[1. LA22-000045 Ellette Anderson and James & Melissa Easley, 1250 Spruce Place & 1260Spruce Place, request vacation of the adjacent unimproved right-of-way of "Lake Street".(Staff: Melanie Curtis)]

LA22-45. WE HAVE 1250 SPRUCE PLACE AND 1260 SPRUCE PLACE.

WE HAVE MS. CURTIS PRESENTING.

YES. THANK YOU.

THE APPLICANTS ARE REQUESTING TO VACATE THE UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW, WHICH IS SITUATED BETWEEN 1250 AND 1260 SPRUCE PLACE.

THIS UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY IS ALSO KNOWN AS LAKE STREET ON THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL.

REVISED. IT TERMINATES AT THE HIGH-WATER LEVEL OF NORTHERN BAY.

THERE ARE NO CITY UTILITIES WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME OVERLAND DRAINAGE SPILLWAYS WITH RIPRAP TAKING THE DRAINAGE FROM THE ROAD TO THE LAKE, AND ADDITIONALLY THERE IS APPROXIMATELY A 900 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF THE NEIGHBORING DRIVEWAY IN THIS LOCATION.

HERE, IF YOU CAN SEE THE MOUSE ENCROACHING WITHIN THAT RIGHT OF WAY.

THE CITY ENGINEER PROVIDED COMMENTS ON THIS REQUEST.

HE DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VACATION, AS THE PROPERTY DOES SERVE AS STORMWATER DRAINAGE FUNCTION AND HAS A POSSIBLE FUTURE PURPOSE.

HIS COMMENTS WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.

THE RIGHT OF WAY CORRIDOR ADDRESSED IN THIS APPLICATION IS IDENTIFIED IN OUR COMP PLAN LAKE ACCESS POINT MAP AS HAVING NO PUBLIC ACCESS.

THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE ANY PARK IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS AREA.

THE ACCESS DOES APPEAR TO HAVE A PUBLIC PURPOSE SERVING AS A DRAINAGE WAY.

THERE ARE IDENTIFIED LAKE ACCESS POINTS IN THIS AREA.

SANDY BEACH IS LOCATED TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS ESTABLISHED AS A SWIMMING BEACH AND THE CITY'S FISHING DOCK OFF OF LOMA LINDA AVENUE TO THE NORTH.

BOTH OF THESE ACCESS POINTS ARE LESS THAN 500FT FROM THIS LOCATION.

THE CHALLENGE WITH VACATING RIGHTS OF WAY IS THAT VACATION IS FINAL.

SHOULD THE PUBLIC OR THE CITY HAVE ACCESS OR UTILITY NEEDS IN THE FUTURE, THE COST OF TAXPAYERS TO REACQUIRE THE PROPERTY WILL BE AT A PREMIUM.

FOR THIS REASON, VACATION REDUCES OPTIONS FOR THE CITY IN THE FUTURE.

THE SUBJECT RIGHT OF WAY SECURES OPPORTUNITY FOR FUTURE ACCESS FOR OFF LAKE PROPERTIES.

WE DID RECEIVE THE FORMAL COMMENTS WHICH WERE PROVIDED TO YOU THIS AFTERNOON, AND I PLACED A COPY AT YOUR SPOTS THIS EVENING.

THE DNR OPPOSES THE VACATION.

THE BASIS FOR THEIR OPPOSITION IS THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION DOES NOT PROVIDE A PUBLIC BENEFIT, NOR DOES IT PROTECT FUTURE PUBLIC USE OF THE LAND TO ACCESS THE LAKE.

WRITTEN COMMENT I'M SORRY, GOT THAT PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED, AND THEY WERE PROVIDED IN THE PACKET AND VIA EMAIL.

I ALSO PRINTED THE MOST RECENT ONE RECEIVED AT YOUR SPOTS.

BOTH OF THESE COMMENTS WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE VACATION REQUEST TONIGHT.

THE COMMISSION SHOULD ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VACATION.

DOES THE LAND HAVE A PUBLIC BENEFIT? DOES THIS REQUEST MEET THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL? WOULD APPROVING THIS ACTION SET A PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE LAKE ACCESS VACATIONS?

[00:05:04]

IN CLOSING, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST TO VACATE THE RIGHT OF WAY, AS THERE IS CURRENTLY A PUBLIC BENEFIT FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES, AND A FUTURE PURPOSE OF THE LAND IS YET UNDETERMINED.

I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.

THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE.

I HAVE SOME OTHER AERIAL PHOTOS IF YOU WANTED TO SEE THOSE, BUT I CAN STAND FOR QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MISS CURTIS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE ONE QUESTION.

IN REVIEWING THE SITE TODAY, IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO TELL WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS SERVED BY CITY WATER, OR IF THESE ARE ON PRIVATE WELLS.

WELLS. OKAY.

THANK YOU. I GUESS I DO HAVE A QUESTION AS WELL.

MS. CURTIS, CAN YOU JUST MAYBE HELP ILLUSTRATE? I KNOW WE'VE HAD VACATION APPLICATIONS BEFORE.

ANY COMPARISON, IN CONTRAST, AS TO HOW THIS APPLICATION MAY DIFFER ONE WAY OR ANOTHER FROM PREVIOUS THAT WE'VE RULED ON OR ANYTHING.

WELL, WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF VACATIONS REQUESTED IN THE CITY.

I MEAN, BASICALLY THIS IS HISTORICALLY REFERRED TO AS A FIRE LANE.

ACCESS IS THE LAKE.

IT ISN'T SET AS HAVING A PARK PURPOSE.

EACH OF THESE VACATIONS ARE REVIEWED INDIVIDUALLY AND ANALYZED THAT WAY.

I THINK YOU'LL SEE CONSISTENCY IN THE DNR'S FEEDBACK ON ALL OF OUR LAKE ACCESS VACATION REQUESTS.

WE DO LOOK AT THE USE AND THE PURPOSE FOR THE VACATION, OR FOR THE AREA WHEN WE EVALUATE THAT AT A STAFF LEVEL.

I GUESS WE HAVE TO RESPOND TO A SPECIFIC QUESTION.

IF YOU HAVE A SITE THAT YOU'RE THINKING OF, BUT THEY'RE ALL THEY'RE ALL UNIQUE BUT OFTEN HAVE A SIMILAR FUNCTION.

YEAH, JUST CANDIDLY, I'LL SPEAK ON MY OWN ACCORD.

I DID NOT GET A CHANCE TO VISIT THE SITE TODAY, SO I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE ILLUSTRATION, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT, LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S BEEN A LOT THAT HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT. SOME HAVE BEEN WETLANDS AND ARGUABLY MUCH LESSER ACCESSIBLE THAN PERHAPS A FIRE LANE THAT HAS HAD USE.

AND SO, AS I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO VISIT THE SITE, I JUST WANTED TO ASK FOR THAT IF YOU HAD IT.

BUT I'M SURE THAT'LL PROBABLY COME OUT IN BOTH THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION AS WELL AS PERHAPS SOME PUBLIC HEARINGS, SO I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MORE ON THAT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? ALL RIGHT, SO I GUESS IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE, THEY'D LIKE TO COME UP AND STEP FORWARD.

PLEASE COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

I JUST HAVE A FEW POINTS AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO.

I'M ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS.

I MEAN, I'M AT 1260 SPRUCE PLACE.

MY NAME IS ARLETTE ANDERSON.

AND THEN THE EASLEY'S, WHO ARE THE OTHER NEIGHBORS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS PROPOSED LAND VACATION ARE HERE AS WELL, ALONG WITH THE REST OF OUR NEIGHBORS ON THE STREET, WHICH IS VERY NICE THAT THEY ALL SHOWED UP.

SO, I JUST HAVE A FEW POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE BASED ON THIS.

WHEN MY PARENTS BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY IN 1972, THE LAND BETWEEN OUR HOME AND THE EASLEY'S WAS A MUDDY STRIP OF PROPERTY WITH OLD DOCKS, GLASS BOTTLES, BEER CANS AND PIPES KIND OF ALONG THE LAKESHORE.

MY MOTHER IS HERE.

WE TOOK OVER THE PROPERTY FROM HER A FEW YEARS AGO.

MY DAD'S HOME BABYSITTING, SO THEY HAVE THE HISTORY AND PROVENANCE TO TELL YOU ABOUT ANYTHING THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND IN 1979, THE CITY OF ORONO CONCLUDED IN A WRITTEN LETTER THAT YOU GUYS SHOULD HAVE IN YOUR FILE THAT THIS WAS NOT SUITABLE FOR ANY TYPE OF PUBLIC DOCK BECAUSE OF THE WATERSHED THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED HERE TONIGHT, AND LACK OF PARKING ON OUR SKINNY DEAD END STREET, AND THE FACT THAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO MAINTAIN IT.

SO ALSO, THERE IS THIS WATERSHED WHICH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH CAN FILL UP TO BE ABOUT THREE FEET WIDE DURING STORMS. SO IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE FOR A GREAT LAKE ACCESS FOR THE PUBLIC.

IT HAS NOT BEEN USED BY THE PUBLIC FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS.

MY PARENTS HAVE LIVED THERE BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO DESIGNATED LAKE ACCESSES WHICH WERE MENTIONED WITHIN 500FT OF THIS.

SO THERE'S A VERY NICE ONE AT THE END OF OUR STREET, FOUR HOUSES DOWN, WHICH HAS A TRAIL.

THE CITY MAINTAINS IT.

THEY CUT THE BRUSH, THEY TAKE CARE OF IT.

PEOPLE USE IT FOR THEIR ATVS, SNOWMOBILES, THEY USE IT.

THERE'S A TINY SWIMMING BEACH THERE THAT THEY MAINTAIN.

AND THEN THERE'S THE PUBLIC DOCK ON LOMA LINDA, WHICH IS ALSO WITHIN 500FT.

SO THERE'S REALLY NO PURPOSE FOR THIS LAKE ACCESS.

I AM NEVER GOING TO BE THE ONE THAT WOULD DENY ANY PUBLIC USE OF THIS, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR EVERYONE TO HAVE ACCESS TO LAKE MINNETONKA, BUT THERE ARE JUST TWO PLACES THAT ARE MUCH BETTER ACCESSES WITHIN 500FT.

SO THE CITY HAS NOT MAINTAINED THIS AREA MORE THAN 40 YEARS.

SO THE RUNOFF COMES DIRECTLY INTO OUR HOUSE.

RIGHT NOW THAT RUNOFF COMES TO OUR BASEMENT.

WE PUT IN ABOUT A $15,000 TILE DRAIN SYSTEM IN THE BASEMENT TO TAKE CARE OF IT.

MY MOTHER HAS LOVINGLY PUT BOULDERS, YOU KNOW, PLANTED GRASS BECAUSE THIS WAS A VERY MUDDY RUNOFF AREA.

