 00:05:54,320
then we can make them concise one word summaries. Then those can be included in the minutes in the future.

54
00:05:57,535 --> 00:06:00,750
>> I think that would be helpful. >> we have a motion and a second. All in favor?

55
00:06:05,955 --> 00:06:07,065
>> aye. >> any opposed? Hearing none motion carries?

56
00:06:11,200 --> 00:06:11,200
I'm going to reach out to staff here because approval of the minutes I guess,

57
00:06:17,800 --> 00:06:17,800
approval wasn't part of your motion, commissioner perkle?

58
00:06:22,115 --> 00:06:23,810
>> no. >> amend and approval? >> no 'cause we can't approve them without knowing what they will say.

59
00:06:27,955 --> 00:06:27,955
>> how would you like me to continue on that agenda item?

60
00:06:33,210 --> 00:06:36,700
>> if you want to then take a motion to table, and then I can bring them back with amended in january.

61
00:06:40,155 --> 00:06:43,100
>> sure. >> okay. >> I would make a motion to table the approval of the minutes till the next meeting so we can amend them.

62
00:06:45,995 --> 00:06:48,530
>> I'll second that. >> motion to table by commissioner perkle.

63
00:06:51,760 --> 00:06:55,440
second by commissioner welson. All in favor? >> aye.

64
00:06:56,715 --> 00:06:58,340
>> any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries. That's going to bring us to our first public hearing of the night.

65
00:07:04,775 --> 00:07:07,430
la25-33. This is hennepin county for 3,700 north shore drive.

66
00:07:11,355 --> 00:07:13,920
this is the north arm public boat launch. This is for a vacation, a variance,

67
00:07:15,920 --> 00:07:19,260
a conditional use permit, and an interim use permit. Miss oakton. >> yes. Good evening,

68
00:07:20,380 --> 00:07:22,680
commissioners. Thank you very much. In front of you tonight is a project within

69
00:07:27,460 --> 00:07:27,460
the city limits to redesign the north arm public boat launch.

70
00:07:32,320 --> 00:07:35,340
of this application and part of the redesign, there's multiple aspects to this project.

71
00:07:38,720 --> 00:07:41,380
one will be to a request to vacate. It is the 20 eastern feet of a cherry avenue,

72
00:07:45,500 --> 00:07:47,140
which is an unimproved right of way, but it is improved as part of the existing parking lot.

73
00:07:49,980 --> 00:07:52,160
then a 20 foot alley, again, it's not improved for an alley,

74
00:07:54,820 --> 00:07:56,960
it is part of the existing parking lot. There are three variances identified for hardcover in the 75 lake shore,

75
00:08:01,640 --> 00:08:05,570
building and structure in the 75 lake shore, and then overall hardcover. There's a conditional use permit for a shoreline protection improvement within

76
00:08:09,220 --> 00:08:09,220
the floodway or the proposed seawall improvements associated with the project,

77
00:08:13,320 --> 00:08:13,320
and then an interim use permit for grading over 10 cubic yards in the lake shore setback.

78
00:08:17,645 --> 00:08:20,940
this is located in our lr-1c, single family residential zoning district.

79
00:08:22,980 --> 00:08:25,900
however, it is a legal non conforming use. This use was created and constructed in

80
00:08:29,220 --> 00:08:29,220
the 1960s and was used as a public boat launch since then,

81
00:08:33,820 --> 00:08:37,270
and we adopted our city code in the 1970s. After this was in existence,

82
00:08:40,440 --> 00:08:43,820
so this is a legal non conforming, how it's operating. It is in our stormwater quality overlay district as a 25% tier hardcover limit,

83
00:08:48,700 --> 00:08:48,700
and the site is roughly 1.8 acres in size.

84
00:08:53,130 --> 00:08:55,210
for the existing conditions, the site currently exists roughly of 70% hardcover,

85
00:08:58,410 --> 00:09:01,670
mostly per two meters, for the parking lot. From the existing condition survey,

86
00:09:04,190 --> 00:09:06,250
roughly 67 parking spots, five handicap, 14 dedicated trailer,

87
00:09:09,070 --> 00:09:11,010
and then 48 standard. The public boat launch, obviously,

88
00:09:13,130 --> 00:09:14,990
there's a garbage dumpster, some temporary porta potty restrooms,

89
00:09:17,530 --> 00:09:17,530
some asi or the aquatic invasive species information, decontamination areas.

90
00:09:26,910 --> 00:09:30,300
some fencing on the site, there's footpath throughout the site. There's some benches and then utility infrastructure,

91
00:09:32,950 --> 00:09:36,930
including generators and other elements throughout the site. Proposed in front of you is to reconstruct the parking lot area and boat launch,

92
00:09:43,380 --> 00:09:47,140
a new fishing areas and walking paths improvements on the east side of the parcel in the shoreline.

93
00:09:51,520 --> 00:09:51,520
improvements to the decontamination area and installation of

94
00:09:55,960 --> 00:09:55,960
a shade structure to support the inspection program for asi inspection program.

95
00:10:01,330 --> 00:10:01,330
installation of new accessibility lift for ada lake access,

96
00:10:07,000 --> 00:10:07,000
reorientation of garbage containers to support fishing activities,

97
00:10:12,240 --> 00:10:12,240
specifically, improvement of overall stormwater management of the site.

98
00:10:16,520 --> 00:10:18,800
a large way that they're addressing that is the parking spaces themselves will be permeable with

99
00:10:22,000 --> 00:10:22,000
a grid gravel system with underwater not underwater,

100
00:10:27,780 --> 00:10:27,780
under parking filtration to manage stormwater.

101
00:10:32,960 --> 00:10:36,300
removal of invasive vegetation and established native plantings on kind of the west side of the site,

102
00:10:40,120 --> 00:10:40,120
as well as screening between the site and a budding residential areas.

103
00:10:44,940 --> 00:10:48,380
the first part of this application is a vacation. The property is bisected by a platted right of way.

104
00:10:51,520 --> 00:10:51,520
I've highlighted the area in red that's proposed to be vacated.

105
00:10:56,420 --> 00:10:59,260
it is 20 feet of cherry avenue, which is over here, and then the 14 foot alley.

106
00:11:02,640 --> 00:11:06,100
there is a blue area over here. It's not showing up great on the screen, but that is proposed to remain right of way.

107
00:11:09,160 --> 00:11:09,160
this is where the existing met council generator is located on the site.

108
00:11:14,040 --> 00:11:16,360
as part of the vacation process, the dnr was notified and provided a letter included in your packet.

109
00:11:21,170 --> 00:11:24,340
as part of that letter, they noted that the proposed vacation does not change the public access to the lake minnetonka, as it exists today.

110
00:11:28,040 --> 00:11:31,220
the dnr and city staff agreed to retain public access over this space should the use ever change in the future,

111
00:11:34,200 --> 00:11:37,780
which can be documented as part of the resolution for this project. This specific right of way that goes into the lake is not identified as

112
00:11:42,240 --> 00:11:42,240
a lake access point within the comprehensive plan. Just of note.

113
00:11:47,610 --> 00:11:51,300
of the variances, there are three variances. The overall site hardcover.

114
00:11:53,495 --> 00:11:57,080
the new hard cover proposed on the site is estimated to be 79% following the definition of hard cover and our city code,

115
00:12:01,960 --> 00:12:04,180
of that 79% proposed, 36% of it is permeable,

116
00:12:06,340 --> 00:12:06,340
which is that parking area that will be kind of that grid and gravel system,

117
00:12:11,080 --> 00:12:13,500
and then 43% will be impermeable, which is concrete and bituminous.

118
00:12:15,705 --> 00:12:18,630
overall, the site will result in a 22,000 square foot decrease in concrete and bituminous.

119
00:12:22,075 --> 00:12:22,075
or of impermeable space on the site as under the current proposed application.

120
00:12:28,740 --> 00:12:31,410
hardcover with the 75 foot lake yard, approximately 24,000 square feet of hardcover will be in the 75.

121
00:12:36,670 --> 00:12:36,670
it is anticipated that there would be hardcover in the 75 as this is

122
00:12:41,470 --> 00:12:41,470
a water oriented use as part of the site for that legal nonconforming use.

123
00:12:49,190 --> 00:12:52,790
buildings and structures within the 75 foot setback. The project plans to upgrade the improvements on

124
00:12:56,270 --> 00:12:56,270
the site and maintain the ancillary use of the site.

125
00:13:00,380 --> 00:13:02,590
they're proposing to change the garbage dumpster into new trash cans over by the fishing area,

126
00:13:07,230 --> 00:13:10,130
proposed screening and fencing around the porta potty, which is there today,

127
00:13:11,710 --> 00:13:11,710
but we'll be moved to a different site here outside of the 75 foot setback.

128
00:13:17,775 --> 00:13:17,775
I'm specifically screening and fencing around utilities such as this

129
00:13:22,300 --> 00:13:22,300
met console generator and some of the asi shed area,

130
00:13:27,880 --> 00:13:27,880
a new canopy for the asi inspector up here,

131
00:13:32,000 --> 00:13:35,660
a new shed to support asi decontamination back here, and the new lighting and signage around the site as well.

132
00:13:40,180 --> 00:13:43,180
a conditional and interim use permit are also requested a conditional use permit for floodway or shoreline management.

133
00:13:47,280 --> 00:13:50,705
specifically, we're calling it the seawall improvements. The application is proposing granite steps on the east side of the property here

134
00:13:56,960 --> 00:14:00,020
to promote accessibility and non motorized boat launching from the site, canoes and kayaks.

135
00:14:04,275 --> 00:14:04,275
new steps along the east side of the shoreline to preserve shoreline

136
00:14:09,010 --> 00:14:09,010
from erosion and allow easier access for non motorized boats, new fishing piers,

137
00:14:14,110 --> 00:14:18,110
and the new orientation of the lake access boat launch, all trigger the need for the shoreline management/sea wall cup,

138
00:14:22,370 --> 00:14:22,370
because it potentially impacts the floodplain.

139
00:14:27,035 --> 00:14:30,180
then an inter use permit for grading. Overall, within the 75 foot setback,

140
00:14:32,400 --> 00:14:32,400
they're cutting roughly 547 cubic yards and filling just over 200 cubic yards of fill.

141
00:14:39,640 --> 00:14:39,640
it results in a net reduction of 339 cubic yards from the area,

142
00:14:44,100 --> 00:14:44,100
which is good as it promotes better 100 year flood storage for the area.

143
00:14:51,760 --> 00:14:51,760
it does trigger our interim use permit for the amount of grading for the site.

144
00:14:58,275 --> 00:15:01,140
highlighted and summarized in your packet, but I just wanted to touch base on a handful of

145
00:15:03,700 --> 00:15:07,120
comments from other government agencies in the public that we've received. The orono pd did submit email with

146
00:15:09,700 --> 00:15:12,680
questions regarding accessibility and enforcement of the site. I did also include hennepin county's response to those questions,

147
00:15:15,820 --> 00:15:17,520
so that's available to you. Dnr provided a letter of support for that vacation.

148
00:15:20,640 --> 00:15:23,740
they also provided an email from the area hydrologist regarding improvements with extent to

149
00:15:27,100 --> 00:15:27,100
those improvements within the ordinary high water level within the fishing piers here,

150
00:15:33,640 --> 00:15:33,640
specifically, they are proposed to butt into the lake beyond the existing shoreline.

151
00:15:40,210 --> 00:15:40,210
the dnr noted that they would have to go

152
00:15:45,500 --> 00:15:47,060
through their permitting process and potentially some site amendments maybe pulling those back to the shoreline,

153
00:15:50,620 --> 00:15:50,620
existing edge of shoreline or something to that effect may be necessary.

154
00:15:54,640 --> 00:15:58,225
the applicants still working through the dnr permitting process. Minnehaha creek submitted a letter included in your packet that

155
00:16:02,360 --> 00:16:02,360
notes the project regarding the wetland requirements,

156
00:16:06,470 --> 00:16:09,330
stormwater and shoreline protections as well. Following minnehaha creek watershed district's comments,

157
00:16:12,310 --> 00:16:14,550
city staff is recommending to incorporate a natural shoreline around the parcel as much as possible,

158
00:16:18,230 --> 00:16:22,050
but not to limit the use of access for the public. Regarding the wetland, there is

159
00:16:24,990 --> 00:16:24,990
a potential wetland shown along the western lake shore side of the property.

160
00:16:29,370 --> 00:16:32,970
the applicant and minnehaha creek indicated that this is likely a wetland not protected by the wetland conservation act,

161
00:16:36,600 --> 00:16:39,470
so it's considered a no loss wetland. A determination is required, however.

162
00:16:42,255 --> 00:16:42,255
if that determination finds that this does qualify under the wetland protection act,

163
00:16:48,230 --> 00:16:51,130
then additional approvals and public hearings may be required as that may trigger an alteration to a wetland.

164
00:16:54,480 --> 00:16:54,480
a condition in front of you tonight as proposed is that a notice of decision

165
00:16:59,770 --> 00:17:01,570
from the watershed must be submitted to the city before the application can proceed to the city council,

166
00:17:05,050 --> 00:17:05,050
just to verify all public hearings are handled before this goes to the city council.

167
00:17:10,025 --> 00:17:10,025
>> lmcd is also involved in the process of reviewing the boat.

168
00:17:14,210 --> 00:17:17,825
they are in the process of reviewing the boat access and launch and the new docks. Comments may be forthcoming from them as they're work through their permitting process.

169
00:17:22,190 --> 00:17:25,895
then the city has received public comments on this application as well. Highlighted in your packet under, I believe,

170
00:17:28,130 --> 00:17:31,940
the three different exhibits from different entities that have submitted, but highlighted as concerns with commercial barge activity,

171
00:17:35,375 --> 00:17:38,285
safety concerns with industrial machines on the site. Preservation of natural buffers, minimize infrastructure,

172
00:17:42,050 --> 00:17:42,050
address trash concerns on the site to maintain public access to the lake,

173
00:17:48,485 --> 00:17:48,485
or high-level summary comments from the comments that were submitted.

174
00:17:54,760 --> 00:17:56,855
in front of you tonight, staff has prepared a few discussion questions and then our recommendations as well.

175
00:18:01,490 --> 00:18:03,650
just for the discussion questions, does the commission have any concerns with the proposed improvements on the site?

176
00:18:08,390 --> 00:18:08,390
are there any concerns with the application related to use and enforcement on the site?

177
00:18:13,685 --> 00:18:16,460
the planning commission should request additional testimony from the applicant regarding the parking demands on the site,

178
00:18:19,295 --> 00:18:22,160
and then the commission should review the materials about how the site may impact abutting residential areas,

179
00:18:26,870 --> 00:18:28,400
including landscaping, lighting, and ask for additional testimony there as you discuss.

180
00:18:31,940 --> 00:18:35,915
with that, staff is recommending approval of the application, conditioned on hennepin county

181
00:18:37,880 --> 00:18:41,750
obtaining all necessary permits from other government agencies, a notice of decision from minnehaha creek to

182
00:18:44,300 --> 00:18:47,375
address wetland regulations before this moves to city council. Then efforts should be made to incorporate a natural shoreline around the property where

183
00:18:51,200 --> 00:18:51,200
possible as to not limit the use for the public.

184
00:18:56,200 --> 00:18:56,200
that's the really high-level 10,000-foot view of this project.

185
00:19:01,565 --> 00:19:03,080
I have a lot of information. I'd be happy to put up on the screen, answer or discuss,

186
00:19:06,230 --> 00:19:08,540
but the applicant is here tonight as well, if you have any questions of them.

187
00:19:11,585 --> 00:19:11,585
with that, I'm available for questions.

188
00:19:16,120 --> 00:19:19,870
>> thank you. Any questions for staff? >> I have a few.

189
00:19:21,900 --> 00:19:23,060
>> yes. >> can you clarify the underlying impetus behind the project?

190
00:19:27,035 --> 00:19:30,630
is it driven by the county? >>yes. >> adding industrial use.

191
00:19:33,175 --> 00:19:35,580
that's one of the big changes. With the barge activity?

192
00:19:37,595 --> 00:19:41,150
>> I wouldn't say that they're adding an industrial use. I think comments that we're hearing and questions are

193
00:19:45,035 --> 00:19:45,035
just about the current state of industrial and commercial activity on the site.

194
00:19:49,760 --> 00:19:49,760
earlier versions of this site did have a barge access,

195
00:19:54,680 --> 00:19:57,770
or they called it a vertical lift element or improvement to this site through conversations and comment letters,

196
00:20:02,060 --> 00:20:04,700
that element has been removed from the site. That element of a barge lift or

197
00:20:06,920 --> 00:20:06,920
a vertical access lift is no longer proposed or as part of this project.

198
00:20:11,630 --> 00:20:11,630
>> then, are you privy to information regarding how the county determined

199
00:20:19,385 --> 00:20:19,385
that this is their priority for making some of these changes to

200
00:20:24,080 --> 00:20:24,080
allow for these different types of access?

201
00:20:29,030 --> 00:20:29,030
>> I think that would be a question for the county.

202
00:20:34,180 --> 00:20:34,180
>> then I'm also curious,

203
00:20:40,630 --> 00:20:40,630
given the amount of feedback received and the fact that there,

204
00:20:48,140 --> 00:20:51,395
is still a question around protected wetlands. I just want to clarify that instead

205
00:20:57,890 --> 00:20:57,890
of saying we might need additional approvals to get around protected wetlands,

206
00:21:04,175 --> 00:21:04,175
we actually may need to rethink the project or question if

207
00:21:08,960 --> 00:21:08,960
some of those wetlands are found to be protected.

208
00:21:13,745 --> 00:21:15,785
but I guess my question is, if staff is recommending approval,

209
00:21:18,845 --> 00:21:18,845
help me understand where that's coming from.

210
00:21:24,845 --> 00:21:24,845
>> when you open up and look at our wetlands map layer,

211
00:21:30,395 --> 00:21:32,870
which indicates an estimation of where wetlands are based on topography and historic information,

212
00:21:36,350 --> 00:21:40,175
it does indicate a wetland on the western side of this property. That being said, there is a long documented history of

213
00:21:44,960 --> 00:21:44,960
this site being man-made and created in the 1960s on fill.

214
00:21:50,210 --> 00:21:50,210
with that, and I'm not necessarily an expert on wetland conservation act and wca,

215
00:21:56,150 --> 00:21:57,635
that comes from the watershed, but between the hennepin county and minnehaha creek conversations.

216
00:22:02,975 --> 00:22:02,975
my understanding is because that is a man-made created area,

217
00:22:07,820 --> 00:22:10,460
and the wetland identified on there is from this man-made area and will most likely count as a no loss,

218
00:22:14,195 --> 00:22:17,600
as it's a wetland that's not protected under the wetland conservation act because it's a man-made area.

219
00:22:21,290 --> 00:22:24,380
I'll let the hennepin county speak to this more, but it wouldn't be regulated under minnehaha creek,

220
00:22:26,765 --> 00:22:30,065
and it wouldn't be protected under the wetland conservation act. That being said, hennepin county does need to go through

221
00:22:34,505 --> 00:22:34,505
the process with minnehaha creek to submit that application and get that determination.

222
00:22:39,485 --> 00:22:39,485
that process hasn't been completed yet through minnehaha creek.

223
00:22:46,610 --> 00:22:46,610
that's why minnehaha creek felt fairly comfortable or confident,

224
00:22:51,500 --> 00:22:55,235
as well as hennepin county, that this most likely because it's a man-made area will not count under the wac of protections.

225
00:22:58,505 --> 00:22:58,505
however, there is a chance because they haven't finished that process.

226
00:23:03,275 --> 00:23:07,115
they won't give that definitive answer, and neither hennepin county until that's completed. I just wanted to bring that to the attention.

227
00:23:08,780 --> 00:23:08,780
>> sure. Thank you. Given that open question and some of the other,

228
00:23:14,390 --> 00:23:17,705
fairly significant feedback that we've received, my question is around how staff got to the recommending approval.

229
00:23:27,100 --> 00:23:30,950
>> with the information that we have based on the submittal and on the information from minnehaha creek,

230
00:23:34,700 --> 00:23:37,370
we believe that that wetland most likely will be a no loss meaning and won't count [overlapping].

231
00:23:40,100 --> 00:23:43,270
>> aside on the wetland, as a point of process, I guess.

232
00:23:46,775 --> 00:23:46,775
>> included in your packet is one of the early exhibits is

233
00:23:51,710 --> 00:23:51,710
governing regulations where staff did the analysis on our practical difficulty standards,

234
00:23:57,110 --> 00:23:59,840
our cup standards, and our interim use standards. Through those standards with the governing regulations put forth by our city code,

235
00:24:04,640 --> 00:24:04,640
staff found that those standards are met for this project.

236
00:24:08,870 --> 00:24:11,290
>> thank you. >> yes. >> any other questions for staff?

237
00:24:15,070 --> 00:24:15,070
>> I have a couple. These are going to be in a random order.

238
00:24:21,785 --> 00:24:24,485
the met console generator. >> yes. >> can you just high level explain what that function is.

239
00:24:27,170 --> 00:24:30,860
[laughter]. >> I believe it supports the sewer.

240
00:24:33,650 --> 00:24:37,480
let me try and get to an aerial here. This right here. Right away.

241
00:24:41,360 --> 00:24:41,360
that generator helps power and support the sewer infrastructure in the area.

242
00:24:46,640 --> 00:24:49,130
>> that's within the city right away. >> yes.

243
00:24:53,050 --> 00:24:53,050
>> hard cover. Permeable surfaces.

244
00:24:57,320 --> 00:24:57,320
you had a nice slide up there with it.

245
00:25:02,320 --> 00:25:02,320
the existing site is 70% somewhere in there.

246
00:25:07,040 --> 00:25:07,910
>> road cover. >> proposed is 79%.

247
00:25:11,980 --> 00:25:15,380
a big portion of this is going to be permeable. >> yes.

248
00:25:16,475 --> 00:25:16,475
>> remind me again, the credit we're allowed to give for permeable versus [overlapping].

249
00:25:22,850 --> 00:25:23,750
>> 100 square feet. >> 100 square feet.

250
00:25:29,450 --> 00:25:31,055
>> by our definition of hardcover, this will increase from 70-79.

251
00:25:34,175 --> 00:25:34,175
I did call out the difference in that this isn't permeable pavers.

252
00:25:42,790 --> 00:25:46,640
if you give me a minute, I can pull up examples of what they're proposing, but it is a loose grid system in all the parking space areas,

253
00:25:54,920 --> 00:25:54,920
and it's a function of their storm water management of the site that they're hoping to

254
00:25:59,770 --> 00:25:59,770
improve by allowing better filtration and capture more storage of water.

255
00:26:05,320 --> 00:26:08,350
I'll let the hennepin county or the applicants speak to their storm water management plan and how that relates to the hard cover.

256
00:26:12,045 --> 00:26:12,045
>> thank you for the clarity. I feel like that's somewhat misleading to show a

257
00:26:17,000 --> 00:26:17,000
22,000 square feet decrease when it's actually increasing.

258
00:26:24,550 --> 00:26:27,560
but I'm understand that correctly. The site's increasing in [overlapping].

259
00:26:29,720 --> 00:26:29,720
>> the site is increasing from 70% hardcover to 79% hardcover.

260
00:26:33,935 --> 00:26:33,935
>> got it. Do you

261
00:26:41,710 --> 00:26:41,710
feel like the application is complete without the wetland delineation?

262
00:26:47,470 --> 00:26:47,470
>> I feel working with hennepin county and neighboring government agency here,

263
00:26:53,360 --> 00:26:56,720
they have submitted enough information for it to be deemed complete outside of that wetland standard,

264
00:27:00,290 --> 00:27:02,810
which is something that has come up as we've been reviewing the project alongside minnehaha creek?

265
00:27:06,700 --> 00:27:09,605
>> timeline january 20th. The city has to make a decision or planning commission has to make a decision by january?

266
00:27:13,400 --> 00:27:17,090
>> as of right now, the city council has to make a decision by january 20th. That is the deadline for the 120-day.

267
00:27:19,530 --> 00:27:19,530
that being said, that's the applicant can extend that deadline if they see fit,

268
00:27:24,970 --> 00:27:27,700
or if they're working through this project. But that is the 120-day extension would be city council acting by that time.

269
00:27:41,350 --> 00:27:45,170
>> that's all I have right now. >> thank you. Anyone else? >> mr. Mayor.

270
00:27:46,175 --> 00:27:49,445
>> yes. >> just one question. I was trying to mind it. Maybe I missed the trailer vehicle counts, propose versus existing.

271
00:28:04,450 --> 00:28:08,225
>> I'm sure the applicant could speak to this as well. Currently, the site, I believe,

272
00:28:11,030 --> 00:28:14,120
has roughly 67 parking, but 48 of them are standard.

273
00:28:17,345 --> 00:28:17,345
that being said, I believe a lot of the parking that abuts north shore.

274
00:28:23,690 --> 00:28:26,900
people use the grass area for trailer parking, but counting it has its constructed.

275
00:28:30,545 --> 00:28:32,510
it is 48 standard. As it's proposed, they have I believe, 64 parking.

276
00:28:38,600 --> 00:28:38,600
is what's proposed on the site with majority of them being trailered, parking.

277
00:28:45,635 --> 00:28:47,165
I believe I have it in my memo, the breakdown, specifically on parking.

278
00:28:49,745 --> 00:28:53,615
but I can get you those numbers as well. Here,64 total stalls, 18 of them will be standard parking,

279
00:28:58,250 --> 00:29:00,200
five will be handicaps, and 41 will be boat and trailer.

280
00:29:03,880 --> 00:29:06,395
>> forty one boat and trailer. That's is it also 41 right now?

281
00:29:10,190 --> 00:29:10,190
>> right now, there is 48 standard.

282
00:29:14,345 --> 00:29:17,840
there's 14 boat and trailer right now currently. >> technically.

283
00:29:18,725 --> 00:29:21,455
>> technically, by the improvement? There's 14 boat and trailer as it exists today,

284
00:29:24,830 --> 00:29:24,830
and they're proposing 41 under the new proposed site plan.

285
00:29:29,045 --> 00:29:32,800
>> perfect. Thank you. Go ahead. >> any other questions?

286
00:29:35,195 --> 00:29:39,155
>> just quickly, and I don't know if you have this or if this is for the applicant. Has there been any analysis of the current traffic counts and patterns on the site?

287
00:29:45,590 --> 00:29:47,750
submitted with it, or? >> the applicant submitted a maneuverability of the site,

288
00:29:52,700 --> 00:29:54,725
but actual traffic counts I do not have. That's something you can ask of the applicant.

289
00:29:57,460 --> 00:29:57,460
>> thank you. I was just going to follow-up on the chair's question about

290
00:30:03,170 --> 00:30:03,170
the amount of permeable hard cover that we give credit to.

291
00:30:08,225 --> 00:30:08,225
is that maximum threshold informed by

292
00:30:13,115 --> 00:30:13,115
how realistically effective permeable hard cover is compared to no hard cover at all?

293
00:30:20,060 --> 00:30:22,685
do we think that maximum is adequate in this. >> for a 100 square feet of permeable.

294
00:30:25,340 --> 00:30:25,340
permeable hardcover is something that we haven't give credit to in the past,

295
00:30:29,750 --> 00:30:31,835
because it takes maintenance. It takes long term maintenance and tracking to ensure that it stays permeable.

296
00:30:37,910 --> 00:30:40,070
that being said with this project, I believe hennepin county would like to speak to the permeability

297
00:30:43,550 --> 00:30:47,210
of their project since it is part of their storm water elements, but in the past,

298
00:30:48,695 --> 00:30:51,800
our city code hasn't identified or given credit beyond 100 square feet of permeable. By definition.

299
00:30:56,500 --> 00:31:00,395
>> any other questions or we can hear from the applicant? >> just one quick question.

300
00:31:02,780 --> 00:31:04,760
just to understand the process. If we approve it, deny it,

301
00:31:08,075 --> 00:31:10,760
table it, no matter what we vote on it, it has to go to the city council because of the open items.

302
00:31:15,940 --> 00:31:15,940
without government agencies, is that correct?

303
00:31:20,230 --> 00:31:20,230
>> it needs to go to city council because of the deadline associated with the project.

304
00:31:26,060 --> 00:31:28,760
that being said, that'd be a question for the applicant, if they'd be willing to extend that deadline to let it go

305
00:31:31,610 --> 00:31:34,850
through the process at your discretion. But we are required by state statute

306
00:31:38,600 --> 00:31:38,600
to act within certain number of days on land use applications.

307
00:31:42,635 --> 00:31:46,205
following that deadline, we have to act within 120 days, which puts us at january 20th.

308
00:31:48,290 --> 00:31:50,780
that the council needs to act by. Other government agencies have their own timing in their own processes.

309
00:31:55,640 --> 00:31:59,000
>> I apologize. I do have one other question.

310
00:32:00,335 --> 00:32:00,335
do we have anything in our code about light pollution near and close to lake?

311
00:32:09,760 --> 00:32:09,760
>> specifically, we talk about shoreline management,

312
00:32:15,860 --> 00:32:19,280
shoreline protections, and our comp plan, and our guiding principles and our impotence for creating for adopting our shoreline regulations,

313
00:32:24,860 --> 00:32:24,860
but there's no specific zoning ordinance that says, no pollution.

314
00:32:33,730 --> 00:32:37,670
>> it's coming up because on the plan when I was looking at it, there was an introduction of lights where the fisheries are,

315
00:32:40,445 --> 00:32:43,685
which is a high traffic waterway. >> light pollution. >> light pollution, which could potentially harm the species and nature there.

316
00:32:50,855 --> 00:32:52,790
>> regarding light pollution, we have a light ordinance about

317
00:32:55,955 --> 00:32:55,955
lighting brightness and how it's viewed on neighboring properties.

318
00:33:01,025 --> 00:33:04,865
but we don't necessarily have an ordinance about light pollution into the water. >> we don't have anything in the lake shore setback related [overlapping].

319
00:33:07,850 --> 00:33:10,730
>> light pollution into the water. >> light fixtures. >> not in the shore setback.

320
00:33:12,890 --> 00:33:16,610
we do have lighting standards for parking lots. We have lighting standards for how it impacts neighboring properties,

321
00:33:19,850 --> 00:33:19,850
but we don't have regarding as a lighting protection against the open water.

322
00:33:26,690 --> 00:33:28,480
>> thank you. >> yes. >> I just had a question regarding the regulation of the boat launch itself,

323
00:33:34,580 --> 00:33:37,400
and who is responsible in some of the counties documentation they submitted that they don't regulate.

324
00:33:43,990 --> 00:33:46,040
who's responsible? Can you answer that question or provide some direction there?

325
00:33:48,755 --> 00:33:48,755
>> it probably more speaks to what we're trying to regulate.

326
00:33:53,855 --> 00:33:53,855
but the county owns and operates the site.

327
00:33:59,075 --> 00:34:02,540
regarding regulation and enforcement of the site, that would be a conversation of what you're trying to regulate or what you're trying

328
00:34:06,560 --> 00:34:06,560
to enforce on who and what would step in to enforce that.

329
00:34:15,280 --> 00:34:17,165
>> thank you. >> any further questions?

330
00:34:19,670 --> 00:34:22,210
if the applicant is here and wish to speak, please approach the podium.

331
00:34:23,750 --> 00:34:26,145
state your name and address for the record, please. >> hello, guy, project architect with

332
00:34:29,310 --> 00:34:29,310
the hennepin county and address is government center, downtown.

333
00:34:40,160 --> 00:34:40,160
>> yes, so I just have a very quick and short presentation to give you,

334
00:34:45,375 --> 00:34:48,630
just to give you a high level understanding of the impetus of where this project is coming from.

335
00:34:51,750 --> 00:34:51,750
I think what occurred was that the county identified that

336
00:34:56,970 --> 00:34:56,970
the location in the project or the current site is worn.

337
00:35:04,065 --> 00:35:06,285
it's just worn weather old. We either need to do something,

338
00:35:08,370 --> 00:35:08,370
either replacing the vituminous asphalt or do something else,

339
00:35:12,480 --> 00:35:12,480
and we decided to go bigger and modernize this.

340
00:35:16,740 --> 00:35:18,990
from the list of deficiencies, there's no dedicated aquatic invasive species decontamination facility.

341
00:35:24,210 --> 00:35:27,090
there's no traffic flow. Ramp that's optimized for modern vehicles and trailers.

342
00:35:32,355 --> 00:35:36,210
they've gotten bigger over time, since the 1960s. There's poor or non-ada accessible shore fishing experience.

343
00:35:41,550 --> 00:35:41,550
the asphalt is worn and the stormwater system is deteriorated.

344
00:35:47,055 --> 00:35:47,055
then the limited accessibility for recreational boaters with disability.

345
00:35:52,875 --> 00:35:52,875
those were the big problems that we saw with the site currently as it stands.

346
00:35:57,465 --> 00:36:01,245
next slide. Our solution is, find a place for a dedicated space for aquatic invasive species prevention.

347
00:36:06,390 --> 00:36:09,690
actions and permanent decontamination facility. That's what you see in number 1,

348
00:36:11,370 --> 00:36:14,685
which is towards the entrance and exit. The site is actually a one way.

349
00:36:16,815 --> 00:36:16,815
it's a right in, and then counterclockwise movement.

350
00:36:21,855 --> 00:36:21,855
then naturally, the exit would also be going on the right side along that,

351
00:36:28,590 --> 00:36:28,590
and the decon station is pretty good there.

352
00:36:32,970 --> 00:36:32,970
optimized traffic flow and parking for larger vehicles and trailers.

353
00:36:37,215 --> 00:36:37,215
like I said, 1960s cars, boats, little smaller.

354
00:36:42,180 --> 00:36:42,180
the trailer parking stalls are actually larger and wider also.

355
00:36:51,710 --> 00:36:51,710
number 3 is wider ramp standard for lake minnetonka with straight backing.

356
00:36:58,230 --> 00:37:00,765
if we go back to the other slide, we can tell that it takes corner backing to get into the ramp right now,

357
00:37:06,105 --> 00:37:06,105
which is not an ideal way of accessing the ramp.

358
00:37:10,935 --> 00:37:13,440
with this, we're going to fix that. There's plenty of space to do just a straight backing maneuver.

359
00:37:17,790 --> 00:37:17,790
then number 4 is enhanced and ada accessible shore fishing experience.

360
00:37:23,580 --> 00:37:23,580
I think that was a pretty big one right now where there's rip rap,

361
00:37:27,600 --> 00:37:27,600
and there's no way for wheelchairs or crutches or walkers

362
00:37:32,910 --> 00:37:32,910
or anything of that nature to enjoy the fishing in that area.

363
00:37:38,625 --> 00:37:42,165
we plan to remedy that. Then five is a new grid pervious parking spaces and stormwater management.

364
00:37:52,670 --> 00:37:55,035
imagine like a milk crate. It's high density poly at the lane.

365
00:37:57,540 --> 00:37:59,820
you throw some gravel and there rocks in there, and water just percolates through it.

366
00:38:02,085 --> 00:38:02,085
I did identify or see that the system does have a long lifespan,

367
00:38:07,860 --> 00:38:07,860
but it's not indefinite because stilt might get trapped under there,

368
00:38:12,915 --> 00:38:12,915
which might cause it to not be permeable over time.

369
00:38:17,265 --> 00:38:18,885
but I think with the county, what we would most likely do or insist on

370
00:38:22,350 --> 00:38:26,040
doing is having it tested at the 15 year interval, and then every five years after that,

371
00:38:28,155 --> 00:38:28,155
just to ensure that the system is working properly.

372
00:38:32,160 --> 00:38:35,205
that's to everybody's best interest. Six is access improvements,

373
00:38:37,680 --> 00:38:40,800
assisting non-motorized watercraft such as kayaks, canoes, and paddle boards.

374
00:38:43,970 --> 00:38:43,970
the parking for the non-motorized watercraft is just below number 6 there.

375
00:38:52,950 --> 00:38:52,950
there is an area that is a little better for

376
00:38:57,945 --> 00:38:57,945
people to pull their water crafts into the launch area,

377
00:39:03,705 --> 00:39:03,705
which is also steps adjacent to the dock.

378
00:39:12,430 --> 00:39:15,840
being able to just access that physically getting your water craft or one's water craft there it's going to be an improvement.

379
00:39:21,895 --> 00:39:25,730
then seven is wheelchair ramp and lift. This is a very special thing.

380
00:39:28,460 --> 00:39:32,220
during the public meetings that we had, we had a non-profit organization called out

381
00:39:35,370 --> 00:39:39,240
wheelchairs and wallis out of south dakota approach us. What they've been doing out there is that they've identified that the use of

382
00:39:45,030 --> 00:39:45,030
their waters was being prevented by persons with disabilities,

383
00:39:52,005 --> 00:39:52,005
somebody who's wheelchair confined or has a temporary disability,

384
00:39:57,420 --> 00:39:57,420
being able to get on the boat to get onto the lake.

385
00:40:02,480 --> 00:40:02,480
their solution, which is a pretty good one is a ramp where the wheelchair would roll up,

386
00:40:09,345 --> 00:40:11,220
and then there is a lift. That's practically one of those swimming pool lifts that they have.

387
00:40:17,145 --> 00:40:17,145
the person on the wheelchair would be lifted onto the boat,

388
00:40:21,315 --> 00:40:24,960
and then the boat would launch on the ramp. That's why it's adjacent to the ramp.

389
00:40:27,360 --> 00:40:27,360
there. Yes, and I think that would be the first of its kind on lake minnetonka.

390
00:40:34,875 --> 00:40:37,170
we'll see how that one goes. But, next slide.

391
00:40:40,400 --> 00:40:40,400
these are the timeline schedules and milestones today.

392
00:40:44,985 --> 00:40:48,735
we have the planning commission meeting. City council meeting. I got really aggressive with that schedule and put it on the eighth.

393
00:40:52,080 --> 00:40:55,740
if it goes to january, totally understand. But I think the big overarching goal is to get the construction document started in

394
00:41:03,780 --> 00:41:03,780
2026 and then have it go out for bidding and procurement in the second quarter.

395
00:41:11,100 --> 00:41:12,720
then the third quarter would be the construction commencement with the caveat that construction will be done in phases,

396
00:41:18,210 --> 00:41:20,820
and we prioritize maintaining public access during the busiest portion of the fishing and boating season.

397
00:41:23,715 --> 00:41:23,715
we don't want anybody to miss out on a good summer.

398
00:41:29,690 --> 00:41:32,460
I can entertain all of the other questions, too, if you can just remind me.

399
00:41:34,890 --> 00:41:34,890
>> we can remind you. Any questions for the applicant?

400
00:41:39,330 --> 00:41:42,410
>> I guess you. >> go ahead. >> just on the question I had asked, our staff,

401
00:41:45,630 --> 00:41:49,230
would like to hear from your mouth just how you guys feel about the regulation of the specifically I'll say,

402
00:41:54,060 --> 00:41:55,980
commercial use of the site. [overlapping] regulation of that.

403
00:41:58,665 --> 00:41:58,665
>> yes. From the county's point of view is,

404
00:42:02,750 --> 00:42:02,750
we don't have a policy in place,

405
00:42:07,095 --> 00:42:09,750
and we're not seeing anything from the state or from the city in terms of policy that would prevent that.

406
00:42:13,530 --> 00:42:13,530
I think that if there was a written policy that we could, I guess,

407
00:42:20,730 --> 00:42:23,055
reference and put on a sign, and it is the policy,

408
00:42:25,080 --> 00:42:28,080
and there is some rules or laws in the books. We wouldn't be opposed to that,

409
00:42:30,075 --> 00:42:32,850
and that's something that could occur in the future. But from our standpoint,

410
00:42:34,275 --> 00:42:37,200
it's a policy issue. The way that the site has operated before since 1960s,

411
00:42:41,460 --> 00:42:44,595
it's been public. It's been open. I don't think that the county has any desire to close it

412
00:42:50,160 --> 00:42:50,160
off to any other users that are currently using it right now.

413
00:42:56,715 --> 00:43:00,630
I will say that we took off the vertical lift access because that could be construed as an expansion of the use.

414
00:43:07,590 --> 00:43:10,755
we acknowledge that and we took it off. Now big picture on

415
00:43:13,850 --> 00:43:13,850
this site now is that it's going to operate the same way that it's operated before.

416
00:43:19,175 --> 00:43:23,150
it's going to be signed properly. If people aren't parking correctly. We'll have signs that make it so that the nopd can enforce that.

417
00:43:29,595 --> 00:43:29,595
then in terms of enforcement from the hennepin county sheriff's office,

418
00:43:34,455 --> 00:43:38,040
the sheriff's office will be enforcing the water side of things. We do have a limit of 20 minutes for people using the launch.

419
00:43:42,405 --> 00:43:45,945
they can't just sit idly and just stage there. That's our approach.

420
00:43:48,750 --> 00:43:50,025
>> thank you. >> is the purpose of the straight backing focused

421
00:43:53,955 --> 00:43:53,955
on larger and possibly industrial use, or is that?

422
00:43:58,695 --> 00:44:01,245
>> no. The purpose is that, I've backed boat trailers,

423
00:44:03,600 --> 00:44:06,585
and I'm not really good at that. It's more of a recreational user focus item.

424
00:44:11,025 --> 00:44:13,470
it's more consistent with what we're seeing at the other boat launches around the lake, too.

425
00:44:16,260 --> 00:44:16,260
>> are there other launches around the lake that are equipped for more industrial use?

426
00:44:21,405 --> 00:44:21,405
>> that, I don't know. I can't understand.

427
00:44:29,250 --> 00:44:29,250
>> rays bay or something that's closer to highways and not adjacent to residential areas.

428
00:44:34,305 --> 00:44:37,470
>> there possibly is, yes. >> then, are you pursuing these same updates or

429
00:44:41,670 --> 00:44:41,670
changes at other accesses around the lake,

430
00:44:45,975 --> 00:44:49,695
including those adjacent to residential areas? >> the county has another access on the lake,

431
00:44:52,380 --> 00:44:54,120
and that's spring park. That's also where the sheriff's office out of.

432
00:44:59,705 --> 00:44:59,705
but I don't think we have any other funding,

433
00:45:07,950 --> 00:45:09,330
really, in a way. >> then, my other question is around the waste receptacle management plan.

434
00:45:17,710 --> 00:45:17,710
the documentation says the county will encourage users to pack it in and pack it out.

435
00:45:23,485 --> 00:45:23,485
a dumpster will not be provided due to the gross misuse of the existing dumpster.

436
00:45:28,995 --> 00:45:32,910
waste and recycling receptacles will be provided in the fishing area. I'm wondering if this is a standard elsewhere and how that's working,

437
00:45:36,750 --> 00:45:36,750
in particular, if there is misuse of the current waste receptacles.

438
00:45:41,640 --> 00:45:45,210
how can we be assured that there won't be waste sitting around this neighborhood?

439
00:45:54,410 --> 00:45:58,185
>> I think what we're doing is we're trying something different currently it's not working.

440
00:46:01,260 --> 00:46:03,765
that dumpster is being grossly misused. It's over filled with stuff that's not even really related to the boat launch.

441
00:46:09,990 --> 00:46:09,990
do you know how often it's being emptied today?

442
00:46:20,720 --> 00:46:23,850
>> I'm chris kenzel. I'm the l water supervisor, hennepin county, address 625 fourth avenue, south in minneapolis.

443
00:46:27,600 --> 00:46:30,615
my staff oversee management of the site. The receptacles are emptied twice per week during the boating season.

444
00:46:35,205 --> 00:46:37,410
that's on mondays and fridays. Proceeding and following weekends.

445
00:46:40,530 --> 00:46:42,660
in that, too, we have a sentence to serve crew that will also do landscaping management as well.

446
00:46:45,060 --> 00:46:48,375
they'll mold the site, maintain it as well. Then the base removal is done by a company we contract with directly.

447
00:46:52,320 --> 00:46:54,195
that will continue on this site, even with removal of the dumpster and just with the waste receptacles.

448
00:46:57,840 --> 00:46:57,840
>> can you speak to how you would characterize the misuse of the dumpster?

449
00:47:04,740 --> 00:47:08,265
>> sure. What we've seen is mostly household waste. When I speak to the misuse only,

450
00:47:10,335 --> 00:47:13,755
we do certainly see a lot of bottle waste in that trash as well. What we've typically seen is if we emptied it,

451
00:47:16,155 --> 00:47:17,520
like I said on mondays and fridays, by saturday mornings and tuesday mornings, it's often full again.

