Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, September 14, 2020 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 7 of 26 <br /> <br />Johnson said the shoreline is not an easement over the property at this point and asked if there is a way to <br />tie the conditions of those out-lots, or how they could tie that in versus using those as out-lots. Lake <br />Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) has jurisdiction over the water and they don’t tie those in, <br />they could potentially petition to the LMCD to get a multiple dock license for those other properties. He <br />noted the rigid ordinance that states if there isn’t a primary structure on a lot there cannot be an accessory <br />structure (the dock) and that is why they have to combine them. What Johnson would not want to see <br />happen is that the Council approves it, the developer uses those as out-lots, they attempt to get multiple <br />dock license from the LMCD and put multiple docks over there versus the three. He said the three land <br />owners could put a singular dock together. <br /> <br />Walsh said he doesn’t think they could because there isn’t a structure on those lots and if they don’t <br />combine them they have no structure. <br /> <br />Barnhart anticipated that as a concern and noted in the resolution they put in that lots would be combined <br />after platting and before any building permit would be issued on lots 1, 2, and 3. <br /> <br />Johnson said that is a good job because the LMCD doesn’t have a concern about a structure being on the <br />property as that is a municipal concern. The LMCD just deals with the docks. He said he’d wait to hear <br />more about the average lakeshore setback, noting the neighbors brought up an interesting question about <br />average lakeshore setback when they’re developing because all of the properties there are set back very <br />far. <br /> <br />Barnhart noted Johnson is jumping way ahead of him. The public comment received to date has to do <br />with the West property line and noted there is not a plan to remove vegetation on Lot 3 and 4, and <br />recognizing the concern they could work with the developer to put that in as a requirement in the final <br />plat documents. Another issue raised from the public had to do with serving the plat with City Water, <br />noting City Water is not near this property and there are no plans to extend water to the property, instead <br />all the lots will be served by wells. There was also a question about burying the electrical and telephone <br />lines, and said final plans haven’t been developed at this stage but it is expected that the electric lines will <br />be buried as it City standard, but overhead lines above Shoreline Drive are not proposed to be buried. It is <br />common to bury the lines within the subdivision. At the Planning Commission level, there was quite a lot <br />of discussion regarding the impacts on the average lakeshore setback. Barnhart said it’s very difficult to <br />describe during a public meeting, as there are so many moving parts, depending on when a house was <br />built, where the other house is, and he tried to document what he was as a reasonable expectation of <br />lakeshore setback. He met with a neighboring property owner who had many questions during the <br />Planning Commission meeting and tried to identify those issues. <br /> <br />Walsh noted in the past they’ve seen houses going around a round body of water and depending on who <br />built first, it could mess up all the average lakeshore setbacks. The Council felt it was important then and <br />at other times to identify that minimum they can always build at, regardless of who builds first. In the <br />future, if someone tears down a house that could change, but at least in the beginning everyone gets the <br />same shot at getting the average lakeshore setback they think they’re going to get. <br /> <br />Barnhart said Johnson identified part of the uniqueness of the property as there are two lakefront edges. <br />He showed a map on screen and walked through the average lakeshore setbacks based on neighboring <br />properties. He said this would provide a buildable site for Lot 6 that is outside of the average lakeshore <br />setback and outside the bluff area. He noted there is no average lakeshore setback for Lot 5 as it is not a <br />lake lot, and the bluff and vegetation will impact location of the house.