[00:10:07]

WE MAINTAIN IT BY MOWING THIS LARGE, ALMOST FULL LOT OF PROPERTY, WHICH THE EASLEY'S PAY FOR TO HAVE MOWED EVERY WEEK.

SO, WE DO MAINTAIN THIS AREA QUITE A BIT.

WE EVEN HAVE THE BIG BOULDERS THAT WE PUT IN CLEANED BECAUSE THEY GET COVERED IN MUD, WHICH IS ALL SALT RUNOFF FROM THE STREET WHICH WE DO NOT WANT TO GO INTO LAKE MINNETONKA.

SO, WE HAVE BEEN MAINTAINING THIS FOR 40 YEARS AND WILL CONTINUE.

THIS IS MY FOREVER HOUSE.

I PLAN ON LIVING THERE FOR THE NEXT 40 YEARS AND MAINTAINING THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

SO AGAIN, MOWING, WE PUT IN $20,000 OR MORE OF RIPRAP ALONG THE SHORELINE TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND IN CONCLUSION, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF THE WAYS THAT IT COULD BENEFIT THE PUBLIC, I WOULD SAY, IS THAT THE EASLEY'S COULD HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO PAVE THEIR DRIVEWAY.

SO RIGHT NOW, YOU'LL SEE IT IS ALL GRAVEL AND THAT THERE'S IT'S A REALLY HARD ACCESS FOR THEM TO GET INTO THEIR DRIVEWAY.

IF THEY COULD PAVE IT, WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO HAVE THAT GRAVEL RUNOFF THAT KIND OF GOES INTO THE WATERSHED, GOES INTO THE LAKE AND ALSO AFFECTS THE PUBLIC STREET WHEN THAT GRAVEL COMES INTO THE STREET. SO, SNOWPLOWS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND IT'S THE ONLY DRIVEWAY ON OUR LOT ON OUR ENTIRE STREET THAT IS NOT PAVED.

SO, IT WOULD BE A BENEFIT, I THINK, TO ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE ABLE TO PAVE THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY AND HAVE THEM HAVE A SAFE ACCESS TO THEIR GARAGE.

THE OTHER BENEFIT, I WOULD SAY IS THAT FOR THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, EONS, YOU'LL HAVE THE TAXPAYER DOLLARS THAT WE WILL BE PAYING AND THE EASLEY'S TO HOPEFULLY BE ABLE TO IMPROVE THE OTHER TWO CLOSE BY LAKE ACCESS SITES THAT ARE MUCH SAFER AND MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC.

SO, THE TAX DOLLARS WILL BE GOING BACK TO MORE BENEFICIAL PROJECTS, AND THAT WOULD BE KIND OF ALL THE POINTS I HAVE TO MAKE TODAY.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

SO, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THANKS, ELLIE. JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS WE'RE GOING TO DO, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT CLARIFYING.

NO, YOU'RE OKAY.

AND THAT MIGHT GIVE YOU MORE TIME TO PERHAPS HAVE SOME COMMENTS DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

BUT WE DO THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION FIRST AND THEN FOLLOWED BY PUBLIC COMMENTS.

REALLY HELPFUL.

AND OBVIOUSLY WE CAN HEAR THEM REGARDLESS OF THE ORDER THAT THEY COME IN.

BUT I JUST DON'T WANT TO CONFUSE THE AGENDA FOR THE REST OF THE MEETING EITHER, THAT WE USUALLY START WITH THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION AND THEN WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ORDER.

BUT AGAIN, VERY HELPFUL COMMENTS AND APPRECIATE THAT.

YEAH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

SO, IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE, SHE'S THE APPLICANT.

OH, I'M SORRY ELLIE. WELL, NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE MADE A JOINT APPLICATION FOR THE EVICTION.

THESE ARE THE OTHER NEIGHBORS THAT WE KNOW VERY WELL.

OKAY, NOW I'M CRYSTAL CLEAR.

I WASN'T FOLLOWING AT FIRST, BUT THAT'S APPRECIATIVE.

AND IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU, ELLIE.

WE GO BACK TO GRADE SCHOOL TOGETHER, SO IT'S NICE TO SEE YOU ANYHOW.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, THE OTHER HALF OF THE APPLICANT LIKE TO GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION.

MY NAME IS JIMMY. I'M AT 1250 SPRUCE PLACE, AND, YOU KNOW, LIKE, ELLIE PRETTY MUCH COVERED EVERYTHING.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT THIS DRAINAGE DOES IS IT SERVICES THE FULL AREA.

IT GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE WATER THAT THAT HITS THE ROAD AND DRAINS OVER BY THE STOP SIGN ON.

LOMA LINDA ACTUALLY DRAINS ALL THE WAY OVER TO HERE AND EXITS.

YOU CAN ZOOM OUT THAT WHOLE THE ONE, THE PROPERTY TO THE LEFT.

OF ON THE HILL.

ALL OF THAT PROPERTY ALL AROUND THE STREET OF SPRUCE PLACE AND ALL THE WAY TO WHERE IT HITS LOMA LINDA, DRAINS IN BETWEEN OUR HOUSES.

AND ELLIE SAID THAT THAT THE DRAINAGE CAN SOMETIMES BE THREE FEET WIDE.

IT CAN BE 10 TO 15FT WIDE.

I MEAN, THERE'S JUST A TON OF WATER, AND WE EVEN HAVE TRENCHES IN OUR DRIVEWAY AFTER A HEAVY RAIN BECAUSE IT'S WASHED THE GRAVEL AWAY.

SO, IF WE COULD ADDRESS THAT, WE WOULD LOVE TO.

I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO IS AT THIS POINT.

SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THIS WILL MAYBE PROVIDE US SOME CLARITY IN, IN WHAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH AND, AND HOW WE CAN REMEDY THE SITUATION AS GOOD AS POSSIBLE. GREAT.

SO THAT'S ABOUT IT.

WE'D LOVE TO. WE HAVE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS ON OUR GARAGE, AND IT'S DUE TO MATURE TREES IN THE IN THE YARD THAT CREATE THE HIGH POINT.

AND SO, THE GRADE GOES TOWARDS THE GARAGE ON THE NORTH SIDE.

BUT I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REALLY NICE TREES RIGHT IN THE DEAD CENTER OF THE LAKE STREET.

[00:15:12]

YES. THOSE RIGHT THERE AND ALL THE WAY DOWN.

SO, WE WOULD YOU KNOW, THEY'VE DONE A REALLY NICE JOB OF TAKING CARE AND LANDSCAPING IT SO THAT IT WORKS, AND IT KEEPS THE WATER OUT OF THEIR HOUSE.

SO THAT'S ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU. IF YOU BOTH MIGHT BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT BE DURING DELIBERATION AMONG PUBLIC COMMENTS AS WELL AS OUR OWN CONVERSATION, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

SO, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

WE WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.

IF THOSE WHO WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE COMMENTS, PLEASE COME ON UP.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

PLEASE START.

I'M SCOTT YOUNG STRAND, 1250 SPRUCE PLACE.

SO JUST A HOUSE DOWN.

I'M SORRY, 1270.

MY GRANDPARENTS LIVED AT 1250 SPRUCE PLACE, WHICH IS NOW THE EASLEY.

SO, I CAN SPEAK TO THE 40 YEARS FOR SURE THAT BEEN, YOU KNOW, JUST BASIC DRAINAGE DITCH.

WE'RE IN FAVOR OF VACATING THE LAND.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS REALLY CLEAR, AS ELLIE MENTIONED AND AS MELANIE MENTIONED AS WELL, JUST UP AT THE END OF OUR STREET IS A WONDERFUL PUBLIC ACCESS.

SO, IF THE CONCERN IS ACCESS TO THE LAKE FOR THE PUBLIC, IT'S A VERY NICE ENTRANCE.

RIGHT? JUST 3 OR 4 HOUSES UP THE STREET.

SO JUST WANT TO VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR VACATING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I ANOTHER YOUNG STRAND, 1270 SPRUCE PLACE.

THAT'S MY HUSBAND, AND I'VE NEVER BEEN TO ONE OF THESE MEETINGS BEFORE, SO THANKS FOR HAVING US.

I LIVE AT 1270 AND I SUPPORT APPROVE WHATEVER YOU NEED TO MY SUPPORT OF THE VACATING.

AND I DON'T HAVE MUCH HISTORY BECAUSE I GREW UP IN GREEN BAY, WISCONSIN.

BUT I BOUGHT MY HOUSE, THE HOUSE FROM MY MOM AND DAD WHO PASSED AWAY ON 1270.

SO. MY SUPPORT IS FOR VACATING.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE TOPIC? 1318 SPRUCE PLACE.

CURIOUS MELANIE ON THE DNR REASONS FOR REJECTING THE PROPOSED VACATION.

VACATING THE. WHY WOULD THEY? HOW DO I FIND OUT THE REASONS FOR THAT FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES OR THIS IS THE DNR COMMENT LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED. TYPICALLY, THE DNR IS NOT GOING TO SUPPORT A VACATION UNLESS THE VACATION ITSELF SERVES A PUBLIC PURPOSE.

AND WITH LEAVING THE LAND OPEN, IT MAINTAINS A PUBLIC FUNCTION.

SO, THE DNR IS TYPICALLY UNSUPPORTIVE OF VACATION OF LAKE ACCESS POINTS.

FOR WHAT REASONS IF THE VACATION BENEFITS THE PUBLIC.

SO, IF THERE'S AN IDENTIFIED BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC BY VACATING THAT IS WHAT THE DNR IS TYPICALLY SUPPORTIVE OF.

GREAT. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.

YEP. I WOULD RECOMMEND FOR YOU FOLKS TO MAYBE DRIVE BY AND ACTUALLY SEE IT IN PERSON, BECAUSE WE JUST MOVED IN ABOUT SEVEN YEARS AGO, AND WE'RE UP AT THE VERY TOP AT THE DEAD END, THE ROAD DEAD ENDS AT OUR HOUSE.

I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A SO-CALLED FIRE WAY THERE BECAUSE IT'S I MEAN, IT LOOKS LIKE A NORMAL HOUSE TO HOUSE.

IT'S SO CLOSE.

SO, ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE PUT IN THERE WOULD BE A REAL NUISANCE FOR THE HOUSES, FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE, LIVE THERE BECAUSE IT'S SO CLOSE.

THAT'S ALL I WOULD HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS.

THANK YOU. VERY WELL, THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO BE HEARD ON THE TOPIC? HI. GOOD EVENING, I'M JENNIFER LINDER.

I LIVE IN THE HOUSE ON THE FAR RIGHT AT 1240 SPRUCE PLACE, AND I'VE BEEN THERE FOR ALMOST 14 YEARS.

I JUST WANT TO CALL OUT THAT THAT GULLY WOULD NOT SERVE ANY PURPOSE TO THE PUBLIC.

