HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 7688 Approving CUP IUP & Variance North Arm Boat LaunchCITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
A RESOLUTION APPROVING
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 6.12.4930
AND
AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 6.12.9420
AND
VARIANCES FROM MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 6.12.6920
AND
DENYING A VACATION FOR A PORTION OF CHERRY AVENUE AND ALLEY WITHIN THE
PLAT OF CRYSTAL BAY VIEW
FILE NO. LA25-000033
WHEREAS, on July 23,2025, Hennepin County (hereinafter the "Applicant"), applied for a
conditional use permit, interim use permit, variances and vacation from the City Code for the
property addressed 3700 North Shore Drive, North Arm Boat Landing, and legally in Exhibit A.
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a conditional use
permit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 6.12.6240 to allow construction of
improvements and a seawall within the Floodway for Shoreland Management, and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for an interim use
permit to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 6.12.9420 to allow grading over 10 cubic yards
within the shoreland setback, and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to
Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 6.12.9210 to allow hardcover to exceed 25%, and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to
Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 6.12.9110 to allow hardcover within the 75 -foot shore
setback, and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has made application to the City of Orono for a variance to
Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 6.12.6240 to allow buildings and structures within the 75 -
foot shore setback, and
WHEREAS, the applicant made an application to the City of Orono to vacate the eastern
20 feet of Cherry Avenue and a 14 -foot -wide alley the bisects the Property; and
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2025, the application was deemed complete. Pursuant to
the 60 -day statutory review timeline, the initial review period was set to expire on November 21,
2025. Staff exercised the option to extend the review period an additional 60 days, establishing
a revised deadline of January 20, 2026. Additional time was required to process the application,
and a further extension was requested by the Applicant in order to provide supplementary
information requested by the commission and council. The current extension period is set to
expire on June 18, 2026; and
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2025, notification of the vacation and request for comment
was mailed to the Department of Natural Resources via certified mail, as required by Minnesota
State statute; and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2025, after published and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which
time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were allowed to speak thereon;
and
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2025, the Planning Commission reviewed the application
noting additional information should be submitted and recommended denial of the applications
as applied; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2026, the applicant submitted additional information following
the planning commission's direction; and
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2026, the City Council reviewed the application and directed
staff to prepare written findings in support for the Conditional Use Permit, Interim Use Permits
and Variances with conditions outlined in the staff report, and
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2026, the City Council reviewed the vacation application and
directed staff to prepare findings of denial for the vacation request; and,
WHEREAS, the Orono City Council finds the vacation as proposed is not in keeping with
the public interest in consideration of the following findings:
1) The rights of ways are dedicated for public use and are serving a public use.
2) The areas have been improved upon.
3) The city may need to utilize the space in the future for utility or drainage purpose.
4) The council finds the right of way spaces may have future benefits to the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota,
hereby approves the requested conditional use permit, interim use permit, and variances and
CITY OF OR0N0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
denies the vacation request as described above based on one or more of the following findings
of fact concerning the Property:
FINDINGS OF FACT:
Al. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid
memos, all minutes from the above -mentioned meetings, and all other materials
distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference.
A2. The Property is located in the LR-1 C One -Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
A3. The Property contains 1.63 acres in area and has a defined lot width of approximately
+/- 500 feet measured at the OHWL and at the 75 -foot setback.
A4. The Property is within Tier 1, and hardcover is limited to 25% according to the
Stormwater Quality Overlay District.
A5. The Applicant has applied for the following
a. Conditional Use Permit for improvements in the Floodway, including a Seawall
b. Interim Use Permit for grading in the 75 -foot shore setback
c. Variance for hardcover to exceed 25%
d. Variance for hardcover within the 75 -foot shore setback
e. Variance for building and structure improvements in the 75 -foot shore setback
f. Vacation of the eastern 20 feet of Cherry Avenue and a 14 -foot alley
A6. In considering this application, the Council has considered the advice and
recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variance
upon the health, safety, and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values
of property in the surrounding area.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS:
B1. Consistent with the community management plan; the property is currently operating
as a legal nonconforming use as a public boat landing, the request for
improvements including rebuilding a seawall and other improvements to the site
all support access to Lake Minnetonka and are consistent with the community
management plan of a Park and Recreational Space.