452
00:47:20,940 --> 00:47:23,625
we have been trying to better track that, and we have looked at doing drop offs even between that twice a week period,

453
00:47:28,260 --> 00:47:31,200
especially if we have household waste that's overflowing, like, we've had chairs, gas tanks,

454
00:47:34,020 --> 00:47:37,830
a lot of other things like that. If we have a need to remove it, we do remove it at that time. We haven't identified the person or persons that are doing it,

455
00:47:40,980 --> 00:47:44,445
per se, but we just try to keep it [inaudible]. >> you have or have not? >> we have not. >>you have not. Is there signage related to penalties for

456
00:47:49,560 --> 00:47:49,560
dumping household or other non voter related refuse?

457
00:47:56,865 --> 00:48:00,000
>> not to my knowledge, no. >> do you think that might be helpful? >> it may be helpful, yes.

458
00:48:01,155 --> 00:48:01,155
>> do you think it's reasonable to expect people to not have

459
00:48:05,325 --> 00:48:05,325
any waste coming off of the boat after a day of boating?

460
00:48:11,205 --> 00:48:14,250
>> the way we manage this is really similar to as this guy outlined how other ecstasies manage this too.

461
00:48:17,985 --> 00:48:21,570
it's consistent with this county zero waste plan, which is to really limit the amount of waste that we generate,

462
00:48:23,745 --> 00:48:25,665
both on this site and off of it. I do think it's reasonable not to provide this.

463
00:48:28,845 --> 00:48:32,370
we certainly are providing it to our shoreline fishermen that are there, but for those that use this access,

464
00:48:34,410 --> 00:48:37,830
and I've used many other ecstasies across other lakes, too, not necessarily minnetonka,

465
00:48:39,435 --> 00:48:42,600
I'm used to that as well. That if I do generate any waste on a lake, that I'm taking it with me and throwing it away, wherever I'm going.

466
00:48:45,795 --> 00:48:48,795
>> my concern would just be that there would be, if you have small receptacles by the shoreline fishing and you take away the dumpster,

467
00:48:54,870 --> 00:48:54,870
that anyone exiting a boat that has take out

468
00:48:59,460 --> 00:48:59,460
containers or other things that they want to get rid of and not

469
00:49:04,395 --> 00:49:04,395
pack back in their vehicle with them that those small receptacles are going to get

470
00:49:09,210 --> 00:49:09,210
over filled very quickly and not be able to be used for the intended purpose,

471
00:49:14,130 --> 00:49:15,795
which is to prevent littering, especially littering or waste falling into the leak.

472
00:49:19,875 --> 00:49:22,230
>> yes, that's certainly on our radar, and what could happen. That's an area of the plan that we're willing to change once we institute it to.

473
00:49:26,400 --> 00:49:29,475
for example, we plan to have both recycling and trash. If we find ones getting over used,

474
00:49:30,840 --> 00:49:34,545
for example, we have a lot of people recycling. We can sign that better as well. If we do find certainly that the dumpster is needed,

475
00:49:37,695 --> 00:49:40,650
either through our work on the site or through advocation we have through our partners, we're willing to add it back to this site, too.

476
00:49:42,855 --> 00:49:45,060
it was just something we wanted to try because we thought it was more consistent with how our axes are managed, including the spring park.

477
00:49:47,640 --> 00:49:50,760
>> that's what I was going to ask, it does work at others? >> yes. >> where you have some small receptacles,

478
00:49:53,325 --> 00:49:57,075
but no large dumpster. >> yes. At spring park, I can't speak specifically for that one per se.

479
00:49:59,595 --> 00:50:01,965
but at other areas that I've certainly gone to, I'm from chicago county myself.

480
00:50:03,690 --> 00:50:06,585
we do occasionally see those in those cases, too. Honestly, most of the time, there's nothing there.

481
00:50:08,880 --> 00:50:11,850
even the availability of those receptacles are special relative to a lot of the other accesses I've been to.

482
00:50:14,790 --> 00:50:18,570
typically, you have nothing there. >> if I can piggy back on that question.

483
00:50:21,880 --> 00:50:21,880
you mentioned that it's a test on this site to not have a dumpster.

484
00:50:26,335 --> 00:50:26,335
if this were to be approved and move forward and you realized that you need a dumpster,

485
00:50:30,430 --> 00:50:30,430
is there a spot on this plan that you would have an enclosure for a dumpster?

486
00:50:34,840 --> 00:50:34,840
>> we have that picnic area on the northwestern portion of the site where

487
00:50:38,980 --> 00:50:41,020
the vertical access formally was that provides ample space where we could provide a dumpster.

488
00:50:43,705 --> 00:50:45,835
we'll also have our signage in that area. To the previous point, we could also include signage there that would

489
00:50:48,700 --> 00:50:48,700
outline expectations that we have for trash management on site.

490
00:50:55,530 --> 00:50:58,885
>> commission kriegler, do you have more questions or if not, I have some I'll start with.

491
00:51:01,795 --> 00:51:01,795
thank you. I think that's all mine that pertain to the garbage.

492
00:51:07,120 --> 00:51:07,120
in the application, one of the reasons for

493
00:51:11,680 --> 00:51:11,680
this redesign you said was to promote safety on the site.

494
00:51:15,805 --> 00:51:18,220
what is currently unsafe about the site, and what does promoting safely mean?

495
00:51:20,755 --> 00:51:23,350
what in this new project is making it safer? >> what's the?

496
00:51:27,140 --> 00:51:29,760
>> that was in the application. That was one of the reasons for the application was to promote

497
00:51:33,240 --> 00:51:33,240
safety on the site and I'm curious what's unsafe about the site today.

498
00:51:38,215 --> 00:51:38,215
>> right now, the site is just not lit.

499
00:51:42,970 --> 00:51:42,970
there's one pole that's by by the boat ramp, and then there's,

500
00:51:48,220 --> 00:51:48,220
I think, one light on county road and that's the only lighting that's on site.

501
00:51:54,160 --> 00:51:54,160
I think that one of the things that we want to

502
00:51:58,180 --> 00:51:58,180
promote in terms of safety is upgrading the lighting.

503
00:52:02,200 --> 00:52:02,200
technically, that was also the impetus for the vertical access lit.

504
00:52:07,060 --> 00:52:11,050
or the vertical access point is that we identified that there are recreational users who get priority on the site,

505
00:52:15,010 --> 00:52:17,110
but there are also other users, and those two users can't exist at the same time in the same place.

506
00:52:21,700 --> 00:52:25,210
if we look back at the vertical access point that we've taken out the reasoning for that was

507
00:52:28,810 --> 00:52:28,810
that we just left spaces for both user groups to use it in a safer manner,

508
00:52:35,905 --> 00:52:38,290
where they're not on top of each other. Currently, they are on top of each other,

509
00:52:40,705 --> 00:52:43,405
and the way that it's going to be going right now, unless there's a policy change,

510
00:52:46,290 --> 00:52:49,690
we assume that's going to occur. Between the lighting and the vertical access point and

511
00:52:53,410 --> 00:52:57,160
then also the accessibility is a safety thing. We don't want anybody who is not able to go fishing,

512
00:53:01,360 --> 00:53:01,360
try to attempt to go on trap rock and hurt themself further.

513
00:53:05,485 --> 00:53:05,485
we've actually seen and witnessed people getting hurt on that.

514
00:53:09,580 --> 00:53:09,580
having things that are accessible it just doesn't benefit,

515
00:53:13,915 --> 00:53:16,720
people who have disabilities, but it benefits everybody.

516
00:53:18,175 --> 00:53:20,200
it makes it safer for everybody. Then in terms of the site circulation,

517
00:53:24,040 --> 00:53:28,030
that's also a safety thing, too, having it be a one way, and then having it be pretty wide aisles,

518
00:53:31,300 --> 00:53:34,810
like, for a one way aisle, having it be 30 feet. That's pretty wide, because on a typical two way,

519
00:53:39,850 --> 00:53:43,630
parking access, it's 24 feet. We're giving more room, you know,

520
00:53:46,255 --> 00:53:46,255
more space to maneuver around the site,

521
00:53:50,260 --> 00:53:50,260
and hopes that it increases the safety for everyone.

522
00:53:54,940 --> 00:53:54,940
>> thank you. A question on the vacation of the city right ways.

523
00:54:01,480 --> 00:54:05,080
is it possible to have this existing use function without that vacation of the right ways?

524
00:54:09,190 --> 00:54:11,245
it this proposed plan. >> would be, I would think.

525
00:54:13,360 --> 00:54:16,855
but just being able to clean it up right now, when we're going through the redevelopment,

526
00:54:19,105 --> 00:54:19,105
I think would be a benefit to everybody.

527
00:54:24,210 --> 00:54:27,115
>> clarity on the parking. Existing, you have 14 boat trailer stalls and it says they're adding 27.

528
00:54:34,900 --> 00:54:34,900
that's a total of 41 trailer and both stalls, correct?

529
00:54:40,315 --> 00:54:43,885
>> correct. >> trailer and car stalls. >> vehicle and trailer stalls.

530
00:54:46,810 --> 00:54:48,745
but with the kabat, if you go back to the first slide,

531
00:54:51,010 --> 00:54:51,010
I learned that that area along the county road,

532
00:54:55,600 --> 00:54:58,435
that the trailers are in in that grass, it was designed as that.

533
00:55:00,145 --> 00:55:03,535
it was designed for the trailers to back up into the grass, hoping that it wouldn't get the county or reach the county road.

534
00:55:07,900 --> 00:55:07,900
I think saying that there's only 14 trailer spaces is technically speaking,

535
00:55:13,390 --> 00:55:17,140
the way that we see it, the way that we would identify it is true. But I think that if we read between the lines and seeing how it is right now,

536
00:55:22,000 --> 00:55:22,000
I would consider those trailer parking spaces also.

537
00:55:30,870 --> 00:55:34,375
>> explain to me the actual boat launch changes. It says wider ramp.

538
00:55:35,755 --> 00:55:35,755
is there a changing the angle of the ramp other than just widening it or what?

539
00:55:40,525 --> 00:55:42,865
>> yes. The angle of the ramp, I think clockwise a little bit.

540
00:55:46,600 --> 00:55:46,600
that was the constraint was the channel.

541
00:55:50,635 --> 00:55:54,340
we didn't want to get the ramp and the docks closed. >> it's more the departure angle or

542
00:55:56,080 --> 00:55:59,230
the actual angle of the ramp itself going into the water. >> that would, I don't think that would change.

543
00:56:02,245 --> 00:56:02,245
I mean, that's pretty standardized, I would assume.

544
00:56:15,180 --> 00:56:18,600
>> thank you. Any other questions? >> I'll go last. Anybody else?

545
00:56:22,645 --> 00:56:22,645
>> I might have some follow up questions after we get into deliberation.

546
00:56:26,905 --> 00:56:30,535
people talk and things before. I just had one question.

547
00:56:33,720 --> 00:56:37,060
in contrast, has the county considered any launch fees for

548
00:56:40,390 --> 00:56:44,350
hennepin county at launches just to supplement costs and things like that. I know that, for example,

549
00:56:46,780 --> 00:56:50,170
the state parks vehicle permit fees. >> sure. >> you think about rights to use things versus privileges versus

550
00:56:54,970 --> 00:56:54,970
licenses and and how that comes together when it comes to funding?

551
00:57:00,205 --> 00:57:03,460
>> yes, we haven't considered that no I don't think we will consider that that would defeat the purpose of a public access.

552
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:11,680
>> I guess humor me on that. [laughter] you have a state park and you have permit fees for that, wouldn't you?

553
00:57:16,090 --> 00:57:19,980
>> correct. >> defeat the purpose of a state park? >> no, I don't think that would defeat the purpose of a state park.

554
00:57:23,965 --> 00:57:23,965
because a state park has amenities such as camping,

555
00:57:28,750 --> 00:57:30,220
such as groom trails, such as things that would need more maintenance and upkeep.

556
00:57:34,345 --> 00:57:34,345
but even in a state park where there's a lake,

557
00:57:38,350 --> 00:57:40,645
there is public access to the lake. I think the dnr carves out that public access because

558
00:57:43,840 --> 00:57:43,840
public access to lakes are a very central thing to minnesotans.

559
00:57:48,070 --> 00:57:51,835
we have so many lakes, and if we start to, I guess, gatekeep it, we might run into a slippery slope on that.

560
00:57:55,915 --> 00:57:58,555
now, the minnesota state forest, I think, doesn't have any access fees.

561
00:58:00,925 --> 00:58:03,475
you can go, like, camping, wilderness, just remote out there,

562
00:58:05,425 --> 00:58:05,425
but there aren't that type of amenities that come with that.

563
00:58:09,715 --> 00:58:09,715
I don't think that, this site, personally, would,

564
00:58:16,060 --> 00:58:16,060
I guess, benefit from departure from the other sites on lake minnetonka,

565
00:58:23,005 --> 00:58:23,005
because what we're offering is nothing more than what the other sites are offering.

566
00:58:27,340 --> 00:58:30,160
it would be unfair to charge people only on this site exclusively if there are other sites,

567
00:58:35,305 --> 00:58:38,935
that aren't being charged. Then I think part of it, too, is that, the number of parking stalls that we have was a recommendation

568
00:58:43,420 --> 00:58:43,420
from the dnr in terms of how many acres of lake there is.

569
00:58:48,685 --> 00:58:50,425
I think they came down to, like, 700, trailer parking stalls.

570
00:58:53,575 --> 00:58:55,330
we're trying to do our part, and that's why we have the request to expand the setback so that we can,

571
00:59:01,735 --> 00:59:05,190
maintain that number of trailer parking. But going back to your question about,

572
00:59:08,635 --> 00:59:11,550
a fee to use it. I personally, I don't think the county would go for that,

573
00:59:17,650 --> 00:59:17,650
because, we view this as a public access.

574
00:59:21,880 --> 00:59:24,530
>> thanks. >> I've just got a quick question on the handicap ramp and lift.

575
00:59:31,900 --> 00:59:31,900
you've got one stall for handicap parking with trailer it looks like next to it?

576
00:59:36,865 --> 00:59:37,525
>> correct. >> however there's two handicap spots across.

577
00:59:41,110 --> 00:59:44,305
is there a reason they're spread out? I would think it'd be better to keep them closer to launch lift?

578
00:59:49,025 --> 00:59:51,225
>> with the launch lift, that's not every accessible stall user would be using that launch lift.

579
00:59:57,305 --> 01:00:00,865
because let's say, if I were somebody who, had an accessibility tag,

580
01:00:03,625 --> 01:00:06,205
had a boat and trailer, needed to park it, but I didn't need to use the ramp,

581
01:00:08,620 --> 01:00:11,710
that's a possibility, because I think they give out those tags to not just people who have,

582
01:00:14,680 --> 01:00:18,160
physical limitations, but, I think I'm sure that if you get old enough,

583
01:00:21,205 --> 01:00:23,530
they'll give you one because they're saying, well, we don't want you to walk too far.

584
01:00:27,840 --> 01:00:27,840
but the number of accessible stalls that we have, I think,

585
01:00:32,650 --> 01:00:32,650
is dictated by the amount or percentage of what is being provided.

586
01:00:38,110 --> 01:00:38,110
I think 5% of parking stalls need to be given,

587
01:00:44,170 --> 01:00:44,170
accessible consideration. Just put it that way.

588
01:00:54,480 --> 01:00:54,480
>> a few questions. First question,

589
01:00:58,790 --> 01:01:02,520
has there been any research into the traffic or any data that you can provide about how many boats are using this launch on average per day?

590
01:01:06,335 --> 01:01:10,180
I know the dnr records it, so I'm curious if you've put that together so we can understand what it looks like right now.

591
01:01:12,880 --> 01:01:12,880
>> I don't have any of that data.

592
01:01:18,570 --> 01:01:18,570
>> do you have any projection on how much this is going to increase the traffic?

593
01:01:25,110 --> 01:01:28,780
>> judging by the size that the site is the same size, and the number of parking stalls are pretty much the same,

594
01:01:32,635 --> 01:01:32,635
I think it would be fair to assume that even if the traffic did want to increase,

595
01:01:37,360 --> 01:01:40,135
it couldn't because it's size constrained. If you have a site with 70 parking stalls

596
01:01:43,210 --> 01:01:46,330
before and you have a site with 70 parking stalls after. No matter how nice it is,

597
01:01:48,070 --> 01:01:50,380
it's just people might want to use it, but they're going to find out very quickly when they get there that,

598
01:01:53,785 --> 01:01:56,560
all of the stalls are taken because it's public access, first come first use,

599
01:01:58,105 --> 01:02:00,955
and everything is signed. Even if you wanted to, work around it by,

600
01:02:02,620 --> 01:02:02,620
detaching your trailer and parking anything in a parking stall,

601
01:02:07,150 --> 01:02:10,000
you're going to get ticketed and find. >> I apologize. I guess I misunderstood.

602
01:02:12,565 --> 01:02:12,565
I thought there was a net increase in parking spots coming out of this.

603
01:02:17,395 --> 01:02:19,840
>> I believe it's a decrease of, like, three parking stalls.

604
01:02:21,535 --> 01:02:23,545
a decrease of the site. It's going from, like, 67-64.

605
01:02:34,230 --> 01:02:37,060
>> that's all I have for a night. >> any other questions?

606
01:02:39,220 --> 01:02:39,220
>> I apologize that I was going to down until there was a little four.

607
01:02:44,110 --> 01:02:47,260
but just out of statistical question, do you know how many boat launches are in hennepin county and

608
01:02:50,950 --> 01:02:54,610
over how many lakes that is of hand by chance. I was trying to find it, so I didn't have to ask you.

609
01:02:56,200 --> 01:02:59,455
>> I think we have two in lake minnetonka. I don't know about the other.

610
01:03:00,520 --> 01:03:03,760
>> was your question, total accesses regardless of owner or accesses managed by the county?

611
01:03:08,485 --> 01:03:08,485
>> I guess the latter. I guess I'd be interested in finding out both questions.

612
01:03:13,555 --> 01:03:15,685
any does the county have? >> the county has two, so the one we're talking about today,

613
01:03:18,070 --> 01:03:21,775
north armas well spring park that we own and operate. Across minnetonka, I think,

614
01:03:23,290 --> 01:03:23,290
believe there are about 10 other ones that are owned and operated by a mix of cities,

615
01:03:28,255 --> 01:03:30,715
worth park district, and dnr. More broadly across the county,

616
01:03:32,590 --> 01:03:34,780
I don't know the exact number, but venture to guess, it's probably well over 100 accesses across lakes and

617
01:03:38,830 --> 01:03:38,830
rivers that are managed by a mix of dnr arc districts,

618
01:03:43,225 --> 01:03:43,225
including three rivers, park and record and various cities.

619
01:03:47,380 --> 01:03:49,900
we do one of my staff members has a full accounting of that. I can get you a total number.

620
01:03:51,925 --> 01:03:53,965
we definitely have that number somewhere. >> I'd be good to know just how many in the county do you guys actually operate?

621
01:03:59,770 --> 01:04:01,675
we be good to know that. Again, didn't mean to put you on the spot, I was trying to find it.

622
01:04:03,955 --> 01:04:06,880
chatgpt keeps spinning right. [laughter] >> then number is two. I can say that definitively. We have to.

623
01:04:11,160 --> 01:04:13,960
>> what question for guy. You mentioned this is back to the permeable parking.

624
01:04:18,820 --> 01:04:18,820
you had mentioned that's made of a high density polyethylene?

625
01:04:23,515 --> 01:04:26,830
>> polyethylene. >> polyethylene. >> like a milk create. >> any environmental impacts from that that we should be worried about.

626
01:04:30,430 --> 01:04:33,985
>> it's recyclable, so it's made from recyclable content. I think in terms of useful life,

627
01:04:35,980 --> 01:04:39,880
the system is, made for 30+ years, probably closer to 50.

628
01:04:42,055 --> 01:04:42,055
maintenance wise, I think you would just take the gravel up,

629
01:04:46,720 --> 01:04:49,030
clean up the silt that's on the bottom, and then reput the gravel back down.

630
01:04:51,640 --> 01:04:51,640
in terms of environmental properties of it.

631
01:04:57,340 --> 01:05:01,240
it's something that's better than asphalt. I'll put it that way. It's better than asphalt, but quite a bit.

632
01:05:05,380 --> 01:05:07,270
>> in what way? >> in that it can be reused,

633
01:05:09,535 --> 01:05:11,560
recycled at the end of its life cycle, in that the actual system itself,

634
01:05:14,485 --> 01:05:16,990
like the gravel also can be reused, where we would argue that asphalt could be reused.

635
01:05:20,140 --> 01:05:22,060
it could be chipped up and used again, but how often that gets done and to what extent?

636
01:05:26,770 --> 01:05:26,770
I don't think it's as favorable compared to the system that we're proposing right now.

637
01:05:33,385 --> 01:05:37,240
>> thank you. >> can you speak to the maintenance, and who performs that and how often that will need to be done?

638
01:05:41,140 --> 01:05:41,140
>> yes ma'am

639
01:05:45,240 --> 01:05:47,710
>> it'll be my staff doing that. As part of this being a cip project,

640
01:05:49,360 --> 01:05:51,850
this will fall under our asset management for the county. Very similar to how we handle our storm water ponds and other stormwater infrastructure.

641
01:05:56,615 --> 01:05:56,615
this will get on a list that's tracked and then maintained regularly.

642
01:06:00,640 --> 01:06:01,900
in the case of permeable pavement, what we typically do is clean it out to take out any silt or

643
01:06:04,990 --> 01:06:04,990
other materials that can fill in and reduce its capacity.

644
01:06:09,295 --> 01:06:13,240
it would be consistent with the manufacturer's expectations, which I think I would lean on ishmael to provide those details,

645
01:06:16,705 --> 01:06:19,440
but we would expect probably at least yearly clean out. >> you're using this somewhere else in the county today?

646
01:06:21,990 --> 01:06:24,300
>> yeah. We have permeable pavement. I wouldn't say fairly widely,

647
01:06:26,490 --> 01:06:29,660
but we probably have at least a half dozen examples of where we use it across the county in various different use types.

648
01:06:33,850 --> 01:06:35,890
>> if it's not properly maintained, then it just starts to act more and more like traditional hard cover.

649
01:06:38,980 --> 01:06:41,185
the permeability is limited? >> exactly. >> okay. Thank you.

650
01:06:43,680 --> 01:06:43,680
>> yeah, and we've accounted for the capacity of the system, too,

651
01:06:47,740 --> 01:06:50,665
and I think it's thicker than it needs to be, so that it has more capacity to hold that water.

652
01:06:57,320 --> 01:06:59,595
>> winter maintenance of the site. What's proposed? Similar to what's being used right now?

653
01:07:02,265 --> 01:07:05,700
>> yeah, I think what's being done right now is that the county plows the dry aisle, and that's it.

654
01:07:10,355 --> 01:07:10,355
they'll be plowing the bitumens or the asphalt dry aisle.

655
01:07:14,920 --> 01:07:16,495
>> not the parking? >> not the parking. No, because I think the use is reduced.

656
01:07:22,645 --> 01:07:25,480
there aren't as many people using it. >> that's currently they're doing that?

657
01:07:26,995 --> 01:07:30,150
I thought they were plowing the entire thing. >> sorry.

658
01:07:32,670 --> 01:07:36,520
>> I believe it's actually the city that is currently plowing it. They do often use it as a resting area, the plow drivers.

659
01:07:40,680 --> 01:07:40,680
I can get that answer though in terms of I think this as winter access.

660
01:07:46,135 --> 01:07:49,960
I don't know the details and the frequency of plowing, but I can provide that. That is a question we should follow up on.

661
01:07:51,940 --> 01:07:54,385
>> fair to say the winter access isn't going to change or the winter use isn't going to change from what we see today.

662
01:07:57,595 --> 01:07:57,595
>> the materials are not at risk with regular plowing?

663
01:08:03,040 --> 01:08:03,040
>> no, certainly not where you outside of permeable area specifically.

664
01:08:07,855 --> 01:08:09,760
those are very easily plowed. Those permeable areas will keep snow piles there,

665
01:08:13,735 --> 01:08:15,160
so as that snow melts, it can infiltrate into that permeable pavement and provide

666
01:08:17,770 --> 01:08:17,770
some especially chloride reductions at a minimal degree,

667
01:08:21,775 --> 01:08:24,400
or any sediment bound nutrients can also be captured in there from a runoff standpoint, it's also beneficial.

668
01:08:27,820 --> 01:08:31,330
but I think if we do plow it would just be a plow way to get from akasa 51 north shore drive down to the lake.

669
01:08:37,500 --> 01:08:40,870
>> thank you. >> any other questions? >> questions, again, about the traffic.

670
01:08:43,870 --> 01:08:47,005
the road that this is on as a county road. >> correct. >> challenging road situation of the launch for large vehicles with boats to pull out.

671
01:08:52,600 --> 01:08:54,850
is the county going to make any changes to the road or the intersection to help alleviate any of the stress from that with this?

672
01:08:58,570 --> 01:08:58,570
>> there was no intention of taking the project scope outside of what we're seeing here.

673
01:09:07,920 --> 01:09:11,545
but I know what you're saying, because I drove by the side. >> I've launched a 32 foot boat from there,

674
01:09:13,600 --> 01:09:15,190
and I've almost been hit a million times. That's why I asked is because even though I understand the parkings not changing,

675
01:09:18,850 --> 01:09:22,750
I can assure you that the use is going to significantly increase from the improvements, and if we've already got traffic issues because of

676
01:09:24,970 --> 01:09:28,480
a blind intersection in the city or the county is the one to take care of it, my hope was that the county would address that at the same time.

677
01:09:32,110 --> 01:09:32,110
>> I think the only thing that we're doing is adding light at the entrance,

678
01:09:36,445 --> 01:09:36,445
so it's better led, but otherwise.

679
01:09:42,000 --> 01:09:44,560
>> there's no option to move the entrance, so it's further away from the blind spot.

680
01:09:46,705 --> 01:09:49,930
because when you come out of there, the right becomes very difficult to see oncoming traffic that's coming through the intersection,

681
01:09:53,005 --> 01:09:53,005
specifically because of where the entrance is right now.

682
01:10:01,110 --> 01:10:04,270
>> I'm not sure if that is an option. The curb cut that's existing. It's a great change.

683
01:10:10,495 --> 01:10:14,380
>> we are removing some of that brush there, so that'll have a minimal benefit, but not a significant one.

684
01:10:16,060 --> 01:10:18,325
I will bring that up with my leadership to see if there will be discussions that re-dated the current project and to understand.

685
01:10:21,490 --> 01:10:23,380
I don't believe it's on our cip list, but I'll make sure I have that answer.

686
01:10:25,525 --> 01:10:28,330
>> I appreciate it. I'd also make some suggestion to because there's a no stop sign coming the other way,

687
01:10:31,360 --> 01:10:34,105
that's what makes it a very dangerous situation to pull out of there. The traffic going eastbound on

688
01:10:36,130 --> 01:10:36,130
that road it's not slowing down when it comes around the blind spot.

689
01:10:40,785 --> 01:10:42,855
>> just looking at this photo right now, I think the driving factor is that

690
01:10:44,940 --> 01:10:44,940
grade change as it's going up because as you move the curb cut to the east,

691
01:10:49,710 --> 01:10:49,710
you'll have a delta elevation that's greater than what it is now.

692
01:10:54,960 --> 01:10:54,960
pick your poison, I guess, we pick this one.

693
01:11:01,200 --> 01:11:04,270
>> thank you. If that's it, we'll open the public hearing. Thank you.

694
01:11:08,065 --> 01:11:10,450
>> thank you. >> this item is a public hearing. Anyone from the public wish to speak on this item, please approach the podium.

695
01:11:14,140 --> 01:11:14,140
state your name and address for the record, please.

696
01:11:20,310 --> 01:11:24,010
>> hello, my name is matt herman. I live at 3825, cherry avenue in orono,

697
01:11:25,420 --> 01:11:25,420
and I got into this after having a conversation with the lake minnetonka association,

698
01:11:33,280 --> 01:11:33,280
and I think all of my neighbors received a letter that this project was going to happen

699
01:11:37,660 --> 01:11:37,660
and part of what I heard from eric was that a lot of citizens hadn't said anything,

700
01:11:43,120 --> 01:11:43,120
and there was this belief that there was there wasn't any concern.

701
01:11:47,230 --> 01:11:49,015
after talking to our neighbors, there's a lot of concern, and you brought up a lot of them tonight.

702
01:11:52,285 --> 01:11:52,285
I would say probably the first thing is the lack of regulation.

703
01:11:56,725 --> 01:11:59,770
the fact that we've seen a tremendous amount of commercial and industrial use at this site.

704
01:12:03,760 --> 01:12:06,220
as many of you know who live here, it's not a huge property,

705
01:12:08,455 --> 01:12:11,005
and it's within a neighborhood. The lake, as you all know is under a lot of pressure,

706
01:12:14,200 --> 01:12:14,200
and we're seeing more landscaping barges that are dropping boulders at the site.

707
01:12:19,525 --> 01:12:19,525
they're running skid steers across the site.

708
01:12:23,605 --> 01:12:23,605
it's not conducive to have semi trailers coming in here with dump trucks, in my opinion.

709
01:12:28,870 --> 01:12:28,870
it creates a huge safety issue that lighting is not going to change.

710
01:12:33,505 --> 01:12:37,150
I truly believe that there should be some regulation on commercial industrial use at this site,

711
01:12:40,435 --> 01:12:43,090
telling people that they can't dump trash and putting up a camera and telling them they're going to be fined.

712
01:12:46,735 --> 01:12:48,850
I think greatly reduce that. Having just receptacles for fishermen,

713
01:12:52,315 --> 01:12:54,100
I think is a huge miss. It concerns me that we're going to lose the buffers that are across from that wetland,

714
01:12:59,935 --> 01:13:03,310
and we don't need a parking lot in our neighborhood. This is a great asset,

715
01:13:04,690 --> 01:13:04,690
and I commend hennepin county for trying to improve an aging asset.

716
01:13:10,510 --> 01:13:10,510
but I think we're seeing a lot of different businesses using this site,

717
01:13:16,600 --> 01:13:18,310
whether they should be or not. I'll be the first to say, I hire a barge to take my boat lift out annually.

718
01:13:23,740 --> 01:13:26,260
I'm not talking about docks and lifts. I'm talking about rip rap and back hoes and dump trucks and skid steers that

719
01:13:32,470 --> 01:13:35,200
are interacting on a property with that should be designated for recreational use, in my opinion.

720
01:13:40,050 --> 01:13:42,730
I'd say one other thing as you mentioned, there's a lot of activity going on here in the winter.

721
01:13:45,415 --> 01:13:45,415
we're seeing more and more guide services that are staging on this site with fish houses,

722
01:13:55,375 --> 01:13:55,375
without houses that are going out onto the bay and coming back off.

723
01:14:00,460 --> 01:14:00,460
there's a lot of activity that happens on this property all year long.

724
01:14:06,835 --> 01:14:09,385
I appreciate you taking my comments. >> thank you.

725
01:14:17,910 --> 01:14:20,920
>> [noise] good evening. My name is betsy newsbam, and I live at 3480 north shore drive in the balder park neighborhood,

726
01:14:25,060 --> 01:14:25,060
which is adjacent to this north arm access.

727
01:14:30,520 --> 01:14:30,520
I'm just going to read

728
01:14:34,600 --> 01:14:34,600
a short paper that I have that we went around and got signatures from neighbors.

729
01:14:43,515 --> 01:14:47,220
as residents of orono most directly affected by the proposed expansion of commercial activities at north arm landing,

730
01:14:52,285 --> 01:14:52,285
we respectfully urge the planning commission and city council

731
01:14:56,470 --> 01:14:58,765
not to approve the current plan. We support improvements that enhance safety and

732
01:15:01,600 --> 01:15:04,165
recreational enjoyment of the site, however, we strongly oppose any additions that would

733
01:15:07,060 --> 01:15:07,060
accommodate or attract increased barge traffic or commercial use.

734
01:15:12,425 --> 01:15:12,425
is public access should prioritize recreational access

735
01:15:16,725 --> 01:15:16,725
and neighborhood livability, not commercial expansion.

736
01:15:21,165 --> 01:15:24,395
to that end, we request the following. Reject all features intended to support or expand commercial use,

737
01:15:28,990 --> 01:15:32,500
retain only those design elements that promote recreational use and protect the character of the surrounding neighborhoods.

738
01:15:37,075 --> 01:15:37,075
require hennepin county to maintain the site litter free with

739
01:15:42,670 --> 01:15:42,670
garbage removal at least twice per week as a condition of any permit.

740
01:15:48,455 --> 01:15:48,455
require hennepin county to reimburse the city of orono for enforcement or litter

741
01:15:53,505 --> 01:15:53,505
removal costs if the county fails to adequately manage the site.

742
01:15:58,755 --> 01:15:58,755
I have to underline that because that is a huge issue.

743
01:16:05,525 --> 01:16:05,525
residents are cleaning up the mess at this access.

744
01:16:11,290 --> 01:16:11,290
preserve existing vegetation along the north and west shoreline.

745
01:16:17,035 --> 01:16:19,720
do not approve its removal. Reject any design changes that facilitate increased barge or commercial activity,

746
01:16:25,405 --> 01:16:25,405
including those that may lead to more traffic or parking on neighborhood streets.

747
01:16:30,890 --> 01:16:32,745
this is a huge concern. Thirty years ago, my husband and I

748
01:16:36,885 --> 01:16:36,885
advocated to stop all parking on north shore drive with trailers.

749
01:16:44,470 --> 01:16:44,470
we could not access our own lake shore because we would

750
01:16:49,450 --> 01:16:49,450
have to climb over people's trailers parked along there.

751
01:16:54,610 --> 01:16:57,130
we would have to shoot people off of our docks, which is a huge concern.

752
01:16:59,365 --> 01:17:02,515
we got that pass. We're so grateful. It's made the neighborhood so much better,

753
01:17:05,185 --> 01:17:06,445
but I got to tell you, I would really hate to see that parking come back to us again,

754
01:17:11,410 --> 01:17:11,410
which it will because there's areas in our neighborhood that don't have no parking signs,

755
01:17:16,990 --> 01:17:20,020
and people find it, and they're going to park there. We have lots of small children in our neighborhood,

756
01:17:23,125 --> 01:17:23,125
and people that come to put their boats in there don't care about us.

757
01:17:28,900 --> 01:17:32,200
why should they? They don't care about our lake shore, and they don't care about us,

758
01:17:33,340 --> 01:17:33,340
so we just need to be very careful and very

759
01:17:37,450 --> 01:17:37,450
responsible for the decisions that are made here tonight and going forward.

760
01:17:43,735 --> 01:17:45,430
thank you so much. >> can I ask one clarifying question.

761
01:17:47,965 --> 01:17:47,965
just to make sure you get credit for those who signed.

762
01:17:53,200 --> 01:17:54,550
how many signatures do you? >> here. May I approach.

763
01:18:02,100 --> 01:18:05,890
thank you. I also wanted to show. This is the upkeep on that site. >> you can pass around.

764
01:18:07,270 --> 01:18:10,345
>> it's not pretty. When they say they take care of it twice a week.

765
01:18:15,720 --> 01:18:19,660
I'm questioning that. We just have to be really careful because that all ends up in the lake.

766
01:18:23,620 --> 01:18:23,620
other accesses have the same garbage problem.

767
01:18:31,720 --> 01:18:34,330
every access has the same garbage problem, so it's an overall huge issue that needs to be,

768
01:18:39,460 --> 01:18:39,460
and it's not only that, obviously that takes care of all these sites, but.

769
01:18:48,180 --> 01:18:51,430
>> thank you. Ms. Oakton is there. >> thank you. >> do you know if that documented stuff is part of the record?

770
01:18:54,805 --> 01:18:57,130
>> no, that document was not submitted to the city, so I don't have that as part of the record.

771
01:18:58,945 --> 01:19:02,530
when it's done being reviewed by the commissioners, if it could make its way back to me, I'll make sure it gets put into the packet.

772
01:19:04,435 --> 01:19:05,620
>> I just did a quick count. There appears to be 40 names.

773
01:19:11,100 --> 01:19:14,530
>> as a note, in one of the public comments, there is a neighborhood signature of one that was submitted.

774
01:19:19,675 --> 01:19:21,910
I'm not sure if that's a different version of this one, but this one looks to be slightly different.

775
01:19:24,115 --> 01:19:27,970
I'd be happy to include that in the packet at the end of this meeting. >> thank you.

776
01:19:36,090 --> 01:19:36,090
>> well, gabriel jobur 985 tanka road.

777
01:19:41,275 --> 01:19:44,155
you guys got a few emails from me. For you to understand what I'm trying to say,

778
01:19:47,920 --> 01:19:47,920
I want to take a few minutes and give you the background how I got here.

779
01:19:52,945 --> 01:19:52,945
I am 54, 53 years of residency on tanka road.

780
01:20:00,190 --> 01:20:00,190
I served almost every position in the city, including the mayor.

781
01:20:06,895 --> 01:20:06,895
that used to be good until the last mayor ruined our reputation.

782
01:20:12,220 --> 01:20:12,220
[laughter]

783
01:20:17,530 --> 01:20:20,905
>> thank you. >> anyway, long story short, I used to be proud of saying it, then I quit saying it.

784
01:20:23,995 --> 01:20:26,605
if you like him, you could hate me. Anyway, so back to the issue.

785
01:20:32,160 --> 01:20:32,160
I believe on public and recreational access.

786
01:20:37,855 --> 01:20:41,605
the state of minnesota of public water. I serve on many committees, our national committees.

787
01:20:45,835 --> 01:20:49,195
we go to colorado, montana, different places, and when we get here,

788
01:20:51,235 --> 01:20:53,875
people ask, why can we do something? The reason we can or cannot is because our constitutional in the state of

789
01:20:59,470 --> 01:20:59,470
minnesota designate water as public for all public.

790
01:21:05,440 --> 01:21:05,440
>> in the '80s and the '90s,

791
01:21:11,080 --> 01:21:14,710
particularly in '90s, I assisted the dnr. Everything I'm telling you firsthand,

792
01:21:16,510 --> 01:21:18,985
not second hand, now I heard about it. I mean, I assisted them personally in acquiring, negotiating, funding, facilitating,

793
01:21:27,295 --> 01:21:27,295
licensing, and dealing with the neighbors for

794
01:21:31,480 --> 01:21:31,480
two years in getting maxwell bay access and grace bay access.

795
01:21:39,025 --> 01:21:42,590
I worked with minnetonka, asked me to help and all. I believe we should have access.

796
01:21:46,080 --> 01:21:49,590
I believe every citizen of the united states or resident should be able to access and nobody put it more eloquently

797
01:21:53,250 --> 01:21:53,250
than bruce stanton when he donated the beach to us to all people to use it indefinitely.

798
01:22:01,000 --> 01:22:03,610
well, to access to water, you need public access,

799
01:22:05,140 --> 01:22:07,900
and I really worked very closely with hennepin county and the neighborhood and all to make things happen.

800
01:22:12,085 --> 01:22:14,680
last five, six years, the wheel fall off the wagon at hennepin county.

801
01:22:18,655 --> 01:22:18,655
starting with one of our representative resigned,

802
01:22:23,230 --> 01:22:25,975
and we had no commissioner for a couple of years, followed by a new commissioner whose brand new didn't know how to go about it,

803
01:22:31,780 --> 01:22:31,780
and we were excited to have a new commissioner be representative.

804
01:22:35,890 --> 01:22:35,890
this is the vision of one man.

805
01:22:40,525 --> 01:22:40,525
the public person who is in charge of minnetonka.

806
01:22:45,715 --> 01:22:45,715
he's been extremely hard on our staff and extremely hard. We are minnesota.

807
01:22:55,000 --> 01:22:57,940
I'm not going to tell you that. As you can tell from my accent, I'm not minnesota and other agency.

808
01:23:01,495 --> 01:23:01,495
the reason the vertical went away access is not because they decided to do that,

809
01:23:11,365 --> 01:23:13,720
is because a lot of pressure was put on our county commissioner and quite a bit of it by our elected official in on.

810
01:23:18,905 --> 01:23:18,905
but this is over ambitious, extremely overreaching.

811
01:23:25,950 --> 01:23:25,950
if you look at the slide before this one,

812
01:23:30,860 --> 01:23:33,205
and you look at this one, please look at the vegetation.

813
01:23:35,320 --> 01:23:35,320
besides the fact it's greenery and we prohibit

814
01:23:39,565 --> 01:23:39,565
any cutting of trees 75 feet of the length,

815
01:23:43,990 --> 01:23:43,990
and we have taken our citizens to court and forced them to re vegetate and

816
01:23:48,820 --> 01:23:48,820
got an entry to their property by court order until the trees are mature.

817
01:23:55,045 --> 01:23:58,015
this serve as a sound buffer, visual buffer, etc,

818
01:24:00,700 --> 01:24:03,235
and I'm really concerned about it. But I would like to show you things more important than this.

819
01:24:06,940 --> 01:24:08,965
there are a few things about this. Give me extreme anxiety,

820
01:24:11,395 --> 01:24:13,435
and few give me heartburn. I'm going to label them heartburn anxiety.

821
01:24:16,360 --> 01:24:16,360
could you be kind enough to show them number one.

822
01:24:22,950 --> 01:24:22,950
staff said, we don't have anything on the books to stop this.

823
01:24:29,350 --> 01:24:33,160
cony wasn't guided. There is something on the books. If I'm doing this regularly at my home,

824
01:24:36,640 --> 01:24:38,800
and the neighbor complain. What do we do? Zone residential.

825
01:24:42,250 --> 01:24:44,920
could you go to the next one? They come in and they unload,

826
01:24:49,855 --> 01:24:53,560
and you guys probably got all of those, and I don't want to bore you. I see I'm losing some of you already.

827
01:24:56,730 --> 01:24:59,650
they unload the cat, the baco off the barge.

828
01:25:08,790 --> 01:25:12,280
you could see it as steel track. The truck comes in and drop the full whatever,

829
01:25:19,300 --> 01:25:21,655
14 yards, 12 yards, full of boulders on the ground.

830
01:25:24,940 --> 01:25:24,940
they go and get the empty one from the barge.

831
01:25:30,475 --> 01:25:34,225
they get back and put the full one on the barge. The cat go back on the barge,

832
01:25:36,910 --> 01:25:40,075
and then they take the empty one back, 10 minutes, 20 minutes.

833
01:25:42,070 --> 01:25:45,985
that's what they want you to believe that this is going to happen 20 minutes. We love shore fishing.

834
01:25:49,345 --> 01:25:49,345
for shore fishing come families and kids.

835
01:25:55,600 --> 01:25:59,320
kids, if you keep their attention for five minutes, you're better than anybody.

836
01:26:01,225 --> 01:26:04,320
they love to wonder. I happen to own three marinas.

837
01:26:07,540 --> 01:26:07,540
by the way, as part of my beliefs,

838
01:26:11,620 --> 01:26:11,620
I offer anybody to launch at

839
01:26:17,340 --> 01:26:17,340
my marina for free and that happened from the day I owned it to this minute.

840
01:26:23,715 --> 01:26:25,935
if you're launching your own boat, you could launch it free on my land.

841
01:26:27,995 --> 01:26:30,940
it's not I'm just doing the talk, I'm doing the walk.

842
01:26:32,890 --> 01:26:34,930
when the barge leaves, it literally take about 1,000 feet.

843
01:26:38,095 --> 01:26:38,095
could we go to the next one, please?

844
01:26:43,230 --> 01:26:43,230
I think there's one in between.

845
01:26:48,210 --> 01:26:51,310
here's one is totally different. They actually gets on the truck with the semi.

846
01:26:56,065 --> 01:26:58,075
this is zone residential. We have nothing to prohibit.

847
01:27:01,650 --> 01:27:04,930
this is not public access. This is a staging slide.

848
01:27:09,040 --> 01:27:09,040
when the city of ana builded the public works.

849
01:27:14,185 --> 01:27:14,185
you were there when they cut the ribbon before they even started,

850
01:27:20,410 --> 01:27:22,390
they barricaded the area. G nygard wanted to go and take in the trailer and take pictures of the drawings.

851
01:27:30,430 --> 01:27:32,275
they made them have a hard hat, a vest, and they walked him back there.

852
01:27:35,095 --> 01:27:35,095
kids are using those trucks to do salam courts

853
01:27:40,330 --> 01:27:40,330
between their parents and the area of their interest.

854
01:27:46,855 --> 01:27:46,855
I cannot believe the city think we have nothing to stop this.

855
01:27:52,920 --> 01:27:52,920
could we go one more, please? Here we are.