I'VE SEEN I'VE BEEN OUT IN POWER OUTAGE RAINSTORMS WITH THE ANDERSONS AND THE EASLEY'S.

WHEN WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR BASEMENTS DON'T GET ANY WATER IN DURING A POWER OUTAGE, AND THAT GULLY IS COULD BE THE COLORADO RIVER, YOU COULD

[00:20:01]

RAFT DOWN THAT THING. IT'S SO FULL OF WATER.

SO, THERE'S THAT.

THAT'S THERE FOR SAFETY AND FOR THE NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE LAKE.

BUT IT WOULDN'T BE ANY VALUE TO THE PUBLIC IN TERMS OF RECREATION.

SO, I HAVE TO ADD. RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANKS.

ANYONE ELSE.

AND SO, I FIND LESLIE CASEY.

I'M ALSO AT THE END OF SPRUCE PLACE.

OUR BACKYARD IS PART OF THAT WONDERFUL TRAIL SYSTEM THAT CONNECTS TO CHERRY PLACE, AND ALSO IS THE ACCESS TO A VERY NICE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE LAKE, WHICH I AND MY DOG BEAU, ENJOY JUST ABOUT EVERY DAY.

IT IS WONDERFUL TO SEE ON ANY DAY NEIGHBORS COMING FROM ALL AROUND, WALKING ALL THE WAY UP SPRUCE PLACE, TAKING THAT LITTLE HIDDEN TRAIL WAY AND GOING ON TO CHERRY PLACE AND CONTINUING ON FOR A NICE, LONG, WONDERFUL WALKS.

THAT AREA MAKES SO MUCH SENSE AND IT IS SO ENJOYABLE.

IT'S EASY TO GET ON THE LAKE.

WE'VE GOT KAYAKS AND THAT TYPE OF THING, AND IT SERVES ITS PURPOSE.

THAT AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, EVEN ME LIVING ON THE STREET, IT I DON'T I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY MOST PEOPLE THAT DON'T EVEN KNOW IT'S PUBLIC ACCESS. I MEAN, IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE A WAY TO GET TO THE LAKE.

YOU'RE BETWEEN TWO HOUSES AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS IT'S A TRAIL.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

OWN THEIR HOUSE FOR 50 SOME YEARS AND PUT A LOT OF LOVE IN GETTING THAT RIPRAP AND THAT DRAINAGE FIGURED OUT THROUGH, LIKE ELLIE SAID, WATER IN THE BASEMENT.

I WON'T GO INTO THE SEWER PROBLEM.

THAT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ISSUE.

AND I WAS HERE FOR THAT SEVERAL TIMES IN PAST YEARS.

BUT WE DID GET THAT FIGURED OUT.

BUT I AM AN ENVIRONMENTALIST AT HEART, AND I HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY, AS THE EASLEY'S HAVE, IN PUTTING THE RIPRAP IN ON THE WATERSHED AND THE RIPRAP IN WHERE THE WATER COMES OUT OF THE CULVERT.

THAT WAS ONE BIG MUDDY MESS WHEN WE BOUGHT IT.

AND MY EXPERIENCE IS WITH PEOPLE.

IT WAS BACK THEN. ANYWAY, WHEN PEOPLE GET SOMETHING FOR NOTHING, THEY ABUSE IT.

AND THAT'S HOW THAT THAT AREA WAS WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE.

EVERYBODY COULD PUT THEIR OLD DOCK IN THERE.

THEY COULD DRIVE THEIR BOAT UP IN THERE.

THERE WERE BEER CANS.

I CAN SHOW YOU THE SCARS ON MY SON'S KNEE, WHERE HE CAME DOWN ON WATER BOTTLES THAT HAD BEEN BROKEN DOWN IN THAT AREA.

NOW, OF COURSE, THE LAKE PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT ON THE LAKE NOW.

THEY DON'T ABUSE IT LIKE THEY DID, BUT I THINK WE'VE DONE A WONDERFUL JOB OF MY DAUGHTER WILL CONTINUE IT FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS, MAKING SURE THAT THAT WATERSHED WORKED LIKE IT SHOULD ENVIRONMENTALLY.

AND THERE'S NO REASON NOT TO LET THESE PEOPLE KEEP TAKING CARE OF IT.

MY OPINION. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE THE BEST MEAT IN THE WHOLE WORLD.

ALL RIGHT, WELL, IF THERE ARE NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS, I'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN IT UP HERE FOR DISCUSSION.

THANKS, EVERYONE, FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS.

UM, I'LL START WITH APOLOGIZING FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO VISIT THE SITE BUT TRAVELING A LOT AND WORK SCHEDULE.

SO, THIS HAS BEEN A HARDER ONE FOR ME.

AND I'M NOT. I WAS NOT THE PLANNED CHAIR FOR TONIGHT, SO.

BUT AFTER MEMORIALIZING THE APPLICANTS, I DO KNOW THAT PROPERTY AND I AM FAMILIAR WITH THAT AREA, SO I APPRECIATE BEING GIVEN A MOMENT TO CATCH UP.

SO THIS TOPIC OF VACATION IS A LITTLE BIT POLARIZING IN THE CITY.

I THINK FUNDAMENTALLY JUST GOING BACK AND PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS, THERE'S BEEN SOME THAT HAVE BEEN BEFORE AND SOME THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FOR.

AND I GUESS I'LL SPEAK AS A SUMMARY AND THEN I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR EVERYONE TO PROVIDE THEIR FEEDBACK AS WELL.

I HAVE PERSONALLY GENERALLY BEEN SUPPORTIVE OVER A VACATION IF THE USE IS NOT EVER GOING TO BE GOING TO BE FOR PUBLIC USE, AND IT'S NOT DESIGNED OR SET UP TO DO SO.

I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS BY THE APPLICANT NOTATING THAT AND NOTATING THE ALTERNATIVES TO PUBLIC USE.

I THINK THAT'S VERY HELPFUL FOR US AS A PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE STILL IS PUBLIC ACCESS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PERHAPS MORE FEASIBLE PUBLIC ACCESS VERY CLOSE BY. SO, I APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS.

MAYBE PAUSE FOR NOW, DIGRESS, AND ALLOW COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL OR THE COMMISSION IF THEY HAVE ANY.

COUPLE QUESTIONS I HAVE.

I'M SORRY, A QUESTION I HAVE IS WHAT WOULD THEY EXPECT TO HAVE CHANGED IN THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY IF THE VACATION GOES THROUGH?

[00:25:05]

I MEAN, IT'S. YES, ONE WAS THE EASLEY'S DRIVEWAY.

MS. ANDERSON, IF YOU DON'T MIND COMING UP JUST BECAUSE IT'S AN ONLINE BROADCAST.

SO AGAIN, ONE WOULD BE THE BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE ABLE TO HAVE EASILY BE ABLE TO PAVE THEIR DRIVEWAY OR CEMENT THEIR DRIVEWAY.

LIKE I SAID, CURRENTLY IT IS GRAVEL, AND THE GRAVEL IS ONLY I MEAN, THE APRON OF THEIR DRIVEWAY COMES OUT IN THAT PROPERTY.

YOU CAN SEE THEIR ENDS PRETTY QUICKLY.

SO, TO HAVE A SAFE ACCESS INTO THEIR DRIVEWAY RIGHT NOW, THERE'S A CITY PHONE POLE THAT KIND OF BLOCKS WHERE THEY WOULD BE TURNING IN.

SO, THEY HAVE TO COME IN ON THE CITY PROPERTY.

WE'D BE HAPPY FOR YOU TO BURY THOSE PHONE POLES, WHICH WOULD ALSO BE LOVELY, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, THEY HAVE TO ACCESS IT THROUGH THE OTHER SIDE, WHICH IS, I WAS OUT THERE TODAY. YOU WERE OKAY.

OKAY. SO, IF YOU SAW A WHITE VAN LOOKING STRANGE, THAT WAS ME.

SAW THAT I WAS OKAY.

OKAY, SO THERE'S MY QUESTION, THOUGH.

IT SOUNDS TO ME AS THOUGH YOU FOLKS HAVE LITERALLY TAKEN OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROPERTY AND PUT A LOT OF TIME, EFFORT AND MONEY INTO IT.

YEAH, WE HAVE MOSTLY, AGAIN, TO HELP WITH THE WATER FLOW ISSUES THAT I THINK BENEFIT THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, BEING ABLE TO CLEANLY GET THAT WATER FROM, AS MY MOM MENTIONED, SHE'S QUITE THE ENVIRONMENTALIST TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF CLEANLY GET THAT SALTY, DIRTY, MUDDY EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S COMING OFF A PUBLIC STREET CLEAN AND KEEP IT FROM GETTING INTO LAKE MINNETONKA.

SO, WE HAVE BEEN YES, WE HAVE BEEN IMPROVING THAT PROPERTY FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS.

BUT WHAT WOULD YOU EXPECT TO CHANGE IF THE VACATION GOES THROUGH? OH, NOTHING. I DON'T HAVE ANY NEFARIOUS PLANS FOR IT.

I DON'T PLAN ON BUILDING ANYTHING THERE.

I'M NOT. WE JUST, WE SPEND SO MUCH MONEY TAKING CARE OF IT AS IT IS.

AGAIN, WITH THE MOWING AND THE RIPRAP AND THE AND JUST EVERYTHING THAT WE DO TO THAT PROPERTY, THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO INCORPORATE IT INTO OUR PROPERTY BECAUSE IT IS NEVER USED BY THE PUBLIC. THERE'S NOT ONE PERSON IN THE LAST 40 YEARS THAT HAS USED THAT AS A PUBLIC ACCESS, NOT TO WALK DOWN TO THE LAKE, NOT TO PUT A KAYAK IN AGAIN, BECAUSE THERE ARE TWO GREAT LAKES VERY CLOSE.

SO, WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE IT.

WE JUST WANT TO AGAIN, BE ABLE TO USE THE DRIVEWAY SAFELY FOR THE NEIGHBORS AND JUST KEEP TAKING CARE OF IT AS WE ARE NOW.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

ANY COMMENTS BASED ON THAT AT ALL? BASED ON YOUR QUESTIONS, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS AT ALL? NO. NO COMMENTS TO ADD.

OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS TO ALSO CONTROL THE DRAINAGE, BECAUSE CURRENTLY THERE IS NO RETAINING WALL THAT PROVIDES HEIGHT.

SO THAT COMING IN OFF THE STREET, YOU DON'T GO INTO A DIP, WHICH WE DO, AND THEN WE HAVE TO COME BACK OUT OF THAT TO GET INTO OUR GARAGE.

SO, THE GARAGE AND THE STREET ARE ABOUT THE SAME LEVEL.

AND THE GRAVEL COMES DOWN ABOUT 3 TO 4FT.

WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT IN A RETAINING WALL THAT CONTROLS THE DRAINAGE AND KEEPS IT SO THAT IT CAN POOL AND NOT BECOME A GIANT RIVER AND WASH.

SO, I THINK THE ROCK SPILLWAY THAT YOU SEE THERE, WE WOULD HAVE A RETAINING WALL THAT GOES ALONGSIDE THAT, AND IT MATCHES WHAT THE ANDERSONS HAVE ON THEIR SITE AS WELL.

SO, I THINK THAT WOULD LOOK PRETTY GOOD HAVING TWO RETAINING WALLS PROBABLY 15FT APART.

AND THEN THE ROCK SPILLWAY IN BETWEEN THE WALLS.

AND THAT'S KIND OF OUR PLAN.

SO, THAT THE CEMENT OR DRIVEWAY WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THE DIRT.

THE PLAN VIEW OF THE DIRT, SO THE RETAINING WALL WOULD CURVE AROUND TO THAT ANGLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CAR.

THERE? YES.

AND ALL THE WAY TO THERE.

AND I THINK THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH ROOM TO BE ABLE TO STILL GET A CAR DOWN, BECAUSE SOMETIMES IN BETWEEN THE RETAINING WALL AND THE SPILLWAY, BECAUSE THERE OFTEN LAKESHORE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE MOVED OUT BY CAR.

SO, WE'D LIKE TO RETAIN THAT.

SO, THAT'S OUR PLANS ARE TO JUST CLEAN IT UP, MAKE IT SO THAT IT'S MUCH MORE LEVEL FROM THE STREET TO OUR GARAGE, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WATER CAN POOL AND, AND SOAK IN AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, AND THEN TO ALSO CATCH THE DRAINAGE AND MOVE IT ALONG THERE.

AND THOSE ARE THE TREES THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT BEFORE.

THEY'RE SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF THE.

THE STREET. SO, I'M GOING TO ATTEMPT MY SENSE OF HUMOR HERE.

AND BY THE WAY, BEAR WITH ME.

[00:30:01]

IT SOUNDS TO ME AS THOUGH YOU'RE OBJECTING TO THE FACT THAT YOU WOULD PUT SOME CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S OWNED BY THE CITY.

WELL, I DON'T I JUST DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD GET APPROVED.

I MEAN, I'D HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU AND ASK FOR PERMISSION.

CORRECT. WE'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT RETAINING WALLS RECENTLY, BY THE WAY.

SO, YOU KNOW THAT I VISITED THE SITE TODAY.

I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE OUT THERE.

I MEAN, IT'S QUITE OBVIOUS THAT YOU'VE GOT THAT WATER COMING UNDERNEATH THE ROAD THERE, AND WHEN IT RAINS HEAVILY, IT'S GOING TO GO DOWN THAT AREA THERE.

I NOTICED THE HOUSE. I THINK IT'S 1260 IS IT NOT YOUR HOUSE BUT THE.

YEAH. 1260 YEAH.

IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE EDGE OF THAT HOUSE IS RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE THERE.

IS THAT VERY CLOSE? YEAH.

OKAY. I THINK THEIR RETAINING WALL IS INTO THE FIRE ROAD.

I'M SORRY. SAY AGAIN PLEASE.

THEIR RETAINING WALL.

ACTUALLY, SITS IN THE LAKE STREET.

IT'S SHOWN HERE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

DID YOU HAVE COMMENTS FEEDBACK BASED ON THE QUESTION? NO, NO, I JUST WANTED TO GET A FEELING FOR WHAT'S TRYING TO GO ON HERE AND UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST.

MAKE SOME COMMENTS. SURE.

YEAH. MR. ERICKSON, PLEASE.

OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE APPLICANTS FOR MAKING THIS APPLICATION BASED ON THE VIEW THAT.

THIS. THIS SITUATION PROVIDES US WITH A THIS IS LIKE A MODEL CASE FOR US AS TO WHY THE LAKE ACCESS SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ORONO WAS REVISED SIGNIFICANTLY, ESPECIALLY AS IT APPLIES TO LAKE ACCESSES.

AND PART OF THAT CASE, YOU'VE ALSO HELPED US TREMENDOUSLY BY INCLUDING YOUR LETTER FROM 1979, WHICH I GIVE YOU LOTS OF CREDIT FOR MAKING THAT AVAILABLE TO US.

AND ALTHOUGH I'M PRETTY MUCH OF AN OLD TIMER, I MET STARTED MEETING MAYORS OF ORONO IN THE 70S. I THINK LOUIS OVERHAUSER MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE MAYOR AT THAT TIME, BUT I'M NOT.

MY MEMORY MIGHT BE A LITTLE OFF ON THAT, BUT THE LETTER ALSO DOES A GOOD JOB OF DESCRIBING THE FEATURES OF THAT PARTICULAR RIGHT OF WAY.

AND. AND ALSO GIVES THE OPINION OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR AT THAT TIME.

HE SAYS SINCE.

SINCE THIS.

IT WAS REGARDING A REQUEST FOR A DOCK AND THE CITY'S OPINION WAS THAT THE AREA IS NOT PREPARED FOR ANY OTHER USE EXCEPT TO ALLOW FOR FOOT TRAFFIC TO THE LAKE.

BUT AS YOU'VE NOTICED IN THE LAST 40 YEARS OR SO, THERE HASN'T REALLY BEEN ANY FOOT TRAFFIC TO THE LAKE IN THAT PARTICULAR SPOT.

SO, IT REALLY INDICATES THAT.

THERE IS NO PUBLIC USE FOR THIS STRIP OF LAND.

AND SO, HE THEN FURTHER IN THE LETTER, HE.

CONCLUDES THAT.

IT SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A PUBLIC LAUNCHING SITE FOR BOATS OR OTHER RECREATIONAL PURPOSES BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF THE CITY TO MAINTAIN REGULATOR, PROVIDE ADEQUATE PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES, AND SO ON.

AND HE ALSO MENTIONS THE GRADE TWO GOING DOWN TO THE LAKE.

AND SO, IT WOULD MAKE IT EVEN IF YOU TRIED TO BUILD A PARKING LOT, IT REALLY WOULDN'T BE SUITABLE FOR IT.

SO, BUT THIS TYPE OF CITY'S POLICY BACK IN THOSE DAYS THEN.

FORCED IT INTO A SITUATION WHERE IT JUST SITS THERE IN LIMBO.

IT'S NOT BEING USED PUBLICLY, BUT IT'S OWNED BY THE PUBLIC.

AND SO, WHAT CAN YOU DO? AND YOU'VE BEEN VERY LIMITED ALL THIS TIME.

[00:35:02]

YOU DON'T WANT TO PAVE YOUR DRIVEWAY BECAUSE YOU DON'T OWN THE LAND, RIGHT? SO THAT'S OR ANY OTHER IMPROVEMENTS YOU MIGHT THINK ABOUT DOING, BUT YOU DON'T OWN IT.

SO, THAT'S A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

SO, BECAUSE OF THAT THE LAST TIME THE CITY REVIEWED ITS GUIDE PLAN.

AND I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION ESPECIALLY TO SECTION FOUR E, WHICH INDICATES THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE.

WELL, IT'S THE DUTY OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO SELECT VERY CAREFULLY AMONG THE VARIOUS, QUOTE, LAKE ACCESSES WHICH THEY CALL THEM, THAT EVEN THOUGH THEY REALLY JUST ARE OLD FIRE LANES THAT AREN'T USED, BUT OVER HALF OF THEM ARE NOT USED.

AND SO FROM ALL THESE ONES THAT ARE NOT USED, IT'S UP TO THE CITY TO GO ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS AND SELECT OKAY, WHICH ONES MIGHT HAVE A GOOD PUBLIC USE.

POSSIBLY THERE MIGHT BE SOME OR WHICH ARE NOT USED BY THE PUBLIC.

AND WHEN THEY'RE NOT USED, THERE'S USUALLY A GOOD REASON FOR IT.

LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE TERRAIN IS NOT USABLE OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOT A MUCKY BOTTOM OR A BUNCH OF SEAWEED OR, YOU KNOW, THERE'S ANY NUMBER OF THINGS WHY IT WOULDN'T BE USED.

AND THAT'S, THERE'S USUALLY MORE THAN ONE.

BUT. AND IN PART OF THAT FOR LANGUAGE IT SAYS THE CITY WILL SELECT CAREFULLY BUT THEY WILL.

BUT IN PARTICULAR IN THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THERE IS NOT ANOTHER LAKE ACCESS THAT'S BETTER NEARBY.

RIGHT. WELL, THAT CERTAINLY DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS CASE BECAUSE WE YOU'VE GOT A WEALTH OF YOU'VE GOT IT'S EXTREMELY RARE THAT YOU GET A FISHING DOCK WITHIN 500FT, WHICH THAT FISHING DOCK CAN ALSO BE USED FOR SNOWMOBILE ACCESS DURING THE WINTER AND THEN ALSO WITHIN 500FT.

AND THIS IS LIKE A RARE GEM ON LAKE MINNETONKA.

THERE'S ALMOST NO SUCH THING AS A SANDY BEACH IN LAKE MINNETONKA, OKAY, UNLESS YOU GO TO BIG ISLAND OR SOMEPLACE.

BUT YOU HAVE ONE AND THAT'S ALSO WITHIN 500FT.

AND THEN THERE ARE OTHER ONES THAT I THINK IN OUR STAFF REPORT WE HAD THEY SHOWED A MAP OF ALL THE MANY LAKE ACCESSES RIGHT AROUND NORTH ARM.

AND THEN ALSO AT THE SAME TIME AS THEY WERE, THE CITY WAS REDOING THE LANGUAGE ON 4.E.

THEY ALSO REDID THE LANGUAGE ON FOUR A OKAY, WHICH UNFORTUNATELY MY OPINION THE BEST PART OF FOUR WAS LEFT OUT OF THE STAFF REPORT.

BUT. THEY DID MENTION THAT THE HALF OF THOSE OUTSIDE OF BIG ISLAND ARE EITHER UNDEVELOPED OR CLOSED TO PUBLIC USE, BUT THEN AFTER THAT, THE NEXT PARAGRAPH INDICATES, IN ADDITION TO ORONO RELATIVELY SMALL PUBLIC LAKE ACCESSES, OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND OPERATE, OWN AND OPERATE SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER LAKE ACCESSES. THESE INCLUDE THE DNR MAXWELL BAY ACCESS, WHICH HAS BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE TO LAUNCH THEIR FISHING BOATS AND PARK THEIR TRAILERS AND ALL THAT SORT OF THING, AND ALSO HENNEPIN COUNTY'S NORTH ARM ACCESS, AND ALSO HENNEPIN COUNTY'S NUREMBERG ACCESS, ALTHOUGH THERE'S NO DOCK THERE.

