06-28-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, June 14, 2004 7:00 o’clock p.m. (12. #04-3012 ROGER D. O’SHAUGHNESSY, 1265 BRACKETTS POINT ROAD - VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - RESOLUTION NO. 5195 continued) Murphy questioned if the boardwalk is denied what will be the access to the lakeshore. Steinwall stated the landscape plan would need to be revisited if the boardwalk feature is denied. Options include use regular grass turf or some combination of vegetation. She stated her client does need some sort of lake access. Steinwall advised that her client, Mr. O’Shaughnessy, is very interested in the prairie restoration project on this property, and proposes to build the boardwalk with spacings to allow infiltration and at a height that would allow li^t for plantings to grow underneath the boardwalk. Steinwall distributed photographs to illustrate her client ’s concept for the prairie restoration project. Murphy mentioned that David Rahn, Planning Commissioner, has encouraged the City to look at the changes to the City’s hardcover requirements. He asked if the boards are spaced far enough apart is it then still a hardcover issue. Murphy indicated that this proposed landscaping design is moving in a good direction and supports this concept, and pointed out the MCWD is a proponent of wetland and shoreland buffers like this proposed prairie restoration. Murphy acknowledged there is no hardship but he personally supports the landscape and boardwalk concept. Murphy asked for information about the existing boardwalks in use around Lake Minnetonka. McMillan advised the LMCD allows boardwalks over cattails marshes to get to waters edge instead of allowing dredging as it did not harm the lakeshore vegetation and the MnDNR uses boardwalks in certain locations, too. McMillan indicated as a member of the LMCD she was a proponent of lakescaping, and sees this application as a privately funded lakescaping project that should be supported. She recognized tliat if the restoration project is installed and if in five years the boardwalk was proposed, it would be considered because the restoration would then be an environmentally sensitive area, i.e, a hardship would exist then. She reiterated that if the restoration area does us it is intended, then it would become a future hardship factor by making lake access difficult or undesirable through a sensitive v egetation environment. McMillan stated the City should not be discouraging the applicant, but acknowledged the City Zoning Code currently does not accommodate such a restoration project. She urged the City to consider this a step in the right direction and stated she was strongly in favor of approving a hardcover variance for this applicant. White pointed out the application hasl% hardcover proposed within the 75’ zone and 24.3% hardcover within the 75-250’ zone, which docs not require a variance, for a total of 25.3% on the whole property which is almost not a variance. Sansevere asked Gaffron for his opinion about the ramifications of approving the hardcover variance. GafTron responded that if the City began to allow more open-spaced decks to allow infiltration and not be counted as hardcover, he believed this would open a ’Pandora ’s box’ of issues. How ever, as Page 10 of 22