856
01:27:57,325 --> 01:27:57,325
one more. Now could we play this?

857
01:28:05,520 --> 01:28:05,520
this is just a handful of rocks left over from my job.

858
01:28:21,330 --> 01:28:24,940
I cut it short because I figured you don't want to sit here all night listening particularly to me.

859
01:28:29,130 --> 01:28:32,905
this is what happened there. This is a negative access.

860
01:28:38,920 --> 01:28:41,410
not that we're not adding access. We're taking away access.

861
01:28:43,150 --> 01:28:43,150
the mom pad that used to come here six other places because they

862
01:28:48,310 --> 01:28:48,310
are competing with extremely dangerous environment.

863
01:28:54,595 --> 01:28:54,595
public safety is the number one that you are in charge of or the city in charge of.

864
01:29:01,300 --> 01:29:01,300
I'm really, really extremely disappointed that the city and staff did not say,

865
01:29:08,140 --> 01:29:09,895
hey, this could not happen. Furthermore, I'm going to send you all a document, 1974,

866
01:29:15,535 --> 01:29:15,535
where the county recognized that they need a site for that,

867
01:29:21,550 --> 01:29:23,830
and they identified the site, and they asked that we sent support for them.

868
01:29:27,805 --> 01:29:27,805
in '74, the county was using one site,

869
01:29:33,160 --> 01:29:33,160
and there was only one dredging company on the length.

870
01:29:37,765 --> 01:29:40,900
when they say it's legally non conforming, that is absolutely not true.

871
01:29:44,455 --> 01:29:47,740
gabriel jabbour called tony, who was in charge of the site four years ago and told him there's a barge unloading,

872
01:29:53,770 --> 01:29:56,395
and he be lying there and stopped him. Three years ago, the policy changed and they flocked here.

873
01:30:00,760 --> 01:30:00,760
those aren't barges that located on the water.

874
01:30:04,930 --> 01:30:04,930
those are barges are being imported to the water as people paying a lot of money.

875
01:30:10,330 --> 01:30:11,860
I'm sorry I'm going on long, but how could you get all of that experience if you didn't live it. Go ahead.

876
01:30:18,320 --> 01:30:18,320
second use, people doing business on the site.

877
01:30:24,160 --> 01:30:26,545
jetski rental, right there, and the county was so nice to modern them and they were so good to put the sign back.

878
01:30:33,930 --> 01:30:37,240
good. Next one. Here's the boat frontal.

879
01:30:41,785 --> 01:30:45,310
they go up and you rent the boat for half a day. You go out till noon and you come back.

880
01:30:49,585 --> 01:30:52,420
what happened to the sewage in the boat? That's not something we want to talk too much about.

881
01:30:55,780 --> 01:30:55,780
here what it is. I want those people to have a good time responsibly.

882
01:31:00,700 --> 01:31:00,700
I want the guy to make a lot of money appropriately. One more.

883
01:31:06,130 --> 01:31:06,130
now, a gas station is built and being used right at the site.

884
01:31:14,725 --> 01:31:14,725
this is not a flat tire that we need to fix.

885
01:31:19,345 --> 01:31:19,345
this is rebuilding engines and changing oil.

886
01:31:24,260 --> 01:31:26,535
where is the county? Absentee ownership.

887
01:31:28,905 --> 01:31:31,695
absentee ownership. I'm not trying to beat on them,

888
01:31:33,930 --> 01:31:35,175
although sounds are way. I'm trying to warn you that promises get you nowhere.

889
01:31:39,565 --> 01:31:42,895
contract get you somewhere. Here they are. See the engines being ripped apart redone. Right there.

890
01:31:47,665 --> 01:31:50,800
getting to the garbage, my favorite subject, as you remember, we did 10 years of cleaning garbage on big island.

891
01:31:56,515 --> 01:31:59,335
got to zero, 40 yards. I personally specialized in cleaning this one.

892
01:32:03,685 --> 01:32:03,685
for the last three years, been total disaster,

893
01:32:07,750 --> 01:32:10,480
and they are right, and the neighborhood is right.

894
01:32:13,320 --> 01:32:17,035
then, particularly in the end of the season. This is full of construction debris.

895
01:32:19,615 --> 01:32:19,615
during the season, there is maynard bags,

896
01:32:23,635 --> 01:32:27,160
there is flucher bags. There are all kinds. This is debris from boats. Go ahead.

897
01:32:36,060 --> 01:32:36,060
please one more. That's my sunday afternoon on my way to eat dinner at fluchers.

898
01:32:44,515 --> 01:32:47,500
I always keep a pitchfork in the bag, and I get it. Now, did we learn the truth?

899
01:32:49,855 --> 01:32:52,920
I called tony, two weeks it was not picked up.

900
01:32:58,075 --> 01:32:58,075
I called aspen, and they intend to do it.

901
01:33:04,255 --> 01:33:04,255
but tony is too busy giving lecture on ais someplace up in northern minnesota.

902
01:33:11,395 --> 01:33:15,040
he was a public works of the leg, and now he is a scientist most concerned about ais.

903
01:33:21,565 --> 01:33:24,760
go ahead, please. This is what we're talking about industrial.

904
01:33:30,480 --> 01:33:30,480
the next one. Go back to the other one,

905
01:33:35,860 --> 01:33:39,760
please, cannot be with this. Those two have an extreme conflict,

906
01:33:43,225 --> 01:33:45,625
a conflict of use. Now, the county really need to find a place for such activities.

907
01:33:52,260 --> 01:33:55,345
in answer to some of the question, there's 78,000 boats launched on minnesota.

908
01:34:00,025 --> 01:34:00,025
the state of minnesota does not allow charging for public water.

909
01:34:07,090 --> 01:34:10,765
that's why your license $80 for three years, and your car license could be as much as 2000.

910
01:34:13,570 --> 01:34:13,570
one is taxation, and I will send you a letter with analysis from the dnr about that.

911
01:34:19,900 --> 01:34:19,900
the problem lies is they might intend to do well.

912
01:34:25,525 --> 01:34:29,170
probably in their mind, this is wonderful. But we learned long time ago,

913
01:34:31,150 --> 01:34:31,150
and I really appreciate a step to rethink the way they approach some of those.

914
01:34:36,100 --> 01:34:39,925
there's urban model and there's rural model. There's open trench for storm water management,

915
01:34:44,350 --> 01:34:46,105
and there's curb and gutter. We are rural. We don't apologize for our philosophy,

916
01:34:52,195 --> 01:34:52,195
and we made that decision in the early '70s to be a residential community.

917
01:34:58,255 --> 01:35:00,985
I'm sorry, sound like I'm a preacher, but I am a preacher for ono and his philosophy.

918
01:35:04,885 --> 01:35:04,885
I really urge you that whatever you do,

919
01:35:09,385 --> 01:35:09,385
even I suggest you approve something that you'll have a stack this wide,

920
01:35:15,340 --> 01:35:15,340
what they cannot do and will do and the consequences.

921
01:35:19,360 --> 01:35:21,970
their own honesty told you, they're not going to manage it.

922
01:35:23,440 --> 01:35:25,795
it's ono police and what have you. There's a letter from ono police and the letter from hennepin county.

923
01:35:29,305 --> 01:35:32,590
hennepin county specifically sheriff, their employee warns you about the large truck in that area

924
01:35:37,990 --> 01:35:37,990
to the comment of shane about the traffic coming in and coming out.

925
01:35:44,470 --> 01:35:44,470
by the way, shane, there used to be a stop sign on the other side.

926
01:35:48,550 --> 01:35:52,450
did I mispronounce your name? >> no, you pronounced right. >> that's a problem. Well,

927
01:35:55,750 --> 01:35:57,715
I'm sorry if I took too much. But you know what? Feel free to call me.

928
01:36:00,925 --> 01:36:00,925
I mean, I'm literally living mammoth.

929
01:36:06,690 --> 01:36:06,690
>> thank you [applause]

930
01:36:16,034 --> 01:36:19,525
>> hi. I'm amy herman, 3825 cherry avenue. Thank you, commissioners, for hearing us.

931
01:36:22,375 --> 01:36:22,375
as you can probably get this is a big issue for our neighbors.

932
01:36:29,420 --> 01:36:29,420
I hear the balder park neighborhood.

933
01:36:34,015 --> 01:36:34,015
I agree with them that the variances and the vacancies should not be approved.

934
01:36:38,590 --> 01:36:42,565
and primarily, it's because this plan is not. And I want to take a moment,

935
01:36:45,295 --> 01:36:45,295
and I would like everyone who's here about the north harm access to raise their hand.

936
01:36:51,300 --> 01:36:55,080
this is a big issue. So let's hit it. So the plan is great recreationally.

937
01:37:01,060 --> 01:37:04,810
I think I have some questions about the handicap access. Who's going to maintain that lift and that ramp?

938
01:37:09,205 --> 01:37:11,590
that ramp is big. And I'd hate for that handicap lift to become a sculpture because it's not maintained,

939
01:37:18,415 --> 01:37:20,650
and it's not used. Also, I feel there's several other governing bodies that need to weigh in on this.

940
01:37:26,320 --> 01:37:26,320
and why not wait and see what some

941
01:37:31,270 --> 01:37:31,270
of those other groups are saying before orono plants the flag?

942
01:37:37,150 --> 01:37:37,150
hard cover, I feel the parking spaces are excessive.

943
01:37:43,230 --> 01:37:46,180
the wetland, which has come up, and I guess it's non-conforming.

944
01:37:48,430 --> 01:37:49,930
I don't know what that means. But I can tell you that if it's been there since the 1960s,

945
01:37:53,500 --> 01:37:53,500
the birds and the animals and the plants don't care.

946
01:37:57,595 --> 01:38:01,360
and you would be amazed at the activity in that wetland in the spring in the fall with ducks flying in and out,

947
01:38:05,770 --> 01:38:08,155
and the red wing blackbirds calling. It's really beautiful, and it really adds to the access, I think.

948
01:38:14,010 --> 01:38:17,410
clear cutting the west side. I don't know. I guess they're non-native species.

949
01:38:21,880 --> 01:38:24,790
but once again, the trees don't know that, and it actually provides a really nice buffer between the neighborhoods. The lighting.

950
01:38:30,715 --> 01:38:30,715
well, we want to go from one light pull to a target parking lot.

951
01:38:37,900 --> 01:38:40,530
that's what it feels like to us. Trash management. I don't think I need to hit on that anymore.

952
01:38:45,085 --> 01:38:48,775
the entrance and exit that shane brought up, I feel for you, shane,

953
01:38:50,380 --> 01:38:50,380
because we hear the breaks and the horns at that entrance all the time.

954
01:38:56,515 --> 01:38:59,620
the non-motorized access. I feel like it's crammed in there.

955
01:39:03,300 --> 01:39:03,300
I think there's other places that would be better.

956
01:39:07,825 --> 01:39:07,825
maxwell bay has a dock that's almost zero access.

957
01:39:13,465 --> 01:39:15,700
you could almost just walk right into the water there. And I think it would be better to open that space up to something else

958
01:39:20,425 --> 01:39:20,425
and encourage paddle boarders and kayakers to go to maxwell bay.

959
01:39:26,185 --> 01:39:30,085
we've already talked about the industrial and commercial use. I definitely feel like it does not mix with recreational use.

960
01:39:33,685 --> 01:39:35,590
if this is a recreational access, let's call it that and not a public access.

961
01:39:39,055 --> 01:39:39,055
and finally, once construction begins on this access,

962
01:39:43,855 --> 01:39:46,300
north arm will be changed forever. It's not going to be the same,

963
01:39:48,250 --> 01:39:48,250
and that's really hard on the neighborhood. Thanks.

964
01:39:53,560 --> 01:39:53,560
>> thank you. [applause]

965
01:40:02,170 --> 01:40:04,300
>> hello, commissioners. I'm christie anderson. I live at 1408 balder park road.

966
01:40:06,655 --> 01:40:06,655
so I am backing up to the landing with the wet land

967
01:40:11,470 --> 01:40:11,470
is in my back yard on the peninsula to give you a little bearings there.

968
01:40:16,585 --> 01:40:19,120
I'm not quite as eloquent as everyone else that was here because I didn't come with a whole lot of prepared notes,

969
01:40:21,160 --> 01:40:24,550
but I sure scribbled a lot of notes while I heard everybody speaking tonight. So I appreciate being given the opportunity to talk.

970
01:40:27,655 --> 01:40:27,655
I appreciate commissioner procal being able to voice for us.

971
01:40:31,915 --> 01:40:32,980
what is the impetus? I was going to this coming in here saying,

972
01:40:35,995 --> 01:40:38,020
why are we doing this? What really is the unsafe piece of it.

973
01:40:42,020 --> 01:40:44,520
and then taking it a little further what is the hard cover issue when we're talking already currently 70%,

974
01:40:48,570 --> 01:40:51,675
and I think standards are 25, but this is going to be exception because it is commercial.

975
01:40:55,010 --> 01:40:55,010
not commercial. Public. So these things started to

976
01:41:00,040 --> 01:41:00,040
occur to me that there is two lights currently.

977
01:41:04,855 --> 01:41:06,760
I am backing up to this, and I don't see where the lights are intended to be placed,

978
01:41:10,435 --> 01:41:10,435
but I don't want to have that light pollution to shane's point.

979
01:41:14,810 --> 01:41:14,810
flowing out into my backyard 24 hours a day is

980
01:41:19,290 --> 01:41:19,290
one other item that I found annoying as I was thinking about the project.

981
01:41:24,770 --> 01:41:28,390
the traffic patterns, again, enter and exit, if we're increasing the amount of use that can be made of the area,

982
01:41:33,610 --> 01:41:35,230
that is going to be a problem, but also, I'm thinking of the water way congestion that you're creating.

983
01:41:38,590 --> 01:41:42,520
I'm not clear wholly, but I think I heard you say that you're tilting the ramp itself in towards what looks like the channel.

984
01:41:50,050 --> 01:41:52,540
that's a pretty congested channel as it is when people are loading and unloading their boats.

985
01:41:54,700 --> 01:41:55,900
so to tilt it, so people are unloading into that lane is

986
01:41:58,750 --> 01:42:02,305
a little bit more nerve racking because I'm someone that does that every season, the beginning and the end of the season.

987
01:42:04,090 --> 01:42:04,090
so to increase that, traffic.

988
01:42:08,185 --> 01:42:12,160
and then to try to squeeze in to my neighbor's point here, the ramp next to it for unloading paddle boards or kayaks or canoes, those folks,

989
01:42:18,085 --> 01:42:19,600
if you look at the picture, are going to be caught in the middle between the people

990
01:42:22,360 --> 01:42:25,030
that are putting their boats and the people that are coming through the channel. So I'm not sure where they're really supposed to go safely if we're talking about safety.

991
01:42:33,630 --> 01:42:33,630
so again, I felt this really expanded the use of that area recreationally.

992
01:42:41,200 --> 01:42:43,315
I think that's really a nice thought. But again, looking at the fishing piers that are out there,

993
01:42:46,240 --> 01:42:48,955
and I think there was an insinuation they might pull those back. That is, again, already a pinched narrow channel after it was redeveloped.

994
01:42:53,710 --> 01:42:53,710
so having those piers potentially reaching out is a real issue as well.

995
01:43:02,190 --> 01:43:02,190
I might have covered all my notes.

996
01:43:07,200 --> 01:43:11,155
it does feel as though we're enlarging this to create a better opportunity for commercial use, not just residential.

997
01:43:16,180 --> 01:43:19,120
to gables point, we are a rural neighborhood. We are not spring park.

998
01:43:20,770 --> 01:43:23,560
so even comparing those two landings doesn't really it's not comparing apples to oranges, apples to apples.

999
01:43:27,250 --> 01:43:30,790
because, truly, that is an industrial area in spring park.

1000
01:43:33,370 --> 01:43:36,490
that is where a lot of the commercial usage is happening. This is a residential area.

1001
01:43:38,995 --> 01:43:41,365
there is nothing commercial here about it. It's all recreational.

1002
01:43:43,150 --> 01:43:43,150
so trying to increase the usage because they want to update.

1003
01:43:49,390 --> 01:43:52,495
I understand that. And I think I wrote this down. We decided to go bigger because we had the budget.didn't really sit well with me.

1004
01:43:57,460 --> 01:43:59,875
I think there's a different plan that can be made. So I appreciate your time.

1005
01:44:02,110 --> 01:44:02,110
>> thank you.

1006
01:44:12,540 --> 01:44:15,820
>> good evening. My name is eric evenson. I'm the director of the lake minnetonka association.

1007
01:44:18,550 --> 01:44:18,550
prior to that, I was a long-term administrator of the mine creek watershed district,

1008
01:44:23,800 --> 01:44:23,800
and I served as a planning and zoning director for two counties in minnesota.

1009
01:44:29,500 --> 01:44:29,500
the lake minnetonka association is a homeowners association on the lake.

1010
01:44:34,810 --> 01:44:38,620
we represent all 4,000 of the property owners on the lake. We have, actually,

1011
01:44:39,850 --> 01:44:43,435
over 1,000 paid members of the lake. We support providing a better and

1012
01:44:47,350 --> 01:44:47,350
a safer recreational handicapped access at north arm landing.

1013
01:44:52,420 --> 01:44:55,735
however, some of the proposed changes have significant implications lake wide moving into the future,

1014
01:44:59,545 --> 01:44:59,545
especially related to the commercial and the industrial use on the site.

1015
01:45:05,230 --> 01:45:05,230
I want to start by making a couple of comments and to reinforce what mr. Debor had said.

1016
01:45:12,010 --> 01:45:12,010
the question was about

1017
01:45:18,880 --> 01:45:22,660
commercial use on the site and whether or not you had the ability to say anything. I believe the county's response was there are no policies to prevent commercial use.

1018
01:45:27,205 --> 01:45:29,515
that is not a fully accurate statement. First off, the dnr does not allow commercial uses any of its accesses in the state,

1019
01:45:34,540 --> 01:45:38,530
if they're only recreational. Secondly, if any funds were used, if any federal grant dollars were used for this access,

1020
01:45:41,710 --> 01:45:44,065
back in the 60s, when many of them were funded, those grants also prohibit the use of commercial activities at these accesses.

1021
01:45:49,490 --> 01:45:49,490
also, the rivers does not allow commercial use at their accesses.

1022
01:45:54,900 --> 01:45:54,900
further, I just want to go into what staff was talking about with this in the plan.

1023
01:46:01,530 --> 01:46:05,300
this is an lr1c zone, it is listed within that zone as a park recreation or open space.

1024
01:46:10,425 --> 01:46:10,425
you have your own policies that prohibit the use of commercial activities in parkland,

1025
01:46:15,705 --> 01:46:18,665
and that's something you might want to have this discussion with staff on. Further, as a planning director and somebody who had some experience in this,

1026
01:46:22,630 --> 01:46:25,690
I can tell you when something comes before you as a variance, you have considerable latitude and arguably an obligation to

1027
01:46:30,810 --> 01:46:33,210
address many of the deficiencies in the plan through conditions that you have the ability to put on it.

1028
01:46:36,015 --> 01:46:37,545
so you can definitely, just like you can require them have a trash container there,

1029
01:46:40,875 --> 01:46:44,330
you can definitely require no commercial access in these these areas, or you can state limits on the type of commercial activity that can occur.

1030
01:46:48,715 --> 01:46:52,300
the question was earlier about who's responsible for regulation? Well, the owners are going to have to take care of this property.

1031
01:46:54,550 --> 01:46:57,190
they're going to have to maintain it, and there are some regulations that the sheriff and the police will have to deal with.

1032
01:47:00,160 --> 01:47:02,500
but ultimately, this group right here, is responsible for land use regulation in the city of orono.

1033
01:47:08,350 --> 01:47:08,350
now, many of these issues are land use things that don't have lake concerns,

1034
01:47:12,850 --> 01:47:15,550
and probably I don't want to get into a lot of those, but I am a little confused.

1035
01:47:18,340 --> 01:47:21,010
the role of zoning, typically, from my experience, has been to reduce nonconformities,

1036
01:47:25,540 --> 01:47:28,585
whether legal illegal nonconformities are just illegal, but legal nonconformity, the role of planning is typically to reduce the nonconformity.

1037
01:47:34,105 --> 01:47:34,105
so I'm not seeing anything here that's going to reduce that nonconformity.

1038
01:47:38,320 --> 01:47:38,320
secondly, your role is to determine what

1039
01:47:42,490 --> 01:47:46,210
are the practical hardships that are driving this. I believe the question was asked.

1040
01:47:48,535 --> 01:47:51,910
what's the need? What's triggering the need? And there was a slide up earlier that you were shown that says,

1041
01:47:56,020 --> 01:47:56,020
well, we don't have ais decontamination on the site.

1042
01:48:00,415 --> 01:48:03,415
the traffic flow was not optimized. We needed to optimize traffic flow.

1043
01:48:05,410 --> 01:48:08,725
we don't have good ada fishing requirements, and their ada access needs some maintenance. It's in poor shape.

1044
01:48:14,530 --> 01:48:18,265
those aren't practical difficulties. Those are all very solvable without even going through a variance.

1045
01:48:22,045 --> 01:48:25,120
the concern about safety was raised, and the response was, well, there's lighting and other things that need to be done.

1046
01:48:28,240 --> 01:48:31,735
again, not a practical difficulty. It's hard for me to get my head around what is creating

1047
01:48:35,470 --> 01:48:35,470
the practical difficulty other than that the county wants to expand the use.

1048
01:48:40,630 --> 01:48:40,630
I find it very interesting that in the entire write up,

1049
01:48:45,625 --> 01:48:48,295
I don't see where the county talks about expanding the use. They talk about redesign.

1050
01:48:49,855 --> 01:48:51,595
they talk about improvements. But we are creating new cuads and fishing things,

1051
01:48:57,475 --> 01:48:57,475
which is fine, construction of a significantly larger boat ramp,

1052
01:49:01,900 --> 01:49:05,020
construction of new docks, buildings, and other structures, increase of hard cover 79% encroachment into the 75-foot wetland area.

1053
01:49:14,965 --> 01:49:16,915
all of these are expansions. Now, your rules and regulations are very clear about not

1054
01:49:21,610 --> 01:49:21,610
wanting to see expansions and limiting expansions of a nonconforming use.

1055
01:49:27,025 --> 01:49:29,440
all of this is talking about expansions. None of this triggers a practical difficulty.

1056
01:49:33,550 --> 01:49:33,550
there is nothing other than I want to that is triggering this practical difficulty.

1057
01:49:39,925 --> 01:49:42,565
this site can be designed to be safe. This site can be designed to provide adequate access

1058
01:49:45,940 --> 01:49:45,940
without even needing a variance can be done.

1059
01:49:51,280 --> 01:49:51,280
so again, we'd want to figure out what is causing the practical difficulty on this site.

1060
01:49:59,700 --> 01:50:02,755
again, this is a local decision for you and the city council to consider is a vacation of easements on this.

1061
01:50:07,990 --> 01:50:10,960
right now, there are ways you can recoup funds through franchises and so forth with having a city easement through there.

1062
01:50:14,320 --> 01:50:17,245
once you vacate that city easement, you lose that ability. I don't see a lot of advantage to the city.

1063
01:50:25,615 --> 01:50:28,405
I see a lot of advantages to the county for you to vacate the easement, but there aren't really any advantages to the city to do so.

1064
01:50:31,060 --> 01:50:31,060
once you do that, you've lost your ability to really enforce and to

1065
01:50:35,770 --> 01:50:35,770
assure the site is adequately maintained and operated into the future.

1066
01:50:41,365 --> 01:50:41,365
I am very concerned that the heavy commercial and industrial uses.

1067
01:50:47,155 --> 01:50:48,925
everybody has talked about here tonight, have raised about the safety issues on the site.

1068
01:50:51,760 --> 01:50:51,760
again, your role in planning is public health safety and welfare.

1069
01:50:56,125 --> 01:50:56,125
mixing recreational use and industrial use or commercial use.

1070
01:51:01,285 --> 01:51:04,180
you typically don't allow in any of your parks or in any other zoning areas unless it's designated for that use.

1071
01:51:07,825 --> 01:51:09,640
now, we're mixing the two of them together, and that's going to create opportunities for conflict,

1072
01:51:12,610 --> 01:51:14,800
that's going to create opportunities for accidents, injury and possibly even death.

1073
01:51:17,590 --> 01:51:17,590
so it's really not a consistent with the role of good community planning.

1074
01:51:25,900 --> 01:51:29,005
I'm also very concerned the environmental issues. Mr. Jabbour showed pictures of people fueling at this ramp.

1075
01:51:32,860 --> 01:51:36,205
if you have a big barge and you're out there, you're not going to take the barge off,

1076
01:51:37,690 --> 01:51:41,410
take it someplace, fuel it, and bring it back on. You're not going to do it. You're going to fill it up,

1077
01:51:42,460 --> 01:51:43,705
you're going to take care of it right there. There are only specific places on the lake where you're allowed to do

1078
01:51:47,530 --> 01:51:47,530
fueling and the type of maintenance that are being done at this site.

1079
01:51:53,020 --> 01:51:55,765
I also appreciate the comment that somebody had made about some of the facilities that are being put into the site.

1080
01:52:00,130 --> 01:52:00,130
if you are as a person that actually has looked at

1081
01:52:04,480 --> 01:52:04,480
the type of handicap a accessibility features.

1082
01:52:08,755 --> 01:52:08,755
we were looking at that on the creek to allow for canoeing and stuff like that.

1083
01:52:12,940 --> 01:52:15,565
the watershed district rejected that idea, simply because we didn't have the staff to maintain it.

1084
01:52:18,790 --> 01:52:18,790
anytime you've got a something that needs some mechanical operation,

1085
01:52:24,985 --> 01:52:27,280
it's going to get broken within the first few weeks. That's just how it is. You're going to have people who're using it inappropriately.

1086
01:52:30,340 --> 01:52:31,885
you're going to have people screwing around with it. It's not going to last. So that's an issue.

1087
01:52:35,750 --> 01:52:35,750
>> also, I'm a little confused because your rules,

1088
01:52:42,620 --> 01:52:44,790
it's really your call, but your rules say that,

1089
01:52:47,720 --> 01:52:51,090
the county says it's minimal fencing going to be used on the site, yet your rules require fencing and a gate for county sites.

1090
01:52:58,140 --> 01:52:58,140
I'll give you the ordinance section number, but it says,

1091
01:53:02,505 --> 01:53:02,505
"within lr1a lake shore residential district,

1092
01:53:07,500 --> 01:53:10,785
a county dock is only allowed," and then they list in other things. It says on the last point that it is secured with a gate and a fence.

1093
01:53:16,035 --> 01:53:17,310
I'm not seeing any of this, so I don't know how that gets around the issue.

1094
01:53:21,525 --> 01:53:24,855
finally, I want to talk a little bit about safety issues, and it's a bigger issue that gets overlooked.

1095
01:53:27,825 --> 01:53:31,350
you're putting a picnic place. I do have to acknowledge that the county did

1096
01:53:33,360 --> 01:53:37,050
hear what we were saying earlier on when we were talking about barges and getting rid of the vertical lift or whatever they called it there.

1097
01:53:39,820 --> 01:53:42,080
but it does not address continuing and allowing this site to be used for commercial purposes,

1098
01:53:45,770 --> 01:53:47,675
mixing recreation and commercial, is creating what is called an attractive nuisance.

1099
01:53:51,145 --> 01:53:54,255
if any of you have any law or real estate background, you'll understand what an attractive nuisance is.

1100
01:53:56,445 --> 01:53:59,190
the reason swimming pools are fenced off under most rules are because swimming pools are an attractive nuisance.

1101
01:54:02,775 --> 01:54:02,775
there are five criteria that are really looked at in most lawsuits,

1102
01:54:08,370 --> 01:54:10,200
and these aren't little lawsuits. They've happened right here in minnetonka,

1103
01:54:12,720 --> 01:54:12,720
where people have been sued for creating an attractive nuisance.

1104
01:54:19,650 --> 01:54:22,620
the first is that the property owner, knows they have created or reasonably should

1105
01:54:25,740 --> 01:54:28,290
know that what they are doing is attracting children. This is a public boat launch.

1106
01:54:29,880 --> 01:54:33,135
you're going to have fishing piers, you're going to have kids. You've got a picnic table right up there. That the property owner should know that children are likely to trespass in their place.

1107
01:54:38,655 --> 01:54:41,385
we're inviting them. We're not trespassing. We're inviting them. The property owner should know that the attractive nuisance has

1108
01:54:45,030 --> 01:54:48,825
created a risk of injury or death to a trespassing child. We know that. When you've got kids playing around heavy equipment,

1109
01:54:53,175 --> 01:54:55,935
heavy equipment operators that have been doing this all day long on a hot day that aren't paying much attention to what's going on there,

1110
01:54:58,785 --> 01:55:01,440
and I've also operated heavy equipment, so I get it. It gets repetitive, and you stop thinking after a while.

1111
01:55:05,085 --> 01:55:07,590
kids are going to take risks. If the property owner fails to exercise reasonably degree

1112
01:55:11,550 --> 01:55:11,550
of care to protect children from harm due to an attractive nuisance,

1113
01:55:15,555 --> 01:55:18,270
you're doing nothing right now by allowing commercial traffic to continue through the site.

1114
01:55:21,675 --> 01:55:23,700
I think this is putting the county, I think this is putting the city and any other permanent agency at risk of

1115
01:55:27,900 --> 01:55:27,900
significant liability by allowing this mix of activities to occur.

1116
01:55:34,200 --> 01:55:37,785
this can be simply fixed. The concerns can be simply addressed,

1117
01:55:40,515 --> 01:55:42,525
simply by saying, look, folks, we're going to limit commercial activity,

1118
01:55:45,090 --> 01:55:47,550
or we're going to prohibit commercial activity on the site, and you have that ability to do that.

1119
01:55:51,530 --> 01:55:55,230
I'm going to pass out a summary of my notes. There are a lot of things that were brought up tonight that I wanted to emphasize,

1120
01:55:59,370 --> 01:56:01,980
and there were other questions that were raised that I thought were excellent questions and excellent concerns raised by the audience.

1121
01:56:07,380 --> 01:56:09,555
many are not included. But I would argue that there's got to be a way to either table

1122
01:56:12,600 --> 01:56:16,545
this thing moving forward or to possibly even deny it, because I'm not seeing what practical hardships are being

1123
01:56:19,200 --> 01:56:22,710
proven and asking the applicant to come back after they've gotten the responses from the other agencies and reapply for something with

1124
01:56:27,015 --> 01:56:27,015
a much better description of what it is that they're trying to solve with this problem,

1125
01:56:32,250 --> 01:56:35,580
because the five items that they've listed here for the practical hardships are not practical hardships,

1126
01:56:39,060 --> 01:56:41,040
they're things that the county itself is creating. It's I want rather than I have to. Thank you.

1127
01:56:44,910 --> 01:56:44,910
>> thank you. [applause]

1128
01:56:58,140 --> 01:57:01,470
>> thank you for listening to all this very good questions, richie anderson, I live at 3205 crystal bay road.

1129
01:57:05,175 --> 01:57:08,475
there was a lot of good points that were made tonight. The north arm launch ramp has turned into a war zone.

1130
01:57:13,770 --> 01:57:17,415
it's not on you, but it is on your counsel. You saw that sign that gabriel showed advertising for jet ski rentals and boat rentals.

1131
01:57:26,460 --> 01:57:26,460
the reason we have an issue now at north arm is

1132
01:57:31,170 --> 01:57:31,170
because you have to get a license to rent boats from the lmcd.

1133
01:57:37,545 --> 01:57:37,545
but the first obstacle is whether or not we have a license requirement at the city.

1134
01:57:45,825 --> 01:57:48,585
if there's no requirement at the city, then the lmcd licenses the rental watercraft.

1135
01:57:54,150 --> 01:57:54,150
the city of mound put a caveat like that in place so all that traffic came to our place.

1136
01:58:06,260 --> 01:58:09,090
it was a war zone. I counted one day,

1137
01:58:10,725 --> 01:58:10,725
seven cars parked in car trailer spots.

1138
01:58:15,675 --> 01:58:15,675
what happens is all the spots for the fishermen come to get dinner,

1139
01:58:21,555 --> 01:58:24,585
they're all taken by rentals. The pictures gabriel showed with all the garbage on

1140
01:58:28,200 --> 01:58:28,200
the sea wall there, they were rentals.

1141
01:58:33,240 --> 01:58:36,675
mound kicked them out, and we got them. But anyway, I'll get one of you guys to partner with me,

1142
01:58:41,550 --> 01:58:44,130
and we'll go to present this to the city. I tried to get it done twice to no avail,

1143
01:58:48,600 --> 01:58:48,600
but I won't quit because this is what happens.

1144
01:58:52,940 --> 01:58:56,250
they talked about the vacation of the orono property. I agree with eric. You don't vacate.

1145
01:59:00,990 --> 01:59:00,990
you have teeth, you mentioned the waste which gabriel showed you.

1146
01:59:09,615 --> 01:59:09,615
we reached out to mr. Genzol,

1147
01:59:14,985 --> 01:59:14,985
he finally got a larger dumpster in there at the marina,

1148
01:59:19,470 --> 01:59:22,545
we always had four yard dumpsters. They'd always fill up. Now we have six yard dumpsters, and they work.

1149
01:59:25,965 --> 01:59:29,085
that is a problem that can be solved. Bigger dumpster, county pays for more pickups.

1150
01:59:34,485 --> 01:59:37,610
that's a non-factor. I don't know if you were at the open house meeting.

1151
01:59:41,295 --> 01:59:43,530
the trash cans along the shore. We used to have garbage cans at our marina.

1152
01:59:47,220 --> 01:59:50,010
raccoons get in, garbage is all over the place. We have one dumpster.

1153
01:59:51,270 --> 01:59:53,520
you bring your bags to the dumpster, throw them in there, it's done.

1154
01:59:56,175 --> 01:59:59,790
there might be some leftover. You go to all the channels, there are some leftover minnow things and stuff,

1155
02:00:02,250 --> 02:00:04,755
but it won't be bags of garbage. You were spot on.

1156
02:00:08,420 --> 02:00:12,105
when the county says that they don't control it, that was quite obvious this summer.

1157
02:00:16,110 --> 02:00:16,110
quite honestly, we did talk to him at the open house to try to get that resolved,

1158
02:00:24,170 --> 02:00:26,370
but it fell on deaf ears, obviously, because it was uncontrolled.

1159
02:00:28,710 --> 02:00:28,710
why should our ono police have to police this thing?

1160
02:00:33,570 --> 02:00:36,600
that seems to me to be ridiculous. If they want to invite this traffic,

1161
02:00:38,700 --> 02:00:41,060
they should police it. Anyway, can you start my- as you know,

1162
02:00:48,510 --> 02:00:48,510
I was in on this initial discussion with the guys from imo and tony.

1163
02:00:57,750 --> 02:01:01,605
tony had sent me out a drawing, what do you think of this?

1164
02:01:03,480 --> 02:01:06,930
I said, well, I'll meet you down there. Bring the truck for the trailer.

1165
02:01:08,490 --> 02:01:12,345
travis came down. We tried some of the parking spots, and we thought that worked pretty well.

1166
02:01:15,045 --> 02:01:17,715
this was the initial drawing. Now, this initial drawing has 55 spots in it.

1167
02:01:22,095 --> 02:01:25,140
now it's down to 44, and you were correct, 413 whatever handicap.

1168
02:01:36,170 --> 02:01:36,170
I went down to the property this morning.

1169
02:01:41,250 --> 02:01:41,250
we have 53 current spots that can be used for car trailer spots,

1170
02:01:48,825 --> 02:01:52,695
51 and two handicap. I'm curious why we're going down to 44.

1171
02:01:58,425 --> 02:01:58,425
that doesn't seem like a a special use of the property when we're trying to create,

1172
02:02:08,030 --> 02:02:11,400
use of recreational, the industrial stuff, you all know about that.

1173
02:02:13,890 --> 02:02:15,720
but the fact of the matter is, if you look at the second we're supposed to be at 80,

1174
02:02:21,180 --> 02:02:24,990
and I'll show you the mandate that was passed on to us. This was in 1992,

1175
02:02:27,300 --> 02:02:30,045
the lake access task force. All these people got together.

1176
02:02:33,060 --> 02:02:35,400
you can see jerry rockvam, who we know well,

1177
02:02:37,440 --> 02:02:40,965
was very instrumental, gabriel jabar, you can see all the mares,

1178
02:02:42,825 --> 02:02:45,225
everything that was there. If you go to the next page,

1179
02:02:48,075 --> 02:02:48,075
you can see that north arm was was given credit for having 80 spots.

1180
02:02:57,750 --> 02:03:00,405
now, why is this important? Then on the street, north arm was 31.

1181
02:03:03,690 --> 02:03:03,690
those were the parking spots that the signage took care of,

1182
02:03:09,015 --> 02:03:10,815
and they're gone now. We're supposed to have 80 spots and the fact of the matter is,

1183
02:03:16,230 --> 02:03:20,040
we get ais money for designated trailer spots. We currently have 53,

1184
02:03:25,300 --> 02:03:25,300
and the proposal is to go down to 44.

1185
02:03:29,510 --> 02:03:32,515
we should be going the other way, the initial drawing that I went out and we checked,

1186
02:03:36,495 --> 02:03:38,985
see if it worked traffic wise, was 55, and now we're 44.

1187
02:03:44,750 --> 02:03:48,180
this will be an issue. It's been go along, get along.

1188
02:03:53,040 --> 02:03:54,210
but the fact of the matter is the current access works great for the 53 trailer parking spots.

1189
02:04:05,600 --> 02:04:05,600
I keep coming back to the fact that it is a one person issue.

1190
02:04:13,320 --> 02:04:15,480
but the fact of the matter is, we all bitch and moan about our 25 percent increase in our haman county taxes.

1191
02:04:21,630 --> 02:04:21,630
here is something that works perfectly well.

1192
02:04:28,040 --> 02:04:28,040
there's no reason to do this for many reasons,

1193
02:04:32,895 --> 02:04:35,865
but to spend money that we really don't have. Now, the last two pictures are current garbage that have been there for about two weeks.

1194
02:04:44,055 --> 02:04:44,055
that picture there, and you can see the spot for the dumpster, if you back up.

1195
02:04:48,300 --> 02:04:51,900
they took the dumpster out ahead of time. I can't believe it. It should sit there for all winter for all the traffic.

1196
02:04:54,690 --> 02:04:54,690
I talked about the fish houses that are going out there now with the satellites.

1197
02:04:58,995 --> 02:05:00,915
that's a big deal. Guess what? They got trash. You can notice that.

1198
02:05:03,315 --> 02:05:05,025
why would they put the trash there? Because they'd have open bottle of felonies,

1199
02:05:10,680 --> 02:05:13,920
not felonies, but tickets if that was in their car, so they throw it on there.

1200
02:05:15,075 --> 02:05:16,395
then the last one, this is over where the satellites are not now there.

1201
02:05:20,430 --> 02:05:22,410
there's a toilet sitting there. Why should we be responsible for this?

1202
02:05:30,750 --> 02:05:30,750
it's only going to get worse it's

1203
02:05:35,100 --> 02:05:35,100
only going to get worse because they don't do anything about it.

1204
02:05:39,630 --> 02:05:41,760
they expect our cops to patrol it. They say they got signage.

1205
02:05:43,650 --> 02:05:47,130
the signage says, don't park here. They park there. Pretty simple fix,

1206
02:05:51,150 --> 02:05:54,435
get a tow company, and they come in there and make some dough. But anyway, thanks you guys.

1207
02:05:56,190 --> 02:06:00,150
very good questions. You're tuned in. Thank you. >> thank you. Anybody else?

1208
02:06:11,630 --> 02:06:14,040
I'll close the public hearing. We'll bring this item back up here for discussion.

1209
02:06:17,220 --> 02:06:19,110
there's a lot to discuss. Does any of the commission want to take

1210
02:06:22,170 --> 02:06:22,170
a short recess before we get into further discussion?

1211
02:06:26,490 --> 02:06:29,940
>> at some point [inaudible]. >> for the next item. Perfect. Well,

1212
02:06:38,190 --> 02:06:41,925
first, I want to thank everybody for coming and speaking. I think that makes our decisions a lot better up

1213
02:06:44,550 --> 02:06:47,550
here as commissioners to have that public input. Good to our bad, it's good to have that so thank you.

1214
02:06:52,005 --> 02:06:55,680
who'd like to start discussion? I'm looking down here. I'm going to pick on you. Go ahead.

1215
02:06:58,110 --> 02:07:00,900
>> actually, I've got a couple more questions that have spurred up from this for the applicant, if that's okay.

1216
02:07:03,495 --> 02:07:05,565
>> yes. Applicant. >> thank you. My first question just relates to the funding.

1217
02:07:12,720 --> 02:07:15,810
the funding's already been allocated for this I'm assuming? >> right. This is a capital improvement project.

1218
02:07:18,225 --> 02:07:18,225
the county board has decided to get some money out and door, and now,

1219
02:07:23,340 --> 02:07:27,150
typically it goes east to the city of minneapolis and such, but we decided that this is a good use of our funds.

1220
02:07:30,975 --> 02:07:30,975
>> is there a time limit if this dragged on or didn't get approved or something came up,

1221
02:07:35,910 --> 02:07:37,665
would those funds expire? >> there is no time limit per se,

1222
02:07:40,815 --> 02:07:42,900
but I do want to say that, we did have public meetings last year,

1223
02:07:45,870 --> 02:07:49,710
so there is a reasonable expectation from our leadership at the county that this moves along in a timely fashion.

1224
02:07:54,795 --> 02:07:57,735
the opportunity to do the public meeting, or go there and voice everything,

1225
02:08:00,680 --> 02:08:03,225
it's been done, and it's gone. We're trying to react to this

1226
02:08:05,550 --> 02:08:05,550
here because we want to listen to people.

1227
02:08:14,925 --> 02:08:18,315
>> this isn't, I guess I'm confused, isn't this? >> the haniba county held two open houses earlier this year.

1228
02:08:23,385 --> 02:08:25,965
>> last year. Public engagement. >> with different sample and design elements where they were gathering feedback.

1229
02:08:29,505 --> 02:08:29,505
you are hosting the formal public hearing required by state statute for the application.

1230
02:08:35,535 --> 02:08:35,535
>> those sessions that they held,

1231
02:08:40,605 --> 02:08:40,605
was the ono community made aware of that before and given an opportunity to go see.

1232
02:08:44,790 --> 02:08:48,000
yes. >> second question. Two launches hennepin county controls on lake minnetonka right now?

1233
02:08:54,000 --> 02:08:54,810
>> correct. >> one of them is essentially supervised 24/7 by the sheriff's department, correct?

1234
02:09:00,090 --> 02:09:02,010
>> the office is right there, yes. >> comparing what happens in that one to this one is

1235
02:09:05,490 --> 02:09:08,640
really not apples to apples because, things that happen there are going to happen

1236
02:09:10,500 --> 02:09:12,705
under the guise at the sheriffs watching it, correct? >> that would be a fair assessment.

1237
02:09:14,715 --> 02:09:14,715
>> is there any intention to have a better sheriff's presence at

1238
02:09:18,975 --> 02:09:20,790
this one to alleviate a lot of these issues that are happening because there's no supervision?

1239
02:09:24,075 --> 02:09:24,075
>> well, that's one of those issues where I think we would resolve as it comes,

1240
02:09:31,035 --> 02:09:32,430
and it sounds like, currently I'm hearing that the on opd and the sheriff's office are working together.

1241
02:09:37,950 --> 02:09:37,950
the tag team, any issues that come along.

1242
02:09:42,195 --> 02:09:42,195
but in terms of dedicating the sheriff's resources to things like,

1243
02:09:47,010 --> 02:09:49,740
parking issues and such. I think we'd have to ask leadership,

1244
02:09:52,665 --> 02:09:52,665
how they would like to approach.

1245
02:09:59,630 --> 02:10:02,955
>> another question that comes up is that came up. When we talk about policies that impact this,

1246
02:10:06,885 --> 02:10:09,045
hennepin county does have rental policies in place for anybody to use rental equipment, correct?

1247
02:10:13,680 --> 02:10:15,735
rental boats, watercraft. There are policies in place for that?

1248
02:10:18,470 --> 02:10:22,320
>> no, we don't have a policy in place for, mandating or regulating that.

