[00:00:03]
ALL RIGHT, WELCOME TO OUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
[Roll Call]
IN RECITING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR ARE PRESENT.
[Approval of Agenda]
ON THE AGENDA, I WOULD ASK FOR A MOTION TO APPROVE TONIGHT'S AGENDA, OR CONVERSELY, IF ANYTHING NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS WRITTEN.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[Consent Agenda]
TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.THESE ITEMS THAT ARE CONSIDERED ROUTINE WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION WITH NO DISCUSSION UNLESS A COUNCIL MEMBER OR STAFF REQUESTS THAT THE ITEM BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND ACTION.
TONIGHT'S CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ARE AS FOLLOWS.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FROM OUR LAST MEETING, CLAIMS AND BILLS, 2026 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AMENDMENT, RESIGNATION OF OUR COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER, TIME EXTENSION FOR A SOLICITOR ACCEPTING A SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT FROM THE WILDHURST FOREST EXTENSION.
AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS TO CARMEN AND FREDERICK STREETS.
ITEM NUMBER EIGHT IS A VARIANCE REQUEST AT 1101 FERNDALE ROAD WEST.
AND FINALLY, NUMBER NINE, DONATION.
FOR IRRIGATION AT BEATERWOOD PARK, THAT'S RESOLUTION 7699.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY ITEMS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO PULL OUT OF CONSENT FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION? I'D LIKE TO PULL NUMBER SEVEN, PLEASE.
ANYTHING ELSE? CAN I ADD ONE? THE CONSENT AGENDA? YES.
NUMBER 10, THE PUBLIC WORKS REPORT OF THE PURCHASE OF THE CAPITAL EQUIPMENT.
ANY COMMENT ON THAT? EVERYBODY OKAY WITH THAT? I'LL GIVE YOU A MINUTE TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT.
ANY OBJECTIONS, I GUESS? ALL RIGHT.
I WOULD ACCEPT A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA MINUS ITEM 7 PLUS NUMBER 10.
OKAY, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
ALL RIGHT, NOW IT'S TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO ADDRESS YOUR COUNSEL.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF VARIANCE REQUESTS THAT ARE COMING UP LATER IN THE...
AGENDA AND SO THIS WOULD BE THE TIME IF YOU'RE CUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE US COMMENT ON THAT WE'LL ASK THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO COME UP AND ADDRESS US WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THOSE BUT IF YOU HAVE COMMENT, YOU'RE NOT THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THIS WOULD BE THE TIME TO GIVE A GIVE A COMMENT THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE COMING UP IN ADDITION TO ANYTHING ELSE.
YOU'D LIKE TO COUNT ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ALL RIGHT, WE WILL MOVE
[7) Award Contract - Curb and Gutter Improvements - Carman & Frederick Streets]
ON TO, I GUESS, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, AND I WILL TURN THAT OVER TO MEMBER BENSON TO DISCUSS CONCERNS AND OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION.WOULD STAFF LIKE TO PRESENT THIS ONE? OTHERWISE, I CAN JUST ASK QUESTIONS.
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS TO AWARD A CONTRACT TO INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE...
...SIDE RADIUS OF THE CARMEN AND FREDERICK INTERSECTION THAT'S DOWN IN NAVARRE LEADING INTO THE MOSCOW KIND OF PART OF TOWN.
EVERY YEAR WE SET ASIDE A BUDGET FOR SMALL STORMWATER RELATED ITEMS. WE PUT $100,000 A YEAR TO THAT.
THIS YEAR, IT ACTUALLY IS A BLEED OVER FROM PREVIOUS YEARS WHERE WE DIDN'T GET GOOD.
SO THIS WOULD BE TO INSTALL THAT CURB AND GUTTER.
THE LOW QUOTE WAS $16,000 ON SOME CHANGE TO INSTALL THAT CURB AND GUTTER
[00:05:02]
AT THAT.AND JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU SAY CURB AND GUTTER, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STYLE THAT IS UP TOWARD THE CIRCLE, THE SAME STYLE OF CURB AND GUTTER AS YOU GO UP CASCO TO THE CASCO CIRCLE AREA, THERE'S CURB AND GUTTER UP THERE.
BECAUSE MOST OF CASCO DOES NOT HAVE CURB AND GUTTER.