BUT THEY ALL ARE SERVED BY METRO TRANSIT FOR THE BUS LINE AND EVERYTHING.

SO THOSE ARE ACCESSES THAT GO WAY BEYOND ANYTHING THAT THE CITY HAS, AND THEY ARE ALL CLOSE TO YOUR LOCATION.

[00:40:02]

OKAY. SO, ALL OF THAT TOGETHER MEANS THAT ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS IN 4.E.

THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PARTICULAR OR PARTICULARLY CAREFUL IN ITS IN ITS DECISION IF, AS THEY LOOK AT YOUR APPLICATION TO VACATE.

I THINK THIS IS A REAL MODEL OF ONE THAT SHOULD BE APPROVED.

AND ANOTHER ASPECT SPEAKS IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL IS THAT, AND AS YOU HAVE MENTIONED, YOU HAVE PLANS TO IMPROVE THE PROPERTY ONCE IT'S VACATED.

AND AS YOU IMPROVE YOUR PROPERTY AND IMPROVES YOUR PROPERTY VALUE, AND YOUR NEIGHBORS, TOO, WILL NOTICE THE DIFFERENCE OF.

THE PROPERTY BEING IMPROVED.

AND SOMEDAY IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO SELL OR SOMETHING.

THAT NEIGHBORHOOD VALUE WILL BE JUST THAT MUCH IMPROVED AS WELL.

SO, AND THE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS THAT.

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE ENTIRE I THINK THE ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN IS I THINK IT'S OVER 350 PAGES. I DON'T KNOW, IT'S HUGE.

BUT ALL THROUGH THAT, THERE IS CONSISTENT REFERENCE TO ONE OF ORONO BASIC FOUNDATIONAL VALUES IS THE PROTECTION OF PROPERTY VALUE.

AND WHAT BETTER WAY TO PROTECT PROPERTY VALUE THAN TO IMPROVE IT? SO. THOSE ARE A FEW OF THE REASONS WHY I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS APPLICATION.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. ERICKSON.

MR. LIBBY, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? I DO. AND I'M SORRY TO STATE THE OBVIOUS, BUT THIS REALLY ISN'T A PUBLIC ACCESS IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.

THIS IS A FIRE LANE WHICH.

IN MY AMATEUR HISTORIAN'S MINDSET.

RECALLS WHY THESE WERE CREATED IN THE FIRST PLACE.

THERE WAS ACTUALLY A MEANING TO THE MADNESS BECAUSE IT WAS A SAFETY ASPECT.

IT GAVE ACCESS TO FIRE RIGS TO ATTEND FIRES THAT WERE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMERCIAL.

THERE'S NOT MUCH COMMERCIAL PROPERTY HERE, BUT IF THERE WAS A FIRE AT A HOUSE BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE PUBLIC ACCESS TO WATER, SO NO FIRE HYDRANTS FOR A TRUCK TO HOOK UP TO.

THIS WAS A PRACTICAL CREATION BY THE MUNICIPALITIES THROUGHOUT OUR 16 COUNTY METRO AREA, SO IT MADE SENSE TO HAVE IT, TO RETAIN IT AND TO KEEP IT FOR THAT PURPOSE.

IT REALLY HAS NEVER BEEN DESIGNATED AS A PUBLIC ACCESS.

AND MR. ERICKSON AND I BOTH WORKED VOLUNTARILY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR 2040, AND THE PLANNERS AT THE TIME DEEMED IT NECESSARY. AND WE SUGGESTED ALSO THAT WE AT LEAST RETAIN THE ACCURACY AND THE EMPIRICAL LOCATIONS OF ALL THESE, BECAUSE, AS MR. ERICKSON MENTIONED, IF WE LOOK AT THE STATUTE AND LOOK AT THE REVISED STATUTE, IT DOES STIPULATE THAT THESE HAVE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES.

SO, THIS CLEARLY IS NOT A PUBLIC ACCESS.

IT'S A FIRE LANE.

LOOKING AT THE AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE STAFF, BUT IF I'M LOOKING AT THE REVISER'S NOTES ON THIS AND AGAIN, I THINK THE STICKING POINT HERE IS THAT EVEN THOUGH THE ANDERSONS AND THE EASLEY'S CERTAINLY ARE OUR CITIZENS, AND THEY ARE THE BODY OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF ORONO, THE GUIDING LIGHT, THE GUIDANCE THAT WE HAVE AS PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, AS THE STAFF HAS.

AND WE'RE REALLY JUST AN ADVISORY BODY.

WE ADVISE THE CITY COUNCIL ON MATTERS LIKE THIS, AND OF COURSE, MANY OTHER TYPES OF MATTERS AND THE SPIRIT OF THE IDEA OF THE VACATION.

IS REALLY THE CORE VALUE IS THAT IF THERE IS A VACATION, THAT IT WOULD SERVE THE LARGER PUBLIC GOOD, NOT NECESSARILY TO ADJOINING OR ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND AGAIN, I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR THE STAFF, BUT I STILL READ THAT IN THE OFFICE OF THE REVISOR STATUTES.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO TO GAUGE OUR DECISIONS AND OUR ADVISEMENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON WHAT IT SAYS, VERSE IN CHAPTER AND HOW WE'RE GUIDED TO ADVISE THE CITY

[00:45:05]

COUNCIL. I, I THINK FOR PUBLIC GOOD, I THINK IT DOES SERVE THE GOOD OF THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS.

I FAIL TO SEE PERHAPS THE WAY THE STAFF SEES IT, THAT IT REALLY SATISFIES THE STATUTE, AND IT DOESN'T REALLY SERVE THE LARGER GENERAL PUBLIC GOOD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE CITY OF.

SO, I SHOULDN'T SAY I'M AMBIVALENT, BUT I'M NOT PERSUADED YET THAT IT'S THE RIGHT DECISION TO DO THIS VACATION.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU BOTH.

MR. KRAMER, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD AS WELL? NO. I THINK IT'S ALL PRETTY WELL BEEN SAID.

I, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF SEE BOTH SIDES OF THIS.

I DON'T SEE ANY PUBLIC BENEFIT TO KEEPING IT.

AND I GUESS THERE IS NO PUBLIC BENEFIT TO VACATING IT, BUT.

YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE TAKEN CARE OF THIS PROPERTY FOR 40 YEARS, AND I WISH THERE WAS SOME WAY HERE TO FIGURE THIS OUT, WHETHER THAT'S WITH CITY STAFF OR THE CITY COUNCIL.

AS YOU MENTIONED, WE'RE AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE HERE, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CITY COUNCIL COMMENT ON THIS, WHICH I KNOW.

WHETHER WE TURN IT DOWN OR VOTE IT FORWARD, THEY STILL CAN BRING IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

WELL, LET ME SEE IF I CAN MAKE AN ATTEMPT AT CLEANING THIS UP A LITTLE BIT.

SO, I DO HAVE ONE BRIEF INTERJECTION, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

SURE. MR. CHAIR.

YEP. THERE IS POSSIBLY A SOLUTION THAT WE SEE IN OTHER PRECEDENT AND OTHER OF THESE THAT WE'VE HAD TO MAKE SOME JUDGMENT AND GIVE ADVISEMENT TO THE COUNCIL ON.

THERE'S DEFINITELY A NET BENEFIT FOR THE ATTENTION AND THE MAINTENANCE THAT THE HOMEOWNER IS.

THE ADJOINING HOMEOWNERS HAVE GIVEN TO IT.

IT TAKES SOME OF THAT BURDEN OFF THE MUNICIPALITY AND THE CITY FOR DOING THAT.

BUT YET I STILL THINK, IN THE INFINITE WISDOM OF THE ORIGINATORS OF THE NEED TO HAVE THESE FIRE LANES, EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T USE PUMPER TRUCKS TO PULL WATER OUT OF THE LAKE ANYMORE, WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO BECAUSE OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND THE TRUCKS.

I THINK THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, AND I WOULD CERTAINLY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH AN APPROVAL ON THIS.

IF THERE COULD BE AN EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE, FOR INSTANCE, IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN APPROVAL OF A VACATION.

THAT'S MY $0.02 WORTH.

ALL RIGHT. SO, BACK TO IT.

I THINK THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE ARE IDENTIFYING THREE THINGS.

THE PROPOSED VACATION, EVALUATING WHETHER IT AND THE PUBLIC BENEFITS TO DO SO IS THE FIRST ONE.

SO, WE MUST EVALUATE THE PROPOSED VACATION AND THE PUBLIC BENEFITS TO DO SO.

I THINK COMMISSIONER KRAMER MAKES A VERY VALID POINT OF SAYING, I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY WAS PLATTED FOR USE APPLICABLE TO TODAY.

THEREFORE, IF THERE WAS GOING TO BE A PUBLIC USE, THERE WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY NEED TO BE.

ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUIRED TO MAKE IT USABLE FOR PUBLIC USE.

SO, YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN AND YOU CAN SAY, IS THE PUBLIC BENEFITING FROM A PROPERTY THAT CANNOT BE USED, OR CAN THE PUBLIC BE BENEFITED FROM THIS VACATION TO ALLOW TAXATION, MAINTENANCE AND UPKEEP THAT HAS ALREADY UNDOUBTEDLY BEEN DONE BY THE HOMEOWNERS FOR THE PAST SEVERAL DECADES? ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS A POTENTIAL FOR EXPENSE FOR THE CITY TO MAINTAIN IT BECAUSE IT IS NOT OWNED BY THE NEIGHBORS AS SUCH, SO THERE COULD BE LIABILITY FOR FUTURE COSTS FOR THE CITY TO MAINTAIN IT IF IT'S NOT MAINTAINED BY THE BY THE HOMEOWNERS.

SO THAT'S ANOTHER IS ANOTHER ITEM TO GO BACK TO FOR PUBLIC BENEFIT AGAIN IF IT'S NOT DESIGNED TO BE CONDUCIVE FOR USE.

I'VE SEEN THESE VACATIONS GOING FORWARD IS APPROVED FOR THOSE REASONS.

AND AGAIN, NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO, I DO APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS BY MY CONSTITUENTS AND CALLING OUT THOSE FACTS.

WE DO HAVE ONE HANGING PROBLEM, AND THAT IS THAT WE NEED TO ALLOW FOR DRAINAGE FOR PUBLIC USE.

[00:50:04]

AND SO, IN ORDER TO GET OVER THIS HURDLE, THERE WOULD ALMOST UNDOUBTEDLY NEED TO BE SOME SORT OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT PUT IN PLACE.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD HAVE AS A CONDITION OF SUPPORTING THE VACATION, THAT THERE WOULD BE A DRAINAGE PLAN PUT IN PLACE AND MAINTAINED AND INSTALLED BY THE HOMEOWNERS, OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

I'LL MAYBE LOOK FOR STAFF TO GIVE ME SOME FEEDBACK, BECAUSE I'M KIND OF GOING OFF ROAD HERE.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PUT IN AS YOU CAN RECOMMEND THAT WE MAINTAIN OUR CURRENT DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITH A VACATION, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

CORRECT. WELL, SO I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT AS PART OF THIS VACATION.