1249
02:10:24,645 --> 02:10:26,250
as I think was previously mentioned, imcd does have a time limit at docking spaces that we have signed in,

1250
02:10:31,275 --> 02:10:33,915
for example, at spring park, that signs up right now. I can't say definitively if it's been at north arm too,

1251
02:10:36,420 --> 02:10:40,185
but I know it was provided at spring park to limit the staging time, because we would want to see is,

1252
02:10:41,790 --> 02:10:41,790
the watercraft placed their boat at a dock for many hours,

1253
02:10:47,100 --> 02:10:49,755
clogging up that particular dock. We are enforcing that.

1254
02:10:59,780 --> 02:11:02,640
>> question then just going on that. So there is a hennepin county rental requirement

1255
02:11:06,165 --> 02:11:09,750
for permits for any rental craft on lake minnetonka. [overlapping] because I'm looking at the website right now where it says,

1256
02:11:13,770 --> 02:11:13,770
water craft are required to have a hennepin county permit?

1257
02:11:18,620 --> 02:11:18,620
>> I think you're referring to one of the reasons as I understand it,

1258
02:11:22,890 --> 02:11:22,890
lmcd wanted to put that in place is that it ensures that water patrol,

1259
02:11:26,940 --> 02:11:26,940
so our sheriff's office is allowed to properly enforce some of the safety requirements.

1260
02:11:32,415 --> 02:11:34,365
that's as far as I understand it. I can't speak to what you're looking to specifically, but my understanding.

1261
02:11:42,380 --> 02:11:45,855
>> any other questions for the applicants since they're up here? Apologize. I do have one more.

1262
02:11:47,625 --> 02:11:51,045
one of the things you had talked about with this one is increasing the lightage? Correct. When I look at the spring lake park,

1263
02:11:54,330 --> 02:11:57,795
there's only two lights there for a significantly larger space, why is there so much more light needed at this one?

1264
02:12:00,780 --> 02:12:03,600
>> well, let's look at the lighting plan. With lighting, those numbers on there are the values,

1265
02:12:09,120 --> 02:12:11,985
and that's the amount of light that's shining on the surface. You will see a lot of zeros.

1266
02:12:14,235 --> 02:12:17,880
at the boundary of border, there's definitely zero. There's no light bled whatsoever.

1267
02:12:20,505 --> 02:12:22,935
we kept the consultants that, we don't want any light bled.

1268
02:12:24,525 --> 02:12:26,910
we don't want anything, disturbing the skies. We are for, dark skies.

1269
02:12:29,535 --> 02:12:29,535
we want to do, just enough so that there is,

1270
02:12:34,305 --> 02:12:37,515
lighting for people to feel comfortable and safe. But not too much that it's going to be glaring or, offensive to people.

1271
02:12:42,240 --> 02:12:45,675
if you look at the values underneath the actual light poles, we went from three or four fixtures down to one fixture.

1272
02:12:50,445 --> 02:12:50,445
when you see a value of eight, 7.7 and six,

1273
02:12:54,510 --> 02:12:54,510
that's, that's dimly lit parking lot lighting effectively.

1274
02:12:59,760 --> 02:13:02,310
we're mounting in on 20 foot poles, instead of 30 foot poles,

1275
02:13:03,855 --> 02:13:05,700
which would technically be better in terms of the minimum to maximum and lighter distribution.

1276
02:13:09,120 --> 02:13:12,925
but that comes at the cost of, somebody staring up and looking at a light, whereas a 20 foot pole is more manageable in terms of that amount of glare.

1277
02:13:17,915 --> 02:13:17,915
then when it comes to the north side where the fishing is, those numbers,

1278
02:13:22,205 --> 02:13:22,205
are effectively zero because they're pedestrian mounted light,

1279
02:13:26,440 --> 02:13:28,560
and they are up and down. There's a shade on it that bounces the light up and then bounces it down,

1280
02:13:32,250 --> 02:13:34,740
so there would only be a soft glow there. We are reducing that number from 2467 to I told my consultant five,

1281
02:13:41,385 --> 02:13:43,725
just being aware of all of this. If you look at all of the other places,

1282
02:13:45,540 --> 02:13:45,540
we strategically placed all of the lights where it would benefit the most.

1283
02:13:49,590 --> 02:13:49,590
one is that the picnic loading area for the ramp there.

1284
02:13:54,840 --> 02:13:57,690
but then it just drops off rather quickly. In between the lights,

1285
02:13:59,085 --> 02:13:59,085
we see effectively one foot candle or less.

1286
02:14:03,240 --> 02:14:05,625
ideally, if it was up to me, I would clear the skies and have a full moon every night,

1287
02:14:09,530 --> 02:14:12,665
and it would be one foot candle all on the site. But that's not possible.

1288
02:14:14,195 --> 02:14:17,650
then the other spot that we have, the light is at the entrance there. That's, another security safety thing.

1289
02:14:21,585 --> 02:14:21,585
can we reduce this down some more, probably.

1290
02:14:25,860 --> 02:14:28,140
that's why we're putting it on dimmer switches so that we can control the intensity of the light?

1291
02:14:30,735 --> 02:14:30,735
what you're seeing is the efficacy of the light at 100% when it's first installed,

1292
02:14:36,465 --> 02:14:36,465
it'll dim down over time at about 80-85%.

1293
02:14:41,505 --> 02:14:43,725
our strategy is, between the dimmer, when it first gets there,

1294
02:14:47,160 --> 02:14:51,135
we'll tweak it down. Then when the light fades, we'll tweak it up again,

1295
02:14:52,200 --> 02:14:53,835
so it stays more consistent. But then we also have it on a timer because we don't feel

1296
02:14:57,330 --> 02:15:01,290
the need to burn the lights that night after 10:00 pm. It'll be off from 10 until sunrise.

1297
02:15:06,585 --> 02:15:06,585
but after hearing a comment about safety, I don't know.

1298
02:15:11,025 --> 02:15:14,490
we might want to do it at the picnic area because I hope everybody understands that this is a 24/7 open environment.

1299
02:15:19,230 --> 02:15:20,925
that's why there are no gates. That this is allowed for public use 24 hours a day,

1300
02:15:26,040 --> 02:15:28,755
seven days a week, and it will not be closed. >> the lights are going to be on dusk to dawn.

1301
02:15:34,515 --> 02:15:36,435
>> sunrise. Then it'll kick on, I think,

1302
02:15:39,480 --> 02:15:41,760
30 minutes before it gets dark, stay let until 10,

1303
02:15:43,620 --> 02:15:45,390
and then go off. We also entertain the idea of having it dimmed down to half or,

1304
02:15:49,785 --> 02:15:52,095
just turn on when somebody approaches. But we figured that would be a little more annoying than just turn it off.

1305
02:15:56,550 --> 02:15:59,985
>> 10:00 pm, they'll be off. >> 10:00 pm. That's our goal. >> I think that's different than what our packet says.

1306
02:16:02,850 --> 02:16:06,260
it says they'll be on until sunrise. That's what I read, but.

1307
02:16:10,160 --> 02:16:12,870
>> I just want to ask one quick question. When you guys go into design phases,

1308
02:16:14,820 --> 02:16:17,535
like pre-design, through the stages, what type of, outreach do you do?

1309
02:16:20,160 --> 02:16:20,160
with community, with stakeholders or impacted residents?

1310
02:16:25,275 --> 02:16:25,275
>> we do the open house process,

1311
02:16:29,820 --> 02:16:32,580
and we had two open houses before this, and that was during schematic design.

1312
02:16:35,745 --> 02:16:39,045
right now, we're trying to get into the design development phase. Everything isn't fixed yet.

1313
02:16:41,940 --> 02:16:44,970
we always welcome feedback. We always welcome, things that we can work with,

1314
02:16:48,195 --> 02:16:51,165
other partners with just, so that everybody knows what's going in there.

1315
02:16:54,980 --> 02:16:57,930
I know change is tough sometimes, but there are things that I think people get in

1316
02:17:00,630 --> 02:17:04,320
their minds that they think it's going to be, really bad, but it really isn't all that bad.

1317
02:17:08,180 --> 02:17:08,180
just referencing the trees along that buffer, the west side,

1318
02:17:13,785 --> 02:17:16,605
we had our forestry department look at it and identify trees that were either invasive or voluntary.

1319
02:17:20,100 --> 02:17:23,160
our idea is to clear and grub, what we need to. But the other part of the idea is to replant,

1320
02:17:26,070 --> 02:17:26,070
to get something else going on there to establish to recreate that buffer,

1321
02:17:31,335 --> 02:17:31,335
with the species that are more appropriate.

1322
02:17:36,920 --> 02:17:36,920
then, I think, I'm hearing a few conflicting things in terms of the parking.

1323
02:17:44,100 --> 02:17:46,815
there's a parking requirement for the trailers, x number that we have now.

1324
02:17:49,365 --> 02:17:52,890
some people say, well, we should have more. Well, more parking means increased use or increased intensity.

1325
02:17:56,565 --> 02:17:59,985
that's just how how it shakes out, really. What we're doing is, we're trying to keep it as,

1326
02:18:02,620 --> 02:18:02,620
similar as possible so that the actual use itself is as similar as possible as it is now,

1327
02:18:10,415 --> 02:18:13,195
as it was from 1960. Because I think that's what drives all of this in terms of the intensity of the use.

1328
02:18:19,345 --> 02:18:21,155
>> one last question. Do you have any design examples from

1329
02:18:24,290 --> 02:18:24,290
the open house feedback you received that you incorporated into the second on?

1330
02:18:29,990 --> 02:18:29,990
>> if we look at the triangle space up there where the fishing pier is,

1331
02:18:35,385 --> 02:18:38,040
that resulted in a comment, I think, city council member,

1332
02:18:42,375 --> 02:18:44,490
that was at one of the meetings. [background] before, it wasn't as developed as this as in green spaces and everything,

1333
02:18:52,020 --> 02:18:55,290
it was, just open. I think at one point, it was, artificial turf.

1334
02:18:57,375 --> 02:18:59,220
then we took that comment, and we integrated into our design.

1335
02:19:02,760 --> 02:19:05,910
that is a result of, one of the comments there. The vertical access point being, taken out,

1336
02:19:10,650 --> 02:19:13,440
is a direct result of, neighbors saying, that they're fearing that, you know.

1337
02:19:17,720 --> 02:19:21,425
by taking it out, our stance is that, the use is now the same.

1338
02:19:23,105 --> 02:19:23,105
I just can't see how the use can be increased,

1339
02:19:28,730 --> 02:19:30,470
with the number of parking, and it's just constraint to this size.

1340
02:19:34,810 --> 02:19:38,745
then, accessibility. The wheelchairs and ways ramp,

1341
02:19:42,330 --> 02:19:45,555
came from one of the meetings. That ramp is actually being donated to the county by wheelchairs and ways.

1342
02:19:52,050 --> 02:19:52,050
in the agreement, wheelchairs and ways will also be maintaining it.

1343
02:19:57,405 --> 02:20:00,405
that's part of their, agreement with the county. In exchange, I think the county will allow wheelchairs and ways to host one event every,

1344
02:20:06,570 --> 02:20:08,355
year on this space, using that space so that people, can fish.

1345
02:20:16,340 --> 02:20:20,040
>> you mentioned that the vertical access point was removed out of concerns for industrial use of the space.

1346
02:20:24,120 --> 02:20:27,030
is there anything else with this design, that was on the table to change with a similar motivation in mind.

1347
02:20:32,595 --> 02:20:34,740
in other words, is there anything else that you would consider maybe changing with this project design too,

1348
02:20:37,725 --> 02:20:39,570
outside of more consistent enforcement, it sounds like to change this space to make it clear that it isn't for industrial use?

1349
02:20:46,410 --> 02:20:46,410
>> I think the county would be looking for the city to have a policy in place,

1350
02:20:51,840 --> 02:20:54,210
that is, enforceable, and actually, we can put it on a sign.

1351
02:20:58,010 --> 02:20:58,010
in my mind, those two things don't really overlap.

1352
02:21:03,615 --> 02:21:07,560
this project is, reconditioning this site use, and it's going to be used the same way as it was before.

1353
02:21:11,340 --> 02:21:11,340
we're not, the county won't be taking the lead on,

1354
02:21:15,825 --> 02:21:15,825
denying access to, whatever user.

1355
02:21:20,130 --> 02:21:20,130
although we don't allow smoking on county property, and that's going to be signed.

1356
02:21:24,135 --> 02:21:26,700
if you're trying to smoke here, good luck, not here. [laughter] but well,

1357
02:21:29,790 --> 02:21:31,215
that's what we have. That's in our policies that there's no tobacco use on our, properties.

1358
02:21:35,745 --> 02:21:39,405
but in terms of, commercial use, industrial use, if the city has something in place or if the state has

1359
02:21:42,540 --> 02:21:45,240
something in place that we can reference clearly, we will gladly sign it,

1360
02:21:46,755 --> 02:21:49,860
and we will work with, enforcing, whether it's sheriff's office or or an opd, enforcing it.

1361
02:21:55,110 --> 02:21:55,110
>> at what point did that policy change with this site for commercial use?

1362
02:21:59,595 --> 02:22:03,240
>> the policy never changed. From 1960 unit was built.

1363
02:22:05,610 --> 02:22:07,590
it's always been a public access. What changed was, I think the city zoning came in in 1975, I want to say.

1364
02:22:14,430 --> 02:22:16,785
that's what changed it from, zoning this to an lr3, is it?

1365
02:22:20,955 --> 02:22:20,955
>> city adopted our zoning in 1975 to lr1c residential,

1366
02:22:26,655 --> 02:22:29,520
but that's where we commented that this is a legal nonconforming use since the use was

1367
02:22:31,875 --> 02:22:31,875
operating before the zoning to came into place.

1368
02:22:36,410 --> 02:22:36,410
>> this was built before the americans disability act in 1991.

1369
02:22:41,820 --> 02:22:45,285
a large part of this is us going in and saying, well, this isn't right, you know?

1370
02:22:47,010 --> 02:22:47,010
that's why we're seeing a lot of accessibility and everything that we touch.

1371
02:22:54,110 --> 02:22:56,460
>> mr. Chair. >> yes. >> I don't have any questions if you might be available later on.

1372
02:23:00,375 --> 02:23:00,375
but I just wanted to keep moving.

1373
02:23:04,530 --> 02:23:04,530
a couple of things, as commissioners,

1374
02:23:09,510 --> 02:23:13,170
we're all volunteers. We're not paid. I want to tell you first and foremost, I know this is not fun for you to probably be standing up here and get fired away

1375
02:23:16,470 --> 02:23:16,470
by the [inaudible] instead of resistant to change.

1376
02:23:20,820 --> 02:23:23,805
humans are naturally resistant to change. That it's always difficult to be the mouthpiece of change.

1377
02:23:28,500 --> 02:23:28,500
the reasons the ways to do that is you demonstrate what the benefit is,

1378
02:23:33,120 --> 02:23:36,210
you demonstrate what the improvement is, and that what's going to be on the other side is going to be better than what you have now,

1379
02:23:39,135 --> 02:23:42,540
and hope that that bridges the gap. But I think that's my foundation of why I'm opposed to this.

1380
02:23:47,130 --> 02:23:47,130
as commissioners, we're all supposed to be coming from different places of expertise.

1381
02:23:53,955 --> 02:23:56,445
some are more familiar with, acreage and livestock and things like that.

1382
02:23:59,910 --> 02:24:01,800
I come from the lake district. I know a lot about this stuff,

1383
02:24:04,470 --> 02:24:06,240
and I've experienced a lot of this stuff, and I think there's a little bit of angst.

1384
02:24:10,470 --> 02:24:13,830
I just got opened up my county tax record statement. I think we know 18%.

1385
02:24:17,210 --> 02:24:17,210
say what you will about public officials and

1386
02:24:21,660 --> 02:24:21,660
previous mayors and current mayors and city council and all those things.

1387
02:24:25,860 --> 02:24:28,260
maybe I'm naive, but I give benefit of the doubt for everybody that we're all trying to do what's best.

1388
02:24:33,260 --> 02:24:36,345
I always like to give that benefit of the doubt. I'm not going to disparage any of those people.

1389
02:24:39,300 --> 02:24:39,300
I do appreciate how there are business owners that are suffering,

1390
02:24:43,740 --> 02:24:46,530
for boat rental companies and boat services that are not paying taxes in our county for those services,

1391
02:24:49,275 --> 02:24:52,290
and there are businesses that are here that do. I appreciate them bringing those things up.

1392
02:24:54,990 --> 02:24:57,885
but I think some of the burn is, there's a lot of things that are being put on our city,

1393
02:25:03,480 --> 02:25:03,480
among others, that is a burden that gets passed on,

1394
02:25:07,605 --> 02:25:09,480
and I think taxation is one of them. I mean, as a city, we have a lot of taxes.

1395
02:25:13,245 --> 02:25:14,490
then when we have the raises, we don't see a lot of that come to our city with that.

1396
02:25:20,570 --> 02:25:20,570
I think that naturally makes people resistant when the ass comes on the other side.

1397
02:25:28,340 --> 02:25:28,340
then you look at it in the way of if this is an application.

1398
02:25:33,735 --> 02:25:36,420
one of the residents mentioned, our job is to try to find a way to make this an improvement.

1399
02:25:39,855 --> 02:25:43,740
how are we improving the current condition? Or not? We might be fixing it,

1400
02:25:45,390 --> 02:25:45,390
but I lived across the road from that boat launch for 30 out of the last 46 years.

1401
02:25:51,720 --> 02:25:51,720
I was the guy those private bmx bike in and out of parking spots.

1402
02:25:57,525 --> 02:26:00,240
I'm the guy now that lives across the way, that launches my boat there,

1403
02:26:01,725 --> 02:26:01,725
and that boat launch has been in disrepair for a really long time. That's disappointing.

1404
02:26:08,840 --> 02:26:12,090
that's why I was actually asking about some of the fees, because I think the grand scheme of things for living

1405
02:26:14,940 --> 02:26:18,285
around here to pay a fee to park and things like that, a drop in the bucket compared to what our property taxes are.

1406
02:26:21,540 --> 02:26:21,540
if it provides safety and it gives us the ability to maintain it, now you're talking.

1407
02:26:26,760 --> 02:26:29,310
I think the residents get behind safety, the residents get behind maintenance.

1408
02:26:32,570 --> 02:26:35,580
>> when I was doing my research, there's 59 total boat launches in hennepin county,

1409
02:26:41,430 --> 02:26:45,300
according to my records that I tried to research. You mentioned two are owned and operated by the hennepin county.

1410
02:26:50,220 --> 02:26:54,075
the rest are scattered between 15 cities, two park districts, the dnr,

1411
02:26:58,470 --> 02:27:01,130
and our national parks. Of those, many of them actually do have fees.

1412
02:27:06,450 --> 02:27:09,480
then you start thinking about some of these being more familiar. Lake minnetonka regional park being one of them.

1413
02:27:12,360 --> 02:27:15,420
they did a tremendous job developing that space. It became a place of attraction for people that live here and people that don't.

1414
02:27:20,715 --> 02:27:23,010
it's a safe place. There's a nice amenities, and they're paid for with some of those use fees.

1415
02:27:26,150 --> 02:27:28,545
fish lake regional park, french regional park, highland lake,

1416
02:27:30,720 --> 02:27:33,360
lake rebecca, lake minnetonka regional park, twin lakes boat access, and robbinsdale.

1417
02:27:36,210 --> 02:27:38,100
all of them have fees, and I think there's good use for that.

1418
02:27:41,010 --> 02:27:41,010
I agree that access should be given,

1419
02:27:45,150 --> 02:27:45,150
but here's some contrary accesses in hennepin county that do have fees for that.

1420
02:27:49,690 --> 02:27:52,850
I don't think it's a fee to make it a barrier to launch. It's an expensive industry to be a part of in the first place.

1421
02:27:56,750 --> 02:27:56,750
but I think what it does do is it take some of the burden off of the city,

1422
02:28:02,400 --> 02:28:04,215
in this case, to maintain. There's a lot of police cars across the road doing their best to maintain the parks,

1423
02:28:08,970 --> 02:28:10,755
but that's paid for by us. I don't know if the county's paying for that.

1424
02:28:13,020 --> 02:28:16,950
I don't know if we're getting credit for the density that we could rezone this for, because we have to answer to

1425
02:28:18,120 --> 02:28:21,120
the met council all the time about how we're going to add density, and add multifamily housing to appease them.

1426
02:28:23,010 --> 02:28:26,190
otherwise, we lose our funding for our municipalities, and city sewer and city water.

1427
02:28:27,810 --> 02:28:30,840
guys, this is what local politics are, and that's a tough job.

1428
02:28:32,895 --> 02:28:35,880
that's why I don't disparage any previous mayor, previous regime or anything like that.

1429
02:28:37,965 --> 02:28:40,350
we have representatives from the lmcd that's here to represent orono and what's best for orono.

1430
02:28:43,260 --> 02:28:45,495
we all have that responsibility. I'm going to give benefit that we're all doing that for what's best for orono.

1431
02:28:49,290 --> 02:28:51,420
if you look at it, as a practical difficulty, it doesn't because it hard covers is going 70-79.

1432
02:28:55,380 --> 02:28:58,815
on top of that, we're really not adding any spots. It's a launch that needs to be improved upon because it hasn't been maintained,

1433
02:29:05,955 --> 02:29:08,865
but that's not a reason to approve this. We don't have a tax benefit.

1434
02:29:11,955 --> 02:29:15,840
it's an intensification of traffic and trailer. If you think about what egress and ingress,

1435
02:29:18,555 --> 02:29:18,555
based on the amount of residential homes are in that immediate area,

1436
02:29:22,710 --> 02:29:22,710
you are either sending them down 51 where there is no stop light,

1437
02:29:26,865 --> 02:29:30,195
which then becomes the county wants to put a stop light in, or you have to drag them through navarre,

1438
02:29:32,760 --> 02:29:32,760
and that's already a heavily congested intersection.

1439
02:29:36,830 --> 02:29:36,830
that's not really conducive for making it easier to add more traffic.

1440
02:29:47,180 --> 02:29:47,180
I think it'd be awesome if you have community centers that partner

1441
02:29:52,470 --> 02:29:55,380
with cities and counties where you as a community center can use a facility as a city resident,

1442
02:29:58,710 --> 02:29:58,710
and maybe that's a place to go with this is helps maintain it, helps keep safety.

1443
02:30:03,345 --> 02:30:03,345
city of orono residents for a city of orono property can use it for free,

1444
02:30:07,830 --> 02:30:10,440
or maybe if you're just launching, you're not parking, you can launch for free.

1445
02:30:12,630 --> 02:30:14,100
I think, that's where one of the previous marina owners mentioned you can launch for free.

1446
02:30:17,580 --> 02:30:19,530
probably can't park for free. All those things. I'd love to get some ideas that way.

1447
02:30:23,730 --> 02:30:26,340
>> sure. Clarifying question. When you say that these parks are charging fees,

1448
02:30:29,685 --> 02:30:29,685
are they charging fees for the park use or charging fees for the lake access?

1449
02:30:34,485 --> 02:30:36,240
>> I'm going to have to dig into that more, but from what I was trying to find their trailer pass requirements.

1450
02:30:44,810 --> 02:30:48,765
honestly I was surprised. This is not a congressional investigation.

1451
02:30:51,030 --> 02:30:54,045
[overlapping] I'm trying to get anybody. I really wanted to know. >> right because I know from reading a few things that I think one of

1452
02:30:59,280 --> 02:30:59,280
the stipulations by the dnr with this piece of

1453
02:31:03,330 --> 02:31:03,330
property that the county owns is that we can't charge a fee to access the lake.

1454
02:31:07,680 --> 02:31:11,520
>> yeah. >> I think, part of it was also in a report for the parking, and that's why the number of parking stalls that are made available is what it is,

1455
02:31:16,530 --> 02:31:18,870
and why we're trying to keep it up also. Could we keep it the same?

1456
02:31:20,910 --> 02:31:20,910
but that would be at the expense of stalls that are back to nine feet wide,

1457
02:31:26,040 --> 02:31:26,040
which essentially means that some stalls just aren't usable because,

1458
02:31:30,345 --> 02:31:32,250
a vehicle in a trailer and a nine foot wide stall might encroach on the other stall potentially.

1459
02:31:37,215 --> 02:31:37,215
>> I don't disagree. I think part of this is just maintaining it too.

1460
02:31:41,910 --> 02:31:41,910
but more importantly, is the vast majority of hennepin county,

1461
02:31:49,080 --> 02:31:51,045
not even in the greater minnesota, are not owned and operated by hennepin county.

1462
02:31:54,700 --> 02:31:56,630
maybe that's a problem. Because the city can then decide who does it, who maintains it,

1463
02:31:59,795 --> 02:32:02,180
how they manage it, and who comes in and out of it and what design they want and all those things.

1464
02:32:04,730 --> 02:32:08,370
then we don't have that dissonance. Because again, I honest to goodness, want to try to always think about what's best.

1465
02:32:10,080 --> 02:32:12,840
I'm like, is this because of a burn about met counsel asking us for density or is this because my taxes went up?

1466
02:32:15,810 --> 02:32:18,345
because I don't want to make it about me. It's not. It's about, okay, well, are we improving it for the benefit of the city?

1467
02:32:21,870 --> 02:32:24,765
are we improving it for the benefit of ourselves? As applicants, if that's the case,

1468
02:32:26,475 --> 02:32:29,010
I always try to put that hat on. The answer is no, in almost all of those aspects,

1469
02:32:32,190 --> 02:32:35,310
because I would love to get some of the counts when they have those people that survey who, where you came from.

1470
02:32:38,700 --> 02:32:42,030
what was your last lake? How many of those are orono residents? I don't see a lot of, I don't know what you may know that.

1471
02:32:44,385 --> 02:32:47,175
>> no. I don't know that offhand, but I will say that the county's approach to

1472
02:32:49,560 --> 02:32:53,325
things with land ownership is stewardship, first and foremost. Then, secondly, also we serve residents.

1473
02:32:57,480 --> 02:32:58,710
residents of orono, and everybody else within the county.

1474
02:33:01,545 --> 02:33:05,025
I can appreciate the residents locally, advocating for themselves,

1475
02:33:06,645 --> 02:33:10,350
and also gabe advocating also. But I think from the county's point of view,

1476
02:33:13,140 --> 02:33:13,140
we have 1.3 million people that reside in hennepin county.

1477
02:33:19,560 --> 02:33:19,560
what we want to do is make sure that all of those people's lives also get enrich,

1478
02:33:26,250 --> 02:33:30,240
and that's the accessibility part, heavy part of it. >> you segue right into my last point.

1479
02:33:33,960 --> 02:33:33,960
there's the gray area between a right and a privilege.

1480
02:33:38,010 --> 02:33:41,265
I think through use comes experience. I think if you are a boater on lake minnetonka, that on weekends,

1481
02:33:45,180 --> 02:33:45,180
you'll find less experience in relation to the use,

1482
02:33:50,085 --> 02:33:52,140
and that can be frustrating for the people that do know the rules, and practice those rules.

1483
02:33:55,725 --> 02:33:59,400
when you have shoreline erosion, that becomes a casualty of that, then that becomes a cost for those people as well.

1484
02:34:02,115 --> 02:34:05,640
I think the landowners are the ones that are the stewards of the, what is our proverbial national park,

1485
02:34:07,650 --> 02:34:07,650
and the gate entrance to that park is that boat launch. The difference is.

1486
02:34:12,570 --> 02:34:12,570
you guys have a gate keeper in those state parks and those parent county parks,

1487
02:34:19,545 --> 02:34:21,480
there's no gate keeper there. Maybe I'm completely off base.

1488
02:34:24,030 --> 02:34:24,030
but that's, I'm trying to find a way for me to support this.

1489
02:34:29,880 --> 02:34:31,965
but we're not improving the condition, or not benefiting the environment.

1490
02:34:34,080 --> 02:34:36,615
we're not benefiting orono residences, and we're not offsetting any expenses or improving expenses that

1491
02:34:39,930 --> 02:34:39,930
might be able to be deferred to other things and maybe reduced taxation.

1492
02:34:44,750 --> 02:34:48,465
but again, it's not personal. I appreciate you being here and having to answer these tough questions.

1493
02:34:51,300 --> 02:34:53,780
>> definitely. >> but, again, I don't like to

1494
02:34:56,790 --> 02:34:59,610
complain and not have an answer as to how what the resolution is, because just saying that you're opposing do any good.

1495
02:35:02,580 --> 02:35:04,200
in doing my part in that, I think what I would like to see with that would be some ability to charge

1496
02:35:10,590 --> 02:35:10,590
a trailer use fee or to do a partnership with the city where there's a joint ownership,

1497
02:35:17,010 --> 02:35:20,310
and a joint regulation on it and what becomes of it. That allows you to pay for some of those amenities to be monitored and maintained,

1498
02:35:25,125 --> 02:35:28,890
and/or maybe just sell it to the city, and work with the city on figuring out what works

1499
02:35:32,220 --> 02:35:35,970
best in that same vein. But that's all I had. >> go ahead.

1500
02:35:39,360 --> 02:35:42,075
>> go down the aisle, if that's okay. First off, thank you to the community members for your feedback.

1501
02:35:46,500 --> 02:35:49,580
that's an important step. Well, I will say that. I'm not going to as elegantly explain my thoughts,

1502
02:35:53,430 --> 02:35:56,130
I wrote down some bullet points because there's a lot to tackle here, but on the negatives,

1503
02:35:58,815 --> 02:35:58,815
I think the trash is something that stood out to me when I first read the application.

1504
02:36:03,710 --> 02:36:03,710
I'll leave it at that. The commercial use is clearly

1505
02:36:07,950 --> 02:36:07,950
a concern vocalized in images in the voices of the residents.

1506
02:36:14,470 --> 02:36:18,050
the safety, I think this is a great opportunity to improve the safety of the in and out at the roadway there.

1507
02:36:21,215 --> 02:36:23,045
I'm not sure I'm not an engineer. I'm not good with road design.

1508
02:36:25,560 --> 02:36:28,680
I'm not sure how that's possible, but at least the thought, and spending time on that.

1509
02:36:30,420 --> 02:36:34,230
I think, this is an important time for that. My last negative is that it's more of an observation.

1510
02:36:39,660 --> 02:36:41,070
one of the residents brought it up, but the non motorized access being in between the rotated boat.

1511
02:36:49,810 --> 02:36:52,775
the launch, sorry, and the channel. I think that is unsafe,

1512
02:36:55,685 --> 02:36:57,890
and I'm surprised that, that truthfully made it this far along.

1513
02:37:02,390 --> 02:37:04,740
again, I'll leave it at that. On the other side, I think the site has aged,

1514
02:37:07,020 --> 02:37:08,940
as everyone can agree. I think refreshing it is okay.

1515
02:37:11,490 --> 02:37:11,490
I do think although the hard scape is increasing,

1516
02:37:16,485 --> 02:37:19,200
we're actually reducing the impermeable surface, which I think improves the site.

1517
02:37:22,125 --> 02:37:22,125
there is increase in recreational use with the fishing,

1518
02:37:26,580 --> 02:37:26,580
the ada accessibility, the non motorized access,

1519
02:37:30,945 --> 02:37:34,200
as well as the picnic area and the green space. I also do see there's clearly better flow with the revised layout, larger parking stalls.

1520
02:37:43,200 --> 02:37:45,420
I know the lighting is a little bit of an issue, but lighting from back then to today,

1521
02:37:48,435 --> 02:37:50,580
and the standards that are in place, I think, the lighting will be greatly improved.

1522
02:37:53,445 --> 02:37:53,445
again, the green spaces that I mentioned.

1523
02:37:57,470 --> 02:37:57,470
back and forth, I will say with those thoughts out there,

1524
02:38:02,325 --> 02:38:05,490
just with the amount of resident pushback, I have a hard time approving a variance.

1525
02:38:08,790 --> 02:38:12,075
when you look at what's in front of us for our approval tonight, it's the vacation of the easement,

1526
02:38:14,925 --> 02:38:14,925
which I have yet to hear a reason from your guys perspective as to why we would do that.

1527
02:38:20,985 --> 02:38:24,645
I firmly in opposition of that. The variance of the hard cover, again,

1528
02:38:27,375 --> 02:38:30,675
I do see improvement in the impermeable surface, overall, which I could get behind.

1529
02:38:33,930 --> 02:38:36,690
I'll come back to that in a second. The conditional use permit and the interim use permit, I think,

1530
02:38:39,330 --> 02:38:39,330
I see those just as pretty regular transactional approvals

1531
02:38:44,100 --> 02:38:46,365
for the improvement of the site. I could get behind those.

1532
02:38:48,375 --> 02:38:50,145
back to the variance, a question maybe to staff would just be,

1533
02:38:53,535 --> 02:38:53,535
if we are going to go out of our way to approve this variance,

1534
02:38:58,830 --> 02:39:02,280
this is where we have the ability potentially to put things in place as a reason for the approval,

1535
02:39:05,895 --> 02:39:09,540
and correct me if I'm wrong in that statement, but I guess would that be an opportunity for us to put regulations of commercial use in

1536
02:39:15,780 --> 02:39:19,620
place against what tools we have in front of us and what the pushback we've heard from the residents?

1537
02:39:23,670 --> 02:39:26,865
>. Sure. To put a condition with a variance, there should be a nexus.

1538
02:39:28,680 --> 02:39:28,680
for the condition, it should be tied to countering or addressing that variance.

1539
02:39:34,785 --> 02:39:37,530
sometimes you'll see variances for hard cover, and then a condition would be to add supporting

1540
02:39:40,965 --> 02:39:40,965
storm water features to the site to counter that variance specifically.

1541
02:39:45,480 --> 02:39:48,870
if you are interested in having discussions or having the council discussions regarding the commercial use of the site,

1542
02:39:53,280 --> 02:39:53,280
that would be an additional comment that the council should

1543
02:39:57,780 --> 02:39:57,780
discuss of potential policy or regulatory changes.

1544
02:40:02,610 --> 02:40:02,610
I would anticipate that is

1545
02:40:07,365 --> 02:40:07,365
obviously a catalyst with the redesign of the site that these discussions are happening,

1546
02:40:11,940 --> 02:40:15,690
and it allows us to have a really in depth review of how this site is used. But to require or enforce maybe

1547
02:40:19,830 --> 02:40:19,830
commercial or industrial or specific user on the site would be most likely

1548
02:40:24,120 --> 02:40:24,120
a policy implication that the council would consider

1549
02:40:28,650 --> 02:40:28,650
probably separate from specific approvals of the site plan project.

1550
02:40:34,155 --> 02:40:34,155
>> awesome. Thank you. You got to the second part of that question is,

1551
02:40:38,355 --> 02:40:40,710
what would be the best way forward? With what she outlined there,

1552
02:40:43,140 --> 02:40:43,140
I would definitely be in favor of some form of language.

1553
02:40:48,600 --> 02:40:51,900
I don't need to propose some yet. Maybe I'll think of some, but some form of language to hold the property owners liable for

1554
02:40:55,980 --> 02:40:55,980
enforcing not only setting a boundary of what's deemed usable or not,

1555
02:41:04,020 --> 02:41:06,390
but also a method of enforcing it, I think is an important step.

1556
02:41:09,075 --> 02:41:12,450
>> chris bollis? >> that's what I have. >> can I just clarify? Are we in discussion,

1557
02:41:13,620 --> 02:41:17,145
or are we still asking questions of the applicant? >> it's both right now.[laughter]

1558
02:41:19,110 --> 02:41:19,110
>> okay. Because I do think it feels different to have discussion between

1559
02:41:23,190 --> 02:41:23,190
us versus feeling like we're validating our points of view to the applicant.

1560
02:41:27,645 --> 02:41:27,645
it feels like a different way to have that discussion.

1561
02:41:31,890 --> 02:41:31,890
>> [overlapping] do you mean, if all the applicant sat down?

1562
02:41:36,080 --> 02:41:36,080
>> if others still have more questions for the applicant, I think.

1563
02:41:40,440 --> 02:41:43,620
>> I was under the impression. We were discussing ourselves, and that's why I didn't direct any questions towards them?

1564
02:41:45,690 --> 02:41:49,050
I don't have any at this time, but that's where I was. >> more question. With the impermeable that's being suggested for this,

1565
02:41:57,570 --> 02:41:59,835
is there weight limits on that? As far as how much weight it can support before it starts deteriorating or right if?

1566
02:42:05,865 --> 02:42:08,700
>> sure. There's probably a weight limit, but that weight limit [overlapping]. >> I've to turn one of the trucks,

1567
02:42:10,170 --> 02:42:13,590
like we saw on there, decided it was going to park in those parking spots. Is that go to damage those parking spots?

1568
02:42:16,245 --> 02:42:17,220
>> no. [background]

1569
02:42:29,160 --> 02:42:32,700
the public hearing is closed, but it is a valid question. How to maintain the dirt,

1570
02:42:34,485 --> 02:42:36,930
I think you had mentioned a maintenance schedule for that? >> it's not dirt. It's gravel.

1571
02:42:39,315 --> 02:42:41,715
>> the gravel? >> box. Yeah, it's aggregate. >> but you had mentioned a maintenance schedule for that?

1572
02:42:44,040 --> 02:42:47,715
>> yeah, there is. The maintenance would come once fine particles percolate down and start to fill up I guess,

1573
02:42:54,300 --> 02:42:54,300
the bottom where the water wants to go down.

1574
02:43:00,750 --> 02:43:00,750
this system, because we have like, 12 ",

1575
02:43:05,310 --> 02:43:05,310
of substance there, it's going to take a while for it to do that.

1576
02:43:10,860 --> 02:43:14,550
but I think part of our plan is pretty much testing to make sure that everything is functioning on an interval that's appropriate.

1577
02:43:19,020 --> 02:43:22,050
I think,15 years is what I'm hearing that, that's about the first time that you want to test it.

1578
02:43:24,660 --> 02:43:27,495
if we find that it's not doing what it's supposed to be doing, which is the storm water management aspect of it,

1579
02:43:31,545 --> 02:43:33,330
then we would maintain it. That's most likely taking up the gravel,

1580
02:43:36,585 --> 02:43:39,000
taking out all of the silt that might be clogging it up and then putting the gravel back on.

1581
02:43:42,350 --> 02:43:45,320
>> okay. >> I'll jump in here with my thoughts.

1582
02:43:48,405 --> 02:43:50,490
thank you, everyone for coming. I appreciated hearing so many different perspectives on the issue.

1583
02:43:54,240 --> 02:43:54,240
I think you raised a fair point, commissioner ressler,

1584
02:43:58,830 --> 02:43:58,830
about taxes coming by way of the city through the county.

1585
02:44:03,240 --> 02:44:03,240
it seems to us we have an opportunity here where budget is on the table for us.

1586
02:44:08,205 --> 02:44:11,355
I do want to take a careful look at this project. There's a lot I like about the project.

1587
02:44:13,980 --> 02:44:13,980
from its expanding area for fishing to its expanded accessibility.

1588
02:44:20,655 --> 02:44:23,870
it feels like the revisions outlined here will make the lake more accessible to more people, in orono.

1589
02:44:27,715 --> 02:44:27,715
I'm in agreement that this should not be a place where fees are requested.

1590
02:44:33,030 --> 02:44:33,030
I think that would still have the same enforcement challenge we see today.

1591
02:44:37,440 --> 02:44:37,440
we would still need someone patrolling this area and making

1592
02:44:42,030 --> 02:44:42,030
sure people are properly licensed or whatever the requirement is.

1593
02:44:47,220 --> 02:44:47,220
I think keeping this for public use without fees is important.

1594
02:44:51,990 --> 02:44:55,935
it sounds like that might be a requirement of the site regardless. I think what really gives me pause,

1595
02:44:58,080 --> 02:44:58,080
as commissioner brandabur raised is approving this

1596
02:45:02,400 --> 02:45:02,400
without some provision or at least recommendation from

1597
02:45:06,930 --> 02:45:06,930
the commission that [noise] enforcement and clear signage about

1598
02:45:11,730 --> 02:45:11,730
the usage of the site will be promptly displayed after these developments.

1599
02:45:17,250 --> 02:45:20,175
it seems right now that, that is not taken too seriously on the site.

1600
02:45:23,430 --> 02:45:26,070
it doesn't feel like there is much threat of enforcement if from an industrial perspective,

1601
02:45:29,205 --> 02:45:33,105
and that's what's led to the improper usage of the site. I would feel comfortable moving forward with a version of this.

1602
02:45:36,315 --> 02:45:36,315
should that proper signage enforcement be a part of that plan.

1603
02:45:40,590 --> 02:45:40,590
it sounds like that will have to come through at the council level rather than here.

1604
02:45:45,375 --> 02:45:48,600
but I wouldn't feel comfortable moving forward with approving this project unless that was a part of this design.

1605
02:45:54,320 --> 02:45:54,320
>> thank you. I'll go.

1606
02:45:58,365 --> 02:46:01,095
this one is pretty easy for me. As planning commission, we have to look at what's in front of us.

1607
02:46:04,330 --> 02:46:07,190
in front of us is a vacation for public right away, variance for hard cover, etc.

1608
02:46:09,455 --> 02:46:11,885
conditional use permit for a sea wall, and then an iup to move the dirt for the site.

1609
02:46:16,460 --> 02:46:20,445
personally, I don't think it meets the practical difficulty standards, what you've posed to us today.

1610
02:46:22,485 --> 02:46:22,485
the site is, although it's in disrepair or it old, it still functions.

1611
02:46:31,140 --> 02:46:31,140
what you're presenting to us is going to function exactly the same way.

1612
02:46:36,090 --> 02:46:36,090
I don't see the practical difficulty in going above and beyond with the hard cover, etc.

1613
02:46:40,575 --> 02:46:40,575
I know that we can tie conditions,

1614
02:46:45,360 --> 02:46:48,270
two variances, if there's a nexus, but those conditions are usually something that's a piece of that project,

1615
02:46:51,870 --> 02:46:54,120
not a policy piece to it. The only time I know that we can tie

1616
02:46:57,000 --> 02:46:57,000
a policy condition is if this is a cup for the entire project.

1617
02:47:01,815 --> 02:47:01,815
to me, this looks like an expansion of an existing non conforming use. I look at it.

1618
02:47:09,375 --> 02:47:11,130
an analogy would be, gas station in a residential area,

1619
02:47:13,740 --> 02:47:16,005
existing non conforming use, would we be allowing these variances to expand that use?

1620
02:47:20,040 --> 02:47:22,320
when I look at the parking metrics, going from 14 trailer stalls to 41,

1621
02:47:26,520 --> 02:47:26,520
it's 192% increase in parking spots for trailers.

1622
02:47:32,715 --> 02:47:34,965
that is an expansion of the use. I could get behind having more parking for trailers,

1623
02:47:38,700 --> 02:47:38,700
as long as there's a condition that would eliminate the commercial use from the site.

1624
02:47:44,115 --> 02:47:46,980
I don't think the way that this is given to us, I don't think we have the power to put a condition policy condition on this.

1625
02:47:51,225 --> 02:47:54,330
I think this should be coming to us as a cup for the entire site because it's a complete redesign of the site.

1626
02:47:58,140 --> 02:47:58,140
this is more than just a vacation and some variances for hardcover.

1627
02:48:03,290 --> 02:48:03,290
I can go into all the nuances of it, all the points.

1628
02:48:08,355 --> 02:48:10,350
but that's just the high level piece of it, so that's why I'm not in favor of this.

1629
02:48:16,550 --> 02:48:19,370
>> I'll just add my $0.02 here. Definitely agree with what everyone's saying.

1630
02:48:22,205 --> 02:48:25,475
if we make it simplified black and white, look at the application.

1631
02:48:27,640 --> 02:48:31,155
we're not doing much with changing the parking. We're improving the surface coverage, etc,

1632
02:48:33,720 --> 02:48:33,720
and not doing anything about the entry and exit point.

1633
02:48:38,235 --> 02:48:41,760
obviously, there's a lot of passion from the community around this. I think that's a second area to solve that's unrelated to what we do here.

1634
02:48:46,500 --> 02:48:48,705
trash, commercial use, running businesses, that needs to be solved whether we do something with this or not.

1635
02:48:53,910 --> 02:48:56,580
then going back to this base, I would agree with what you're saying.

1636
02:48:58,515 --> 02:48:58,515
it doesn't seem to make it better when you look at the functionality.

1637
02:49:02,715 --> 02:49:06,600
based on that point alone, I'd be against it. >> I agree with my fellow commissioners with the concerns around the industrial use,

1638
02:49:12,645 --> 02:49:12,645
and I would just add the open question around wetlands,

1639
02:49:16,770 --> 02:49:19,185
I think, remains open. I find that concerning the county has not

1640
02:49:23,340 --> 02:49:23,340
demonstrated a great history regarding maintaining the existing access.

