My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-13-1992 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1992
>
07-13-1992 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/2/2024 2:13:38 PM
Creation date
4/2/2024 2:09:40 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
396
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ii-f <br />EC’ <br />s <br />¥■ <br />!,- <br />h. ■ <br />r. <br />Kh <br />C; <br />1$. <br />% <br />iSkVr <br />fteF- <br />jfajfe;),. <br />(».'■ <br />TOj <br />PROM I <br />DATE: <br />SUBJECTS <br />Ron Moorse# City Administrator <br />Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning t Zoning Administrator <br />June 18, 1992 <br />Review of Minnetrista Shoreland Ordinance <br />1 have reviewed the information submitted by Minnetrista and would <br />make the following comments: <br />1. <br />b. <br />They are requesting flexibility in three specific areas: <br />a. Height of structures, requesting 35’ versus DNR's 25'. <br />Deck setback requirements. It is indicated that <br />Minnetrista allows a 6' wide deck as a non-encroachment <br />when it extends into the 0-75* lakeshore yard from a <br />house located at the 75* setback. Since the DNR would <br />allow such a deck to be 15% of the required setback <br />area or ll-*- feet, I don't know why they feel this needs <br />flexibility from the DNR requirements. <br />25%/35% impervious surface (hardcover) in R-2 Douglas <br />Beach District. Minnetrista uses the entire lot area <br />as their hardcover basis. In the Douglas Beach <br />District, they allowed 25% of the lot to be covered <br />by above—grade structures, with an additional 1-J% <br />coverage by at-grade impervious surfaces like pools, <br />patios, etc. This was done to reduce the number of <br />variance recjests. Minnetrista justifies this by <br />controlling open space in the neighborhood and being <br />more restrictive than DNR standards in over 95% of <br />their shoreland areas. <br />c. <br />Z don't have any problems with their flexibility requests. While I <br />have not reviewed their existing ordinances, I an generally of the <br />Improssion that Minnetrista*s ordinances are fairly similar <br />philosophically to Orono's. I am more concerned about some of the <br />othar more densely developed cities such as Wayzata, Excelsior, and <br />ipring Park. <br />!:p <br />.r <br />r •;-f <br />V f-'t. ' \ <br />Ip
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.