CITY OF OR0N0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
B2. Compliant with the zoning code, including any conditions imposed on specific uses as
required by article V, division 3 of the City Code; The property will maintain the
existing use, which is legally nonconforming, to support a public boat launch.
B3. Adequately served by police, fire, roads, and stormwater management; The proposed
project improves the stormwater management on the site and accessibility with a
new parking lot design. This criterion is met.
B4. Provided with an adequate water supply and sewage disposal system; This criterion is
met.
B5. Not expected to generate excessive demand for public services at public cost; The
existing use of a public boat launch is being maintained. The new structures and
seawall for the site are not anticipated to generate additional demand for the site.
If any additional demand for public services is necessary from the site; it will be
coordinated with Hennepin County as the property owner.
B6. Compatible with the surrounding area as the area is used both presently and as it is
planned to be used in the future; The property will maintain the existing use which is
legally nonconforming to support a public boat launch which is consistent with
the existing conditions.
B7. Consistent with the character of the surrounding area, unless a change of character is
called for in the community management plan; The property will maintain the existing,
legally nonconforming use to support a public boat launch which is consistent
with the existing conditions for the neighborhood and surrounding uses. The site
is consistent with the community management plan.
B8. Compatible with the character of buildings and site improvements in the surrounding
area, unless a change of character is called for in the community management plan; The
proposed seawall to support the boat launch and access to the site is compatible
with the community management plan. The two proposed buildings are intended
to facilitate implementation for protections against aquatic invasive species (AIS),
a program Hennepin County implements for water quality protections for Lake
Minnetonka.
B9. Not expected to substantially impair the use and enjoyment of the property in the area or
have a materially adverse impact on the property values in the area when compared to
the impairment or impact of generally permitted uses. The proposed site
improvements require review and approval by other governmental agencies such
as MCWD, DNR and LMCD. The proposed seawall will not have adverse impact on
the neighborhood.
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
B10. Provided with screening and buffering adequate to mitigate undesirable views
and activities likely to disturb surrounding uses; The applicant has submitted
landscape and lighting plans to mitigate views for the abutting properties and
limits activities on the site.
B11. Not create a nuisance which generates smoke, noise, glare, vibration, odors,
fumes, dust, electrical interference, general unsightliness, or other means; The
applicants will be required to adhere to the City's erosion control regulations as
well as the permitting requirements of the DNR, LMCD, and MCWD. Timely re -
vegetation and stabilization will be a requirement of the permitting process. The
project should not result in a nuisance condition.
B12. Not cause excessive non-residential traffic on residential streets, parking needs
that cause a demonstrable inconvenience to adjoining properties, traffic congestion, or
unsafe access; During construction of the improvements, the applicant will be
required to keep debris off of the public roadways. The noise resulting from the
trucks and equipment moving the material in and around the site should be
minimized to the extent possible. The project will be evaluated and monitored by
the City to minimize nuisances during construction of the project. The
improvements in the floodway will not impact the existing levels of traffic, parking,
traffic congestions or access.
B13. Designed to take into account the natural, scenic, and historic features of the
area and to minimize environmental impact; the overall long-term effect of the project
should promote sustainability throughout the site with improved stormwater
management, reduction of shoreline impacts and additional native vegetation
areas within the site.
B14. All exterior lighting shall be so directed so as not to cast glare toward or onto the
public right-of-way or neighboring residential uses or districts; The proposed lighting
plan includes down directed, diffused or shielded/hooded fixtures, timers,
ensuring that this criterion will be met.
B15. Not detrimental to the public health, public safety, or general welfare. The
project should improve accessibility and safety within site. It will not be a
detriment to the public health, public safety, or general welfare.
INTERIM USE PERMIT ANALYSIS
CITY OF OR0N0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
C1.The use will meet the general performance standards in section 6.12.4090; Project
has been reviewed against the CUP standards (6.12.4090). The general
performance standards are met.
C2. The use is allowed as an interim use in the applicable zoning district; Grading activities
are permitted within the LR-1C Zoning District. This criterion is met.