1641
02:49:33,590 --> 02:49:37,290
I think there are concerns about enforcement as well. I would encourage the county to to focus on starting there.

1642
02:49:43,425 --> 02:49:46,680
I do see some benefit to some improvements, and I hope we can find a way that makes sense

1643
02:49:51,060 --> 02:49:51,060
to allow the space to be improved for residential use.

1644
02:49:56,040 --> 02:49:59,670
I agree that we need to find a way. I don't think it's through this venue,

1645
02:50:01,680 --> 02:50:01,680
but to propose that the city limit the commercial and industrial use at that space.

1646
02:50:11,900 --> 02:50:14,355
>> apologies. Like everybody else. I want to thank all the community for coming and speaking out.

1647
02:50:17,295 --> 02:50:20,040
I appreciate all the time that you've given to us tonight staying late with us all to talk to this.

1648
02:50:24,260 --> 02:50:27,800
as many of the other commissioners said, I have pros and cons.

1649
02:50:30,660 --> 02:50:33,735
I do, to some extent, like the layout and the look of it. I understand what you're trying to get at,

1650
02:50:35,310 --> 02:50:38,790
the ada clincy of it, making it more accessible. I really like that. I think there's a lot of value to that.

1651
02:50:42,030 --> 02:50:42,030
my struggle is that as well as many of them have said,

1652
02:50:46,695 --> 02:50:46,695
there's this two fold that we're getting where we're going to do all this,

1653
02:50:51,090 --> 02:50:52,980
but if it comes to enforcement, everything else, we're going to put that on you, and we're backing off on it,

1654
02:50:55,530 --> 02:50:58,530
and a struggle with that because this expansion, which it is, we're expanding we're giving a variance to expand the footage.

1655
02:51:04,155 --> 02:51:07,650
that's going to create more use. It's going to create more traffic problems. It's going to create a lot of other things,

1656
02:51:09,000 --> 02:51:09,000
and I'm just not hearing anything to solve any of those issues other than well,

1657
02:51:13,620 --> 02:51:16,410
we've had this many spots before, but I've driven by there, and I've never really seen all those spots used like that.

1658
02:51:20,460 --> 02:51:23,250
that's where a lot of my struggle comes from, and I'd really like to see something more

1659
02:51:25,575 --> 02:51:29,445
concrete about how this is going to benefit the county, benefit the city beyond just here, it's done.

1660
02:51:33,150 --> 02:51:35,430
you deal with it, we're done. That's my perspective of it.

1661
02:51:42,110 --> 02:51:42,110
>> I would propose a motion to deny this proposal as applied.

1662
02:51:48,570 --> 02:51:51,480
>> are you recommending or are you making a motion? >> I'm making a motion.

1663
02:51:52,650 --> 02:51:55,280
>> I'll second the motion. >> I have a motion to deny from commissioner perkle.

1664
02:51:58,500 --> 02:52:00,855
I have a second by commissioner ressler. Any further discussion? Seeing none,

1665
02:52:05,790 --> 02:52:08,490
will vote, all in favor. Say aye. >> aye. >> any opposed? Hearing none motion carries.

1666
02:52:11,400 --> 02:52:13,575
>> thank you. >> thank you. >> I think this would be a good time to take

1667
02:52:16,140 --> 02:52:16,140
a short break five minute break for the next application.

1668
02:52:21,580 --> 02:52:21,580
[background]

1669
03:00:34,053 --> 03:00:37,925
>> reconvening the november 17th meeting of the on planning commission after that short break.

1670
03:00:40,985 --> 03:00:43,805
this will bring us to our next public hearing, la 25-7, ryan peters, 1978, shadywood road.

1671
03:00:50,000 --> 03:00:50,000
this is a lake setback and average lakeshore setback. Ms. Curtis.

1672
03:00:54,200 --> 03:00:57,575
>> thank you. The applicant is requesting a 75 foot lake setback variance to construct a covered porch and

1673
03:01:01,235 --> 03:01:01,235
a privacy screen over an existing lakeside deck and also relocate a deck stair tread.

1674
03:01:10,730 --> 03:01:13,280
an average lakeshore setback variance is also required for a portion of the privacy screen.

1675
03:01:15,740 --> 03:01:15,740
the privacy screen is on the north side of the deck.

1676
03:01:20,075 --> 03:01:22,370
the applicant is proposing to construct a 202 square foot roof porch over the existing deck,

1677
03:01:25,790 --> 03:01:25,790
48 feet from the lake where a 75 foot setback is required.

1678
03:01:29,900 --> 03:01:29,900
project also includes the five foot tall privacy screen on the north side of the deck.

1679
03:01:40,010 --> 03:01:43,160
with the deck height at 18 inches, it's about 6.5 feet total height,

1680
03:01:45,590 --> 03:01:45,590
and then there's a new smaller relocated stair tread centered on the porch.

1681
03:01:50,375 --> 03:01:52,460
the stair tread depth will be reduced resulting in a six square foot reduction in hard cover.

1682
03:01:55,655 --> 03:01:55,655
the proposed privacy screen also encroaches two feet into the average lakeshore setback.

1683
03:02:01,010 --> 03:02:04,580
the applicants identified the small lot size and the proximity of the home to the lake as practical difficulties supporting the requested variances.

1684
03:02:08,315 --> 03:02:08,315
staff concurs with the applicants assessment of the private properties and finds

1685
03:02:12,860 --> 03:02:14,960
that although the project will result in an increase in the building footprint within the lake setback,

1686
03:02:17,195 --> 03:02:17,195
it does not result in new hardcover encroachments within the lake setback.

1687
03:02:22,970 --> 03:02:25,490
as the porch and the privacy screen are [noise] constructed over minimal or over existing improvements.

1688
03:02:28,790 --> 03:02:32,390
the average lakeshore setback encroachment by the privacy screen is minimal. It's used to screen

1689
03:02:34,715 --> 03:02:34,715
an area that they're going to use for a small kitchen, outdoor kitchen.

1690
03:02:38,735 --> 03:02:42,470
the affected neighbor indicated that their view will not be adversely impacted. The neighbors on either side of the applicant's home have

1691
03:02:44,630 --> 03:02:47,165
submitted support for the application. Comments were included in your packet as exhibit h.

1692
03:02:49,880 --> 03:02:53,375
staff is recommending approval of the application as applied. The property owner is not in attendance this evening,

1693
03:02:55,670 --> 03:02:58,130
but they have sent their representatives and they are here and available for questions. Thank you.

1694
03:03:01,310 --> 03:03:04,175
>> thank you. Any questions for staff? No. If the applicants here wish to speak, please approach a podium.

1695
03:03:07,985 --> 03:03:11,320
state your name and address for the record, please. >> good evening. >> hi. >> my name is david berta.

1696
03:03:13,325 --> 03:03:17,015
I live at 1966 shadywood road. Two doors down from brian and lynn.

1697
03:03:19,895 --> 03:03:23,735
I only mentioned they're out of town and unable to attend, so he asked me to step in his dad.

1698
03:03:27,125 --> 03:03:27,125
the request over half the house is within the 75 foot setback from the lake,

1699
03:03:35,030 --> 03:03:38,750
so anything they do to the back, we're going to require a variance for this. The deck, as you seen that picture.

1700
03:03:41,660 --> 03:03:41,660
no, you keep that picture up because that's a good representation. Was existing.

1701
03:03:47,885 --> 03:03:50,345
it was just replaced with a new deck. The one request is the step you see that's now

1702
03:03:53,600 --> 03:03:57,440
centered underneath that roof is a little bit off to the right, centered between this panels of the sliding door.

1703
03:04:01,325 --> 03:04:01,325
moving that a little bit to the left and reducing the size just makes it aesthetically

1704
03:04:05,330 --> 03:04:05,330
more pleasing with the addition of to that.

1705
03:04:09,395 --> 03:04:11,435
the privacy screen, as it's referenced, is really no more than like a black backsplash,

1706
03:04:14,255 --> 03:04:17,735
so they're having a little bit of outdoor kitchen put in. Having a tree below the countertop.

1707
03:04:20,405 --> 03:04:20,405
real. That privacy screen, as we're calling,

1708
03:04:24,455 --> 03:04:27,740
it is really designed not only to add asthetics to it, but as you have things on the counter there,

1709
03:04:30,470 --> 03:04:33,440
we're right on the lake there, obviously, and the winds pick up pretty good. Keeping things from blowing around.

1710
03:04:35,435 --> 03:04:38,780
I'm to the right of that privacy screen, and we're sitting out on our patio it doesn't lock

1711
03:04:43,190 --> 03:04:43,190
much just adds a little bit of protection from stuff on the counter.

1712
03:04:48,500 --> 03:04:51,470
but also the backside, once you put in the cabinetry, that will block the back of the cabinetry,

1713
03:04:54,050 --> 03:04:56,285
which sometimes is finished, or what have you. The real changes, obviously, with the roof,

1714
03:05:00,170 --> 03:05:00,170
the 200 change square feet and roof addition is being added,

1715
03:05:05,390 --> 03:05:05,390
still has them below the 20% allotment for coverage for all building area.

1716
03:05:11,015 --> 03:05:12,320
on the size of the property, they're at about 13,000 square feet lot standpoint.

1717
03:05:15,905 --> 03:05:19,520
two still keeps below that 20% number. The idea with this, not only is it very attractive,

1718
03:05:22,895 --> 03:05:22,895
but we have the good fortune of living on the lake

1719
03:05:28,000 --> 03:05:30,820
and utilizing it for all it has to offer is obviously critical to our enjoyment of the lake.

1720
03:05:34,280 --> 03:05:36,755
where this is at, the idea is to add a little bit more livable space

1721
03:05:40,970 --> 03:05:40,970
outside when the weather isn't j sere not my words.

1722
03:05:45,950 --> 03:05:45,950
these are brian's words. The entertainment space inside the house is somewhat limited.

1723
03:05:50,255 --> 03:05:53,270
this just allows them to pull more outside and enjoying nice weather or when it's not nice out,

1724
03:05:56,300 --> 03:05:58,235
you now have a little bit of coverage. As we get older, sensitivity to sun becomes a concern,

1725
03:06:01,790 --> 03:06:05,600
and having some shaded area certainly helps that protection. The idea is to add this.

1726
03:06:07,610 --> 03:06:11,570
it's a two season. There will be retractable screens inset into the posts so that they can be open and close,

1727
03:06:14,645 --> 03:06:17,705
depending upon bugs, what have you, as well as pull down plastic windows.

1728
03:06:22,870 --> 03:06:26,600
that is I ask nick to come up. Nick is with e elevated, the contractor.

1729
03:06:28,985 --> 03:06:28,985
maybe you can [inaudible].

1730
03:06:34,100 --> 03:06:37,400
>> nick, before you start, could you state your name and address for the record? >> nick camp 1161.

1731
03:06:40,010 --> 03:06:41,945
>> great. >> the overall porch would have retractable vinyl panels that open most vertically,

1732
03:06:48,950 --> 03:06:48,950
those would be concealed within all the beams in trim details,

1733
03:06:53,450 --> 03:06:53,450
and then they have manual retractable screens that slide horizontally.

1734
03:06:59,180 --> 03:07:03,020
one of the reasons for trying to move the step two feet to the south is because on the lake side,

1735
03:07:06,890 --> 03:07:10,325
those two screen panels come together in the center. For functionality, to be able to walk over and open and close one of those and

1736
03:07:14,300 --> 03:07:14,300
have direct access to the [inaudible].

1737
03:07:19,670 --> 03:07:19,670
>> the request, you can see is pretty minor with the step.

1738
03:07:24,020 --> 03:07:27,155
just need to get your permission to do that because we're in the setback. The backsplash, purely functional,

1739
03:07:29,300 --> 03:07:31,580
but also add some decorative elements to it. Then the addition of the 200 square feet for the roof,

1740
03:07:35,315 --> 03:07:39,140
providing just some more usability to the overall space outside, as well as making it more functional and weather isn't ideal on the lake.

1741
03:07:44,210 --> 03:07:44,210
any questions? No questions. Thank you.

1742
03:07:48,740 --> 03:07:52,520
>> really? >> [laughter] that's usually a good thing. >> no comment? >> [laughter] we will. Thank you.

1743
03:07:55,340 --> 03:07:57,635
I appreciate your consideration. Thank you. >> this item is a public hearing.

1744
03:07:59,690 --> 03:08:01,370
anyone from the public wish to speak on this, please approach the podium, state your name and address for the record.

1745
03:08:04,690 --> 03:08:07,250
saying nobody close the public hearing. We'll bring it back up here for discussion.

1746
03:08:10,090 --> 03:08:12,830
this one looks very straightforward to me. You look at the if you look at the survey,

1747
03:08:15,680 --> 03:08:18,140
being put that back up on the screen. Basically looks like more than half the houses in front of that 75 foot,

1748
03:08:23,915 --> 03:08:26,630
and I think they're doing everything they can to keep it behind the average lakeshore setback and the small encroachment there,

1749
03:08:29,720 --> 03:08:32,680
I don't think impedes any of you. >> I agree. I'll just add that you're

1750
03:08:35,120 --> 03:08:35,120
a really good neighbor to sit through all of this to represent your neighbor.

1751
03:08:40,535 --> 03:08:40,535
>> [laughter] thank you.

1752
03:08:46,100 --> 03:08:48,875
>> any other comments? Any questions or concerns? >> I would agree with commissioner perkle's comment about being

1753
03:08:52,070 --> 03:08:55,730
a good neighbor I have lead them know we gave you a hard time in charge him extra. No, I would hearing nothing else from the commissioners.

1754
03:08:59,510 --> 03:08:59,510
I would make a motion to approve la 25-47 as applied.

1755
03:09:06,680 --> 03:09:08,360
>> I will second. A. >> motion to approve by commissioner brandeber second by commissioner jonah.

1756
03:09:13,490 --> 03:09:15,575
any further discussion? No. All in favor say aye.

1757
03:09:17,855 --> 03:09:18,710
>> aye. >> aye. >> any opposed? None motion carries. Thank you.

1758
03:09:22,010 --> 03:09:22,010
>> thank you.

1759
03:09:27,720 --> 03:09:27,720
>> la 25-48 is our next public hearing.

1760
03:09:31,885 --> 03:09:34,870
this is hoxie homes, 755 tonka road. This is for a variance, mr. Kearney.

1761
03:09:38,670 --> 03:09:38,670
>> thank you, mr. Chair. This is a variance application at 7:55 tonka road.

1762
03:09:45,820 --> 03:09:45,820
ultimately, the applicant is proposing a sawa building,

1763
03:09:50,815 --> 03:09:50,815
which by our classifications is an accessory building.

1764
03:09:55,280 --> 03:09:59,045
this is being proposed on a property of 2.33 acres located towards the west end of the city.

1765
03:10:05,080 --> 03:10:05,080
in terms of the proposed conditions that the applicant has presented to staff.

1766
03:10:10,520 --> 03:10:10,520
we're looking at an approximately 148 square foot sauna building

1767
03:10:14,645 --> 03:10:14,645
with a slightly larger roof structure above it.

1768
03:10:19,235 --> 03:10:22,820
I think getting that up to 293 square feet for hard covers considerations by our estimations and the numbers submitted by the applicant.

1769
03:10:28,850 --> 03:10:28,850
we're looking at an increase of about 0.4% to the total hard cover.

1770
03:10:34,280 --> 03:10:36,500
generally speaking, we are looking at a pretty significant impact to the average lakeshore setback line.

1771
03:10:41,150 --> 03:10:41,150
however, we are about 6.6 feet past the 75 foot lakeshore.

1772
03:10:46,790 --> 03:10:46,790
we'll note that as I move it into the survey on the next page,

1773
03:10:51,650 --> 03:10:54,020
it's about the same distance lakeward of the average lakeshore setback as the existing house.

1774
03:10:58,540 --> 03:10:58,540
this building meets the 10 foot side setback.

1775
03:11:03,670 --> 03:11:06,185
in terms of the average lakeshore, we have a fairly unique property here,

1776
03:11:09,080 --> 03:11:11,510
not for the property itself, but the property it is neighboring.

1777
03:11:13,740 --> 03:11:13,740
don't have many cases where we are adjacent to non-residential property.

1778
03:11:20,110 --> 03:11:23,305
this is the camp teko property to the north. Staffs determination ultimately is that there are a number of buildings on this property,

1779
03:11:28,810 --> 03:11:28,810
and as we have identified it in the past,

1780
03:11:33,105 --> 03:11:33,105
all of the buildings incidental to that camp teko use in

1781
03:11:37,115 --> 03:11:40,970
our previous staff interpretations have been identified as principal buildings where the average lakeshore setback would be measured from.

1782
03:11:45,470 --> 03:11:48,770
given the circumstances regarding this site, we measured the average lakeshore setback from the closest principal building on

1783
03:11:52,910 --> 03:11:52,910
the camp teko site to the closest protrusion on the property to the south,

1784
03:11:57,980 --> 03:11:57,980
leading to this fairly aggressive line that is about 140 feet behind

1785
03:12:04,010 --> 03:12:04,010
the existing house and 140 feet or so behind where the proposed sauna is located.

1786
03:12:11,375 --> 03:12:11,375
looking at the area image I presented here,

1787
03:12:15,395 --> 03:12:15,395
we are not anticipating any impact whatsoever to sight lines for either property,

1788
03:12:22,055 --> 03:12:22,055
mainly because the house to the south is already in

1789
03:12:26,660 --> 03:12:26,660
close proximity to a lake consistent with that of the subject property.

1790
03:12:31,310 --> 03:12:34,580
there is a sufficient amount of vegetation separating the two structures or the two buildings,

1791
03:12:38,765 --> 03:12:38,765
the home and the principal buildings that we have identified on the camp teko site.

1792
03:12:44,470 --> 03:12:44,470
with mind staff has found that a practical difficulty has been established,

1793
03:12:49,700 --> 03:12:53,645
and mainly that sit lines are to be minimally impacted, if at all, staff has not received any public comments pertinent to the application,

1794
03:12:58,415 --> 03:12:58,415
and we recommend approval of the variance as applied.

1795
03:13:03,280 --> 03:13:06,245
>> thank you. Questions for staff. >> do you have the 75 foot line on that map?

1796
03:13:11,650 --> 03:13:11,650
>> 75 foot line will be this tapered line as it goes through here,

1797
03:13:18,590 --> 03:13:22,580
so it breaches the house and this relative location, but is just ahead of the sauna and the location.

1798
03:13:29,740 --> 03:13:32,780
>> any other questions? >> no. >> thank you. If the applicant is here and wish to speak, please approach the podium.

1799
03:13:36,560 --> 03:13:40,180
state your name and address for the record, please. >> hello. Thank you, jeff hoxie, hoxie homes,

1800
03:13:43,385 --> 03:13:47,030
364 industrial boulevard, waconia, minnesota. Thank you, matthew. I'll quickly add.

1801
03:13:50,150 --> 03:13:53,795
I believe the existing house is about 40 feet from the lake. The 75 yard does cut the 75 foot. Is that back?

1802
03:13:58,370 --> 03:13:58,370
proximity of the sauna is simply close to the house, easy access.

1803
03:14:03,170 --> 03:14:05,120
it is a flat yard, so trying to keep it as close to the house as we can.

1804
03:14:07,895 --> 03:14:09,665
it is out of the sightlines of the lake, and we could maintain the 75 foot set back,

1805
03:14:13,040 --> 03:14:16,775
but with that camp to the north northwest, not that even if there was a house to the north northwest, it would have met it,

1806
03:14:20,240 --> 03:14:20,240
but it's all about proximity to the home for easy access. Any questions?

1807
03:14:27,940 --> 03:14:31,220
>> no questions. Thank you. This item is a public hearing.

1808
03:14:33,350 --> 03:14:35,000
anyone from the public who wish to speak on this, please post a protium state your name and address for the record.

1809
03:14:38,920 --> 03:14:41,510
seeing no one will close a public hearing. Bring it back here for discussion.

1810
03:14:43,745 --> 03:14:46,085
commissioner ressler, would you like to start? >> I can go. This one's pretty straightforward for me.

1811
03:14:48,650 --> 03:14:50,900
it's not within the 75 feet, which we're very sensitive typically,

1812
03:14:52,880 --> 03:14:52,880
for the purpose of placement is next to the existing structure.

1813
03:14:59,210 --> 03:14:59,210
the size of the lot is reasonable when we're talking about existing hard cover 16%.

1814
03:15:07,160 --> 03:15:09,470
they're allocated 25 at how it's zoned. I don't have an issue with that,

1815
03:15:11,210 --> 03:15:15,020
and then the last mitigant is, of course, being not next to another residential property,

1816
03:15:18,590 --> 03:15:18,590
being argued or a commercial property that gives

1817
03:15:23,090 --> 03:15:23,090
you a little bit of leeway in my opinion as far as use goes.

1818
03:15:28,565 --> 03:15:32,285
for me very straightforward because or 75 feet is one of things sensitive to all the things called out and thank you,

1819
03:15:38,105 --> 03:15:41,945
mr. Kearney, for pointing those out and makes it easy for me. I'd be prepared to make a motion agreement for you.

1820
03:15:47,260 --> 03:15:47,260
I'm going to do it. I'm going to make a motion to approve la 25-47 as applied.

1821
03:15:52,760 --> 03:15:54,770
>> I second. >> motion to approve by commissioner ressler,

1822
03:15:57,110 --> 03:15:59,015
a second by commissioner perkle. Any further discussion? Hearing none.

1823
03:16:04,175 --> 03:16:07,670
let's vote. All in favor. Say aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> any opposed? Hearing nothing.

1824
03:16:10,355 --> 03:16:10,355
motion carries. Thank you.

1825
03:16:16,660 --> 03:16:16,660
la 25-4902 design, on behalf of stephen and stacengm,

1826
03:16:25,330 --> 03:16:28,055
1450 brackets point road. This is for a cup for retaining wall, ms. Curtis.

1827
03:16:41,950 --> 03:16:41,950
>> the property owner is requesting the conditional use permit to

1828
03:16:45,980 --> 03:16:49,595
allow a new retaining wall to be constructed within 75 feet of the lake. The owners are planning to rebuild the existing boathouse in kind,

1829
03:16:54,200 --> 03:16:56,510
and as part of the project are also reconstructing the aging walls surrounding the both house.

1830
03:16:59,810 --> 03:17:03,290
they're using a different material resulting in a smaller footprint. The lake access stairs are also being reconstructed and reconfigured, and as a result,

1831
03:17:08,150 --> 03:17:08,150
one of the existing walls will be constructed under the new stair to support it.

1832
03:17:13,985 --> 03:17:16,520
that wall requires a conditional use permit. The hardcover associated with the both house walls and stairs

1833
03:17:20,090 --> 03:17:20,090
is going to be reduced by eight square feet from the existing condition.

1834
03:17:24,230 --> 03:17:27,470
there's a new home currently under construction on the property. As design, the new wall will run perpendicular to the lake and

1835
03:17:30,530 --> 03:17:33,725
will be completely screened by the stair it is supporting. The plans were designed by a registered landscape architect and structural engineer,

1836
03:17:37,670 --> 03:17:39,815
and they were provided in the packet. We received a supportive comment from one of the neighbors.

1837
03:17:43,610 --> 03:17:45,935
that was included in your packet as well. Staff is recommending approval of

1838
03:17:47,720 --> 03:17:50,600
the conditional use permit for the new wall as proposed. I have the plan information,

1839
03:17:52,130 --> 03:17:56,120
the survey to show, if you have any questions, I can address those [inaudible]

1840
03:17:59,180 --> 03:18:02,720
>> thank you. In your eyes, it meets all the conditions of the cop. >> true.

1841
03:18:03,545 --> 03:18:07,445
>> thank you. If the applicants here and wish to speak, please approach the podium. State your name and address for the record, please.

1842
03:18:11,580 --> 03:18:14,665
>> comissioners, my name is han jon. I'm in 1034 hite avenue, s pam.

1843
03:18:17,620 --> 03:18:17,620
I from 02 design representing les and peter stendm, the home owner.

1844
03:18:24,325 --> 03:18:24,325
this is originally a pump pause when the whole bracket point was on property,

1845
03:18:30,835 --> 03:18:30,835
and it was pumping water from the lake to support the nurseries for this whole mansion.

1846
03:18:37,105 --> 03:18:41,050
it was left empty and vacant for the longest time, and the new home owner wants to use it as

1847
03:18:44,200 --> 03:18:44,200
a porch just step closer to the dock in the summertime.

1848
03:18:50,530 --> 03:18:50,530
we are going to keep all the activities inside other than the boat dock,

1849
03:18:56,050 --> 03:18:56,050
which is seasonal, we will get the lake min tonka permit separately.

1850
03:19:01,465 --> 03:19:04,465
the existing stone is original, and as you can see in the photos,

1851
03:19:06,535 --> 03:19:09,430
it was a clutch of different sides of stones, and it was cemented together.

1852
03:19:11,245 --> 03:19:13,945
it's actually bulging quite badly. We have consulted a structural engineer.

1853
03:19:16,510 --> 03:19:19,615
we really think it is a structural safety issue, if we start to dig anything or do any renovations very close to that.

1854
03:19:25,255 --> 03:19:28,120
that's why we decide to build a new wall. The home owner is actually very kin to these traditional stones,

1855
03:19:32,290 --> 03:19:35,125
and she was kind of set to let it go. By doing that, we are going to construct a concrete wall,

1856
03:19:40,060 --> 03:19:42,505
which will be behind the boathouse, totally screened by the boathouse from the lake side because the new wall is concrete.

1857
03:19:49,120 --> 03:19:49,120
we are reducing the bulging footprint of the wall from two feet to the 12 inch.

1858
03:19:55,375 --> 03:19:55,375
and that will allow us to have actual square footage to construct the stairs,

1859
03:20:00,235 --> 03:20:00,235
which we aren't it to be perpendicular to the house and parallel.

1860
03:20:04,900 --> 03:20:04,900
I'm sorry, perpendicular to the lake and parallel to the house.

1861
03:20:10,260 --> 03:20:12,445
>> any questions? >> any questions for the applicant?

1862
03:20:15,030 --> 03:20:17,590
no. Great. Thank you. Thanks. This item is a public hearing.

1863
03:20:20,200 --> 03:20:23,080
anyone from the public wish to speak. Please oppose podium. State your name and address for the record.

1864
03:20:25,630 --> 03:20:28,300
say nobody, I'll close the public hearing. We'll bring it back here for discussion.

1865
03:20:32,240 --> 03:20:32,240
>> I'll just say, I think the fact that they're rebuilding in kind

1866
03:20:37,725 --> 03:20:40,410
and need the supportive structures in order to do that makes this really straightforward for me.

1867
03:20:44,700 --> 03:20:47,335
>> I agree. Very straightforward. Anyone applying for a retaining wall in the lake yard,

1868
03:20:52,795 --> 03:20:56,515
this would be good to take notes on this application. It's nice when they come to us,

1869
03:20:58,990 --> 03:20:58,990
meeting all the conditions that engineer design,

1870
03:21:03,040 --> 03:21:06,270
et cetera. I'm in favor of this. >> make a motion to approve la 25-49 as applied.

1871
03:21:12,670 --> 03:21:16,030
>> I'll second. Motion to approved by commissioner brandeber second by commissioner welson.

1872
03:21:19,795 --> 03:21:19,795
any further discussion? All in favor say aye.

1873
03:21:24,625 --> 03:21:27,355
>> aye. >> any opposed? >> no. >> motion carries. Thank you.

1874
03:21:38,490 --> 03:21:38,490
la 25-51 ungerman, inc 4680 north shore drive.

1875
03:21:44,755 --> 03:21:47,005
variance. Mr. Carney. >> thank you, mr. Share. Also, we have a variance located at 4680 north shore drive.

1876
03:21:54,565 --> 03:21:57,145
this is a rear setback variance. Ultimately, there is a proposal to put in a bump out

1877
03:22:01,840 --> 03:22:01,840
or an addition of sorts to the existing garage in the rear of the property.

1878
03:22:06,445 --> 03:22:06,445
I will note that we have a standard within our zoning code.

1879
03:22:10,885 --> 03:22:10,885
once you hit 100 square feet as a standalone accessory building,

1880
03:22:15,475 --> 03:22:18,595
you are considered an oversized accessory building. What this means is that principal building setbacks or what you would

1881
03:22:22,690 --> 03:22:22,690
typically see for a house would be applicable for a building of this size.

1882
03:22:27,415 --> 03:22:30,610
I just want to make that distinction right now. Overall, we're looking at a property of about 26,000 square feet.

1883
03:22:34,480 --> 03:22:37,060
I did not get the tier changed on there. It is actually tier two,

1884
03:22:38,755 --> 03:22:41,540
which is 30% hard cover. In terms of proposed conditions,

1885
03:22:44,205 --> 03:22:48,165
I did a few markups on the survey submitted by the applicant. In terms of a six foot bump out,

1886
03:22:50,500 --> 03:22:53,065
we are looking a little bit eastward. The bump out will be towards the east over an existing driveway.

1887
03:22:57,430 --> 03:22:59,320
in terms of hard cover, hard cover is not going up or down.

1888
03:23:01,705 --> 03:23:03,850
it's simply being changed from the existing bituminous driveway to where this addition would be.

1889
03:23:08,500 --> 03:23:08,500
no changes to hard cover even though we're in the realm of about 29.7%.

1890
03:23:13,750 --> 03:23:15,400
the addition itself will be about 234 or so square feet for six feet out the length of the garage.

1891
03:23:22,075 --> 03:23:25,000
the clarification about the setback, and I put a little bit of a blue bar on the graphic.

1892
03:23:28,510 --> 03:23:32,500
that is my measurement of 30 feet from the property line, which would be the principal building rear setback in this case,

1893
03:23:36,910 --> 03:23:36,910
whereas ten foot would be applicable if this building was below 1,000 square feet.

1894
03:23:42,205 --> 03:23:42,205
that is where the setback line would fall almost halfway through the existing garage.

1895
03:23:49,890 --> 03:23:52,300
I will note as well, although we're looking at an existing condition of about ten feet from the property line,

1896
03:23:56,455 --> 03:23:56,455
that encroachment is not supposed to get larger as a part of this addition.

1897
03:24:00,940 --> 03:24:04,255
I have some elevation views to show you as well, given the topography and some of the uniqueness of the property,

1898
03:24:08,920 --> 03:24:11,950
the eastern side, where the garage doors would be, where that addition would be,

1899
03:24:13,255 --> 03:24:16,405
just on the main level, balcony on top of it, and nothing on the third level.

1900
03:24:18,205 --> 03:24:19,930
as a three story garage, the addition is confined just to the bottom level of the building.

1901
03:24:25,470 --> 03:24:25,470
in terms of a summary to walk through the staff findings,

1902
03:24:31,345 --> 03:24:31,345
ultimately, this is the expansion of a non conforming building.

1903
03:24:36,145 --> 03:24:36,145
even beforehand, the building is measured at 1,008 square feet,

1904
03:24:41,875 --> 03:24:41,875
meaning that this oversize building setback would be applicable that 30 foot rear.

1905
03:24:48,310 --> 03:24:51,370
staff will note that the property is unique, that there are existing conditions and topography on the site that make

1906
03:24:55,390 --> 03:24:55,390
this different from other variance cases and would like

1907
03:24:59,890 --> 03:24:59,890
to make note that there is something unique about the property in terms of

1908
03:25:04,060 --> 03:25:04,060
how it is laid out and the existing building and how it's built into the grade there.

1909
03:25:08,920 --> 03:25:12,310
whether that be for screening or whatever purpose, it is noteworthy to staff.

1910
03:25:14,050 --> 03:25:14,050
and staff would also qualify their findings with,

1911
03:25:19,645 --> 03:25:22,975
mainly that the reasonable use of the building exists. There is an existing garage there that can

1912
03:25:25,540 --> 03:25:28,285
be used for the purpose that the applicant has stated. Although it may not be large enough for

1913
03:25:30,505 --> 03:25:33,040
the materials or the equipment that they want to store there, there is still reasonable use of that building.

1914
03:25:36,070 --> 03:25:38,080
I will identify that there were not any public comments submitted for this particular application.

1915
03:25:41,695 --> 03:25:44,545
given the items I've walked you through here, staff recommends denial of the variance as not all criteria of approval.

1916
03:25:50,155 --> 03:25:52,930
favorable for the variance. I'm here to answer any questions. Thank you.

1917
03:25:55,675 --> 03:25:58,420
>> thank you. You did touch on it, but if this was not an oab,

1918
03:26:02,320 --> 03:26:04,330
it would be a ten foot setback. >> that's correct?

1919
03:26:09,600 --> 03:26:13,495
>> that's the maximum size accessory building. >> allowed,2000. Even with the addition that would come up to

1920
03:26:20,020 --> 03:26:20,020
one and 242 square feet.

1921
03:26:29,220 --> 03:26:32,965
>> there's no other garages on this site, correct? >> this is the only accessory building.

1922
03:26:37,380 --> 03:26:37,380
>> can you show, that one.

1923
03:26:42,600 --> 03:26:45,685
if the applicant had an interest, they have the ability and

1924
03:26:50,260 --> 03:26:50,260
the hard cover allowance to expand the building without requiring a variance, correct?

1925
03:26:56,845 --> 03:27:00,640
in a certain direction? >> it could be. Really, that blue bar illustrates,

1926
03:27:02,515 --> 03:27:02,515
you know, the extent to which the building is falling within the setback.

1927
03:27:07,045 --> 03:27:10,450
ultimately, changes or a proposal to the south side of the building could be conforming with zoning requirements.

1928
03:27:14,770 --> 03:27:16,500
>> thank you. >> any other questions for staff?

1929
03:27:19,315 --> 03:27:19,315
the applicant is here and wish to speak.

1930
03:27:24,870 --> 03:27:24,870
please state your name and address for the record.

1931
03:27:30,030 --> 03:27:33,680
>> harte, 46 80 drive. I'm ron ngraman with grea construction,

1932
03:27:36,645 --> 03:27:36,645
14021st avenue, north, plymouth, minnesota.

1933
03:27:43,830 --> 03:27:43,830
>> any questions at all for the applicants.

1934
03:27:48,930 --> 03:27:52,060
>> do you guys know if this building was there before the current owner took ownership of the I couldn't hear you.

1935
03:27:56,395 --> 03:27:58,270
>> this existing garage, was that there prior to the current owner's purchase of the lot?

1936
03:28:03,070 --> 03:28:04,840
assuming they didn't build the structure? >> yes, it was. It's been there for decades.

1937
03:28:07,180 --> 03:28:08,410
I don't know when it was built, but it's it's definitely older than the house.

1938
03:28:11,440 --> 03:28:12,805
the house is not that old. >> the aerials confirm it back through the 90s at a minimum.

1939
03:28:17,550 --> 03:28:17,550
the aerial imagery that we have dates it back to at least the '90s. Couple of decades.

1940
03:28:28,500 --> 03:28:32,470
>> is there an existing garage attached to the house, or is this the only garage for the property?

1941
03:28:35,365 --> 03:28:38,010
>> there is attached. >> the main purpose of the bump out is you would like to be

1942
03:28:44,790 --> 03:28:47,520
able to park his boat and trailers actually inside the garage versus leaving him parked outside in the garage.

1943
03:28:50,845 --> 03:28:53,230
what he wants to do is be a good steward of the neighborhood, tuck them away so they're not out invisible for everybody.

1944
03:28:56,800 --> 03:29:00,440
that's really the main purpose of it just so we can park. >> if you were to expand on the south side of the garage,

1945
03:29:05,130 --> 03:29:05,130
would you need to reconfigure the driveway and add additional hard cover?

1946
03:29:11,280 --> 03:29:14,440
>> well, you would have to reconfigure the driveway to go up and in. You'd also have to re engineer the building.

1947
03:29:29,970 --> 03:29:29,970
the practical difficulty really here is just that the building itself is non conforming.

1948
03:29:34,660 --> 03:29:36,205
anything we do to the building, whether it's putting a roof on or siding,

1949
03:29:38,755 --> 03:29:38,755
everything we do is non conforming.

1950
03:29:43,560 --> 03:29:43,560
>> I'm trying to orientate myself on the view.

1951
03:29:47,950 --> 03:29:47,950
the east side is the view that you're expanding out, correct?

1952
03:29:52,690 --> 03:29:56,515
>> that's the natural way that the garage functions right now as well. >> that is correct. The doors are on these.

1953
03:29:58,615 --> 03:29:58,615
>> thank you. Any other questions for the apple? Thank you.

1954
03:30:04,525 --> 03:30:06,360
>> thank you very much. >> this item is a public hearing.

1955
03:30:08,560 --> 03:30:10,990
anyone from the public wish to speak? Please approach the podium. State your name and address for the record, please.

1956
03:30:13,045 --> 03:30:13,045
being nobody. Close public hearing.

1957
03:30:17,695 --> 03:30:20,560
bring it back up here for discussion. >> quick question for staff.

1958
03:30:23,485 --> 03:30:23,485
is there a reason why you guys define it as not having a practical difficulty?

1959
03:30:29,785 --> 03:30:33,090
but acknowledging the topography of the site? >> it's really the way that the practical difficulties are laid out within our code.

1960
03:30:40,375 --> 03:30:43,660
ultimately, the practical difficulties are defined by state statute and very specific about what those items are.

1961
03:30:48,715 --> 03:30:48,715
the criterion that staff did support are elements of our code that speak

1962
03:30:53,590 --> 03:30:53,590
to really the special conditions of the structure or the land in question,

1963
03:31:00,220 --> 03:31:00,220
peculiar to the property or the immediately adjoining property.

1964
03:31:04,450 --> 03:31:07,000
there are aspects of the property in this particular area that are unique to this particular case,

1965
03:31:11,395 --> 03:31:14,230
but they don't rise to the level of warranty in this type of expansion to a non conforming.

1966
03:31:17,785 --> 03:31:17,785
we believe that nonconformity should not be expanded in that particular area,

1967
03:31:23,680 --> 03:31:26,170
just given some of those specifics. Although I do believe, you know,

1968
03:31:28,450 --> 03:31:30,850
the slope, the topography, the existing condition of a fairly massive accessory building is noteworthy.

1969
03:31:36,460 --> 03:31:36,460
why we identified that to you as those cry for those criteria being met,

1970
03:31:41,545 --> 03:31:45,265
whereas some of the others didn't rise to that level. >> the last question is,

1971
03:31:47,605 --> 03:31:51,310
is it fair to say that this building was present before that city ever had regulations on oversized accessory buildings?

1972
03:32:01,650 --> 03:32:01,650
well, that's I don't either. Thank you.

1973
03:32:06,900 --> 03:32:06,900
>> can I just ask about the requirements for setback from the side of the property?

1974
03:32:18,535 --> 03:32:18,535
I understand the garages are accessed from the east side.

1975
03:32:25,060 --> 03:32:25,060
if they wanted to add a fully separate stall,

1976
03:32:29,260 --> 03:32:31,405
to the south of the building, they could do that. There's no setback requirement that would be challenged on the west side?

1977
03:32:38,610 --> 03:32:38,610
>> sorry to interrupt. I believe from a setback standpoint,

1978
03:32:42,910 --> 03:32:46,600
that might be possible, but I think the site is right at the limit of hard cover. They would have to balance adding additional hard cover.

1979
03:32:50,020 --> 03:32:50,020
>> it's at approximately 29.7% hard cover just with the eyeball test.

1980
03:32:56,860 --> 03:32:59,395
some amount of that driveway that is going to where we have these doors proposed would have to

1981
03:33:03,190 --> 03:33:05,650
go away in some way shape or form in order to accommodate the reallocation of hard cover on the south side of the build.

1982
03:33:11,850 --> 03:33:14,530
>> I'll just voice my opinion quick that I grew up around the area very familiar with this road,

1983
03:33:18,160 --> 03:33:20,890
and I think the images we're seeing don't really do it justice as how unique this property is.

1984
03:33:24,070 --> 03:33:26,530
you're standing on the north side of this building, you'd be looking over the roof.

1985
03:33:29,425 --> 03:33:32,125
if you're on the west side of the property, you're not going to see there isn't a house there,

1986
03:33:34,630 --> 03:33:36,595
obviously you can see all the woods. You're not seeing the bump out.

1987
03:33:39,265 --> 03:33:41,695
now, if you're driving on the road and look to your right, you're probably going to see the bump out,

1988
03:33:43,420 --> 03:33:46,180
but you're also might be going down in the lake, which is about 150 feet below you right there.

1989
03:33:50,520 --> 03:33:54,190
I find the practical difficulty just being within the topography of the site as well as it being,

1990
03:33:56,950 --> 03:33:56,950
a structure that was there prior to this owner isn't something they did to themselves.

1991
03:34:01,795 --> 03:34:05,080
buildings been there for a while and they're trying to improve it. Not to mention to hide some of their stuff out of

1992
03:34:07,870 --> 03:34:10,735
their yard and keeping a better condition than it could be. I would disagree with staff's recommendation,

1993
03:34:14,950 --> 03:34:14,950
and I personally would definitely be in support of this. This variance or cost.

1994
03:34:22,860 --> 03:34:25,765
>> question for staff for the applicant. When I look at this, there's no windows or anything on the second story of that,

1995
03:34:29,680 --> 03:34:33,190
so that's currently not a livable space on the second story, but it's being proposed to become one?

1996
03:34:35,950 --> 03:34:35,950
>> ultimately, it's part of a larger building permit for remodel of that space.

1997
03:34:42,120 --> 03:34:45,985
>> does that allow for two livable spaces that could be rented out? >> no. This property would not qualify for an accessory unit.

1998
03:34:50,320 --> 03:34:52,930
>> but is that what's being proposed by them as an accessory? >> no. That is something that staff can approve administratively as an interior model,

1999
03:35:00,580 --> 03:35:00,580
subject to certain controls to assure it's not being used as an accessory dwelling unit.

2000
03:35:05,920 --> 03:35:09,835
however, what is before you tonight is strictly for that additional six feet coming out of the garage and that ancillary [inaudible]

2001
03:35:16,300 --> 03:35:16,300
>> thank you.

2002
03:35:21,920 --> 03:35:24,825
>> I'll add my comments quick. Looking at the picture here,

2003
03:35:26,835 --> 03:35:26,835
the design is actually going to hang over the driveway,

2004
03:35:31,740 --> 03:35:31,740
so you're not going to do anything to technically the hard cover.

2005
03:35:36,495 --> 03:35:39,510
you're not going absurd with six feet, so it's not really going to change the characteristics by much.

2006
03:35:45,510 --> 03:35:48,735
then looking at the design of the building, it seems impossible to pull out another wing of that rectangle building to extend it.

2007
03:35:55,485 --> 03:35:55,485
then if the use case is for boats that's where you need the length.

2008
03:35:59,790 --> 03:35:59,790
it's through the entry point and to extend it.

2009
03:36:03,855 --> 03:36:03,855
I guess I'm having a hard time saying I would be against this.

2010
03:36:09,560 --> 03:36:09,560
I think the staff has raised some good comments and suggestions on it,

2011
03:36:16,620 --> 03:36:16,620
but I actually would be in favor of this.

2012
03:36:21,950 --> 03:36:24,660
>> mr. Chairman. >> yes. >> I think there's a lot of things that make sense.

2013
03:36:29,175 --> 03:36:31,710
there's a lot of things that are demonstrated. I think the topography of the lot is relevant.

2014
03:36:36,270 --> 03:36:36,270
I think the biggest thing is I don't think it's a coincidence that

2015
03:36:41,010 --> 03:36:44,385
the existing total cover that we have in structure is exactly at the location because that's what was built.

2016
03:36:49,490 --> 03:36:51,510
this isn't like an after the fact variance they had built the house or anything like that,

2017
03:36:53,790 --> 03:36:57,420
but that's why we have limitations as you fit it into the box, you build what you can. That's already there.

2018
03:37:00,105 --> 03:37:00,105
that's the only hard part that I have with this is if there was some mitigation,

2019
03:37:04,800 --> 03:37:07,350
there with hard cover that would be still within the guidelines, and within the boundaries as well as how we define accessory buildings because again,

2020
03:37:12,795 --> 03:37:12,795
it was probably built at a time before we realized that that could be a problem,

2021
03:37:17,205 --> 03:37:20,850
and I think we've done some great things in the last decade and tightening things and loosening things and continue

2022
03:37:26,040 --> 03:37:26,040
to do so I think we have to set rules for what they are.

2023
03:37:34,800 --> 03:37:34,800
a little variance is still a variance.

