07-22-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

18. 19. high'risc development proposals on Lake users and other neighboring communities, and are encouraged to exhibit restraint in approving variances and conditional use permits for buildings that will be visible above the treeline from the lake’s surface and shoreline. Lead Agency: Cities Cooperating Agencies: DNR, LMCD, MCWD, Council Like art, the size, shape and facade of buildings may be pleasing to some people while unpleastng to others. The large open areas of the lake and the relatively low-lying nature of the terrain around much of the lake tend to make shoreland development, and especially taller buildings that .^end above the treeline, easily visible to lake users and residents on other shores. City planning commissions, variance boards and city councils arc encourage to work with developers to minimize the impacts of proposals that arc likely to be visible from the lake or other cities. The lake cities and LMCD should agree in writing on the procedures that cities will follow in notifying each other on proposed rezonings, variances, special or conditional use permits applications in the shoreland zone, or proposed development plans that may impact lake users or other lake cities because of proposed building height. Lead Agency: Cities Cooperating Agencies: DNR, LMCD, MCWD, Council Cities are encouraged to develop written review procedures that include special notiflcatior to other lake cities and the LMCD of proposed variances in the shoreland zones. The special notices should provide enough detail to allow the other cities and LMCD to determine whether or not to attend the meetings being held by the city to review the proposed project. Transportation agencies are encouraged to provide ring routes to divert commuter and commercial trafllc from shorelands and to work to incorporate recreational access to Lake Minnetonka in future public transit alternatives. Lead Agency: Metropolitan Council Cooperating Agencies: MN DOT, Hennepin County, Carver County, Cities Presently, Highway IS carries considerable traffic through Minnetrista, Mound, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, Orono and Wayzata. Efforts should be expanded to provide attractive, rapid alternatives for through trafEc away from the lake, to reduce the direct impact of higher traffic volumes on the shorelands. Reduced traffic volumes reduce traffic noise and improve the recreational experience for residents and lake users. Major roads in the shoreland area also likely sources of direct runoff into the lake, caoying silt, sand and chemicals into the lake. As these road are rebuflt and upgraded, the designs should be modified to eliminate direct runoff and improve the quality of the runoft Such measures will become more important as development and redevelopment continues to occur. Further, if the decision is made to serve western Hennepin County suburbs with alternative public transit, recreational access to Lake Minnetonka should be considered. This includes use of public transportation as a means of reaching the lake shore for day use, and moving 7/11 Draft - 16