Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />MINUTES OF THE ORONO P1.ANMNG COMMISSION WORK SESSION <br />WEDNESDAY, MARCH 9 1994 <br />Peterson responded that some ot the ;^;ees.si>r\ uses were not changes from the axle as it was <br />created 20 years ago, such as boat rental. <br />Lindquist ct>mmenied that there will be operators vfbo run minimum qierations and that is what <br />the Citv wants to address. <br />Dunn made an example of Prior Lake wht) never had any zoning whereas Orono has had the <br />zoning and is try ing to fine-tune it. He stated that st>me operators have to maintain minimum <br />operations because of the land and envelope they have to work w ith while others can be more <br />aggressive and have to make the most of all opportunities. He felt if the City worked with each <br />marina they could develop a list of activities that would be appropriate for that marina. By <br />working with the parking formula, the property only allows so much activity. <br />Peterson reiterated that these meetings have been work sessions and their recommendations are <br />not necessarily what will be the end result. Comments the operators have made will be brought <br />to Council's attention. <br />Discussion continued with Subdivision 17, Variances for Required Landscaping Areas. Gaffron <br />suggested leaving the language basically the same with a little tweaking and updating. Members <br />agreed. <br />Subdivision 18. Regulations Relating to Location, Construction, Installation and Maintenance <br />of Docks, Boat Mooring Arc and Other Fixed or Floating Structures and Objects on l^kes - <br />Adoption by Reference, references three LMCD ordinances. Peterson thought this section <br />should remain at this time as the City needs to be able to "reserve the right to deny any variance <br />to provisions of Ordinance No. 1 as amemled, even though the same variance was granted by <br />the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District". Smith asked why specific ordinances needed to <br />be referenced. Gaffron responded that if, for instance, the specific ordinance on dock standards <br />was not referenced, there W'ould be nothing to enforce. Members agreed these references should <br />be updated. <br />Lindquist did not think the language needed to be changed for Subdivision 19, Reference to <br />Other Ordinances. Dunn suggested including a disclaimer in both Subdivisions 18 and 19 <br />regarding the LMCD and add reference to the axle afx>ut the DNR as the authority on the lake. <br />Members agreed there should be reference to the DNR. Peterson expressed concern that the <br />DNR may not care about the individual cities siiKc the DNR looks at the entire populace of <br />Minnesota and what will be beneficial to the whole. <br />Peterson asked if anything had been missed in the work session discussions. <br />Gaffron replied that Subdivisions 1. 2 and 3 had not been discussed. He stated that Subdivision <br />1 states a purpo.se that ftKUses on taking care of the environment and being a goixl neighbor by