2024
03:37:38,810 --> 03:37:41,610
I agree, it does make sense. Just that I don't agree with [inaudible]

2025
03:37:47,610 --> 03:37:51,365
>> they're not increasing the hard cover. >> but it's at the maximum. Right now, I guess what I'm trying to determine

2026
03:37:56,450 --> 03:37:56,450
is if they're eliminating hard cover to accommodate an addition.

2027
03:38:02,475 --> 03:38:02,475
is that going to be sufficient [inaudible].

2028
03:38:12,590 --> 03:38:13,855
>> just for clarity, they're proposing the addition on top of the existing hard cover,

2029
03:38:18,765 --> 03:38:21,030
so they're not trying to eliminate it somewhere else. >> no, but the structure is an addition like this right now.

2030
03:38:25,275 --> 03:38:27,705
>> the structural hard cover is increasing. I think structural hard cover.

2031
03:38:29,835 --> 03:38:29,835
now we're speaking the same language.

2032
03:38:34,190 --> 03:38:37,635
but they're not exceeding structural hard cover. >> that's correct.

2033
03:38:40,220 --> 03:38:43,260
>> I'm looking at this, and I think that is the practical place to put in addition to an accessory building.

2034
03:38:47,475 --> 03:38:47,475
there's an existing garage on the house that presumably is designed for

2035
03:38:51,780 --> 03:38:51,780
vehicles that person there is living and using the attached garage of their house.

2036
03:38:56,325 --> 03:38:56,325
the purpose of the accessory building is to store accessories such as boats, etc.

2037
03:39:01,965 --> 03:39:05,295
boats are bigger than they were in the 90s. I think I look at this,

2038
03:39:08,640 --> 03:39:08,640
and I can see the practical difficulty with the elevation change on the lot.

2039
03:39:14,390 --> 03:39:14,390
if they were to try to configure this on the south side of the garage,

2040
03:39:18,660 --> 03:39:18,660
they're not going to gain any length.

2041
03:39:23,690 --> 03:39:25,920
it's variance is all over. It's pick your poison.

2042
03:39:28,275 --> 03:39:31,215
we're going to be looking at a hard cover variance. They try to expand on the south side.

2043
03:39:33,210 --> 03:39:33,210
I don't think that the 10 foot setback is affecting anybody.

2044
03:39:40,520 --> 03:39:40,520
I agree with the applicant's practical difficulty analysis. Thanks.

2045
03:39:46,755 --> 03:39:50,410
>> we did not hear from the neighbor to the north. >> I have not heard from any neighbors in the area.

2046
03:39:54,050 --> 03:39:54,050
>> I agree with agent ressler that I think we have code for a reason.

2047
03:40:03,900 --> 03:40:03,900
we got to stick to it when there's validity to it.

2048
03:40:08,055 --> 03:40:11,820
I have some concern about this, just when you look at the aerial cover of it, if you could bring up the aerial quick.

2049
03:40:14,100 --> 03:40:14,100
it's not technically considered hard cover at this very specific point in time.

2050
03:40:20,220 --> 03:40:20,220
do you have an actual aerial aerial that's not concealed by the tree?

2051
03:40:24,270 --> 03:40:26,460
that's really a roundabout there, that's not being calculated as hard cover because it's just being driven over the grass.

2052
03:40:30,900 --> 03:40:33,030
but historically, we've seen where that all of a sudden somehow becomes driveway at some point in time,

2053
03:40:35,640 --> 03:40:38,070
it becomes considered a hard cover, and now we're stuck dealing with it.

2054
03:40:39,675 --> 03:40:39,675
I also have some difficulty where he's talking about how this is really about a boat,

2055
03:40:44,430 --> 03:40:46,650
six feet going from 10-16, but it's really more about a deck for

2056
03:40:48,825 --> 03:40:48,825
upstairs space that could all of a sudden become a rental space without a rental license.

2057
03:40:53,820 --> 03:40:55,440
I don't want to put things out there, but this seems to be a lot more going on than I'm just

2058
03:40:58,800 --> 03:40:58,800
trying to get a space to put a 14 foot boat or a 12 foot boat.

2059
03:41:03,150 --> 03:41:03,150
>> question for staff. I know a while ago it used to be a cup for an adu.

2060
03:41:09,255 --> 03:41:09,255
now it's administrative decision.

2061
03:41:13,440 --> 03:41:17,060
do the setbacks of the building, does it have to be in conforming structure within conforming setbacks,

2062
03:41:21,720 --> 03:41:24,510
or does it just have to be a structure on the property? >> we used to have a conditional use permit for guest houses,

2063
03:41:28,305 --> 03:41:31,980
and that's what our code did was guest houses, and that still, I believe required a covenant.

2064
03:41:34,380 --> 03:41:34,380
for guest houses, that it couldn't be rental or could could be a dwelling.

2065
03:41:40,110 --> 03:41:40,110
we amended our code 6 five years ago.

2066
03:41:44,220 --> 03:41:46,530
a few years ago, to open it up to allow accessory dwelling units,

2067
03:41:50,475 --> 03:41:53,895
and then we dropped the conditional use permit for guest houses. We allow oversized accessory buildings,

2068
03:41:56,550 --> 03:41:59,640
and then adus are administrative, and that's how they were written when the regulation went into place.

2069
03:42:05,120 --> 03:42:05,120
to build a new adu need to be conforming to setbacks.

2070
03:42:10,965 --> 03:42:14,910
I believe you can convert an existing structure to an adu as long as the conditions of the adu are

2071
03:42:18,510 --> 03:42:21,990
met regarding the connection for sewer and the sizing requirements and things of that nature.

2072
03:42:25,830 --> 03:42:28,635
>> there's no conditions on that as far as conforming setbacks if you're converting an existing building?

2073
03:42:35,630 --> 03:42:39,195
>> if you get the variance first as a garage, then it's an existing building that can be converted.

2074
03:42:42,030 --> 03:42:42,030
but if you were to go for these in the beginning you'd need those setbacks.

2075
03:42:47,445 --> 03:42:50,505
>> if you have a building, and you want to turn it into an adu,

2076
03:42:52,575 --> 03:42:55,125
you need to meet the standards of the adu. Example, this site, one of the standards for

2077
03:42:57,510 --> 03:43:00,465
an adu is you need to have one acre minimum, so I don't [overlapping].

2078
03:43:02,610 --> 03:43:06,270
>> the setbacks are not part of that standard. That's [overlapping]. >> let me confirm.

2079
03:43:11,090 --> 03:43:11,090
>> those are my concerns. It just we have

2080
03:43:15,165 --> 03:43:18,840
ordinance and rules in place to keep things from becoming a slippery slope, and just need to continue to go down.

2081
03:43:20,370 --> 03:43:23,070
I haven't seen enough justification for why he needs to expand it to put a 12 foot boat in there.

2082
03:43:27,075 --> 03:43:28,710
>> mr. Chair. >> yes. >> I have a question. It probably was already answered.

2083
03:43:32,940 --> 03:43:32,940
what's the demarcation of oversize accessory building by size? Was it 1,008?

2084
03:43:40,680 --> 03:43:42,210
>> before the expansion. >> yes, I see [inaudible].

2085
03:43:50,220 --> 03:43:51,870
[laughter] because I'm like, wait a minute. I thought for a second, maybe it just had to do with this setback.

2086
03:43:55,760 --> 03:43:58,740
that's what I thought it was. We're taking an accessory building that's already oversize making it bigger.

2087
03:44:07,550 --> 03:44:09,930
>> but you're allowed to make it bigger. You're allowed to make it bigger just within the setbacks.

2088
03:44:12,780 --> 03:44:12,780
because that triggers a different setback for an oversized accessory.

2089
03:44:17,670 --> 03:44:20,520
>> oversized accessory building can be up to 2,000 square feet on this property, is that correct?

2090
03:44:23,415 --> 03:44:23,415
be conforming. What's not conforming is that it's in the setback.

2091
03:44:27,570 --> 03:44:30,110
>> that's correct. >> I know that we're going to read and sign,

2092
03:44:33,000 --> 03:44:33,000
but we can't have any of the proposed additions inside the 30 foot, is that correct?

2093
03:44:48,000 --> 03:44:49,680
>> [inaudible] >> but then you're adding the hard cover to the site.

2094
03:44:54,694 --> 03:44:56,040
>> [inaudible]. >> or if you add it to the house.

2095
03:44:59,360 --> 03:45:02,730
>> I'm just going to take a stab at here because I'm always trying to find ways to be in support of it.

2096
03:45:05,955 --> 03:45:08,750
if we could make the hard cover standard 30% and we're not doing any of the addition within the 30 feet,

2097
03:45:11,990 --> 03:45:13,415
I would probably support it. I know that sounds [inaudible],

2098
03:45:17,220 --> 03:45:17,220
whoever we vote on this if that feedback gets on the record for council.

2099
03:45:21,750 --> 03:45:21,750
>> that wouldn't happen for us.

2100
03:45:28,390 --> 03:45:28,390
>> there you go. [laughter]. I think we all want to support this.

2101
03:45:36,180 --> 03:45:37,410
I'm still in support of it. I think that if we're looking at the application as its face

2102
03:45:42,330 --> 03:45:42,330
and not trying to guess into the future that they're going to turn this into an adu,

2103
03:45:48,160 --> 03:45:51,570
this accessory building can be bigger. I think it meets the criteria of

2104
03:45:53,535 --> 03:45:53,535
practical difficulty so that you can store the accessories that he has in this building.

2105
03:45:58,710 --> 03:46:01,405
I'm still in favor of it. I don't like looking into the future and saying,

2106
03:46:04,535 --> 03:46:08,120
then he might apply for an adu permit, which is fine. It's administrative. We've already come up with the standards of what that person needs to get that permit,

2107
03:46:12,555 --> 03:46:14,790
and there's conditions a time to it. That's stuff that we debated over and talked about for months years ago.

2108
03:46:21,540 --> 03:46:24,555
it's worked really well because we used to have a room full of people applying for cups for guest houses.

2109
03:46:29,660 --> 03:46:31,830
they were very long meetings, and they all came to the same conclusion that the people could have the guest house.

2110
03:46:35,700 --> 03:46:37,140
it really wasn't an issue, because we found out that people aren't using these as rental properties.

2111
03:46:41,505 --> 03:46:41,505
that's a condition of it, so it doesn't scare me looking at this.

2112
03:46:46,155 --> 03:46:48,510
I think we have to look at this at face value. What he's applying for is to make this garage bigger so he

2113
03:46:51,870 --> 03:46:55,545
can store the accessory equipment that he owns. That's a practical difficulty.

2114
03:46:57,705 --> 03:46:57,705
>> my perspective is that if he can bump out

2115
03:47:01,860 --> 03:47:01,860
only a portion of the building and not the entire east side,

2116
03:47:06,915 --> 03:47:06,915
that he can still meet,

2117
03:47:11,745 --> 03:47:11,745
I would guess the majority of his needs for boat storage,

2118
03:47:15,855 --> 03:47:15,855
or at least some of them.

2119
03:47:20,000 --> 03:47:20,000
because that exists within the current code,

2120
03:47:30,890 --> 03:47:30,890
that would be where my vote would lie.

2121
03:47:38,550 --> 03:47:40,785
I don't think we all need to agree, and so at some point,

2122
03:47:44,310 --> 03:47:44,310
if we all vote our own way, that's okay.

2123
03:47:49,070 --> 03:47:50,910
>> any other discussions? >> I'm going to make a motion.

2124
03:47:54,890 --> 03:47:58,380
I think it's in the best interest of the applicant. Again, I'm hanging my hat on just that it's in their property right.

2125
03:48:03,615 --> 03:48:03,615
it's a structure that was there prior to their ownership of the property.

2126
03:48:08,175 --> 03:48:11,475
I think they're making a reasonable proposal. They're not extending out 15 20 feet.

2127
03:48:14,325 --> 03:48:16,950
I think it's very much in the means of that. I think a big part is they're not increasing the hard cover.

2128
03:48:19,215 --> 03:48:19,215
I would certainly not be in approval if they were increasing the hard cover.

2129
03:48:23,670 --> 03:48:26,220
again, there's clearly demonstratable difficulty in my perspective based on the topography.

2130
03:48:30,420 --> 03:48:30,420
because of those reasons, I'm going to make a motion to approve as applied la-25-51.

2131
03:48:39,170 --> 03:48:40,830
>> I'll second that. >> a motion to approve by commissioner brandabur as applied.

2132
03:48:45,960 --> 03:48:48,765
I have a second by commissioner pajonar. Any further discussion on that motion?

2133
03:48:53,450 --> 03:48:57,420
hearing none. We'll put it to a vote. All in favor say aye. >> aye.

2134
03:48:58,515 --> 03:49:01,335
>> any opposed? >> nay. >> that motion failed 3-4? Is that correct?

2135
03:49:07,880 --> 03:49:07,880
>> chair, can you please note who were the nays?

2136
03:49:12,360 --> 03:49:16,080
>> raise your hand if you were a nay? >> four? >> yes.

2137
03:49:16,650 --> 03:49:17,580
>> thank you. >> yes. That being said, entertain another motion.

2138
03:49:26,180 --> 03:49:29,220
>> I'll make a motion to deny. >> I'll second.

2139
03:49:31,125 --> 03:49:34,905
>> motion to deny by commissioner wilson, a second by commissioner percol. Any further discussions?

2140
03:49:36,900 --> 03:49:40,545
all in favor of denial, say aye. >> aye.

2141
03:49:41,505 --> 03:49:43,785
>> an opposed? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye.

2142
03:49:48,350 --> 03:49:51,300
>> motion is denied. That we'll move on to city council meeting on 10th of december, I think.

2143
03:50:05,715 --> 03:50:09,255
>> eighth. >> on a note that's somewhat related to this application.

2144
03:50:13,785 --> 03:50:13,785
I think it'd be interesting to revisit the code for oversize accessory buildings.

2145
03:50:19,500 --> 03:50:19,500
make sure that there's an actual need for this additional setback.

2146
03:50:28,065 --> 03:50:30,540
because I think it seems a little egregious, especially when we're looking at this existing building is only eight feet over,

2147
03:50:35,610 --> 03:50:35,610
and this would require it to be built 30 more feet towards the center.

2148
03:50:40,335 --> 03:50:40,335
I think that's a big reason that people don't want [inaudible] upper room,

2149
03:50:45,645 --> 03:50:47,985
have some accessory buildings on their lots, and I think we need to revisit that piece to make sure

2150
03:50:50,460 --> 03:50:53,175
that it's adequate for today's use. >> I think that's a good idea mr. Chair,

2151
03:50:54,660 --> 03:50:58,155
the neighboring communities have for those. >> second, I think we could revisit the adu

2152
03:51:03,495 --> 03:51:05,490
and make sure that the standards for that would take something like this into consideration.

2153
03:51:09,105 --> 03:51:12,480
I can see some places where it might be a problem if someone wants to convert a zero setback building into an adu,

2154
03:51:16,170 --> 03:51:18,840
and they can just do that through the administration process right now. That should be looked at,

2155
03:51:22,860 --> 03:51:25,770
and that's my thought. Do you need something formal from us to push recommendations forward or?

2156
03:51:30,300 --> 03:51:30,300
>> no. This is probably getting more to the administrative side of the meeting,

2157
03:51:35,850 --> 03:51:35,850
but as we move forward [noise] in the early part of next year,

2158
03:51:40,680 --> 03:51:42,210
staff will be putting together probably some work session and work session topics and discussion,

2159
03:51:47,040 --> 03:51:49,890
so I'm taking note of the different things we've run into this year to be a point of discussion,

2160
03:51:53,010 --> 03:51:53,010
and from that, we can move on with discussions and direction from there.

2161
03:51:58,320 --> 03:51:58,320
I'll add this to the list of potential work session discussion or topics.

2162
03:52:02,460 --> 03:52:06,240
>> just for clarity, the applicant, if we were to revisit that language,

2163
03:52:09,360 --> 03:52:09,360
it's possible the applicant could build that without needing a variance.

2164
03:52:14,775 --> 03:52:14,775
in the future, if we were to change or re-examine those setback requirements.

2165
03:52:21,030 --> 03:52:22,845
just a thought. >> yes. My thought is not to be aggressive with these changes, but look at them,

2166
03:52:27,555 --> 03:52:27,555
is 1000 feet really the right metric we need for that oversized building?

2167
03:52:32,160 --> 03:52:34,965
maybe it's [overlapping]. >> or the setback. >> maybe it's 1,500,

2168
03:52:36,705 --> 03:52:39,675
but anything bigger then has to get that bigger setback. Those are things we should constantly be looking at, I think.

2169
03:52:42,255 --> 03:52:45,960
>> we did, like three years ago, change that regarding this is an elevation to stay..

2170
03:52:49,875 --> 03:52:49,875
>> that was that change the criteria, you're right there,

2171
03:52:54,150 --> 03:52:54,150
it's usually seen as that the transparency

2172
03:52:59,040 --> 03:53:02,400
to look into those things to change the progress. >> yeah.

2173
03:53:03,210 --> 03:53:05,900
>> I don't disagree with it. >> all that being said, we'll move on to new business.

2174
03:53:09,210 --> 03:53:11,640
chair appointment discussion. >> commissioner, I think that is an old agenda that got published.

2175
03:53:17,115 --> 03:53:19,080
my apologies or that got printed. The next item is la 25-44.

2176
03:53:22,770 --> 03:53:24,465
>> we're just out of order. >> I think the one that got printed out front was out of order,

2177
03:53:27,450 --> 03:53:29,550
my apologies, and the one that got published. >> do we formally asked to change the agenda?

2178
03:53:32,325 --> 03:53:32,325
>> I think the agenda was changed immediately after publication,

2179
03:53:38,400 --> 03:53:38,400
but I think the copy that got printed on the out there was the old copy.

2180
03:53:43,275 --> 03:53:46,260
>> we formally adopted the correct agenda. We just have cancel it. >> yes. That's true, chair. Thank you.

2181
03:53:47,940 --> 03:53:50,895
[laughter] the one online is correct. Yes. >>that brings us to a sketch plan.

2182
03:53:53,145 --> 03:53:55,620
>> for the clarity quick. The hair appointment discussion that's not until like february, march, correct.

2183
03:53:57,300 --> 03:53:58,785
is that when that would happen? >> no, we'll talk about a recommendation for appointments of chair on this agenda,

2184
03:54:05,460 --> 03:54:08,280
but actual reappointments of people who want to get reappointed formally as commissioners or if there's openings,

2185
03:54:11,700 --> 03:54:11,700
will happen later in the first part of 2026.

2186
03:54:18,230 --> 03:54:21,420
>> brings us to la 25-44. This is a sketch plan, scott england,

2187
03:54:23,115 --> 03:54:26,565
on behalf of barbara lupian, for 3220. Was that a boulevard? Ms. Oakton.

2188
03:54:29,715 --> 03:54:29,715
>> thank you. Will you bring up just the I believe I have a site plan.

2189
03:54:34,605 --> 03:54:34,605
is exhibit d. We'll just kind of work from this.

2190
03:54:40,185 --> 03:54:42,990
the applicant in front of you tonight is a sketch plan. The applicants requesting comments regarding

2191
03:54:45,480 --> 03:54:45,480
a proposed development for a 26 detached townhome on the south side of lake classen,

2192
03:54:49,665 --> 03:54:49,665
which is on the north just to the north of wayzata, boulevard.

2193
03:54:54,120 --> 03:54:56,220
as a point of a reminder, a sketch plan is a part of a process to get non-binding feedback to a project.

2194
03:55:02,850 --> 03:55:02,850
it's not a formal application in the sense that this is a high 10,000-foot

2195
03:55:07,695 --> 03:55:07,695
view of the project to gauge interest or support from commission,

2196
03:55:13,005 --> 03:55:13,005
as well as council before any formal applications are made.

2197
03:55:17,190 --> 03:55:17,190
a little bit background, the proposed property is in the rr-1b district,

2198
03:55:22,590 --> 03:55:25,545
guided rural residential through our comprehensive plan. The parcels are outside of the musa and are

2199
03:55:28,530 --> 03:55:31,560
not eligible for sanitary sewer and water at this time. The parcels are located on lake classen,

2200
03:55:34,560 --> 03:55:34,560
which is a natural environment lake with 150 foot lake shore setback for all structures.

2201
03:55:39,825 --> 03:55:42,810
based on the existing zoning of this parcel, the minimum lot size for new lots is two acres and

2202
03:55:45,450 --> 03:55:49,020
200 feet width measured at that lake shore setback. The proposal in front of you tonight provided by the developer,

2203
03:55:52,830 --> 03:55:55,905
is a 26 detached townhome proposal. The homes are single-storey with a combination of 2-3 car garages.

2204
03:56:00,225 --> 03:56:00,225
the project includes a viewing platform for the residents,

2205
03:56:04,980 --> 03:56:07,050
as well as a large conservation easement, which is indicated in that darker green perimeter edging on the site plan.

2206
03:56:12,465 --> 03:56:16,305
access to the site is provided on two entrances, off wayzata boulevard on the south of the subject property,

2207
03:56:20,670 --> 03:56:20,670
which would be subject to approval by head of the county.

2208
03:56:25,770 --> 03:56:28,845
the proposal will require an amendment, the comprehensive plan for both land use and expansion of the musa boundary.

2209
03:56:33,690 --> 03:56:33,690
the met council requires that a minimum density of three units per

2210
03:56:38,055 --> 03:56:38,055
acre for all land within the musa for the city.

2211
03:56:42,870 --> 03:56:46,650
the upcoming comprehensive plan amendment that we will start to work on it's called the comp plan for 2050,

2212
03:56:50,640 --> 03:56:50,640
will require the city to meet a 3.5 units per acre in density.

2213
03:56:55,260 --> 03:56:58,485
we will be asked for more density within our musa district, coming into the comprehensive plan update.

2214
03:57:01,380 --> 03:57:04,500
net density for this site specifically, the property is roughly 14 acres in size in land.

2215
03:57:08,265 --> 03:57:11,070
the developer is proposing that conservation easement, which is roughly 4.5 acres around the perimeter.

2216
03:57:14,445 --> 03:57:14,445
a conservation easement can be subtracted from the developable land

2217
03:57:19,260 --> 03:57:19,260
of the density calculation if the area is owned and maintained by a government agency.

2218
03:57:24,640 --> 03:57:27,350
if the conservation area is removed, the adjusted land would be approximately 8.5 acres in size,

2219
03:57:32,005 --> 03:57:32,005
which results with the 26-unit project and a 3.1 unit per acre density,

2220
03:57:37,680 --> 03:57:37,680
which is in line with the current 2040 city guidelines of our comprehensive plan,

2221
03:57:44,445 --> 03:57:44,445
but would be short of the future requirement for our 2050, which is 3.5.

2222
03:57:51,920 --> 03:57:51,920
let's see here. Comp plan and land use.

2223
03:57:59,280 --> 03:57:59,280
the comp plan talks at length about the rural character of orono and the protection of

2224
03:58:03,720 --> 03:58:03,720
natural resources noting that the delineation of urban and rural area is fixed.

2225
03:58:10,115 --> 03:58:13,775
this is at a demarcation part in our comprehensive plan. To the south is considered urban.

2226
03:58:15,635 --> 03:58:18,475
this parcel is considered rural. Part of the city's solution to retain its rural character is to place

2227
03:58:22,755 --> 03:58:22,755
higher densities as appropriate locations in the city, such as navarre.

2228
03:58:29,205 --> 03:58:31,740
the planning commission, the council should determine if the site is appropriate for an urban density,

2229
03:58:34,320 --> 03:58:36,525
greater than one unit per two acres. If so, they should determine if the proposed development

2230
03:58:39,030 --> 03:58:42,195
provides appropriate level of density for the city. In our 2040 comp plan,

2231
03:58:44,355 --> 03:58:47,865
we do prioritize projects when considering musa expansions. One of those priorities would be that properties that above the shoreline of orono lakes.

2232
03:58:54,960 --> 03:58:54,960
another policy or another prioritization is that

2233
03:59:00,420 --> 03:59:00,420
new developments use some cluster or permanently preserved blocks of open space.

2234
03:59:06,990 --> 03:59:09,555
this development does meet those two. I think there are six in total prioritizations for conditions for expanding the musa.

2235
03:59:16,050 --> 03:59:16,050
under zoning, orono does not have a high-density residential zoning district.

2236
03:59:21,420 --> 03:59:21,420
all of our high-density zoning is done through a tool,

2237
03:59:26,805 --> 03:59:29,355
either an rpud or a puds. Stone bay, orono senior housing orono woods are all done under our rpud,

2238
03:59:34,710 --> 03:59:37,290
which is a residential planned unit development. That specific zoning requirement lists that no [noise]

2239
03:59:41,970 --> 03:59:41,970
can be within 250 feet of an ohw of a protected water,

2240
03:59:46,365 --> 03:59:49,215
so that would be encumbered with the site. However, the city does have another tool that is a planned unit development in pud.

2241
03:59:55,740 --> 03:59:55,740
[noise] this is allowed or this is a site that would qualify for a pud,

2242
04:00:00,600 --> 04:00:03,615
as it is off of wayzata boulevard or old highway 12, but it would need to be explored regarding the priorities of

2243
04:00:07,470 --> 04:00:07,470
clustering development and the densities associated with that pud.

2244
04:00:12,450 --> 04:00:15,735
if the planning commission and council supports the project, some modifications to a zoning ordinance may be necessary,

2245
04:00:18,750 --> 04:00:21,030
may be an ordinance amendment or a variance. A leniency may be requested depending on the scale and location of approvement.

2246
04:00:25,230 --> 04:00:25,230
plan commission should provide guidance for its appetite for necessary modifications.

2247
04:00:32,060 --> 04:00:32,060
for public comments, this is not a public hearing.

2248
04:00:36,315 --> 04:00:39,945
no public comments have been submitted to the city for this project. The applicant, however, did hold a neighborhood meeting on november 5,

2249
04:00:45,000 --> 04:00:45,000
and they submitted supporting documents of that meeting,

2250
04:00:50,040 --> 04:00:50,040
where they showed the sketch plan and heard from neighbors.

2251
04:00:54,645 --> 04:00:57,465
items for consideration. Does the planning commission support expansion of the musa boundary?

2252
04:01:01,245 --> 04:01:01,245
is a specific question that you should discuss and provide feedback on.

2253
04:01:05,805 --> 04:01:08,370
then, as well as, does the commission support expansion of an urban density into the property?

2254
04:01:11,235 --> 04:01:13,455
because if we expand the musa, then the density should support that infrastructure.

2255
04:01:16,965 --> 04:01:20,295
additionally, specifically for this site. The proposed conservation easement

2256
04:01:22,095 --> 04:01:22,095
shown must be owned and maintained by a government agency.

2257
04:01:26,190 --> 04:01:28,605
this is critical for this proposed site, as is estimated density of 3.1 units is only met

2258
04:01:33,270 --> 04:01:33,270
by identifying that conservation area and netting those acres out of the development.

2259
04:01:38,325 --> 04:01:40,590
the planning commission should ask the applicant for additional testimony regarding this requirement and

2260
04:01:43,260 --> 04:01:45,750
provide feedback on city ownership or maintenance of the development for that conservation easement.

2261
04:01:48,675 --> 04:01:51,810
that conservation easement must be dedicated to a government agency as well as maintained by that government agency.

2262
04:01:56,270 --> 04:01:59,010
then, would the planning commission support any zoning ordinances if it was necessary for the site?

2263
04:02:02,400 --> 04:02:05,205
are there other issues or concerns with this project? I have maps from the comprehensive plan we can work through.

2264
04:02:08,715 --> 04:02:08,715
I also have some perspective views to work through on this,

2265
04:02:13,380 --> 04:02:16,665
but the developer has prepared a powerpoint as well. I'm happy to take any questions.

2266
04:02:21,770 --> 04:02:24,795
>>that was a lot. >> yes. >> good job.

2267
04:02:26,010 --> 04:02:28,740
>> I know. [laughter] >> you said it doesn't meet the guidelines of an rpud because?

2268
04:02:32,220 --> 04:02:32,220
>> an rpud has a specific regulation that it can't be within 250 feet of an ohw.

2269
04:02:39,360 --> 04:02:39,360
that being said, the an rpud it may either require

2270
04:02:44,700 --> 04:02:46,500
a text amendment or a variance to that zoning district to incorporate those rpud standards.

2271
04:02:51,525 --> 04:02:51,525
I think there's some tools in place that applicant could explore regarding our zoning,

2272
04:02:57,960 --> 04:03:00,885
whether it's an rpud or a pud district, but further research and information on the proposal would need to be determined.

2273
04:03:07,920 --> 04:03:11,080
>> in the pud, it does not meet because of? >> staff believes it does meet the pud standards.

2274
04:03:14,280 --> 04:03:14,280
we only allow puds in the navarre area or in the highway 12 corridor.

2275
04:03:21,450 --> 04:03:21,450
the highway 12 corridor study was done in the '80s and was

2276
04:03:27,000 --> 04:03:29,190
a small area site plan that was when we were planning to shift highway 12 from wayzata boulevard to now.

2277
04:03:34,680 --> 04:03:38,550
this area was identified as rural and part of that plan, but it was part of that plan,

2278
04:03:39,990 --> 04:03:39,990
so it would be identified and potential a possible lot for a pud development.

2279
04:03:46,340 --> 04:03:48,645
>> either of those vehicles, there need to be code changed?

2280
04:03:50,640 --> 04:03:53,265
>>there might not be a code change for pud, but pud does prioritize cluster development.

2281
04:03:56,805 --> 04:03:59,565
it allows for mixed-use development. It's a little bit wider breadth of it all.

2282
04:04:02,925 --> 04:04:04,350
>> just a second. Not to interrupt you, but you're saying it's not meeting the current.

2283
04:04:06,990 --> 04:04:09,540
>> I think it would meet the pud standards. >> the standards it meets, but it doesn't meet the current location for puds?

2284
04:04:13,200 --> 04:04:15,405
>> it does meet the pud. I do believe a pud would work for this site.

2285
04:04:20,930 --> 04:04:23,730
>> you said the pud is not allowed on this site because it's only allowed on the highway 12 corridor.

2286
04:04:27,135 --> 04:04:30,120
>> it's just considered part of the highway 12 corridor. >> it is? >> yes. >> yes. I totally misunderstood what you said.

2287
04:04:32,790 --> 04:04:36,705
>> this is part of the highway 12 corridor. I'm sorry if I spoke in circles there. This is considered part of the highway 12 corridor.

2288
04:04:39,060 --> 04:04:39,060
it is in the area where a pud could be identified and could be placed.

2289
04:04:43,890 --> 04:04:45,495
>> that makes more sense. >> so sorry.

2290
04:04:49,280 --> 04:04:49,280
>> if that land along the lake shore is not maintained by a government entity,

2291
04:04:58,215 --> 04:04:58,215
that feels like a really high burden.

2292
04:05:04,700 --> 04:05:08,625
what would the density need to change to? >> yeah, so if that land would be counted.

2293
04:05:14,820 --> 04:05:18,750
the site is roughly 14 acres. Under our current guide, we need three units per acre at minimum.

2294
04:05:21,735 --> 04:05:25,065
that would be 14*3. It's light and that's math.

2295
04:05:26,535 --> 04:05:30,015
>> forty two. >> what was that, matt? >> forty two. >> thank you, 42 units would be required just to hit

2296
04:05:33,870 --> 04:05:33,870
the absolute minimum to support a musa infrastructure,

2297
04:05:40,215 --> 04:05:42,375
and following council requirements. >> remind us how many are we looking at here?

2298
04:05:44,310 --> 04:05:45,360
>> twenty six. >> doubling the size, essentially/.

2299
04:05:49,190 --> 04:05:52,560
>> without the musa boundaries, this site could accommodate seven homes?

2300
04:05:56,175 --> 04:05:56,175
>> at most. We would require 200 feet of width at the 150-foot setback.

2301
04:06:05,930 --> 04:06:08,355
forty five. I haven't sketched it out, but rural.

2302
04:06:12,435 --> 04:06:14,685
>> can I clarify, also, because of the setback requirements from the lake,

2303
04:06:20,310 --> 04:06:20,310
you'd have to fit those 42 units within the lighter green shaded area, correct?

2304
04:06:29,430 --> 04:06:29,430
>> the dark green is roughly at the 75-foot setback.

2305
04:06:33,435 --> 04:06:37,125
there's an additional line right at the rear of the homes. >>yes.

2306
04:06:37,455 --> 04:06:39,855
>> that's the 150. >> got it. >> within the current homes area,

2307
04:06:42,930 --> 04:06:46,380
you'd need to fit almost double the amount of homes if the lakeshore was not being maintained by a government entity.

2308
04:06:50,775 --> 04:06:52,335
>> yeah, if it could not be netted out, if it had to be counted on the parcel.

2309
04:06:56,390 --> 04:06:56,390
>> if that was turned over to government agency and there was the overlook,

2310
04:07:02,400 --> 04:07:05,370
would that agency be responsible for that overlook to then in this point? >> not necessarily.

2311
04:07:07,395 --> 04:07:11,280
I think an agreement could get worked. That's a question for the applicant. But I believe there could be a agreement in

2312
04:07:14,820 --> 04:07:18,210
place that would allow an overlook to be maintained or be in that space while the rest of

2313
04:07:21,270 --> 04:07:25,230
the area could be a lot or an an easement managed by the government agency. That would be an agreement between those two entities.

2314
04:07:28,605 --> 04:07:30,810
>> I didn't pull it up on a map, but what does the other side of the lake look like from a density standpoint?

2315
04:07:36,710 --> 04:07:36,710
>> just to the west is the lurton dog park to

2316
04:07:41,760 --> 04:07:41,760
the east is the orono school district campus.

2317
04:07:48,345 --> 04:07:48,345
there's an existing neighborhood in the northeast.

2318
04:07:54,410 --> 04:07:57,105
>> there's just a small handful of homes. >> then there's about, I think five properties on honey hill.

2319
04:08:00,390 --> 04:08:03,270
that is a newer development that will be building that's a rural two-acre development on just north of the lurton dog park,

2320
04:08:09,105 --> 04:08:13,010
where that little pond is right there. Then to the south, I will note,

2321
04:08:16,080 --> 04:08:19,620
on the south side of wayzata boulevard, right where the cursor is, that's where we have guided low and high residential density for the city.

2322
04:08:29,930 --> 04:08:29,930
will you pull up the comp plan exhibit g?

2323
04:08:34,980 --> 04:08:34,980
this shows rural and urban areas.

2324
04:08:39,135 --> 04:08:39,135
we have this also identified as rural and urban to the south,

2325
04:08:43,950 --> 04:08:46,020
and then if you go down a map, I believe we have our land use map.

2326
04:08:48,990 --> 04:08:52,065
this is a shore land. There we go. We have this land identified as rural, but just to the south,

2327
04:08:55,440 --> 04:08:59,010
we do have it guided for different variations of high, medium, and low density, but urban area.

2328
04:09:02,085 --> 04:09:02,085
we are anticipating some city densities in that spot. But to the south.

2329
04:09:08,460 --> 04:09:11,895
>> mr. Chair. >> yes. >> I believe the applicants here as well if you have a question?

2330
04:09:14,550 --> 04:09:18,330
>> I do I will have more questions. I just wanted to clarify a couple of things. First of all, I appreciate you pointing out some things like the classification,

2331
04:09:24,330 --> 04:09:27,210
is not something that we have in our inventory. That's helpful to know.

2332
04:09:29,100 --> 04:09:29,100
my question is, expansion of the ma and expanding urban density, calling out.

2333
04:09:37,440 --> 04:09:40,770
I think you said we're 3.1 units per acre, and we need to go to a density of 18.

2334
04:09:42,930 --> 04:09:45,810
under comprehensive plan. >> under our current comp plan,

2335
04:09:46,950 --> 04:09:46,950
we are required to be three units per acre for all land within the musa,

2336
04:09:52,185 --> 04:09:54,480
and that's not necessarily existing conditions, that we've provided opportunities for

2337
04:09:57,030 --> 04:10:00,690
development that would meet us at three units per acre. We currently are at three even. Three even right now.

2338
04:10:05,415 --> 04:10:05,415
2050 comp plan has as a requirement for 3.5.

2339
04:10:11,265 --> 04:10:14,325
we will start the comprehensive plan, updates, outreach, public engagement stuff, probably into 2026.

2340
04:10:18,915 --> 04:10:18,915
into 2027, it's required to be submitted in 2028.

2341
04:10:23,070 --> 04:10:25,320
>> in effect 2030? >> it would be in effect once we submitted it to the mt council.

2342
04:10:29,190 --> 04:10:31,935
so 2028 is when the deadline to submit, I will go into effect early part of 2029 once they accept.

2343
04:10:35,385 --> 04:10:38,100
>> summary, we got to get to 3.5 units per acre for the comp plan right around two years from now?

2344
04:10:41,985 --> 04:10:41,985
>> yes. That's a bigger conversation. I just noted.

2345
04:10:46,703 --> 04:10:47,355
>> yes. >> it's review just so that that's are on the horizon.

2346
04:10:52,140 --> 04:10:55,965
>> if I can jump in just a question. I thought I heard you say that that ratio only counts for properties that are in the musa.

2347
04:11:00,660 --> 04:11:00,660
if this wasn't a part of the musa when [inaudible].

2348
04:11:05,580 --> 04:11:08,760
>> they're requesting city services. That land is only for land in the musa.

2349
04:11:11,715 --> 04:11:11,715
land outside of the musa or in our rural area is not counted in.

2350
04:11:15,825 --> 04:11:15,825
>> I was just asking, so if this state exactly to count negatively.

2351
04:11:21,230 --> 04:11:23,460
>> true. >> I'll have more questions, but I'll maybe let the applicant last question,

2352
04:11:27,765 --> 04:11:29,100
I think it was mentioned, but I'm not sure if it was resonated with anyone.

2353
04:11:33,035 --> 04:11:33,035
current guidance is rural residential in the 2040 compel.

2354
04:11:37,985 --> 04:11:40,260
>> true. >> one last question, sorry.

2355
04:11:42,195 --> 04:11:45,030
has the county provided feedback or, at what point do they provide feedback regarding the road,

2356
04:11:47,535 --> 04:11:47,535
and all this density that's going to be faking out right there at a high high speed road.

2357
04:11:52,950 --> 04:11:52,950
>> no. The applicant would engage with the county once a

2358
04:11:57,270 --> 04:11:58,620
preliminary plan or once the formal applications are starting to be developed and created.

2359
04:12:02,175 --> 04:12:04,560
I will note that the county knows that we do have high density guided just to the south side of this road,

2360
04:12:07,530 --> 04:12:09,840
so they are anticipating. Any additional traffic demands that this development would trigger,

2361
04:12:13,515 --> 04:12:13,515
the county would work and ask for upgrades from the developer to install.

2362
04:12:21,080 --> 04:12:24,105
>> the applicants here and wish to speak? >> I believe there's a powerpoint. Thank you.

2363
04:12:32,540 --> 04:12:32,540
>> chair members of the commission mike waldo with ron clark construction,

2364
04:12:36,630 --> 04:12:39,315
07,500 west 78th street n dana. Along with us tonight, what architect neil webber

2365
04:12:44,640 --> 04:12:47,310
is also consultant for us on this project. Might have been more eloquent a couple of hours ago [laughter].

2366
04:12:51,630 --> 04:12:55,260
hopefully, everyone's still awake. We'll try to be through this after as laura said, it's a very complicated process we're requesting,

2367
04:12:58,920 --> 04:13:01,320
but I think a lot of it is driven by the fact that we're bringing sewer pipes to the site.

2368
04:13:04,260 --> 04:13:07,095
in other words, with the development to the south, there will be sewer pipes running along our order.

2369
04:13:10,800 --> 04:13:14,670
the other thing that I think as we talked a little bit with the neighbors about is this is as a council continues to push everyone for more density.

2370
04:13:21,255 --> 04:13:21,255
getting this developed at 3.1 or if you decide,

2371
04:13:26,040 --> 04:13:28,170
what, you want us to be at 3.5, that's a couple of units we probably get there.

2372
04:13:30,870 --> 04:13:33,240
but at some point, with the natural environmental lake and with a limited amount of developable area,

2373
04:13:37,185 --> 04:13:40,830
all of a sudden, they could be pushing you to 60 units. All of a sudden, you're looking at a 100 or 300 unit apartment,

2374
04:13:44,400 --> 04:13:44,400
similar to what was brought in front of you by someone of 56 years.

2375
04:13:49,125 --> 04:13:51,540
which the landowners apologize for. There was a miscommunication between consultant of the land owner,

2376
04:13:55,335 --> 04:13:57,315
even that that site even got in front of you. Two of the landowners, which is the three mam members,

2377
04:13:59,490 --> 04:14:02,190
didn't even know it had. One of the things. Reason why our first meeting was with

2378
04:14:04,170 --> 04:14:06,690
the neighborhood before we came to you guys was just because of them going through the process and we need

2379
04:14:08,850 --> 04:14:11,610
to re engage the neighborhood, talk about what we're doing. Talk about the fact that, this has been in

2380
04:14:13,350 --> 04:14:16,850
their family for 40 years, and they want to be. I'm going to let step back for a second,

2381
04:14:19,110 --> 04:14:21,210
have tim talk about the plan quick, and then I'll jump in and talk for some of the technical stuff and then be

2382
04:14:24,960 --> 04:14:24,960
available for questions and try not to make this go too long. Thank you.

2383
04:14:30,890 --> 04:14:33,930
>> good evening, chair, commissioners. Tim whitten, witness associates,

2384
04:14:36,135 --> 04:14:36,135
men tonka. Are you there?

2385
04:14:40,320 --> 04:14:42,495
move. Over here, sir. Could you hand down a couple more?

2386
04:14:48,170 --> 04:14:48,170
what's go with this for now?

2387
04:14:52,670 --> 04:14:52,670
the property itself, the grades are such that

2388
04:14:58,020 --> 04:14:58,020
the highest point is really in the center along is that a boulevard.

2389
04:15:04,005 --> 04:15:04,005
then it slopes down steeply towards the shoreline.

2390
04:15:10,305 --> 04:15:14,100
our mission is always to design a product that adapts to the site as opposed to forcing a design,

2391
04:15:18,105 --> 04:15:18,105
on the site and change the elevations and so forth of the property.

2392
04:15:25,485 --> 04:15:25,485
this villa type design does that very well.

2393
04:15:29,760 --> 04:15:31,890
it's very flexible, because each of the units are 40 foot wide,

2394
04:15:35,670 --> 04:15:35,670
and we have 15-20 foot space in between each of the homes.

2395
04:15:40,545 --> 04:15:42,675
then as it flares out, around the shoreline that actually widens to a greater separation.

2396
04:15:48,930 --> 04:15:48,930
the fact that we have a sloping down towards the shoreline,

2397
04:15:55,635 --> 04:15:57,615
we have one level, low profile villas with walkout, lower levels.

2398
04:16:03,840 --> 04:16:03,840
then for the units that are facing south towards,

2399
04:16:08,370 --> 04:16:11,610
is that a boulevard, those are a tuck under type. Still the same formula where you've got the owners live on one level,

2400
04:16:16,380 --> 04:16:16,380
main level, and then the lower level has a family room with some guest bedrooms.

2401
04:16:22,425 --> 04:16:24,585
again, very low profile, it's really designed for empty nesters, active adults locally,

2402
04:16:31,455 --> 04:16:31,455
in many cases, that choose this alternative lifestyle,

2403
04:16:36,210 --> 04:16:36,210
that offers a homeowners association and no maintenance.

2404
04:16:41,895 --> 04:16:45,240
it's a very high demand, and I'm sure it's very popular within this area.

2405
04:16:49,140 --> 04:16:52,470
I'm not sure there's too many options, right now available. This would be a great option for the site.

2406
04:16:56,250 --> 04:16:56,250
the units are approximately 3,000-3,500 square feet in that range.

2407
04:17:04,425 --> 04:17:08,370
there's 26 fillers proposed, and there are two access points, along wiseley boulevard.

2408
04:17:14,760 --> 04:17:14,760
the one to the west is really in line with an existing drive that's to the south.

2409
04:17:21,210 --> 04:17:21,210
it's also pretty close to where we have an existing access to this site right now.

2410
04:17:27,240 --> 04:17:29,550
the second access is on the east, which is pretty in line with an existing access as well.

2411
04:17:33,090 --> 04:17:34,470
there's one in the center. We're not proposing on having that one.

2412
04:17:38,100 --> 04:17:38,100
having two access points as opposed to three, will be favorable.

2413
04:17:43,500 --> 04:17:46,860
we have a single private drive, very simple, private drive that gives access to all the villas on the site.