C3. The use will not delay anticipated development or redevelopment of the site; The
grading activities necessary for future site development. This criterion is met.
C4. The use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the city code on an ongoing basis;
The plan will be reviewed by the City Engineer, MCWD, DNR, and the applicant
will be required to follow all governing agency requirements. The applicant will
obtain all necessary permits with outside agencies including MPCA, and NPDES
permitting. This criterion is met.
C5.The use will not adversely affect the adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood,
or other uses on the property where the use will be located; The applicant shall
ensure the project scope remains within the property limits, the haul route is
monitored (and cleaned as often as necessary), and that any adverse impacts
are mitigated. This criterion is met.
C6. The use will not impose additional unreasonable costs on the public; The project will
not impose additional costs on the public. This criterion is met.
C7.The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; The
applicant has provided a project timeline which will commence in the Fall of
2026 with a goal to be complete in 2028. This criterion is met.
C8.And the applicant agrees in writing to any conditions that the city council deems
appropriate for the use, including a requirement for a financial security to ensure
removal of all evidence of the use upon termination, and restoration of the site to prior
or better conditions. The conditions shall be set forth in a development agreement
between the property owner and the city, which agreement shall be recorded with the
Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Deeds. Approval of the Interim Use
Permit will be memorialized through a resolution that will be recorded against
the property. All requirements and conditions will be listed as part of the
resolution. This criterion is met.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS
D1.The variance is in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Ordinance. The
proposed variances are in harmony with the intent of the Ordinance supporting the
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
improvements for the legally nonconforming use. The public boat launch is a legally
nonconforming water -oriented use. The improvements proposed to the site for
parking, lighting, and accessory structures support the site by improving safety,
accessibility and screening on the parcel.
D2. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The variances proposed to
rebuild the public access boat launch are consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the use of this property as
Park/Recreation/Open Space which include private and public areas. This site is
owned by Hennepin County and operates as a public boat launch to access and
support activities for Lake Minnetonka.
D3. The applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties.
a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by the official controls; The property is a legal nonconforming use.
The site has operated as a public boat launch since the 1960s before
establishment of the City's current zoning classification of LR-1C. This
proposed redesign will maintain this existing use. The improvements
proposed are reasonable and support the public boat launch and includes
a redesign of a public parking lot, ADA improvements, and improved
stormwater management on the site.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner;
The property's orientation and proximity to the lake is an existing
condition, and there is no available land with which to make the property
more conforming. The proposed parking lot is decreasing by 2 parking
stalls with the proposed project. The restricted roadway, low topography,
lot size and shape, and location are challenges with the parcel. There
should be consideration for variances to setback requirements for the
property which is nonconforming. The project has been designed with an
effort toward promoting stormwater management, improving accessibility
and safety without sacrificing functionality; and
c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variances
are requested to permit the reconstruction of a parking lot, new public boat
launch, and installation of additional functional features, which is
reasonable. Increasing the hardcover to support the parking area will
promote safer maneuverability for vehicles, but also raises concerns for
promoting commercial and industrial users for the site. Staff finds the
layout of the proposed plan to be reasonable and should adequately
fd
CITY OF OR0N0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
support functional traffic circulation. However, the parking lot currently
supports public access and recreational users of the lake. The parking and
operating of special mobile equipment, material staging, vehicle
maintenance and business operations are prohibited within the parking lot.
D4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Economic
considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination.
D5. Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access to direct
sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth -sheltered
construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd. 17, when in harmony with Orono
City Code Chapter 78. This condition is not applicable.
D6.The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted
under Orono City Code Chapter 6.12 for property in the zone where the affected
person's land is located. This condition is not applicable, as the property is a legal
nonconforming use. The site has operated as a public boat launch since the
1960s before the City Zoning of LR-1C was adopted. This proposed redesign will
maintain this existing use. Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6(2) allows the city to grant
variances from restrictions on legal nonconformities, such as the proposed
variances from hardcover and setback restrictions.
D7. The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one -family
dwelling as a two-family dwelling. This condition is not applicable.