BUT ONE OF THE POINTS BEING CALLED OUT BY THIS APPLICATION, BESIDES THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT CURRENTLY BEING USED AS A PUBLIC ACCESS, IS BEING ABLE TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE.

SO, WHETHER THE STAFF FINDS THAT TO BE THE CASE OR NOT, I GUESS WOULD BE WHO IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE.

WHAT ARE YOU ASKING FOR THE APPLICANTS TO IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE OR THE CITY? WELL, WHAT I WAS PROPOSING, WE WERE WE HEARD COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT TALKING ABOUT IMPROVEMENTS TO DRAINAGE.

SO, I'M TRYING TO JUST FIND A WAY TO GET COMFORTABLE WITH THE DRAINAGE PART BEING ADDED AS AN EASEMENT.

THAT WOULD BE MAYBE A MITIGANT FOR THE VACATION.

I DO BELIEVE THAT IF THIS AREA IS TO BE VACATED, IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE MAINTAIN A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

SO, WHETHER OR NOT ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS ARE REQUIRED IN THAT AREA, I DON'T THINK THAT'S BEEN STUDIED.

I DO THINK THE ADJACENT OWNERS HAVE BEEN MAINTAINING THAT VERY WELL.

BUT I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, SO.

OKAY. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YEP. JUST FOR CLARITY, YES, WE ALREADY HAVE A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

YES. BUT IF WE VACATE IT, WE NEED TO BE SPECIFIC ABOUT MAINTAINING AN EXISTING EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE.

I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DO THAT.

YES, WE CAN, YES, YES, WE CAN.

SO, WE REALLY CAN DO THAT.

WE CAN CLARIFY WITH WHATEVER DECISION WE COLLECTIVELY DECIDE TO VOTE ON.

WE CAN CLARIFY THAT THE CITY WILL MAINTAIN THE EXISTING DRAINAGE EASEMENT BECAUSE IT ALREADY HAS IT.

IT IS TAKING ALL THAT WATER FROM THE STREET AND PUBLIC WATER, SO IT SHOULD BE MAINTAINED.

NEEDS TO BE THERE, RIGHT? YES.

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S QUESTIONING THAT.

I THINK MAYBE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION THEN.

OKAY. SO, IF IT APPEARS BASED ON FEEDBACK, BECAUSE I DON'T LIVE ON THAT STREET, SO I CANNOT MEMORIALIZE WHAT HAPPENS TO THE WATER WHEN IT RAINS THERE.

BUT I CAN EMPATHIZE WITH THE HOMEOWNERS IN WHAT THEY HAVE RECALLED IT TO BE OVER THE LAST 40 YEARS WHEN THERE IS A RAIN WHERE THAT WATER GOES, AND IF WE CAN IMPROVE THAT POSITION AS A MITIGANT FOR THE SITUATION, NOT ONLY ALLOWING THEM TO MAKE THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'D LIKE TO THEIR HOME AND MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT THEIR PROPERTY, WE COULD MAYBE SEE IF WE COULD HAVE THIS BE SUBJECT TO AN EVALUATION BY A CITY ENGINEER TO SEE IF THERE IS AN IMPROVEMENT THAT WE CAN MAKE TO THAT DRAINAGE.

YES, YOU CAN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS.

IS THAT THAT THAT HAS LEGS TO ME TO SEE IF WE COULD HAVE, WE COULD HAVE CERTAINLY HAD A PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT OR BENEFIT FROM THIS VACATION IF WE HAD A CITY ENGINEER EVALUATE IF THERE'S AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S ONE THING WE'VE, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MELANIE, PLEASE.

YES. HOW DOES THE DNR FALL INTO THIS APPROVAL PROCESS.

THEY'VE ALREADY SAID THEY'RE AGAINST IT.

IF WE SAY YES, WE'LL VACATE IT.

THE CITY COUNCIL SAYS YES, WE'LL VACATE IT.

DOES THE DNR TRUMP US AND SAY NO? WE ALREADY SAID.

OR ARE THEY JUST ADVISING US? THEY'RE ADVISING US.

OKAY. SO, THEY'RE NOT THE DECISION MAKER.

NO, THEY'RE NOT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE DNR HAS THE RIGHT TO COMMENT, WHICH THEY HAVE COMMENTED.

AND THE CITY IS OBLIGATED TO RECEIVE THEIR COMMENT.

SURE. I'M JUST, I'M THE NEW GUY, SO I DON'T KNOW ALL THE STUFF.

AND WHEN THEY COMMENT ON LAKE ACCESS, THEY DO SO WITH THE VIEWPOINT OF MAXIMIZING LAKE ACCESSES ALL OVER THE STATE EVERYWHERE.

AND THEY ALWAYS DO.

AND THAT'S THEIR COMMENT.

OKAY. AND I GET IT.

MANY YEARS AGO, JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE HISTORY, MANY YEARS AGO, THEY USED TO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE THEIR VIEW.

AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS THEY KEPT GETTING TAKEN TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT AND GETTING OVERRULED BECAUSE THEY WERE BEING OVERLY

[00:55:06]

HEAVY HANDED IN THEIR OPINIONS.

AND SO, THEY ASKED THE LEGISLATURE TO TAKE THAT AUTHORITY AWAY, WHICH THEY DID.

AND SO, BUT THEY WERE LEFT WITH THE AUTHORITY TO HAVE A COMMENT.

OKAY. AND THEY'RE ALWAYS THE SAME.

AND, YOU KNOW, BUT THE CITY HAS THE RIGHT TO LOOK AT EACH CASE-BY-CASE SITUATION. AND.

OKAY. THANKS FOR CLARIFYING.

YEAH, I HAVE ZERO INTEREST IN HAVING THIS GO TO THE SUPREME COURT.

BUT THE THAT'S A GOOD SEGUE INTO NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS THE PRESENT AND POTENTIAL USE OF THE LAND FOR ACCESS TO PUBLIC WATERS.

SO AGAIN, THAT'S A TALKING POINT THAT I THINK WE'VE UNROLLED HERE.

YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE SHAPE OF THE LOT, KNOWING HOW ONCE WE GET TO RIPRAP OUT TO WATER, THAT IS NO LONGER OUR GOVERNING AUTHORITY.

RIGHT. BUT WE DO KNOW HOW IT WORKS.

THAT IS REGULATED BY.

THE MWCD.

AND THEREFORE, THAT BECOMES A DIFFERENT PROBLEM FOR USE.

SO, A DOCK WOULDN'T REALLY WORK THERE BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE SHORELINE IS ANGLED.

SO, IT REALLY DOESN'T ALLOW IT TO HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF SUITABLE USE.

SO, THE PRESENT AND POTENTIAL USE, GOING BACK TO JUST THE FUNDAMENTALS OF WHAT WE ARE DEALING WITH TODAY, THE PRESENT USE IS CLEARLY NOT BEING USED FOR PUBLIC ACCESS, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE HARD PRESSED FOR EVEN A NEIGHBOR IN THE COMMUNITY TO FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE RIGHT TO TRAVERSE THAT AREA TO ACCESS THE LAKE AGAIN.

ALSO, JUST SIMPLE COMMON SENSE, NOTABLY THAT THERE ARE MORE REASONABLE ACCESSES IN THE AREA.

SO JUST CALLING OUT OUR POINTS HERE.

SO THAT'S NUMBER TWO.

NUMBER THREE HOW THE VACATION WOULD IMPACT CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

SO AGAIN, IT'S BEEN IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED HOW THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN MAINTAINED THE LAST SEVERAL DECADES.

I THINK THAT IS RELEVANT HERE.

WHETHER IT WAS AN APPLICATION I BELIEVE I'M MEMORIALIZING AN APPLICATION ON FOREST LAKE BAY THAT WAS A TREACHEROUS DESCENT DOWN TO THE WATER AND LOTS AND LOTS OF BRUSH THAT WOULD BASICALLY BE VERY COSTLY TO IMPROVE AND UNNECESSARY ACCESS.

I FIND THAT TO BE KIND OF SIMILAR TO THIS, BECAUSE AGAIN, IF YOU THINK ABOUT HOW THIS WAS PLATTED, AGAIN, I THINK IT'S BEEN CALLED OUT THAT IT WAS MAYBE FOR FIRE USE, AND THAT'S CLEARLY NOT THE CASE ANYMORE.

AND THERE WOULD BE MUCH MORE FEASIBLE ACCESSES FOR THAT KIND OF WATER THAN THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

SO TRYING TO CLEAN THIS UP A LITTLE BIT, I THINK I WOULD JUST SAY THAT MY OPINION OF THOSE THREE POINTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED, BUT THE NUMBER ONE WOULD BE IF WE CAN IDENTIFY SOME SORT OF ENGINEERING OPINION OF HOW WE CAN IMPROVE THAT, THAT RUNOFF TO MAKE IT BETTER FOR THE FLOW OF STORMWATER RUNOFF AS A AS A BENEFIT FOR PUBLIC USE, AS WELL AS OPENING UP THE ABILITY FOR.

PROPERTY VALUES CANDIDLY.

AND THAT TURNS INTO TAXATION, WHICH ALLOWS US TO PAY FOR PARKS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE THAT WE DO SPEND MONEY ON.

SO, IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FURTHER ABOVE AND BEYOND? I JUST HAVE ONE POINT OF INFORMATION THAT THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE APPLICANT.

BEING A LAKESHORE PROPERTY OWNER MYSELF AND BEING ON SEVERAL BAYS ON LAKE MINNETONKA JUST AS A CAUTIONARY MEASURE BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE OF OUR AUTHORITY.

SO I'M NOT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS OR SUGGESTIONS FOR OTHER AGENCIES THAT ARE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHAT WE ADVISE.

BUT THE EARLY ON, SOMEONE MENTIONED THE CONSERVATION DISTRICT.

THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT DOES HAVE AUTHORITY, SIGNIFICANT AUTHORITY ON MODIFICATION OF THE LAKESHORE.

MY POINT OF INFORMATION IS THAT I JUST RECOMMEND IF YOU CONTINUE TO, TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS WHICH.

THANK YOU. THAT'S NICE THAT YOU DO THAT.

YOU REALLY DO NEED TO GO TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BECAUSE THEY HAVE PERMITTING REQUIRED ON SOME OF THOSE CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS.

AND AGAIN, IF YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS, SORRY FOR MY REDUNDANCY, BUT I'VE BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT WITH ABOUT 365FT OF LAKESHORE.