2414
04:17:55,340 --> 04:17:57,855
there is, as mentioned, this proposed conservation area,

2415
04:18:00,765 --> 04:18:00,765
along the shoreline, that really preserves all the existing trees in that area.

2416
04:18:05,220 --> 04:18:08,820
then with that, there's the 150 foot setback, that pulls the homes back from it.

2417
04:18:11,655 --> 04:18:11,655
mike can talk a little bit more about what hoa type controls are in that area,

2418
04:18:18,660 --> 04:18:18,660
but the whole intent is for that not to be an active area at all.

2419
04:18:23,505 --> 04:18:23,505
the architecture is proposed to be what we call transitional,

2420
04:18:28,125 --> 04:18:28,125
which is a combination of traditional forms,

2421
04:18:33,585 --> 04:18:33,585
but with a contemporary, materials and details,

2422
04:18:41,660 --> 04:18:41,660
the fact that they're going to have variety of exterior elevations,

2423
04:18:47,865 --> 04:18:50,505
of colors and materials, along with a number of these homes,

2424
04:18:52,470 --> 04:18:54,840
offer either a side load garage, or a front load garage.

2425
04:18:57,075 --> 04:19:00,255
virtually every villa will be unique. This is going to be four sided architecture.

2426
04:19:03,680 --> 04:19:03,680
same detailing we have on the front of the home is going to go around the entire home,

2427
04:19:09,260 --> 04:19:12,170
same thing with the materials and the colors and so forth, of high quality material.

2428
04:19:14,225 --> 04:19:14,225
I think with that, I'll give it back to mike. Thank you.

2429
04:19:24,230 --> 04:19:26,970
>> not to drag in too long. I try to talk a little bit about the neighborhood meeting.

2430
04:19:29,850 --> 04:19:32,250
we did include that. I'll try to step back a little bit. Include that with your packet.

2431
04:19:34,035 --> 04:19:35,895
the comments that came out of there. I think a couple of the neighbors are here tonight.

2432
04:19:38,160 --> 04:19:40,350
we're at that same meeting. Some of the lighting in the back we talked

2433
04:19:42,510 --> 04:19:44,640
about in most cases in our billing neighborhoods, we don't allow spot lights in the backyard.

2434
04:19:46,695 --> 04:19:48,780
I think that's an important piece for them because they don't want that light across the lake.

2435
04:19:52,600 --> 04:19:55,520
also no lake access. The little viewing area,

2436
04:19:57,815 --> 04:20:00,410
which we're still trying to determine location. I think in the end, it may end up going over towards more towards the high school.

2437
04:20:03,845 --> 04:20:06,590
because the topo was a little bit better there to be able to get down there. Otherwise, we'd have some pretty good steps going down.

2438
04:20:08,710 --> 04:20:11,970
the intent of that is strictly, that it's a viewing area. It's a quasi dock,

2439
04:20:13,485 --> 04:20:16,110
with no vertical structure, no lake access, no canoes, because the residents pretty much said there

2440
04:20:18,840 --> 04:20:22,065
isn't really anyone that uses a lake because it's natural environmental. What's really just to look at.

2441
04:20:24,920 --> 04:20:28,815
I think from one of the things, we've done our homework, can you back to the original?

2442
04:20:31,050 --> 04:20:33,680
got to start to the second slide. Again, I think as everyone looks at,

2443
04:20:36,015 --> 04:20:37,770
we've can see that it's tucked away and is really more relationable to the area to the south,

2444
04:20:42,720 --> 04:20:45,765
probably than it is to the homes to the north. If we jump to the next one,

2445
04:20:47,580 --> 04:20:50,850
we've done our homework, we've went in and reverifi with the dnr, the elevation of the water.

2446
04:20:52,335 --> 04:20:54,750
we've actually done the wetland study to determine wetland edge and make sure we knew exactly what we had to work with there.

2447
04:20:59,390 --> 04:20:59,390
we actually did a tree survey to determine where the nicer trees were.

2448
04:21:05,340 --> 04:21:09,210
the area to the west, has been an orchard for a long time. Those are a lot of smaller trees.

2449
04:21:11,685 --> 04:21:15,555
again, a lot of the internal trees aren't super healthy. I think the ones along the bank and along

2450
04:21:17,310 --> 04:21:21,195
the lake have seemed to be maintained pretty well. As past that. Let's keep going.

2451
04:21:24,255 --> 04:21:26,295
again, we just showed you a little bit of that. There was that tree survey on the next one down.

2452
04:21:28,290 --> 04:21:28,290
sorry. That shows the ones that we would have.

2453
04:21:33,560 --> 04:21:36,720
we actually took that tree survey, and overlaid where the houses are at.

2454
04:21:39,270 --> 04:21:41,820
we could show a correlation to the fact that, really in that first 20,

2455
04:21:43,650 --> 04:21:46,860
30 feet behind the homes, we expect that to be sod, somewhere between that 30 and 50 foot mark.

2456
04:21:49,920 --> 04:21:49,920
we may expand that conservation from 100 feet from the water to maybe 120,

2457
04:21:55,935 --> 04:21:59,820
depending on what we need in order to meet the density requirements of the city, but also just looking at they want a little bit of mobile lawn,

2458
04:22:03,360 --> 04:22:07,290
but the rest of it, we really want to be able to maintain with buffer grasses, which a lot of that stuff is pretty right now so we've work with the water to replant,

2459
04:22:12,780 --> 04:22:15,780
reef grass that buffer, take out the dead trees.

2460
04:22:17,130 --> 04:22:19,905
that's one of the biggest things we have a complaint for, at least, in that first 75 feet,

2461
04:22:22,080 --> 04:22:25,890
maybe that last 50 feet to the water, we'd have to work with the watershed to determine. Some of them they want the dead.

2462
04:22:27,555 --> 04:22:30,060
they fall in and be habitat for that. Which is okay, probably, because a lot of that's at the lower piece. Let's see.

2463
04:22:35,715 --> 04:22:39,030
again, looking at it, as you're sitting on if you're on the lake, these are what they are.

2464
04:22:40,200 --> 04:22:44,055
we're looking at ranches with walkouts and garden levels to be most cases. If you pop the next one, you'll see,

2465
04:22:47,055 --> 04:22:47,055
these are the actual trees located on the plan and a lot of the elevations.

2466
04:22:51,630 --> 04:22:51,630
the trees are well higher than the height of those houses.

2467
04:22:56,325 --> 04:22:59,385
but one of the things as we talked about with the neighbors was, you're going to see a few rooftops.

2468
04:23:01,260 --> 04:23:03,135
you're going to see maybe a little bit more in the winter, but you're not seeing a massive building that's two or three or four stories high.

2469
04:23:07,980 --> 04:23:11,370
even if you put in six or seven, the mega mansions, which is what gets built.

2470
04:23:13,890 --> 04:23:16,890
they're going to be 2.5 story huge houses. They have no control over what you do the lake.

2471
04:23:19,590 --> 04:23:22,920
they can mow right down to the edge of the lakeshore. You're taking the at environmental and making that not as economically friendly.

2472
04:23:27,885 --> 04:23:30,180
we think there are some advantages there. No, let's a couple of different protective views.

2473
04:23:34,335 --> 04:23:36,870
this is actually view from standing, I think, would be about just not quite north.

2474
04:23:39,690 --> 04:23:42,480
this one is actually, we did a couple of drone shots. This one looking back from the north,

2475
04:23:44,190 --> 04:23:47,265
looking south at the property. I think if you go back one. This was actually the one looking north to see

2476
04:23:51,750 --> 04:23:51,750
where you can see that we don't see any of the houses that are across,

2477
04:23:56,280 --> 04:23:56,280
just like they wouldn't be seeing.

2478
04:24:03,200 --> 04:24:06,645
coming back to the reason we're here. We've been working with the landowners for a couple of years.

2479
04:24:08,910 --> 04:24:12,270
I think as we've looked through the comp plan, and said, why are we in a position to bring something forward,

2480
04:24:15,090 --> 04:24:17,670
which is we think unique to the city because we think it's a great product with an empty nester product that can work well.

2481
04:24:21,120 --> 04:24:24,600
but we do look at the comp plan. We do meet the priority for. We've got urban services right to our doorstep.

2482
04:24:28,260 --> 04:24:30,705
then four with the other ones you mentioned. We think that we meet, those criterias.

2483
04:24:33,375 --> 04:24:35,865
I think from a neighborhood perspective, we bring a product that we think is compatible with them,

2484
04:24:39,375 --> 04:24:43,050
even though it is 26 units or 24, 28, whatever that ends up being,

2485
04:24:44,340 --> 04:24:47,565
to make the density work, versus a six or seven, but it's under a lot more control.

2486
04:24:50,190 --> 04:24:54,135
we have reached out to both the watershed initially. Neil reached out to james at the watershed.

2487
04:24:56,865 --> 04:24:58,965
they will have an interest or we'll consider, taking over that conservation easement had done that other areas.

2488
04:25:03,870 --> 04:25:06,510
we also will reach out depending on its size. I don't I didn't seem like staff thought that the city

2489
04:25:08,910 --> 04:25:11,940
would be supportive of being in control of it because there's working. The other thing that happens when we do that with either the land trust

2490
04:25:15,180 --> 04:25:18,555
or the watershed is we provide a funding mechanism, within the homeowners association to cover those costs of maintenance.

2491
04:25:22,575 --> 04:25:22,575
it doesn't become a burden on the watershed to maintain that property.

2492
04:25:26,910 --> 04:25:29,655
the homeowner association takes on that responsibility, and the watershed is there strictly as a governing agent to say,

2493
04:25:33,345 --> 04:25:36,510
every spring, this is what you can do, this is what you can't do. You need to go fix this up, or you need to fix that up.

2494
04:25:39,030 --> 04:25:41,835
it doesn't put the burden on that government agency, but it actually allows for the protection of that area permanently,

2495
04:25:45,555 --> 04:25:45,555
which is what I think you as a planning commission will be looking.

2496
04:25:53,330 --> 04:25:53,330
the story. Again,

2497
04:26:00,780 --> 04:26:03,540
one of the other things that's in the ordinance is that between us, combined with the homeowners to the south,

2498
04:26:05,505 --> 04:26:07,980
would end up paying for all the infrastructure out there. One of the advantages to this could be is that it may allow the properties to the south,

2499
04:26:12,150 --> 04:26:14,280
to develop sooner because we would be paying our pro rata share of bringing the utilities out here.

2500
04:26:17,265 --> 04:26:19,665
or if we end up bringing them out first, they would actually then pay their pro rata later.

2501
04:26:22,305 --> 04:26:25,140
it allows for that development to be a limit or contiguous, but actually give them the opportunity right completed in a more timely manner.

2502
04:26:33,210 --> 04:26:35,620
>> a couple of the questions that came up. The one was about traffic.

2503
04:26:38,170 --> 04:26:42,130
we've done multiple neighborhoods and I think I left you some examples in there of the different neighborhoods we had and recommended that the residents look at those two.

2504
04:26:46,135 --> 04:26:46,135
the impact of traffic on this will be minuscule.

2505
04:26:51,265 --> 04:26:53,350
the advantage is because they're empty nester, they're not leaving at peak hours in the morning,

2506
04:26:55,630 --> 04:26:57,460
not leaving at peak hours at night. Normally, it's one car because it's a retired couple.

2507
04:27:01,675 --> 04:27:05,140
those are the things that affect that when we've done little traffic memos and

2508
04:27:06,550 --> 04:27:09,400
traffic analysis of probably five or six projects for [inaudible], a lot of traffic coming on.

2509
04:27:12,440 --> 04:27:14,640
I know in one of the conversations from the neighbors, they'd love the speed limit to be lowered in front of this property.

2510
04:27:18,840 --> 04:27:20,805
we would be supportive of that. If we could get it to 35 instead of 45,

2511
04:27:22,935 --> 04:27:25,040
I think that's a win win for everyone. But I think the traffic driven by the project to the south will be 10 times ours.

2512
04:27:30,055 --> 04:27:32,260
that's consistent with we've done traffic studies both before and after, we've done projects.

2513
04:27:38,400 --> 04:27:41,155
I think I've covered everything, and, I think our goal is to bring a high quality homeowners association maintainer to orono,

2514
04:27:47,170 --> 04:27:47,170
and we look forward to your feedback and just see what you're

2515
04:27:51,820 --> 04:27:54,280
thinking and what you think are the positive and negative what we're doing and what do you see with concerns about us proceeding?

2516
04:27:59,430 --> 04:27:59,430
>> thank you. Questions.

2517
04:28:05,280 --> 04:28:05,280
>> how many of these projects have you done in excelsior orono?

2518
04:28:09,520 --> 04:28:09,520
>> none in orono, build up on crystal bay years ago.

2519
04:28:14,695 --> 04:28:14,695
we've done minnetonka, eden prairie.

2520
04:28:19,330 --> 04:28:22,420
we're just do in plymouth. We've done a lot of them. Have not done any out here.

2521
04:28:23,950 --> 04:28:27,265
these are not a great sites in orono, but allow for something like this. >> these are ideally going to be $1 million retirement.

2522
04:28:30,025 --> 04:28:33,115
>> I would say we will see somewhere 1-2. Where we see the project.

2523
04:28:34,930 --> 04:28:34,930
>> do you think there's demand for that versus the condos that are being put up in yz?

2524
04:28:39,985 --> 04:28:39,985
>> the last s it we just finished in ridgewood was only an 11 allowed project.

2525
04:28:45,760 --> 04:28:49,390
we had seven sold before we opened our bottle. >> where was ridgewood? >> those are average between those average about two point.

2526
04:28:52,525 --> 04:28:56,470
>> sorry. Apologize. What city was that? >> [inaudible]. >> on the lake or near the lake?

2527
04:28:57,775 --> 04:29:01,570
>> no. On a wet land. Very similar this is a lake, but it was on a very nice wet land that was 24 acre site we purchased

2528
04:29:05,215 --> 04:29:05,215
that actually had about six acres buildable,11 lots on it.

2529
04:29:09,745 --> 04:29:12,535
similar to this. It's actually a 24 acre site. If you look at that one map, we actually own a little sliver over by the dark park yet,

2530
04:29:15,940 --> 04:29:18,745
so this is a very similar situation. About 13-14 acres buildable,

2531
04:29:21,790 --> 04:29:25,735
not five like there was on. >> how long did it take you to sell that one? >> we've been open 15 months, and we have left.

2532
04:29:32,010 --> 04:29:32,010
we tend to our goals to be we're not a national builder.

2533
04:29:36,175 --> 04:29:39,955
our goals have been a project to do between 4-6 year. We're not trying to build it out in eight months.

2534
04:29:42,370 --> 04:29:45,835
>> no, I've just done some of these in excel [inaudible], and I've seen them take three years to self. So that's where my question comes from is I know

2535
04:29:47,860 --> 04:29:50,860
that those communities have high demand for this, but ours has shifted towards like

2536
04:29:54,310 --> 04:29:58,000
the minnetonka flats and the significant ones that are going into that, where that retirement communities looking for

2537
04:30:00,130 --> 04:30:00,130
something a little more high end with lake access.

2538
04:30:05,250 --> 04:30:05,250
>> I think there's again, there's we feel very confident

2539
04:30:10,240 --> 04:30:11,950
based on the other project you've did and the fact that orono does have a mixture of some of the condos,

2540
04:30:14,605 --> 04:30:16,495
but there's a lot of people that aren't willing to accept the world enough to go into a condo,

2541
04:30:19,090 --> 04:30:23,080
and they want to still have the fully association maintain a third of, I think, almost half the people in

2542
04:30:25,510 --> 04:30:28,690
our ridgewood site go south for at least three to five months. We've probably got three in there that are actually florida residents.

2543
04:30:33,390 --> 04:30:33,390
>> your estimate that these would be targeted

2544
04:30:39,400 --> 04:30:39,400
towards retirees is based on the price point and the limited maintenance.

2545
04:30:47,335 --> 04:30:49,450
>> it's more just based on the floor plans. Every one of them is a ranch with a primary bedroom on the main floor,

2546
04:30:54,805 --> 04:30:57,865
beautiful kitchen, and then downstairs is two bedrooms, and a family room bar area,

2547
04:31:00,115 --> 04:31:02,515
which is the grand area, as we call it. >> sure. >> we have not age restricted them ever.

2548
04:31:05,785 --> 04:31:08,485
we did a project in minnetonka also, where we had a combination of villas,

2549
04:31:10,375 --> 04:31:13,390
twins, we did town homes, and we did a condo, and we had one high school age kid living around there.

2550
04:31:21,220 --> 04:31:23,530
>> because that was going to be my next question is, if you've done any duplexes,

2551
04:31:25,645 --> 04:31:28,720
you're right in the shadow of the school, and if you were able to get depending on the density requirements going forward,

2552
04:31:38,570 --> 04:31:38,570
if you were able to get more units in there with duplexes

2553
04:31:43,840 --> 04:31:43,840
or other multi family smaller multifamily.

2554
04:31:48,805 --> 04:31:48,805
>> I think a lot would be freak what the zoning would allow we've done some two,

2555
04:31:53,920 --> 04:31:56,230
three, and four unit townhomes, both in legacy and in our plymouth project.

2556
04:31:58,960 --> 04:32:01,920
you get there are 30 foot wide products, so you get a little bit more density on them.

2557
04:32:03,450 --> 04:32:03,450
you don't really get still the ones in plymouth are still going to average 890-960,

2558
04:32:08,190 --> 04:32:11,760
so we're not looking at something where it's going to be based on kid being able to do it.

2559
04:32:16,330 --> 04:32:19,915
it's going to be in a kind of a mature family. >> what is your research show the city

2560
04:32:23,740 --> 04:32:23,740
is in need of when it comes to this denser housing.

2561
04:32:27,925 --> 04:32:29,680
>> I think it's the empty nester product. The product that we're looking at on the villa concept.

2562
04:32:32,005 --> 04:32:34,120
when you look around everything that's been done here and the houses that are built around.

2563
04:32:36,955 --> 04:32:39,610
you've got 678000 square foot homes. You've got people it's more of a lateral move even a down move.

2564
04:32:43,735 --> 04:32:46,045
but they're getting rid of that big home, which then it continues to attract more families.

2565
04:32:48,385 --> 04:32:52,330
but they're looking for something that when they're living there, they don't want to feel like,

2566
04:32:53,560 --> 04:32:57,550
god, where's that wing or this wing? It's like I live my kitchen, dining room, family room, and then my bedroom.

2567
04:33:00,820 --> 04:33:03,460
>> my biggest concern is around the government entity requirement with the lake shore property.

2568
04:33:10,390 --> 04:33:12,775
you've spoken to some folks. Do you have any expressed interest from the watershed?

2569
04:33:17,290 --> 04:33:20,650
>> the watersheds common issue was they would consider it. I think based on what we're looking at here,

2570
04:33:23,200 --> 04:33:24,895
we know that would be a requirement. I didn't want to waste a lot of their time unless we

2571
04:33:27,280 --> 04:33:30,640
knew that there was interest in that from the city's perspective that, this is something we would like.

2572
04:33:32,290 --> 04:33:34,480
work with the watershed dump ideals. I worked with the land trust on a similar to this in the past.

2573
04:33:37,795 --> 04:33:39,610
I think we'll get something done. If the city has an interest, we'd be interested.

2574
04:33:42,520 --> 04:33:45,250
of course, you guys would be the first choice in that, but I think honestly, the watershed has other properties like this,

2575
04:33:48,040 --> 04:33:50,545
where they've maintained them, especially in situation like this, where it's ecologically sensitive.

2576
04:33:52,315 --> 04:33:55,990
>> thanks. >> this is a couple of questions from my side. I think you had mentioned you've been working on the property

2577
04:33:58,240 --> 04:34:02,125
for a few years now, two years plus? >> two years plus. >> obviously, we want to give you constructive feedback that you can action.

2578
04:34:07,825 --> 04:34:11,170
I guess, has the plan changed much over the two years, or what's been the biggest sticking point in the design process?

2579
04:34:15,025 --> 04:34:18,025
>> I think the biggest sticking point was probably the political environment in orono over the last 36 months.

2580
04:34:22,615 --> 04:34:25,510
honestly, we looked at potentially doing it, and we just felt it was a suicide mission to come in.

2581
04:34:27,805 --> 04:34:31,330
at time, and I think that's one of the reasons, again, why we've held off now,

2582
04:34:32,605 --> 04:34:36,205
knowing that we've got a brand new council with four new members. We were looking for this to be able to come in at a time when

2583
04:34:39,250 --> 04:34:41,980
we felt it could get at least a fresh look. We know there's no guarantees.

2584
04:34:43,810 --> 04:34:47,320
we feel very strong. There's a great project. We think we can do a great neighborhood. I think any of you that have seen our stuff, it's high quality.

2585
04:34:50,365 --> 04:34:53,980
but we wanted to come in with something where we felt we could get a good look at it and evaluate the print the actual issues,

2586
04:34:58,870 --> 04:35:01,945
which is what I think we're looking for you guys tonight to say is, do you want to see this be 50 or 100 units down the road?

2587
04:35:05,230 --> 04:35:08,860
do you wanted this to be stay at six or seven with private septics? We think that ours is a nice balance in between that is beneficial to the community,

2588
04:35:14,380 --> 04:35:18,160
beneficial to the tax base, helps pay for some of the pipes out there, and doesn't negatively affect the neighbors.

2589
04:35:21,085 --> 04:35:21,085
still does they'd love to see nothing, but blame.

2590
04:35:28,020 --> 04:35:28,020
>> thank you. For a couple of questions,

2591
04:35:32,155 --> 04:35:35,710
and commissioner perko, you asked one or it got answered in there. I was is it age restricted,

2592
04:35:37,885 --> 04:35:37,885
but your traffic study is based on a certain age living there.

2593
04:35:42,175 --> 04:35:45,400
>> they'll run the traffic. They run it as a little bit more expansive. It's a number of bedrooms.

2594
04:35:46,615 --> 04:35:48,910
at the end of it, so they base it on the fact that, yes, you could have and I'd be here,

2595
04:35:52,120 --> 04:35:55,960
I would think if the proximity of high school that if somebody's got a senior or a junior and they're looking if that's their last kid,

2596
04:36:00,275 --> 04:36:02,510
I would move into here. It has been empty nasty for way too long.

2597
04:36:04,585 --> 04:36:06,400
>> but if it's not age restricted, any traffic study is just going to be based on based on general general occupancy,

2598
04:36:10,945 --> 04:36:10,945
and then you showed a lot of nice views from the north.

2599
04:36:16,060 --> 04:36:16,060
have you considered the views from the south for the residents to the south that live?

2600
04:36:20,735 --> 04:36:23,065
>> I really won't be much because it'd be the multifamily the higher density stuff to the south,

2601
04:36:25,945 --> 04:36:28,510
and then we've got a pretty good tree buffer that we'll be able to maintain along the right away there.

2602
04:36:31,465 --> 04:36:34,360
>> further south across the highway. There's houses that are elevated up high above that have perfect view of that property.

2603
04:36:41,845 --> 04:36:45,610
similar to across lake lassen, but just on the opposite side. >> back here towards the old crystal bay and row and some of those areas.

2604
04:36:48,685 --> 04:36:50,410
we've looked when we ran, I've got another 150 of those drone shots,

2605
04:36:53,290 --> 04:36:53,290
and we didn't see anything there that would see that we have houses looking into this.

2606
04:36:58,660 --> 04:37:00,220
again, especially with the ranch style, with the walkout, you've got a very low profile home.

2607
04:37:03,415 --> 04:37:03,415
you don't have full two stories with upper stuff in it.

2608
04:37:07,600 --> 04:37:07,600
I would see we can pull some additional stuff as we move forward,

2609
04:37:12,160 --> 04:37:15,205
we'll make sure we get some of that information. But when we looked at the drone shots, we didn't see anything that we thought would negatively affect

2610
04:37:17,590 --> 04:37:20,350
anybody south of west of them. >> in your opinion, the advantage to open this site up to the musa

2611
04:37:25,210 --> 04:37:25,210
for the city is that there's just more control over the development?

2612
04:37:30,940 --> 04:37:33,580
>> I think the first sees there, and if I look at the com plan,

2613
04:37:35,965 --> 04:37:39,940
we meet the com plan priorities for expansion. We think there's a benefit there,

2614
04:37:41,740 --> 04:37:41,740
which ultimately that's what we're looking to see if you guys agree with that.

2615
04:37:46,195 --> 04:37:49,900
we think it brings a new product into orono, where there hasn't been a lot of it.

2616
04:37:50,980 --> 04:37:52,810
there was a few of them, which actually, I'm not quite sure if that's long lake or.

2617
04:37:55,375 --> 04:37:58,435
orono border there it gets confusing to me, even. But I think it's just the fact that you all of us are aging grandkids going to graduate.

2618
04:38:06,130 --> 04:38:08,020
I think that's what we're looking at is that buyers looking for that little bit simpler life,

2619
04:38:10,360 --> 04:38:14,350
being able to travel more. Don't want to maintain the big house anymore, and orono is a perfect location

2620
04:38:16,450 --> 04:38:19,800
for that because it's got a lot of that product out there. >> specifically, you had mentioned something about the property would

2621
04:38:26,200 --> 04:38:28,690
be under more control this way than if it were seven individual homes or or whatever could fit within.

2622
04:38:32,410 --> 04:38:36,250
> I came in the plan to develop seven homes because I think we do have enough 200 foot lengths to get seven to six or seven my camera.

2623
04:38:40,510 --> 04:38:40,510
at that point, that individual resident has complete control of the lot.

2624
04:38:44,740 --> 04:38:44,740
city doesn't have any ability to really restrict it beyond that situation,

2625
04:38:48,970 --> 04:38:50,515
so they can mow down to the grass, they can mow down. They can take trees.

2626
04:38:53,635 --> 04:38:55,990
>> I see what you're saying. I disagree with that, though because there are code provisions in our code to

2627
04:39:00,145 --> 04:39:00,145
limit removal of trees specifically by wetlands and high provisions for buildings etc.

2628
04:39:05,980 --> 04:39:05,980
just wanted to see where you are going with that piece. Great. Thank you.

2629
04:39:14,850 --> 04:39:18,520
>> I did have one question. Do you just have an estimate on the hoa cost and what that encompasses? I think you mentioned.

2630
04:39:22,015 --> 04:39:24,820
>> these have run because with the villas, they do their own insurance and a lot of those things,

2631
04:39:27,250 --> 04:39:31,210
so these probably run about around $500. A month, I would say with this one with the natural area.

2632
04:39:34,945 --> 04:39:38,140
we probably see that maybe being about $200 more, so probably maybe closer to 700 because of the natural area and the cost of mat.

2633
04:39:42,985 --> 04:39:46,600
>> then the insurance you were saying as part of the homeownership. >> homeownership because it's a detached home.

2634
04:39:48,445 --> 04:39:51,040
they take care of that. They take care of their exterior maintenance. The homeowner association if you let something get run down,

2635
04:39:54,640 --> 04:39:58,000
the homeowners compensation ask you to fix it, but they're not going to actually do it like you would in down home association where they just maintain.

2636
04:40:00,955 --> 04:40:02,890
>> I just my last question, do you have any comments as a developer on the density that is

2637
04:40:05,470 --> 04:40:05,470
being pushed on the property versus what you guys prefer to do?

2638
04:40:11,050 --> 04:40:14,050
>> I think in our mind, we look at each property and decide what we think is the best use for it because we do apartments.

2639
04:40:16,990 --> 04:40:19,450
single family. We do the villas. The villas is something that we have seen as an extremely high demand product right now.

2640
04:40:24,115 --> 04:40:27,010
we think it fits in well with existing neighborhoods. Even when we've had issues where we've in a neighborhood in the neighborhood.

2641
04:40:30,010 --> 04:40:33,970
we don't want this in. At the time we're done, they're like this is great. Why do we care? [laughter] I completely, it's

2642
04:40:36,550 --> 04:40:39,610
exactly the neighbor that you want in a situation like that. I think that's really what we see as a positive.

2643
04:40:43,740 --> 04:40:46,570
you could do a couple hundred unit apartment here. I just don't think it fits the nature of

2644
04:40:49,090 --> 04:40:51,955
that lake and what you're looking at for that area, even though it would fit on that.

2645
04:40:55,530 --> 04:40:58,030
>> I think you'll have grandparents fighting for these units at the high school personally.

2646
04:40:59,860 --> 04:41:00,970
>> yes. >> on the note of the hoa.

2647
04:41:04,270 --> 04:41:07,255
could you describe why you feel that is essential here? Could this development exist without the hoa?

2648
04:41:10,810 --> 04:41:14,050
>> we usually find with the villas that that's one of the things that they're looking for is the fact that when they're gone in the winter,

2649
04:41:17,500 --> 04:41:19,420
noah's being taken care of. They're looks like it's lived in even

2650
04:41:21,670 --> 04:41:25,660
if they're spending a month down south or traveling, and even the same thing in the summer. They just don't have to worry about it.

2651
04:41:27,415 --> 04:41:29,860
I know people are spending tens of thousands of dollars a year maintaining their property.

2652
04:41:32,500 --> 04:41:32,500
or they're looking at is that's not somebody else's problem.

2653
04:41:37,975 --> 04:41:37,975
>> I'm looking through the wetland summary that you presented here,

2654
04:41:47,650 --> 04:41:51,505
and I'm trying to find the classification of that wetlands primarily one wetland. >> it's actually classified as a lake,

2655
04:41:53,260 --> 04:41:57,025
so it's not but considered a wetland edge, but it actually is classified as a lake. Natural is not a wetland.

2656
04:41:59,035 --> 04:42:02,050
>> it is not a wetland? >> it is a lake. >> that's why we had the dnr confirmed the ordinary water level,

2657
04:42:05,950 --> 04:42:07,810
which is how our setback. I think it's the lesser of the tubing.

2658
04:42:11,680 --> 04:42:14,860
>> it's pretty common that the edging of lake and land, there is an identified perimeter wetland by a lot of means,

2659
04:42:18,490 --> 04:42:19,660
but then they'll take the more restrictive regulation between

2660
04:42:22,750 --> 04:42:26,050
the two often when they overlap like that on that edging. I believe you guys did go through a wetland delineation.

2661
04:42:29,500 --> 04:42:33,175
have you submitted it to the watershed or? >> it's been approved. >> they've been working through that with the watershed

2662
04:42:35,170 --> 04:42:37,630
and sounds like they have a notice of decision with that, and those are good for five years once they're adopted by the watershed.

2663
04:42:41,530 --> 04:42:41,530
>> I understand. I'm looking at the wetland map on the application.

2664
04:42:46,375 --> 04:42:48,940
and it's showing a delineated shoreline, but then it's also showing a wetland.

2665
04:42:52,050 --> 04:42:52,050
I'm just curious what the applied buffers are for that.

2666
04:42:56,605 --> 04:42:58,570
not for the shoreline, but for the wetland. >> mannehaha creek would assign buffers on once a formal application is developed,

2667
04:43:04,015 --> 04:43:07,855
they won't necessarily assign buffers just with the notice of decision. When a preliminary plat comes through,

2668
04:43:09,880 --> 04:43:11,860
they would then work through to assign necessary buffers depending on the intensification and the use of the site.

2669
04:43:15,790 --> 04:43:19,570
>> the the buffers are assigned based on the classification of the wetland.? >> they are.

2670
04:43:20,395 --> 04:43:23,155
>> is the wetland classified right now or not? >> I'd have to look back through the notice decision.

2671
04:43:25,510 --> 04:43:26,680
it's been a year since we did that. I think the more restrictive at this point is a 150 foot setback from the lake edge,

2672
04:43:31,720 --> 04:43:31,720
whereas the wetland buffer would be more in that 70 50 to 75 range,

2673
04:43:36,160 --> 04:43:36,160
so the more restrictive at this point is going to be that lake edge verification.

2674
04:43:40,825 --> 04:43:43,450
>> thank you. >> I have an additional question, victors, have you guys thought through a berm on the nearest to county road side and or

2675
04:43:47,650 --> 04:43:49,450
a future light potential from the department complex that may or may not be on the south side?

2676
04:43:53,620 --> 04:43:55,300
>> we would normally, like I said, I think one of the things we had talked about was whether we do a street light or not.

2677
04:43:58,045 --> 04:44:00,280
I think that we were we weren't sure what or that we normally see one of the two intersections.

2678
04:44:04,510 --> 04:44:05,920
I think it lights that. I think from a buffering of the property to the south and a higher density,

2679
04:44:09,505 --> 04:44:13,060
we'd have a combination of either possibly a fence or we would just do additional trees because we'll have a setback from that road there.

2680
04:44:16,720 --> 04:44:20,040
we'll have additional trees being able to put along the right away that we would try to do more natural screening. Anything else?

2681
04:44:27,150 --> 04:44:30,850
>> great. Any other questions for applicant? Otherwise we can [overlapping]. >> thank you.

2682
04:44:31,300 --> 04:44:32,970
>> thank you. >> the purpose of this is a sketch plan.

2683
04:44:35,440 --> 04:44:37,810
there's no public comment period. If anyone from the public that's here,

2684
04:44:40,015 --> 04:44:43,720
that's great. I'm glad you guys are here. We won't hold a public hearing, but if this application moves any farther,

2685
04:44:45,700 --> 04:44:47,620
there will be an opportunity for the public hearing, just so everybody knows that.

2686
04:44:52,050 --> 04:44:52,050
discussion tonight from the commission is expanding the musa to this site.

2687
04:44:57,895 --> 04:45:01,090
who up here feels that it's a good idea to expand the musa to a site that it's not designated for? Order.

2688
04:45:07,500 --> 04:45:07,500
>> I think we've looked at this quite a few times.

2689
04:45:11,590 --> 04:45:11,590
I'm curious. We're running out of places to add density.

2690
04:45:17,560 --> 04:45:17,560
this is one of the places that are very attractive to do so.

2691
04:45:22,525 --> 04:45:25,165
the egress and ingress from main roads make this a lot

2692
04:45:29,725 --> 04:45:29,725
more affordable for a city to put infrastructure for expanding the musa.

2693
04:45:36,060 --> 04:45:36,060
I think from the applicant made a notation that historically,

2694
04:45:45,145 --> 04:45:47,740
we add density reluctantly, but we do so because we are required.

2695
04:45:50,575 --> 04:45:53,050
typically when the flip over of the next comprehensive plan is usually what then it happens,

2696
04:45:56,470 --> 04:45:58,930
whether you have to wait for that to happen or not, I think would be still determined through who counsel,

2697
04:46:02,365 --> 04:46:02,365
what their beliefs are because we always change things like that.

2698
04:46:09,190 --> 04:46:10,510
but if it were, I think this ironically becomes a conversation where is it enough density?

2699
04:46:18,030 --> 04:46:20,980
I don't disagree that I don't think a four story apartment complex is the right place for that, either.

2700
04:46:24,910 --> 04:46:24,910
I think what's being proposed by the applicant for the sketch here,

2701
04:46:32,200 --> 04:46:33,700
would be a great fit, and it resonated that we don't have inventory like this.

2702
04:46:37,480 --> 04:46:40,840
you either have town homes, your condos or apartments or you have the five million dollar houses.

2703
04:46:45,460 --> 04:46:48,535
there's not a lot in between. It does provide some other options,

2704
04:46:52,885 --> 04:46:55,510
I think, for people that want to stay in the community. I had the opportunity to visit the development that they have in minnetonka.

2705
04:47:01,060 --> 04:47:01,060
it does by like far 94 and 384.

2706
04:47:05,290 --> 04:47:05,290
if you drive through, it's thoughtfully placed and you wouldn't exaggerate a little bit,

2707
04:47:11,620 --> 04:47:11,620
but you really can't really tell that it's a cluster or a detached plentier town.

2708
04:47:18,265 --> 04:47:20,710
it looks like a single family home, with tight guidelines would depending on the city,

2709
04:47:23,440 --> 04:47:25,645
and what probably would be. I think that as far as what would go there,

2710
04:47:29,830 --> 04:47:31,750
what could go there? I think it would look really nice there.

2711
04:47:34,930 --> 04:47:34,930
I'm just worried about having enough density quite candidly looks

2712
04:47:39,730 --> 04:47:39,730
darn down the barrel of the next comprehensive plan.

2713
04:47:44,050 --> 04:47:46,120
we're just running out of real estate. It's a nice property.

2714
04:47:49,590 --> 04:47:52,795
>> my struggle with putting it on the musa is that I think we are better served from meeting

2715
04:47:56,485 --> 04:47:56,485
our quota by looking

2716
04:48:01,840 --> 04:48:04,390
at some of what's going to be coming for the navarre area to significantly increase the units there.

2717
04:48:07,615 --> 04:48:10,480
instead of trying to add something else to it that's going to put us in a jeopardy to begin with.

2718
04:48:13,300 --> 04:48:13,300
I know there's several developers that are looking at doing a massive upgrade there,

2719
04:48:19,150 --> 04:48:21,850
which realistically we need anyways. That could be the gateway to or know if

2720
04:48:24,070 --> 04:48:26,590
somebody does it like what they're doing in victoria right now, where we could add significant units to meet those quotas without having

2721
04:48:31,060 --> 04:48:31,060
to expand the musa to something that could have put sending us negative.

2722
04:48:35,920 --> 04:48:37,945
that's my opinion, I've seen these and they work really

2723
04:48:41,500 --> 04:48:41,500
well in certain places where the surrounding community meets the needs,

2724
04:48:45,820 --> 04:48:47,110
whether it's minnetonka, that's close to everything and really popular or eden prairie or pryor lake,

2725
04:48:52,000 --> 04:48:54,490
where there's a lot of demand for people to live there because what they want is surrounding there.

2726
04:48:57,220 --> 04:48:59,560
that's my other struggle is I can't see retirees going there when they don't have a boat slip like

2727
04:49:02,260 --> 04:49:02,260
they do in some of the other places in the area where they can get the same price,

2728
04:49:07,090 --> 04:49:10,060
the same hoa fees, but have a slip. That's my other struggle is are we putting something there that's going to be like

2729
04:49:13,090 --> 04:49:16,830
the one in excelsior that sat five years before it could settle? >> question for steff.

2730
04:49:19,495 --> 04:49:19,495
typically, if the musa is expanded,

2731
04:49:23,740 --> 04:49:26,095
that's going to expand our density requirement. Right now, we're not required to have anything density on that.

2732
04:49:29,360 --> 04:49:31,855
>> this is considered our rural area. We are not anticipated,

2733
04:49:33,415 --> 04:49:35,710
and it's our rural and urban line. Our musa line is a fixed line.

2734
04:49:38,650 --> 04:49:38,650
this parcel is outside of that land and does not count towards our musa calculations,

2735
04:49:46,240 --> 04:49:49,675
it's anticipated this to be rural and to stay rural. If you were to expand it to put the musa in that land,

2736
04:49:52,900 --> 04:49:55,090
then that land now is counted in the calculations of meeting that three units per density,

2737
04:49:58,465 --> 04:50:00,970
soon to be 3.5 units per density. We would need to take that into account in our

2738
04:50:02,950 --> 04:50:06,310
guiding a land use classification to ensure that we're guiding it with enough units to maintain the city's a required three units per acre.

2739
04:50:12,115 --> 04:50:15,983
>> but it would help us towards the total calculation for the city. >> no.

2740
04:50:16,270 --> 04:50:19,645
>> if you add it into the musa, then you need to put enough density on that land so it maintains the city's unit.

2741
04:50:24,730 --> 04:50:27,310
>> it does not help with our existing musa boundary. >> it does not impact or hurt musa.

2742
04:50:29,230 --> 04:50:31,465
[overlapping] not part of the equation. >> it's not part of the equation. That's where I was getting to.

2743
04:50:34,315 --> 04:50:34,315
the talk about 100 or 50 unit apartment building is just that. It's just talk.

2744
04:50:39,700 --> 04:50:43,150
this is guided for rural residential. It's not guided for to be within the musa and be high density.

2745
04:50:49,060 --> 04:50:49,060
it does not affect this requirement that we're talking about.

2746
04:50:54,505 --> 04:50:57,745
that is that fact. >> yes, this property is rural residential and does not

2747
04:51:00,700 --> 04:51:03,520
count into our musa calculations currently. >> now, when we redo the comp plan, the 2050 plan,

2748
04:51:07,255 --> 04:51:10,810
if this gets rescheduled for high density, or whatever the case is,

2749
04:51:12,130 --> 04:51:16,050
then it will count towards that. >> if in our 2050 comp plan,

2750
04:51:18,850 --> 04:51:18,850
if we suggest to alter our musa boundary and include this in the musa,

2751
04:51:23,905 --> 04:51:25,420
we would then need to guide it for a land use classification that allows us to have enough units,

2752
04:51:29,020 --> 04:51:31,555
so we're maintaining a required 3.5. >> 3.5. That being said,

2753
04:51:35,935 --> 04:51:38,350
if for some reason we were to allow this development prior to the 2040 plan and the guidance,

2754
04:51:41,950 --> 04:51:44,230
we'd have to amend the comprehensive plan, would we then subtract out

2755
04:51:46,360 --> 04:51:46,360
a different musa area from the 2040 plan to compensate for this?

2756
04:51:51,220 --> 04:51:52,495
>> no. >> we would be adding density regardless.

2757
04:51:56,340 --> 04:51:56,340
it would not help. It would create the need to add more density.

2758
04:52:01,030 --> 04:52:03,175
it would be a negative impact. >> did it before the new comprehensive plan.

2759
04:52:06,760 --> 04:52:10,555
>> if it wasn't guided in the new plan, then it wouldn't matter.

2760
04:52:12,190 --> 04:52:15,940
as it's guided today, we're looking at the 2040 plan. >> I will note my council

2761
04:52:20,550 --> 04:52:20,550
is not recommending adjusting our musa at this point for the 2050 plan.

2762
04:52:27,010 --> 04:52:30,010
they see it as a fixed boundary, as we do as well. It would take a suggestion to amend it either

2763
04:52:32,260 --> 04:52:35,140
from the city or from a development or something. >> just so the commission knows if we direct them and say,

2764
04:52:39,010 --> 04:52:40,210
yes, we think this is a good idea, and we think that it's good to adjust that musa boundary,

2765
04:52:43,210 --> 04:52:46,285
we're putting those conditions on ourselves for the density. It doesn't count towards the density that's already supposed to be there.

2766
04:52:50,965 --> 04:52:53,680
>> we currently have land guided within the musa, that we are meeting three units per acre today as it sits.

2767
04:52:58,285 --> 04:52:59,905
if you were to expand the musa, this land now counts into that calculation,

2768
04:53:02,530 --> 04:53:06,040
and we would need to re-evaluate that calculation to ensure we have enough density on this land where the city's maintaining that three units.

2769
04:53:10,285 --> 04:53:10,285
>> we would essentially want to make sure that in order for it to help,

2770
04:53:16,090 --> 04:53:20,080
it would need to have more than 3.5 per. >> it still wouldn't help because we're

2771
04:53:23,290 --> 04:53:27,115
expanding that area that has the condition of the density. But they're not proposing to.

2772
04:53:29,035 --> 04:53:31,195
>> if it's higher than the city average, wouldn't that push it?

2773
04:53:34,140 --> 04:53:36,745
>> in an extreme situation, if you were going to help the city's density,

2774
04:53:39,130 --> 04:53:39,130
you could suggest adding a small area land with a lot of a lot of units.

2775
04:53:43,750 --> 04:53:43,750
there's 300 units on two acres of land, something very extreme.

2776
04:53:48,145 --> 04:53:50,425
that would then push the calculation. The city's average density is well above our minimum standard of three units per acre.

2777
04:53:56,005 --> 04:53:56,005
right now, the city meets our minimum standard three units per acre.

2778
04:54:00,055 --> 04:54:00,055
this site would need to be at least three units an acre to maintain that calculation.

2779
04:54:07,680 --> 04:54:09,940
>> even though it's not required to, do we know if it meets that threshold?

2780
04:54:12,040 --> 04:54:13,975
>> right now, as proposed, it meets the 2040.

2781
04:54:16,165 --> 04:54:20,005
the project meets the 2040 of three, if this project were to come through in 2050,

2782
04:54:24,180 --> 04:54:26,770
our standard would be 3.5, and as proposed, it does not meet that 3.5.

2783
04:54:29,260 --> 04:54:29,260
but that's just getting the city to the minimum standard of 3.5.

2784
04:54:33,310 --> 04:54:36,985
it's not getting the city at or above our required standard. >> but it doesn't meet the 2040.

2785
04:54:38,905 --> 04:54:41,155
you say, as proposed at musa 2040. There's no guidance for this that is requiring three point anything for this.