D8.The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property. The property's existing orientation and
current use are peculiar to the property. This creates unique difficulties for the
site that also apply to other water -oriented uses. The proposed variances are not
out of character.
D9.The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which
the land is located. The property has limited land availability and the orientation of
the site, which serves the established water -oriented use, create difficulties that
do not apply other properties in the City.
D10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment
of a substantial property right of the applicant. The site is currently being used for
public access to Lake Minnetonka. The redesign supports and maintains the
current use. The improvements are necessary to address stormwater,
accessibility and safety for the public (users of the property).
D1 1. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety,
comfort, or morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter.
8
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
Granting the variances in this situation is not contrary to the intent of the zoning
chapter. The variances will improve safety on the site by allowing better
maneuverability on the site, support the AIS program for Lake Minnetonka water
quality, improve accessibility to the lake and lakeshore by disabled person, and
support stormwater improvements for the site.
D12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicants but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The site is
nonconforming as the restrictive 75 lake setback area encumbers a majority of the
land. The site currently operates as a public access for Lake Minnetonka. The
proposed redesign will maintain the current use and improve the stormwater,
accessibility and safety. Granting the variances are necessary to maintain the
current use of the property.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS:
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
conditional use permit for improvements included a seaway withing the floodplain, an interim
use permit for grading and variances for hardcover within the shore setback, buildings and
structures within the shore setback and overall site hardcover to exceed 25% and denial of the
vacation request for the portion of Cherry Avenue and the adjoining alley, to allow the redesign
and construction of the North Arm Boat Landing, a legal nonconforming use, subject to the
following conditions:
C1. Council approval is based on the entire record and the above Findings.
C2. The approved project shall conform to the proposed Site Plan dated 6/1/2026 by IMO
Consulting Group, submitted by the Applicant attached to this Resolution as Exhibits B.
C3.Any amendments to the plans that do not conform to City codes may require additional
review by the Planning Commission and City Council.
C4. Hennepin County must obtain all permits and approvals from other government agencies
(MCWD, DNR, LMCD, and Met Council); and
C5.The parking and operating of special mobile equipment, as defined by City Code Section
6.12.7820, material staging, vehicle maintenance and business operations are prohibited
within the site.
CITY OF OR0N0
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
NO.7688
C6. The landscape and lighting plans must buffer adjacent residential properties in order to
minimize off -site impacts.
C7. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the Property, not with the Owners, but are
permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the new
construction and commencing construction of said project. A building permit must be
obtained within one year of the date of Council approval, or the approvals will expire on
that date (June 8, 2027).
C8. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution
may result in the termination of any authority granted herein.
ADOPTED by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of June, 2026.
ATTEST:
CITY OF ORONO:
Chris Gsia.f, City clerk Bob Tunheim, Mayor
10
CITY OF ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Exhibit A
Legal Description:
Lots 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and 10, Block 2, "Crystal Bay View" Hennepin County, Minnesota
WO)
S
F£
fy(D�
Co 2
w
LL
E
w�o� W
m
; >a
o Z W
z
g
Wo
I
i
s
lb
Nd
Q
ems
o
� a
Z
o
g
"°
awo
1
o m e
o
c z J
C m
w U
< W O
G6m
��yy
Rio
I
I I I
I I I
Fapii )
�nu�f
IIIlilil
l��
�Y
Gc
O O
Ba
��
:�
mo'�'wo ��
rcwQ g�i
OV�l..
Rp
w
0
IIIIIIii
I�
�Ob�m FL�dI
}
Z
y
U
W
N
LL
y
LL
N
N
N m
N
6
o
a
j
o
z
111
¢
N
W
N
O
y
N
N
(V_
N
0)
W
0 W
N
D 0
W U
wa
W Ui
(7W
w¢LLo
as
�(7 to
N
Ui
N
N O N M O N V N N V N
U XXX!!d
XXXXXXXX
I
o ! m N
N � i
8+'Y'S)Nidimxv1-M,v 0)80))?OIEOd-OOLok'Y.)auvo P U)y)vel 000%N?O0)00IEOd\�O O000HtCO.000U]NUi