SO, I KNOW THAT IT'S WISEST TO BE SAFE RATHER THAN SORRY WITH THE WITH THE LICENSING AND AUTHORITIES.

[01:00:01]

THE CITY ALSO HAS PERMITTING AUTHORITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON THE LAND AND THE LAKESHORE.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO, I'M GOING TO TAKE A STAB AT THIS, MS. CURTIS, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

FIRST OF ALL, WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS IF THIS PASSES, IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.

IF THIS FAILS, IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.

IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT THIS IS MERELY JUST COMMENTS THAT WE'RE PROVIDING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO LET THEM DECIDE.

BUT FIRST AND FOREMOST, THOSE COMMENTS, I WANT THEM TO BE HELPFUL.

AND SO, MY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF WOULD BE HELP ME MAYBE CONSTRUCT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE COUNCIL, BECAUSE IT APPEARS THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S SUPPORT FOR THIS VACATION.

IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DO NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO PUBLIC BENEFIT WHENEVER THERE IS A VACATION BEING PUT IN PLACE.

IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A PUBLIC NEED HERE, WHICH IS IMPROVEMENT TO DRAINAGE.

SO, IF THERE WAS A PROPOSED.

MOTION ON THIS APPLICATION, WOULD THAT BE PRUDENT TO MOTION TO APPROVE? IN THAT CASE, CONTINGENT UPON WHAT A PROPOSED PLAN BASED ON THE FEEDBACK OF THE CITY ENGINEER? I'M SORRY, FROM THE FROM THE ENGINEER ON STORMWATER RUNOFF OR SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENTS CONDITIONALLY DONE BEFORE THE VACATION.

CAN YOU GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF HELP ON THAT? DOES THAT HELP? I JUST I HAVE A QUICK CLARIFYING QUESTION FOR YOU.

SURE. SO, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOME ACTION TO IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE WAY IN THAT AREA.

I SEE THAT AS KIND OF A SECONDARY PROJECT REGARDING SEPARATE FROM THIS VACATION IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT.

IF THE VACATION WERE TO BE PROCESSED, THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO COME FORWARD WITH SOME SORT OF DRAINAGE PLAN, AND WE'D WORK THROUGH WHATEVER PERMITTING IS NECESSARY. IF THE VACATION IS DENIED AND IT REMAINS CITY LAND, THEN THEY CAN TALK TO THE CITY ENGINEER AND PETITION THE CITY TO DO A CITY PROJECT THERE TO IMPROVE THE DRAINAGE IF THERE'S PROBLEMS OUT THERE.

SO THAT'S KIND OF A FUTURE, MAYBE IMPROVEMENT.

IT HAS BEEN NOTED HERE THROUGH YOUR DISCUSSION THAT THERE'S MAYBE SOME DRAINAGE NEEDS THERE.

SO, THE COUNCIL WILL REVIEW THAT AS PART OF YOUR DISCUSSION AND AS PART OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

BUT I SEE THAT AS A SEPARATE AND VERY MUCH SO.

YOU CAN MAKE IT INCORPORATED INTO YOUR MOTION, BUT YOU DO NOT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO, MAYBE TO PUT IT ANOTHER WAY, IS THERE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO, TO APPROVE THIS VACATION WITHOUT ANY CONTINGENCY OF DRAINAGE EASEMENT? WELL, I THINK I THINK NOT.

RIGHT. WE'RE ALL FEELING LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT BECAUSE IT'S NECESSARY, I THINK.

I THINK WHAT WE NEED IS A MOTION TO APPROVE IT.

AND THEN WE DO NEED TO MAINTAIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

THAT'S NOT TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT AT ALL.

APPROVE. YOU KNOW, WHAT? WE'RE WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE.

CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MELANIE, BUT WHAT WE'RE APPROVING IS THE FACT THAT WE WOULD KEEP CONTROL OF THAT PROPERTY AS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

BUT WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN DRAIN TILE OR PIPE OR ANYTHING.

THAT WOULD BE A FUTURE PROJECT.

KNOW THAT WOULD BE PROPOSED BY NEIGHBORS.

CORRECT. IT COULD BE.

CURRENTLY THERE IS THERE IS PUBLIC WATER RUNNING OVER THAT AREA.

AND CURRENTLY, AS IT IS A RIGHT OF WAY, IT'S WITHIN THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY.

THE NEIGHBORS HAVE BEEN TAKING CARE OF IT.

AND, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THAT, PUBLIC WATER ISN'T GOING TO STOP RUNNING OVER THAT PROPERTY.

SO, THE EASEMENT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT.

OTHERWISE, IT'S A PUBLIC WATER RUNNING OVER PRIVATE PROPERTY.

YEAH. AND THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY, IS THAT MS. OAKDEN, YOU MENTIONED IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE.

I FEEL LIKE IT DOES.

YEAH. AND SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I WAS ASKING.

IT WASN'T. SO, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REQUESTING OR REQUIRING US TO IMPROVE THE AREA OR MAINTAINING AN EASEMENT.

AND WHAT STAFF IS SAYING IS MAINTAIN THE EASEMENT.

YEAH. AND IF ANYTHING, TO IMPROVE IT WOULD BE A FUTURE IF A FUTURE PROJECT FOR IMPROVED PROJECT IS SEPARATE, THAT WOULD BE SEPARATE.

BUT STAFF'S RECOMMENDING TO AT MINIMUM MAINTAIN THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION IF YOU WANT ME TO.

WELL, YEAH. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF WE I MEAN, AGAIN, LET ME JUST PUT IT IN MY WORDS.

I THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC TO ALLOW THIS TO, TO BE VACATED UPON REVIEW OF THE CITY ENGINEER TO SEE IF THERE'S A BETTER WAY

[01:05:02]

TO, TO PROVIDE THAT STORMWATER RUNOFF.

AND SO, AGAIN, MAYBE THIS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANTS WORK WITH THE CITY ENGINEERING ON HOW THAT CAN BE DONE.

AND THAT IS PART OF THEIR PLAN AND THEIR APPLICATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AS A MITIGANT, I'M NOT SURE, BUT I WOULD AGREE WITH STAFF THAT IT NEEDS TO BE PART OF DRAINAGE.

I THINK THE WHOLE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO AGREES THAT THE DRAINAGE NEEDS TO BE PART OF THE VACATION.

SO, THEN IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW DO WE WORD THIS TO PASS IT ALONG AND DOES IT PASS OR FAIL? I DO HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR STAFF IF YOU PERMIT.

OKAY. DOES IT COMPLICATE IT, OR IS IT A MOOT POINT THAT WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT A SUBDIVISION OF THE EASEMENT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT? WELL, WE'RE NOT.

THE COUNTY DETERMINES WHERE THE LAND IS APPLIED.

OKAY. I'M JUST KNOWING HOW IT'S DENOTED IN HERE BECAUSE WE HAVE A BIFURCATION OF THE EASEMENT TO TWO PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS TYPICALLY WHEN THE LAND HAS BEEN DEDICATED FROM THE SAME PLAT, IT IS SPLIT EQUALLY BETWEEN THE ABUTTING PROPERTIES.

SO THAT ISN'T WE HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT THAT HAPPENS.

THE SURVEYOR HAS PROVIDED AN ILLUSTRATION OF THAT.

THE COUNTY MAKES THAT DETERMINATION.

THERE REALLY IS NO COMPLICATION FOR US THEN AT A CITY LEVEL.

TRUE. ALL WE'RE SAYING IS RELEASE THE LAND.

THAT WAS MY CLARIFICATION QUESTION.

THANKS. OKAY, ONE LAST QUESTION FOR STAFF.

WHEN THERE IS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT IS IN PLACE FOR THE PUBLIC ON PRIVATE LAND, IF THERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MADE TO THAT EASEMENT, IS THAT PAID FOR BY THE CITY, OR IS THAT PAID FOR BY THE HOMEOWNERS ON THOSE EASEMENTS OR THAT EASEMENT IS? I THINK. I THINK IT'S GOING TO DEPEND, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS HERE.

OKAY. GOT IT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION ISN'T THE BODY THAT WOULD DETERMINE THAT EITHER.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF WE CAN HAVE IT FIGURED OUT.

I'M JUST TRYING TO, I THINK WE NEED TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE VACATION, JOHN.

VERY WELL. ALL RIGHT, I TRIED, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

LET'S GO FOR IT. WE GOT.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 23 DASH 45, WITH THE ONE CHANGE BEING THAT THE CITY WILL MAINTAIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

WHILE WE WON'T OWN THE PROPERTY, WE WILL STILL HAVE.

THE EASEMENT TO THE PROPERTY.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? DOES.

I'LL SECOND. OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE THE VACATION CONTINGENT UPON MAINTAINING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

AM I CLEAR ON THAT? BEFORE WE RULE ON THAT.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT, WE'RE AMENDING OUR CHOICE? IS THAT AGREEABLE TO THE APPLICANTS? SEEING TWO NODDED YESES.

OKAY. DON'T WANT TO RULE ON SOMETHING THAT'S NOT AGREEABLE.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO APPROVE THE VACATION REQUEST.

CONTINGENT UPON MAINTAINING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT.

LOTS OF FEEDBACK FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO LET THEM DECIDE ON WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH IT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANKS, EVERYONE.

I SHOULD CLARIFY, IT WAS A MOTION BY KRAEMER.

SECONDED BY ERICKSON.

YEAH. OKAY, THANKS.

ALL RIGHT. SO, MOVING ON TO THE SECOND ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS LR 23-60.

[2. LA23-000060 Brian Benson, 3600 Casco Avenue, requests variances for average lakeshoresetback and hardcover to exceed 25% for the construction of a new home. (Staff: Natalie Nye)]

THAT'S 3600 CASCO AVENUE.

AND WE HAVE MS. NYE.

YES. GOOD EVENING.

LET ME JUST PULL UP A FEW THINGS BEFORE I START MY PRESENTATION.

CHAIR, WHILE NATALIE'S PULLING THAT UP, CAN I JUST CLARIFY? WAS THAT VOTE OF 5 TO 0 OR A 4 TO 1? DID I GET FIVE ZERO? FIVE ZERO. THANK YOU.

I CALLED FOR NAYS AND THERE WERE NO NAYS.

YEP. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THIS APPLICATION IS FOR VARIANCES FROM AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK AS WELL AS OVERALL HARDCOVER.

I HAVE AN AERIAL IMAGE ON THE SCREEN.

RIGHT NOW. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING HOME ON THE PROPERTY AND CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME IN A SIMILAR LOCATION.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A UNIQUE SHAPE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A FLAG LOT AND ALSO IS SUBJECT TO AN EXTREME AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK.

SO, THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK LINE WOULD RUN BEHIND WHERE THE CURRENT HOUSE IS NOW.

ALSO. CURRENTLY THE PROPERTY IS OVER THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED HARDCOVER.