2786
04:54:45,655 --> 04:54:45,655
>> if this land were to be entered into the musa.

2787
04:54:51,455 --> 04:54:51,455
then it would meet the density of the musa because it is 3.1.

2788
04:54:56,210 --> 04:55:00,130
currently, under the 2040, it is guided rural, and we would need to change that land use classification and

2789
04:55:03,190 --> 04:55:06,460
the musa expansion in order to support this type of development. Today, this type of development is not anticipated as part of the comprehensive plan.

2790
04:55:12,100 --> 04:55:12,100
the comprehensive plan has this land guided rural.

2791
04:55:17,460 --> 04:55:19,060
>> mr. Chair? >> yes. My question,

2792
04:55:22,210 --> 04:55:25,300
I guess, was for clarification is generally speaking, we have basing on a 10-year renewal,

2793
04:55:28,315 --> 04:55:28,315
the need to provide a demonstration of how we're going to add more density.

2794
04:55:32,710 --> 04:55:35,125
is that not your understanding? >> within the musa, and they're not proposing to change the musa boundaries.

2795
04:55:38,785 --> 04:55:38,785
that would be simply looking at, it's not simple,

2796
04:55:43,510 --> 04:55:47,425
but the 2040 plan, looking at that, looking at the density there, the musa is not changing.

2797
04:55:49,195 --> 04:55:51,100
it's looking at the areas within that, you can add the density 0.5 per acre.

2798
04:55:54,730 --> 04:55:57,760
>> we're adjusting our density ranges. Adjusting our density categories to anticipate some different units or

2799
04:56:02,590 --> 04:56:02,590
finding some infill areas or redevelopment areas potentially in the city.

2800
04:56:06,955 --> 04:56:06,955
but that's for the 2050 comprehensive plan.

2801
04:56:11,815 --> 04:56:15,415
>> where I was trying to get with that is, if we'd feel like that area,

2802
04:56:18,970 --> 04:56:18,970
which has been heavily examined to add density,

2803
04:56:24,940 --> 04:56:28,540
it seems like it's the death star. Feels like it's going to happen. There's not a lot of places for it to sensibly happen

2804
04:56:31,105 --> 04:56:34,300
without having to spend a lot more on infrastructure. I guess that's where my head was at.

2805
04:56:36,220 --> 04:56:36,220
going back to it as the density requirements grow,

2806
04:56:42,880 --> 04:56:45,520
that means that right now it's 3.1. If it goes into the next chapter, it has to be 3.5.

2807
04:56:49,600 --> 04:56:49,600
that means you have to create even more density if you were to develop it.

2808
04:56:53,635 --> 04:56:53,635
it just goes down the tracks of apartments is what my concern is.

2809
04:56:58,750 --> 04:56:58,750
I feel like we'll never have to and never will develop any of that area,

2810
04:57:06,160 --> 04:57:06,160
even though we have a development going on right now off of road 6.

2811
04:57:11,485 --> 04:57:14,770
there's two large parcels that are right there by each other and they all dump off onto a major road.

2812
04:57:18,960 --> 04:57:18,960
I'll bet you a dollar that the next 20 years that's going to get developed.

2813
04:57:23,665 --> 04:57:25,630
if we're going to have it developed, we might as well have it developed at lower density, that's more reasonable.

2814
04:57:29,820 --> 04:57:29,820
if you're going to have [inaudible] was my perspective. [overlapping]

2815
04:57:35,170 --> 04:57:35,170
>> but I don't think there

2816
04:57:39,640 --> 04:57:39,640
was I think that when you look at this,

2817
04:57:45,625 --> 04:57:45,625
this does not have to become a more dense it's rural residential.

2818
04:57:50,650 --> 04:57:54,130
that's what it is. That's what it is going to be, 2040. That's what's going to be 2050. The only people driving this to be a high density is the land owner. The city is not.

2819
04:58:00,115 --> 04:58:00,115
we're not going to, our plan doesn't ever say that this lot will be a high density lot.

2820
04:58:05,095 --> 04:58:06,760
the only one coming and saying, hey, I want to make this high density as the owner.

2821
04:58:09,160 --> 04:58:12,175
that's what I just want to point out here, there's not going to be a 10 year down the road.

2822
04:58:14,560 --> 04:58:16,720
we got to figure out how to put 3.5 houses on it because it's still going to be rural residential if we don't approve it.

2823
04:58:19,285 --> 04:58:22,570
>> I disagree. I think that can change down the line. We don't know where that will go.

2824
04:58:24,235 --> 04:58:24,235
when you look at the map and you look at the comprehensive plan map.

2825
04:58:29,575 --> 04:58:29,575
that is a lone rural residential in the middle of high density.

2826
04:58:35,575 --> 04:58:35,575
>> that's what blows the pipe. It's already there.

2827
04:58:39,990 --> 04:58:42,985
>> I don't disagree with you. >> it's got to be discovered.

2828
04:58:45,325 --> 04:58:45,325
that's for the volunteers that create the 2050 plan. I'm glad I'm not one of those.

2829
04:58:55,860 --> 04:58:58,855
commissioner ressler, you do have a point. It looks like a natural place to continue the pipe because it is to the south there.

2830
04:59:05,920 --> 04:59:05,920
but it's also around a lake that is surrounded by rural residential.

2831
04:59:13,270 --> 04:59:13,270
I think that's why the creators of the 2040 plan left it, not to be,

2832
04:59:19,315 --> 04:59:19,315
like the commercial higher density stuff.

2833
04:59:26,620 --> 04:59:30,310
I think that's why it's now. I'm not saying that this isn't a nice plan. I think there's a lot of nice aspects to the plan but it does not fit with our guidance.

2834
04:59:34,960 --> 04:59:36,850
it does not fit with our 2040 plan, and it does not fit with the current zoning. Not even close.

2835
04:59:40,630 --> 04:59:40,630
you could come and subdivide it today and possibly get 6-7 houses there.

2836
04:59:45,385 --> 04:59:48,790
that's what we can approve. You probably wouldn't even be before us for it.

2837
04:59:51,685 --> 04:59:51,685
there are with it being on a lake like this,

2838
04:59:55,705 --> 04:59:58,810
they're not going to come and clear cut the lots because they're not going to be allowed to. There's stuff in our zone our code that allows that those trees have to stay.

2839
05:00:05,350 --> 05:00:05,350
it's not going to be a clear cut with seven giant homes there.

2840
05:00:09,505 --> 05:00:12,565
they'll be seven giant homes or potentially. But it's still going to look very similar to what it is today.

2841
05:00:15,625 --> 05:00:18,925
I think if we approve to move that musa line, we're putting it on ourselves to say, hey,

2842
05:00:21,505 --> 05:00:23,650
we're orono, we want more density here, because that's what we're doing.

2843
05:00:26,430 --> 05:00:30,355
I don't see it. I like the product. I think the product's awesome. I just think it needs to be in a different spot in the city.

2844
05:00:33,775 --> 05:00:35,830
>> that's where I disagree, there's not a better spot.

2845
05:00:38,395 --> 05:00:38,395
if you want to have discussion about lakes and the wetlands,

2846
05:00:43,360 --> 05:00:44,860
that's where you need to have musa. You need to protect it from to have the city sewer and city water there.

2847
05:00:50,470 --> 05:00:53,740
it makes more sense to have the musa fixed there where you've got rural property to protect.

2848
05:01:00,240 --> 05:01:00,240
>> especially with the grading that it has down towards the lake.

2849
05:01:04,975 --> 05:01:04,975
>> steff, can you confirm that musa is already enveloped the southern

2850
05:01:10,000 --> 05:01:10,000
sites?e>> you can see a southern of the subject property is in those brown colors.

2851
05:01:18,580 --> 05:01:22,195
the dotted line indicates the musa boundary. Those properties to the south of the subject property in brown are within the musa.

2852
05:01:28,075 --> 05:01:28,075
>> there's not a scenario where musa would come to us and say,

2853
05:01:32,845 --> 05:01:35,245
we want that piece as well. >> when I informally talked to the met council about the site,

2854
05:01:39,805 --> 05:01:39,805
they did not anticipate that they would be suggesting any musa expansions.

2855
05:01:44,230 --> 05:01:44,230
so no, and I don't think they typically have historically.

2856
05:01:48,700 --> 05:01:51,115
they typically haven't. They're not pushing the infrastructure out here.

2857
05:01:54,490 --> 05:01:54,490
it's development driven.

2858
05:02:01,040 --> 05:02:03,210
>> yeah, I see it both ways. >> there's no talk about reducing the musser.

2859
05:02:06,630 --> 05:02:09,270
>> the musser there. We can't re if we expand it here, we can't reduce it somewhere else.

2860
05:02:10,695 --> 05:02:13,485
that isn't developed, but has it. >> I think with the comprehensive plan,

2861
05:02:15,630 --> 05:02:15,630
you can talk about maybe adjusting land where you take some away and give some back,

2862
05:02:20,295 --> 05:02:20,295
but it's it's not something I think we did at the last comprehensive plan.

2863
05:02:26,370 --> 05:02:29,490
I think, and that's not, it'd be unusual, but you through the comprehensive plan,

2864
05:02:33,180 --> 05:02:36,210
you can make suggestions to adjust your musser. But that impacts your density,

2865
05:02:38,490 --> 05:02:41,445
your guidance, property values, and it impacts all those things. Right. When you adjust those guidance.

2866
05:02:43,260 --> 05:02:45,060
>> I think that's why we always wait for the comprehensive plan when everything's shifting around at once,

2867
05:02:48,030 --> 05:02:50,115
so that there's much calculations, horse trading, if you will, everything comes together.

2868
05:02:56,780 --> 05:02:59,475
>> that's a lot of discussion about musser. Can you remind me the second topic for discussion tonight on this one?

2869
05:03:03,645 --> 05:03:05,295
>> urban density. >> yeah. So the first question was expansion of musser.

2870
05:03:08,115 --> 05:03:08,115
next was, would you support the urban densities since this is guided rural?

2871
05:03:12,510 --> 05:03:15,495
>> right. The current property is guided rural. It's guided that way till 2040.

2872
05:03:19,065 --> 05:03:22,980
is that something that we see that we'd support is guiding this a different way or to urban density?

2873
05:03:29,360 --> 05:03:33,270
>> I'm pro development, but I see that site, and I think seven homes would be beautiful.

2874
05:03:36,150 --> 05:03:38,190
but at the same time, I don't want an apartment complex there.

2875
05:03:40,395 --> 05:03:42,930
that's what that's what I'm weighing right now. That's why, isn't that far away from?

2876
05:03:49,335 --> 05:03:51,870
>> but what's the scare of the apartment complex, if that let's just say the 2050 plan,

2877
05:03:56,100 --> 05:03:57,990
said that, hey, we're going to guide that towards that's going to be part of the musser boundary.

2878
05:04:02,600 --> 05:04:05,220
there's no requirements, and still requirements going to be 3.5 versus three, like it is today?

2879
05:04:10,065 --> 05:04:13,455
it's not going to be 100 units. >> I would be putting the land use density guidance on the land.

2880
05:04:19,140 --> 05:04:22,245
if it was in the musser, it then is up to the city to determine how to allocate the units across the musser area.

2881
05:04:28,520 --> 05:04:30,270
>> I just like. >> it's just that eventually,

2882
05:04:33,030 --> 05:04:36,915
we're going to be looking for areas to increase our density. We will run out of spaces.

2883
05:04:39,270 --> 05:04:40,785
that's where I say. If we don't develop it now as four homes or 10 homes,

2884
05:04:44,430 --> 05:04:47,700
we will eventually be looking at this parcel and saying, that's an opportunity to increase our density as a city and it will potentially,

2885
05:04:52,680 --> 05:04:55,395
at that point to point, you need 100 units now to actually change the metric of your density as a city.

2886
05:05:00,285 --> 05:05:00,285
and again, that's a parcel that has capacity to allow that.

2887
05:05:04,725 --> 05:05:08,700
that's where I struggle. >> yeah, I think you make a lot of good points. That could be a big tipping point for the next 10 years of development.

2888
05:05:13,455 --> 05:05:17,055
then I just keep thinking back with the use case. You have the school right there. If you built some nice single family homes,

2889
05:05:19,590 --> 05:05:23,325
you pull a lot of new families into the area that are looking. Then I think there's a rather new development

2890
05:05:26,145 --> 05:05:29,085
just to the south of the on school systems, it would match that neighborhood pretty well.

2891
05:05:31,980 --> 05:05:35,400
so yeah, I agree with your points. Just along those same lines,

2892
05:05:37,740 --> 05:05:37,740
my first thought was that it would be nice to see

2893
05:05:41,900 --> 05:05:41,900
some more affordable housing close to the school like

2894
05:05:47,550 --> 05:05:47,550
that because I think economic diversity is beneficial.

2895
05:05:53,220 --> 05:05:53,220
>> yeah, it's hard to imagine that 900 was it one to $2 million is affordable,

2896
05:05:59,010 --> 05:05:59,010
but that's just the world that we live in, and that's, again,

2897
05:06:03,420 --> 05:06:06,690
I agree with you, that right now you've got, either really expensive or you've got something

2898
05:06:10,200 --> 05:06:10,200
that's maybe something that's more updating and what have you.

2899
05:06:15,870 --> 05:06:18,180
there's not a lot in between. >> I was actually thinking that even more affordable would be nice, but [laughter].

2900
05:06:23,310 --> 05:06:24,360
>> possible in our city. >> it really, isn't? That's some of the conversations that we've had.

2901
05:06:28,395 --> 05:06:31,695
you know, but you know, commissioner brander makes a really good point.

2902
05:06:35,690 --> 05:06:38,460
if we don't think that it's going to get developed, then that's a completely different conversation.

2903
05:06:40,065 --> 05:06:43,005
but I know that I've been on the planning commission for eight years. This has probably come up for sketch seven times.

2904
05:06:48,045 --> 05:06:48,045
if you look at the map, it's kind of the lone one and it just follows.

2905
05:06:54,705 --> 05:06:54,705
there's going to be a time where we're going to be approach and has to expand our musser.

2906
05:06:59,430 --> 05:07:02,910
I'm sorry. It's just go to happen. I'm surprised that they're saying that they're not. I think that's cool. I think it's great.

2907
05:07:04,965 --> 05:07:07,860
but if there's not being it's not being developed, when they do s2s2.

2908
05:07:09,645 --> 05:07:13,035
this is going to get developed and it won't be this. That's what I'm concerned about. Yeah, that's it.

2909
05:07:15,165 --> 05:07:18,240
that's why I think that m I'm supportive of it simply based on the fact that it is going to

2910
05:07:21,120 --> 05:07:24,360
provide a classification of homes that we don't currently have to commissioner of [inaudible] and candidly,

2911
05:07:29,985 --> 05:07:29,985
selfishly, I'd rather not have an building in there.

2912
05:07:34,200 --> 05:07:36,795
>> I do think that's an important point, about the product they're proposing.

2913
05:07:39,090 --> 05:07:42,750
I do think that's a missing middle of our community. I think they're going to sell relatively quick,

2914
05:07:45,360 --> 05:07:49,260
just based on a price point they're hitting, but also a villa buyer. There's not a lot of that in our area.

2915
05:07:51,480 --> 05:07:55,260
as much as I'd like to see six homes that unfortunately, those price points are going to go above 2.5 million,

2916
05:07:57,600 --> 05:07:59,985
and then you might as well go. You know, there's other opportunities for that product right now.

2917
05:08:04,820 --> 05:08:08,280
to your point about a more affordable option, that's going to be on the south side of the street with high density.

2918
05:08:11,325 --> 05:08:11,325
>> I think even if you build those six single family homes,

2919
05:08:15,735 --> 05:08:19,185
the reality is to your point. Families won't be occupying them. It'll still probably be empty nesters.

2920
05:08:22,610 --> 05:08:22,610
we do have provisions around what you can do along the shoreline there.

2921
05:08:28,515 --> 05:08:28,515
but I think this proposal actually sets up more incentives for the residents of the lot.

2922
05:08:35,745 --> 05:08:39,180
to leave the shoreline alone and not take it into their hands and rip up vegetation and bring in the rocks along the shore,

2923
05:08:42,660 --> 05:08:45,105
as we've seen happen time and time again. I think this plan actually does a really nice job of creating

2924
05:08:49,320 --> 05:08:49,320
more homes while preserving the shoreline, exactly.

2925
05:08:54,210 --> 05:08:54,210
especially if that's managed by a separate government agency,

2926
05:08:58,230 --> 05:08:58,230
that would give me a lot of confidence in managing the rural character of the lot well,

2927
05:09:05,310 --> 05:09:05,310
still providing more homes at a relatively reasonable price I'm

2928
05:09:10,170 --> 05:09:10,170
given or noose range here.

2929
05:09:15,330 --> 05:09:17,895
>> the part that I don't think any of us can answer would be whether this is whether it is or isn't because that's not deliberating here,

2930
05:09:22,140 --> 05:09:22,140
but would be what our council feels like if it were to be changed,

2931
05:09:28,260 --> 05:09:28,260
if it would need to be changed when the turnover of the comprehensive plan is renewed.

2932
05:09:33,060 --> 05:09:33,060
but I don't think we can answer that because it's going to be up to the city council.

2933
05:09:38,150 --> 05:09:38,150
but I will say that being the staff tasked us with these questions.

2934
05:09:44,040 --> 05:09:47,505
should we expand the musser and should we expand urban density? For the reasons that I mentioned,

2935
05:09:49,635 --> 05:09:53,325
generally, no, but because I think that it's going to be asked for. This is going to be the better of the two.

2936
05:09:55,620 --> 05:09:59,100
it's not now, it's going to be later at a higher density. For that reason, I would be in support of it for this classification of homes.

2937
05:10:08,150 --> 05:10:10,590
>> I did say I appreciate our discussion. I think it helped me kind of think through it and generally,

2938
05:10:13,920 --> 05:10:13,920
I'd say I'm in agreement with commissioner ressler.

2939
05:10:18,080 --> 05:10:20,490
>> looking at the conservation easement. That's another discussion point.

2940
05:10:22,755 --> 05:10:22,755
do we feel it's a benefit that that would be controlled by a government agency?

2941
05:10:28,515 --> 05:10:28,515
is that something that we would want to suggest to put that task on the city,

2942
05:10:34,095 --> 05:10:36,930
or should the developer be looking for a different agency to be the one that's in charge of that.

2943
05:10:39,755 --> 05:10:41,670
>> I love the idea of the watershed. I think it makes a lot of sense given the proposal and the goals of the proposal and

2944
05:10:51,285 --> 05:10:54,480
the means through which the government agency would be able to maintain the property.

2945
05:11:02,490 --> 05:11:02,490
I think the watershed would make a lot of sense if they have an interest.

2946
05:11:08,900 --> 05:11:11,235
>> anybody else feel strongly on that, whether the city should be the one or the different agency?

2947
05:11:14,535 --> 05:11:18,300
>> I just wondered, isn't oftentimes the city is going to defer to somebody else anyway as experts because we're not going to be the ones to staff experts.

2948
05:11:22,785 --> 05:11:24,915
so to me, I guess I'm indifferent for that. Probably would go to watershed from their perspective.

2949
05:11:28,095 --> 05:11:28,095
>> do we know how much the city is currently managing shoreline in that area?

2950
05:11:34,260 --> 05:11:37,065
I mean, if they're in the area already up, you know, it could be a pretty.

2951
05:11:38,910 --> 05:11:38,910
>> there's a little nature preserve right there on the west side of school.

2952
05:11:45,705 --> 05:11:49,155
I don't know. Is that run through the parks? >> no. The city doesn't do a lot of necessarily shoreline.

2953
05:11:52,335 --> 05:11:55,560
we do we manage a bunch of land and open space and conservation these parks on passive parks,

2954
05:12:00,315 --> 05:12:03,585
lake access points, and that type of thing. There is land that we own that's not necessarily

2955
05:12:06,435 --> 05:12:09,360
a park that we do provide maintenance for, but it is secondary as just making sure.

2956
05:12:12,660 --> 05:12:14,730
it's really a question of, is the city want to be the responsible party for

2957
05:12:16,950 --> 05:12:16,950
maintaining trees in the area when they're dead, dying or hazardous.

2958
05:12:21,345 --> 05:12:21,345
then secondly, about if there's issues with that relationship with

2959
05:12:26,820 --> 05:12:30,030
the hoa and the city then would play a role with managing some of that as the land owner,

2960
05:12:33,480 --> 05:12:33,480
and what the role of the city would be doing as the maintenance of that land.

2961
05:12:40,430 --> 05:12:40,430
>> I'd rather have us on a boat launch.

2962
05:12:44,850 --> 05:12:48,750
>> it's not it's not our core purpose,. >> correct? [laughter]. >> or it's not our expertise, right?

2963
05:12:50,940 --> 05:12:52,640
>> yeah. >> then the last discussion point,

2964
05:12:56,130 --> 05:12:57,690
I have zoning written down here, but can you remind me laura what that was?

2965
05:13:00,930 --> 05:13:03,960
>> yeah, so there's kind of two zoning tools we have. One is a rpud,

2966
05:13:05,220 --> 05:13:08,445
which this would require flexibility towards as an rpud requires a 250 foot setback from an ohw.

2967
05:13:13,560 --> 05:13:16,740
so this would be within that zone, so there would either need to be a zoning amendment or a text amendment or a variance for that zoning district.

2968
05:13:23,130 --> 05:13:25,620
that's the typical zoning district we've seen when we redo residential plan zoning districts.

2969
05:13:28,425 --> 05:13:31,635
puds, the other zoning district, that's a little bit unique. We haven't done a lot of those,

2970
05:13:33,180 --> 05:13:33,180
but they are allowed within the highway 12 corridor and within the navar area.

2971
05:13:37,800 --> 05:13:41,265
lots of times that's identified for areas that want to do mixed use. But there is an element in there that prioritizes or supports for cluster developing,

2972
05:13:46,140 --> 05:13:49,020
or potentially this one could qualify for that. So just as a note that staff brought up,

2973
05:13:51,780 --> 05:13:54,540
that there could be some potential leniency needed depending on with the two tools that we have,

2974
05:13:57,525 --> 05:14:00,870
as they are just customizable tools, we don't have just a uniform district for this level of density.

2975
05:14:04,260 --> 05:14:04,260
>> which vehicle would staff recommend that they support?

2976
05:14:09,525 --> 05:14:11,985
>> right now, we're exploring the pud. That seems to be more conforming to the location,

2977
05:14:14,835 --> 05:14:17,370
but there is a priority about cluster developing, so just going through those regulations and making sure that this meets that,

2978
05:14:20,580 --> 05:14:20,580
which it seems to be as they are creating a conservation and protection of open space.

2979
05:14:25,365 --> 05:14:28,890
but again, that's kind of just 10,000 foot view. Haven't come through the formal standards of that yet.

2980
05:14:33,690 --> 05:14:36,210
>> I don't know if it was a typo, but quick clarification. The applicants presentation had prd.

2981
05:14:39,480 --> 05:14:42,435
>> that's a third district we have. It's an overlay district,

2982
05:14:44,430 --> 05:14:46,560
but that one really allows for, that one also allows for cluster developing,

2983
05:14:49,980 --> 05:14:52,020
but you have to have an underlying zoning district, and it doesn't allow for additional density beyond that underlying zoning district.

2984
05:14:56,565 --> 05:14:59,430
that one wouldn't I think that was part of our discussion when we were talking about

2985
05:15:00,960 --> 05:15:04,935
the different tools that we have in our zoning district, but that one really wouldn't be applicable, as this one's asking for additional density

2986
05:15:06,750 --> 05:15:10,170
beyond any underlying zoning district that we could apply. >> I'm sorry. What is ohw?

2987
05:15:12,900 --> 05:15:16,650
>> the ordinary high water level. It's the trial lake. I'm sorry. >> you've said it. >> I have said it a few times. I'm sorry.

2988
05:15:18,570 --> 05:15:21,990
[overlapping]. >> ohw. I got.

2989
05:15:23,115 --> 05:15:25,605
>> there's a 250 foot set back from the lake. For that rpud zoning district. Sorry.

2990
05:15:28,305 --> 05:15:31,320
>> how I'm picking up what you're throwing. >> there you go. >> all right. >> thank you. Great discussion, guys.

2991
05:15:33,510 --> 05:15:36,840
is there any last comments anybody wants to give? >> the only last comment is, I want to be in support of the overlook.

2992
05:15:40,170 --> 05:15:43,740
I think that's a little excessive. I think you're also sticking it to a lot of the neighbors who are told that they can't build anything in there,

2993
05:15:46,530 --> 05:15:48,060
and then all of a sudden this comes in with an overlook and a place that's not allowed to build.

2994
05:15:51,390 --> 05:15:51,390
I don't see really any justification for it other than increasing the value of the homes.

2995
05:15:56,805 --> 05:15:59,130
>> are you talking about the lake shore, the little lake gathering area?

2996
05:16:01,470 --> 05:16:01,470
>> the viewing area. Yeah. That 150 supposed to be a no build anything.

2997
05:16:08,745 --> 05:16:10,455
you look at all the other houses, they don't have anything giving them look over the lake,

2998
05:16:13,290 --> 05:16:15,210
and then all of a sudden, you've got that. Again, the only value that really gives is increasing the value of the units,

2999
05:16:19,050 --> 05:16:22,590
and it doesn't seem to be a good justification for me. >> there are restrictions on that lake for docks or put a dock out there?

3000
05:16:26,880 --> 05:16:28,050
>> you can have a dock. >> this won't be an improvement from having it as a dock?

3001
05:16:31,200 --> 05:16:32,910
>> yeah, so you can have a dock, but this would be an improvement within 150 foots above.

3002
05:16:36,060 --> 05:16:39,660
>> are there environmental restrictions? Can you have a boat on this lake? >> motorized.

3003
05:16:41,115 --> 05:16:41,115
>> build a platform that serves a purpose, a permanent dock.

3004
05:16:46,080 --> 05:16:49,635
that's a platform that would be a gathering place. As long as it's in the water and not within the set back.

3005
05:16:54,900 --> 05:16:56,370
>> part of their feedback they got, I read did say the neighbors didn't want them to basically have

3006
05:17:00,540 --> 05:17:00,540
lake access or sporting activities that would maybe define it in that area,

3007
05:17:04,830 --> 05:17:04,830
and I think this is a great way to improve property value,

3008
05:17:09,495 --> 05:17:11,295
a beautiful view of the lake, and a community gathering area, if you will.

3009
05:17:14,445 --> 05:17:18,420
so those reasons, I'm in support of it, but glad you brought it up. >> yeah, I just pointed out because increasing

3010
05:17:21,090 --> 05:17:24,225
the property value is not a justification for a variance. So as much as we can say win like that,

3011
05:17:26,460 --> 05:17:30,330
we cannot use that as a decision maker for venus. >> so just making it clear to the applicant that

3012
05:17:32,370 --> 05:17:32,370
that one would take a lot of discussion and very well may not get approved.

3013
05:17:43,061 --> 05:17:45,540
>> [inaudible]. >> it looks to be on land, though, not in the water.

3014
05:17:52,695 --> 05:17:54,780
>> [inaudible]. [laughter] >> again, I pointed out because that's bigger than the houses.

3015
05:17:57,150 --> 05:17:57,150
[laughter]

3016
05:18:14,300 --> 05:18:14,300
>> [inaudible]

3017
05:18:20,200 --> 05:18:23,570
>> there are some I don't think are within orono, but they're within nearby lakeville victoria, that.

3018
05:18:31,150 --> 05:18:31,150
the one just in maple plain, there,

3019
05:18:35,855 --> 05:18:38,060
where there are some, like, walking path docks. Do you know what I'm talking about?

3020
05:18:42,425 --> 05:18:44,780
>> boating docks. Kind of a thing. >> they just follow the shoreline,

3021
05:18:46,985 --> 05:18:46,985
and they're not meant for anyone to get in or out of the lake.

3022
05:18:51,515 --> 05:18:52,910
they're just a nice, like, walking path that allows visibility.

3023
05:18:57,840 --> 05:18:57,840
that might be something that would meet

3024
05:19:02,050 --> 05:19:02,050
the dock standard and not building within the setback standard.

3025
05:19:06,825 --> 05:19:08,945
>> I think that'd be a reset. >> katrina.

3026
05:19:12,580 --> 05:19:15,830
>> could you, sorry, could you come to the microphone, please? Thank you. Sorry.

3027
05:19:17,750 --> 05:19:17,750
>> katrina lake is the one that I was thinking of on the far west northwest side of it.

3028
05:19:23,555 --> 05:19:23,555
>> just state your name and address, so we have it.

3029
05:19:27,610 --> 05:19:29,885
>> right county right now. I lived 23 years in long lake.

3030
05:19:33,725 --> 05:19:36,435
you are a wonderful neighbor. Well, I think what we're talking about is a lot of what is done at the high school.

3031
05:19:41,115 --> 05:19:44,150
they're not being maintained very well right now, but the platforms, are you aware of what area down there?

3032
05:19:48,935 --> 05:19:48,935
there are three or four platforms that are adjacent to the wetland.

3033
05:19:54,185 --> 05:19:54,185
I think that's what we're talking about.

3034
05:19:58,750 --> 05:19:58,750
>> I don't know that you're allowed to build those now,

3035
05:20:03,785 --> 05:20:07,760
according to the city code within the setback. That's what I think, just our feedback is just

3036
05:20:10,520 --> 05:20:13,790
be aware of that because that's pretty sensitive. It would be a hard variance to pursue.

3037
05:20:17,285 --> 05:20:17,285
>> just to add to that. I had the conversation with james whiskers about this thing,

3038
05:20:22,925 --> 05:20:22,925
and he said that they would have a lot of questions about it to know what they would

3039
05:20:27,575 --> 05:20:27,575
be getting into to talk to the city staff and us together.

3040
05:20:33,260 --> 05:20:36,155
the region agreement for that. They do maintain or monitor conservation easements,

3041
05:20:43,790 --> 05:20:46,445
and he would be interested in pursuing it. >> this is who? Sorry.

3042
05:20:47,915 --> 05:20:51,755
>> james whiskers, the director and minnehawk creek. >>> got it. >> I'm sorry.

3043
05:20:53,300 --> 05:20:54,095
>> no, it's okay. >> I spent eight years on the cac committee for the watershed district.

3044
05:20:58,865 --> 05:20:58,865
I got to know jim when he was in the planning department, and now he's heading it up.

3045
05:21:03,845 --> 05:21:03,845
but basically, we've had I've had these conversations with him over the years.

3046
05:21:09,005 --> 05:21:09,005
this is a great opportunity where excuse me.

3047
05:21:14,510 --> 05:21:14,510
you get into these public-private relationships,

3048
05:21:19,070 --> 05:21:19,070
and I think that from the city's point of view,

3049
05:21:23,330 --> 05:21:26,585
and from the council's point of view, it would be better if the city weren't involved in it.

3050
05:21:29,390 --> 05:21:32,390
just involved in the formation of it, but not the running of it,

3051
05:21:34,040 --> 05:21:36,110
because they don't have the staff. The minnehawk creek has to maintain it.

3052
05:21:39,155 --> 05:21:39,155
james, I would have to have annual inspections,

3053
05:21:43,910 --> 05:21:46,415
reports, and so forth. It's not just a passive relationship. It's an active relationship.

3054
05:21:51,905 --> 05:21:51,905
the thing that I think works well for this is when you look at the aerial of it,

3055
05:21:59,465 --> 05:22:01,565
when you take the dog park, the land owned by the school district,

3056
05:22:04,955 --> 05:22:06,650
and then add this to it, it provides a visual,

3057
05:22:09,110 --> 05:22:11,525
at least to do the calculation. About two-thirds of the shoreline of lake lassen is in public control,

3058
05:22:18,260 --> 05:22:21,350
which I think long range, 30, 40 years is of great benefit to everyone.

3059
05:22:27,700 --> 05:22:31,570
>> well said. Thank you. >> we don't make a motion on this.

3060
05:22:33,935 --> 05:22:33,935
>> correct. I do see the applicant has one more comment here. Speak.

3061
05:22:40,865 --> 05:22:43,340
>> I want a clarification question. Can you get back to the uthaline diagram on yours?

3062
05:22:49,630 --> 05:22:52,160
I think this was a comment that you made. Just want to clarify that over half of the lassen lake right now is in the mussa line.

3063
05:22:57,290 --> 05:22:57,290
everything on the east side of it is in mussa,

3064
05:23:01,715 --> 05:23:01,715
and I think it was done that way to protect it in the future if there was septic to do.

3065
05:23:05,930 --> 05:23:07,280
yellow is music, correct? >> true, so it's the school compound and then

3066
05:23:10,190 --> 05:23:13,265
that neighborhood up is all within the mussa, yes. >> we wouldn't be the only thing in the mussa in that clarification. That was a comment.

3067
05:23:21,310 --> 05:23:25,220
>> you see those lines going all over, it's like, unless you've studied it for a long time, you didn't catch that. Thank you.

3068
05:23:30,820 --> 05:23:34,160
>> I think that's some great discussion, and certainly a lot of guidance,

3069
05:23:35,990 --> 05:23:35,990
and hopefully that's helpful for you guys and that moves us onto our next agenda item.

3070
05:23:43,530 --> 05:23:46,180
>> appreciate [background]. >> thank you. I lost my agenda here.

3071
05:23:51,255 --> 05:23:51,255
this is a new business chair appointment discussion.

3072
05:23:57,070 --> 05:23:57,070
>> tonight, the staff is asking for the commission to make a recommendation to

3073
05:24:02,330 --> 05:24:02,330
the city council for who will operate as chair and vice chair of the commission for 2026.

3074
05:24:08,705 --> 05:24:11,390
these are part of the annual appointments. Council reviews annual appointments.

3075
05:24:14,360 --> 05:24:18,170
council reviews annual appointments at the december meeting of every year to reappoint for the upcoming year.

3076
05:24:22,670 --> 05:24:26,045
I've included in your memo, history of who has been chair over the last ten years or so, since 2026.

3077
05:24:33,215 --> 05:24:34,910
it has fluctuated. There was a period where one person would be the chair for a continuous time.

3078
05:24:41,410 --> 05:24:45,410
one person would be the chair for a continuous time, multiple years, and then there was a change in pattern where I think the past council had a desire

3079
05:24:51,290 --> 05:24:51,290
to rotate chairs to let everyone have an opportunity to experience being chair,

3080
05:24:57,110 --> 05:25:00,575
so I think that was implemented for a while as well. There hasn't really been a clear pattern as of recent on how the chair has come to be,

3081
05:25:05,240 --> 05:25:05,240
but I wanted to give the opportunity to the commission to create a motion

3082
05:25:09,935 --> 05:25:09,935
to give a recommendation on who you feel should be the chair and vice chair for 2026.

3083
05:25:15,590 --> 05:25:19,070
is not a final, but it's for the council to consider. >> just to clarify the timing given the hour.

3084
05:25:24,890 --> 05:25:28,010
this must go to the december meeting, so we can't table this agenda item to the next meeting.

3085
05:25:31,685 --> 05:25:31,685
>> true, because the council will be deciding on appointments, or december meeting.

3086
05:25:35,795 --> 05:25:39,350
however, if you don't feel like you have strong opinions, you do not need to act on this.

3087
05:25:41,030 --> 05:25:43,190
this is a staff. This is an administrative management of this thing of the commission.

3088
05:25:47,870 --> 05:25:50,540
the council will appoint someone for next year with or without your recommendation if you don't feel like it.

3089
05:25:53,840 --> 05:25:57,110
we will not decide on a motion tonight. [background]

3090
05:26:19,670 --> 05:26:22,565
>> I have heard it all night, I think, just because it's so quiet in here. >> the family got quiet.

3091
05:26:23,705 --> 05:26:26,770
>> you don't of anybody talking in the office. >> with that, the staff is asking for you to make

3092
05:26:31,970 --> 05:26:33,950
a motion on a chair and a vice chair as a recommendation for the city council to consider.

3093
05:26:37,310 --> 05:26:39,380
>> is anybody interested in a chair? Raise your hand? >> volunteer. I'm happy to serve in any role.

3094
05:26:43,475 --> 05:26:45,970
>> same. >> I've served as chair in the past.

3095
05:26:49,640 --> 05:26:49,640
I would be willing to throw my head in the ring as a chair if

3096
05:26:55,160 --> 05:26:55,160
the council were so inclined. There are others.

3097
05:27:05,800 --> 05:27:05,800
>> I guess I would be in favor of keeping everything the way it is right now,

3098
05:27:10,610 --> 05:27:10,610
but if we wanted to do a little seat and trade.

3099
05:27:15,610 --> 05:27:17,900
I guess, chair, I'd be looking for your input on if there's zero offense if anybody wants to dethrone me.

3100
05:27:25,595 --> 05:27:29,075
I've been doing this, I've been chair for two years now, I think. >> I think you got appointed mid-2023.

3101
05:27:32,420 --> 05:27:34,820
there was a change up in there. In 2023, 2024, and then 2025.

3102
05:27:38,705 --> 05:27:38,705
>> I think what worked well in the past was to have somebody with tenure as the chair,

3103
05:27:46,145 --> 05:27:47,420
and then a vice chair, and then the vice chair actually gets to run the meetings when that person isn't here.

3104
05:27:53,180 --> 05:27:54,800
I mean, with that thought, if I don't know.

3105
05:27:58,190 --> 05:28:00,665
>> I support. If you're interested in no longer being chair,

3106
05:28:04,190 --> 05:28:04,190
then I would support commissioner ressler as chair.

3107
05:28:08,740 --> 05:28:10,780
I'd be happy to serve as vice, or if you wanted to be vice.

3108
05:28:20,020 --> 05:28:22,710
>> was that a motion? >> well, no, I'd like,

3109
05:28:25,315 --> 05:28:27,820
given the vice chair discussion, I'd like an independent perspective in motion. I guess.

3110
05:28:31,750 --> 05:28:34,680
>> are we able to vote you to chair then? I mean, sorry, to the vice chair.

3111
05:28:37,970 --> 05:28:40,250
so essentially sheet. >> we can do essentially, you can do whatever you want.

3112
05:28:44,390 --> 05:28:44,390
I actually personally feel like it would be nice if I were not chair or vice chair.

3113
05:28:49,220 --> 05:28:49,220
I think it'd be nice if someone that has had experience here, I guess,

3114
05:28:54,920 --> 05:28:57,470
commissioner ressler has been here quite a while, so if he were chair,

3115
05:28:59,735 --> 05:29:03,500
and then we put someone new as vice chair, and then you're able to swap duties and move in.

3116
05:29:07,145 --> 05:29:07,145
>> I would be fine. I guess my 2 sense would be we put ressler as chair,

3117
05:29:16,460 --> 05:29:20,075
and cris as vice chair. >> quickly, on either one of you guys being chair.

3118
05:29:23,975 --> 05:29:27,620
are either of your guys' terms up next march? Would that matter, or are you guys both serving?

3119
05:29:28,730 --> 05:29:30,620
>> I have the longest term. >> I will say the two newest appointments.

3120
05:29:33,200 --> 05:29:33,200
I believe commissioner tift and commissioner wintel are on a one-year rotation.

3121
05:29:37,535 --> 05:29:40,595
in march, we'll be talking before them, but in march, I'll be requesting if you guys want to do a second term,

3122
05:29:44,360 --> 05:29:47,480
which will be a three-year stint, and typically, incumbents have glided to keep their position.

3123
05:29:54,200 --> 05:29:57,950
it's not unless someone decides to step down or someone expires in their term that a really open seat gets interviewed for.

3124
05:30:02,225 --> 05:30:03,380
I'm saying too many words. I'm so sorry. I said expires,

3125
05:30:10,250 --> 05:30:13,310
so to answer your question, commissioner tift and wenzel, I believe, are up for reappointment next year if they're interested.

3126
05:30:17,650 --> 05:30:17,650
>> we have a much younger planning commission now.

3127
05:30:23,350 --> 05:30:23,350
>> you're just looking for a motion from us on what we think.

3128
05:30:27,650 --> 05:30:29,630
>> it'll be a recommendation for the council to consider when they're making appointments at their december meeting.

3129
05:30:33,605 --> 05:30:33,605
>> was that a motion that you put forward or just a discussion?

3130
05:30:38,150 --> 05:30:38,150
>> put it forward, but I want to make sure we have other voices too.

3131
05:30:42,695 --> 05:30:46,445
does everyone have any opposition or comments? >> I don't know if you guys ever have a preference.

3132
05:30:48,470 --> 05:30:51,215
I'm happy putting commissioner ressler's chair. Sounds like commissioner bis was okay with that and

3133
05:30:53,690 --> 05:30:56,285
was willing to step aside from being vice chair. I don't have any interest in serving as vice chair.

3134
05:30:58,430 --> 05:31:00,260
I'd like to continue learning, maybe a future role I'd be interested in, but not right now.

3135
05:31:03,470 --> 05:31:06,950
I didn't hear from either of these two about wanting to be vice chair, so I'm not sure if you guys have a fighting preference,

3136
05:31:09,680 --> 05:31:13,115
otherwise. That's where I stand. >> I'm in the same boat. I'd like to spend a little more time on the commission,

3137
05:31:15,170 --> 05:31:18,230
becoming more familiar with the intricacies of everything we're talking about here before I step into a role like that,

3138
05:31:21,590 --> 05:31:21,590
so I'm respectfully off.

3139
05:31:27,190 --> 05:31:30,290
>> I think right now, we have a third. We have a chair vice chair, and a third.

3140
05:31:35,560 --> 05:31:38,720
>> I don't know if we still have that this year. I think we had that at one point because there were a lot of transitions going on,

3141
05:31:42,530 --> 05:31:44,825
but I think once we came to a full appointment, I don't think we kept the third.

3142
05:31:47,300 --> 05:31:50,975
but we did have that relatively recently. You're right. >> if the goal is to have a pipeline,

3143
05:31:55,175 --> 05:31:55,175
given that I have the longest term, I believe, remaining.

3144
05:32:01,370 --> 05:32:04,130
I don't know if that influences thought process, and if that makes sense for me to then serve as vice,

3145
05:32:07,775 --> 05:32:07,775
or if others would like the opportunity earlier. Thoughts?

3146
05:32:15,850 --> 05:32:19,115
>> I think logistically that makes a lot of sense. For me, the most important thing in a chair is

3147
05:32:21,230 --> 05:32:25,070
someone who brings the commission along with them. Makes sure voices can be heard across the panel and

3148
05:32:29,360 --> 05:32:29,360
tries to look for that synthesis when things are seemingly.

3149
05:32:35,500 --> 05:32:35,500
>> actually true. I think as someone who has also served in the chair before.

3150
05:32:42,530 --> 05:32:42,530
it is more about just the point of order and protocol and remembering,

3151
05:32:49,820 --> 05:32:53,135
and it's not like a stand of the world if you miss it. When you make a mistake, usually,

3152
05:32:55,430 --> 05:32:55,430
the staff does a pretty nice job of getting you back on track.

3153
05:33:02,050 --> 05:33:05,120
it is a situation where you get your legs underneath, you're just getting used to the process,

3154
05:33:07,250 --> 05:33:09,335
and sometimes the only way to do that is to do it, right? But you know, it's a good job,

3155
05:33:12,680 --> 05:33:12,680
but it's mr. Ballas has done a fantastic job for.

3156
05:33:18,920 --> 05:33:21,050
>> I'll make a motion on this, so the motion would be to nominate

3157
05:33:24,470 --> 05:33:24,470
commissioner ressler for chair and nominate commissioner perkel for vice chair.

3158
05:33:30,275 --> 05:33:33,910
>> a second. >> who am I going to take? [background] I got that one.

3159
05:33:41,380 --> 05:33:41,380
>> there's a motion on the table for commissioner journat,

3160
05:33:46,090 --> 05:33:48,590
commissioner ressler, to be chair, and commissioner perkel to be vice chair for 2026.

3161
05:33:52,880 --> 05:33:56,330
>> correct. >> there will be a recommendation to the council. The councils ultimately will decide who to appoint,

3162
05:33:58,760 --> 05:34:02,105
but I'm happy to give that recommendation up. >> there's a second by commissioner tift.

3163
05:34:04,775 --> 05:34:08,675
any further discussion? All in favor? Say aye. >> aye.

3164
05:34:09,800 --> 05:34:13,040
>> any opposed? Motion carries. >> motion to adjourn.

3165
05:34:14,465 --> 05:34:17,855
>> second. >> all in favor? >> aye.

3166
05:34:18,980 --> 05:34:18,980
aye. Good night. [laughter]