Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 28, 1989 <br />ZONING FILE #1429-BURGESS CONTINUED <br />that he had submitted a letter spelling out his hardships. <br />City Administrator Bernhardz7on said that the people <br />responsible for drafting the ordinances in 1960/1970 chose not to <br />have these matters addressed on a case -by -case basis. They chose <br />to state that no excavation could occur within 0-75' of Lake <br />Minnetonka unless a hardship is demonstrated. Councilmember <br />Goetten interjected that Mr. Brad VanNest was one of the persons <br />responsible for the development of the City Ordinances pertaining <br />to the lakeshore. <br />Mr. Burgess said that significant portions of the bank had <br />fallen into the Lake and unless something was done, more bank <br />would be washed away. Councilmember Goetten said that the City <br />staff would be willing to work with Mr. Burgess in that regard, <br />but that the erosion and walk -out were two separate issues. <br />Mayor Grabek stated that erosion of the bank was not a hardship <br />to warrant a walk -out. <br />Councilmember Goetten asked Mr. Burgess if he had met with <br />the City staff to discuss restoration of his bank? Mr. Burgess <br />stated that he had met with Mr. Gaff ron and Mr. Cook. He said <br />that Mr. Cook had recommended that fabric be installed and a <br />beneficial amount of sloping be done. Mr. Burgess said that Mr. <br />Cook indicated that the City preferred to have vegetation rather <br />than retaining wall. Mr. Burgess said that he would have no <br />problem implementing those recommendations. <br />Mr. Berg said that he had taken the time to go back and <br />track Orono's ordinances as they changed. Fe said the <br />prohibitions about disturbing the Lake had always existed. The <br />difference came when Orono required a permit to disturb the <br />lakeshore and proof that such disturbance would meet the goals of <br />the Community for preserving It. -he lakeshore. Mr. Berg said that <br />in 1975, Orono decided to stop reviewing the aspects of the <br />permits, but rather chose to deny them as a +hole. Mr. Berg said <br />that in examining the precedent aspect of denying this type of an <br />application, that he could distinguish Mr. Burgess's proposal <br />from others. He said that Mr. Burgess's proposal also addresses <br />all of the engineering concerns. Mr. Berg noted that the <br />existing house encroaches 35' into the 0-75' setback zone. The <br />r -oposed residence would allow hardcover to be totally eliminated <br />that area and remain the same in the 75-250' zone. He said <br />Uldt the walk -out was an additional benefit. <br />Mr- Berg asked to have the 6 reasons supporting denial of <br />this application included in the record (see MPG memo 7/13/89). <br />It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember <br />Goetten, to deny application #1429. Councilmember Goetten sa=.d <br />that she would like to give Mr. Burgess the opportunity to revise <br />his proposal and go back before the Plsnnina Commissirin, <br />Councilmember Nettles reiterated Councilmember Goetten's commentF <br />rege.iuinq :he City's consistency in dtnying applications <br />6 <br />