THE MAXIMUM IS 25% FOR THIS DISTRICT, AND THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY AT ABOUT 34%.

THE PROPERTY'S UNIQUE SHAPE RESULTS IN A VERY LONG DRIVEWAY.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THE DRIVEWAY IS ABOUT 355FT LONG AND THEREFORE ABOUT 15% OF THE TOTAL HARDCOVER FOR THE LOT.

THE APPLICANT HAS LISTED THE FLAG SHAPE AS ONE OF THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTY HAD A TYPICAL DRIVEWAY LENGTH.

[01:10:11]

FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE PROPERTY ENDED HERE, THE PROPERTY WOULD BE UNDER.

AT ABOUT 25 OR ABOUT 24%, IT WOULD BE UNDER THE MAXIMUM.

THE PROPERTY ALSO HAS A WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT.

I'LL PULL UP THE SURVEY ALONG THE SOUTH, WHICH ALSO IMPACTS THE BUILDING ENVELOPE.

STAFF AGREES WITH THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY ASSESSMENT FROM THE APPLICANT.

THE PROPERTY IS UNIQUELY SHAPED AND SUBJECT TO AN EXTREME AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK DUE TO THE ORIENTATION OF THE NEIGHBORS AND THE HOMES.

CONSTRUCTING A NEW HOME IN A SIMILAR LOCATION WOULD NOT IMPACT ANY CURRENTLY ENJOYED VIEWS OF THE LAKE FROM THE AERIAL.

YOU CAN SEE THE NORTHERN PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY SITUATED QUITE A BIT BACK FROM THE LAKE.

THEY KIND OF HAVE A REVERSE FLAG SHAPED LOT AND DON'T HAVE MUCH OF A VIEW WITH THIS THIN STRIP GOING DOWN TO THE LAKE.

WHEREAS THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY HERE ISN'T IMPACTED.

THEY ENJOY THIS VIEW OF THE LAKE BY THE BAY.

THE PROJECT IS REDUCING THE OVERALL HARD COVER FROM ABOUT 34% TO 30%, BRINGING IT CLOSER TO COMPLIANCE.

YET IT STILL REQUIRES A VARIANCE.

THE NEW HOME WILL BE PLACED IN A SIMILAR LOCATION.

THE EXISTING HOME IS ABOUT 101FT FROM THE POOL, AND THE NEW HOME WILL BE SLIGHTLY CLOSER AT ABOUT 98FT.

STAFF IS NOT CONCERNED AS THIS IS MINIMAL, AND ALL THE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS ARE OUTSIDE OF THE 75-FOOT SETBACK.

STAFF HAS RECEIVED NEIGHBOR SUPPORT LETTERS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE PACKET.

THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TONIGHT.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION AS APPLIED.

THANK YOU, MS. NYE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT, SEEING NONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND WISHES TO BE HEARD, PLEASE COME ON UP.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

MY NAME IS BRIAN BENSON.

I'M WITH COMPASS REAL ESTATE, ADDRESS 401 EAST LAKE STREET IN WAYZATA, MINNESOTA.

AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, NIH HOMES LLC.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING TO BUILD A NEW HOUSE, AS YOU'VE SEEN IN THE PROPOSAL.

I THINK OUR SITUATION HERE IS A TEXTBOOK CASE OF WHY VARIANCES ARE NEEDED.

THE LINE MAKES NO SENSE FOR THIS PROPERTY.

YOU CANNOT BUILD A NEW HOUSE.

YOU CAN'T EVEN BUILD A GARAGE REALLY WITH THE CURRENT LS LINE SETUP.

SO, AND CONSIDERING TWO FLAG LOTS NEXT TO EACH OTHER AND THIS IS AND THEN WE'RE ALSO KIND OF LIKE A POINT LOT RELATIVE TO THE SITE TO THE SOUTH.

SO, WE'VE PLACED THE NEW HOUSE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO WHERE THE EXISTING HOUSE IS LOCATED.

THIS EXHIBIT HERE IS PROBABLY THE MOST USEFUL.

IT SHOWS. THE CURRENT HOUSE IN RED.

AND THEN THE NEW HOUSE IN BLUE.

AND THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE PROPERTY IN BROWN IS THE UTILITY EASEMENT.

AND SO, WE'VE FACTORED IN THIS UTILITY EASEMENT INTO THE PROPOSED LAYOUT OF THE NEW HOUSE.

AND NOT ONLY DOES THAT OPEN UP THAT EASEMENT, BUT IT ALSO GIVES SOME, AS ADDITIONAL SETBACKS FOR THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH.

SO, THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, VARIANCE WE NEED IS THE LINE.

OTHER NOTES ON THAT.

I'VE SPOKEN WITH BOTH NEIGHBORS, THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, WHICH HAS A HOUSE SET WAY BACK.

THEY DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE ANY LAKEVIEW, SO WE'RE NOT IMPACTING ANY VIEWS FROM THAT HOUSE.

AND HE IS IN FULL SUPPORT OF OUR PROJECT.

AND AGAIN, THE HOUSE TO THE SOUTH.

THEY LOOK THE OTHER WAY.

WE HAVE DESIGNED A ONE AND A HALF STOREY HOUSE HERE THAT MINIMIZES MASSING, FITS IN WELL WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE FEEL LIKE THE TIMELESS CLASSIC IT WILL BE, HOPEFULLY THERE FOR 100 PLUS YEARS.

CLEARLY, A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY FOR THE LINE AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE HOUSE ALSO IS IMPACTED SOMEWHAT BY THE UTILITY. THAT Y UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE SOUTH WHICH IS 20FT WIDE.

[01:15:07]

REGARDING THE HARD COVER, THE DRIVEWAY IS.

355FT LONG.

THAT TAKES UP A LOT OF THE HARD COVER HERE.

AGAIN, IF WE HAD A NORMAL DESIGN HOUSE OR DRIVEWAY, WE WOULD BE UNDER THE 25%.

SO WE ARE REQUESTING A 30% HARD COVER VARIANCE COMING DOWN FROM THE CURRENT HARD COVER OF 34%.

SO THAT'S REALLY A 9%.

CHANGE REDUCTION.

AND I THINK IT'S ALSO WORTH NOTING THE NEIGHBOR DOES GET TO USE THE DRIVEWAY 121FT.

I KNOW WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE THE DRIVEWAY EITHER WAY, BUT THEY WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS.

SO, I CLEARLY SEE A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY WITH THE DRIVEWAY LENGTH FOR THE HARDCOVER.

SO JUST KIND OF IN SUMMARY, YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE THESE VARIANCE REQUESTS ARE NECESSARY AND REASONABLE CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE LOT CONFIGURATION POINT, LAKE POINT LIKE LAKESHORE SETTING AND SUBSTANTIAL UTILITY EASEMENT.

WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE CITY WEIGH THESE FACTORS IN CONSIDERING OUR PROPOSAL AND APPROVING THE COST.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT NOW.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. BENSON. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT BEFORE HE STEPS DOWN? SEEING NONE. IF YOU MIGHT BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS, JUST IN CASE.

WHEN WE HAVE DELIBERATION, THAT'D BE GREAT.

YES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. THOSE WHO WISH TO BE HEARD.

PLEASE COME ON UP. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MOVE IT BACK HERE FOR DISCUSSION.

ALL RIGHT, SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE HIGHLIGHTS.

WE ARE MEETING ALL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS EXISTING AND PROPOSED.

LOT AREA WIDTH SEEMS FINE.

BIG HANGUP IS OF COURSE AS CALLED OUT BY STAFF IS HARDCOVER.

FUNDAMENTALLY SPEAKING WE HAVE 25% ALLOWED.

WE HAVE 34% EXISTING.

AND THE PROPOSED IS AN IMPROVEMENT DOWN TO 29%.

TO ME, THAT SEEMS LIKE AN IMPROVEMENT FROM THE SITUATION THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

I LIKE THAT THE COMMENTS DO WE HAVE ON THAT? I LIKE THIS ONE TOO.

I THINK IT'S LIKE BRIAN SAID, THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE HAVE VARIANCES, AND I THINK ANYTIME WE GET A REDUCTION IN HARDCOVER OF THIS MAGNITUDE, I THINK IT'S A GREAT PROJECT FOR EVERYBODY.

SO, I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THE APPLICATION? ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO EXPEDITE.

IF THERE'S ANYBODY WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION, UNLESS THERE'S FURTHER COMMENT THAT THEY'D LIKE TO MAKE, I WOULD ENTERTAIN IT.

OH, I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

YEAH. WE'VE ONLY BEEN THROUGH ONE APPLICATION.

IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY ALREADY.

WE'LL OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC FOR OUR PUBLIC HEARING.

OH, NO. WE DID HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

YEAH, WE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND GUESSING MYSELF.

NOW I DID IT, I FOLLOWED RULES.

WELL, WE'LL DO THAT FOR YOU.

THANK YOU, MAN.

OKAY. IT'S CALLED A SENIOR MOMENT.

YEAH, WE'RE DOING GOOD.

WE'RE DOING GOOD OKAY.

NO SENIOR MOMENT JOKES.

ALL RIGHT LET'S HIT THE RESET BUTTON.

IS ANYBODY GOING TO MAKE A MOTION? I WOULD MAKE A MOTION.

ALL RIGHT. TO APPROVE LA 23, QUADRUPLE OT SIX ZERO BRIAN BENSON, 3600 CASCO AVENUE. AS APPLIED.

AS APPLIED. I'LL SECOND THAT.

WE HAVE A MOTION BY OLIVIA AND A SECOND BY KRAMER TO APPROVE LA 20 360 AS APPLIED.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

NICE TO HAVE IT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO THE THIRD ITEM ON THE AGENDA, LA 20 3-61.

[3. LA23-000061 Outdoor Excapes, 2601 Casco Point Road, requests a 75’ lake setbackvariance for the construction of retaining walls within the lakeyard. (Staff: Natalie Nye)]

THAT IS 2601 CASCO POINT ROAD STAFF PRESENTATION ALSO BY MISS NYE.

GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO CHANGE GEARS.

YES. NO PROBLEM.

OKAY. THAT'S FINE.

ALL RIGHT. I'LL ZOOM IN A LITTLE BIT.

ALL RIGHT. THIS APPLICATION FOR 2601 CASTLE POINT ROAD.

THE APPLICANT, OUTDOOR ESCAPES, IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS.

THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS FOR A 75 FOOT LAKE SETBACK VARIANCE TO ALLOW NEW RETAINING WALLS WITHIN THE LAKE YARD.

[01:20:01]

HIGHLIGHTED OVER THERE IN RED IS THE AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THIS IS THE 75 FOOT SETBACK LINE RIGHT HERE.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW LAKE STAIR AND TWO NEW RETAINING WALLS WITHIN THE 75 FOOT SETBACK.