SO IT WOULD BE THE SAME STYLE AS WHEN YOU'RE APPROACHING THE CIRCLE, THAT TYPE OF CURB AND GUTTER? LIKE YOU'D SEE OUT HERE? YES, IT'S LIKE HOW YOU SEE IN THE PARKING LOT.
THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AROUND THIS ARE MY, I GUESS WHY I WANTED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHT GIVEN HERE IS BECAUSE I'M NOT REAL AWARE OF THE HISTORY OF EITHER FLOODING, STORMWATER ISSUES, OR COMPLAINTS IN THE AREA.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A HISTORY HERE, BUT THE BIGGER ISSUE WITH THIS PARTICULAR AREA OF THE CITY IS THAT THIS AREA DOES NOT HAVE CURB AND GUTTER BY AND LARGE.
SO ARE WE RUNNING INTO A SITUATION HERE WHERE WE'RE DOING ONE-OFFS AND WE'RE GOING TO START CHANGING THE CHARACTER OF THAT AREA AND ALSO WHAT OTHER MITIGATION HAS BEEN UTILIZED IN THAT AREA TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE? AND FINALLY, IS THIS AN ISSUE OF A HOMEOWNER WHO'S NOT WANTING FOLKS DRIVING ON THEIR LAWN, WHICH IS SEPARATE FROM NEEDING CURB AND GUTTER FOR STORMWATER MITIGATION? IT'S A LOT, BUT I'M JUST LOOKING FOR A LITTLE MORE DETAIL ON THIS ONE.
I RECALL FIRST MONTH WORK TEAM STANDING ON THE STREET SUPERVISOR AND THIS CORNER IT'S BEEN A PROBLEM WE HAVE OVER THE YEARS BEEN TRYING TO WORK CURB AND GUTTER INTO OUR PRO INTO ONE OUR PROJECTS WHERE WE CAN AND WHERE WE DON'T HAVE A PROJECTED PROJECT THAT MAY ALLOW US TO DO THAT PROJECT A STREET PROJECT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO SMALL SECTIONS WHERE WE HAVE PROBLEMS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY WITH URBAN GUTTER USING OUR THERE'S ANOTHER SECTION OF WE DID VERY SIMILAR DOWN A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN INTO THE CASCO NEIGHBORHOOD WE DID A SIMILAR TYPE OF PROBLEM AND THEN THE OTHER THING IS THIS THIS NEIGHBORHOOD DID HAVE CURBING.
I TOOK SOME PICTURES OFF OF GOOGLE AFTER YOU EMAILED TODAY.
YOU CAN BARELY SEE IT, BUT IT USED TO HAVE ASPHALT CURBING.
YOU CAN KIND OF SEE ALONG THE SIDE OF THE ROAD.
AND THAT, YOU KNOW, BLESS OUR PREDECESSORS, THAT WAS A METHOD OF TRYING TO GET SOME CURBING IN.
IT'S LESS EXPENSIVE THAN PUTTING IN A PROPER CONCRETE CURBING GUTTER.
BUT IT DOES PROVIDE SOME SHORT-TERM RELIEF.
HOWEVER, IT'S NOT A GOOD ASPHALT, TWO MINUTES CURVING IS NOT A GOOD FIT FOR NARROW ROADS, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE TRAVEL WAY.
GARBAGE TRUCKS, WHEN IT'S HOT IN THE SUMMER AND SMOOSHED, IT GETS HIT BY SNOW PLOWS IN THE WINTER AND CHIPPED, SO IT DOESN'T LAST VERY LONG.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT AT SOME POINT IT WAS THERE, IT WENT AWAY AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING WITH THIS PROJECT IS TO DEAL WITH THE WORST ISSUE ALONG THIS STREET.
IF WE HAD UNLIMITED RESOURCES, WE'D PROBABLY BE COMING AND SAYING WE SHOULD PUT CURB AND GUTTER THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD, GIVEN HOW NARROW THE STREET IS AND THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY DITCHES, ANY OTHER WAYS.
IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, AND THERE ARE MANY LIKE IT IN OUR CITY, THIS IS...
THERE IS THE SECONDARY ISSUE OF, YES, AND I THINK THE HOMEOWNERS ARE HERE, WHERE ALSO BY THE NATURE OF THIS CORNER, EVERY LONGER TRUCK IN THE WORLD ACROSS THEIR PROPERTY, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IN THE AERIAL IMAGE THERE, THE BROWN AREA.
I HIGHLIGHTED IN PURPLE WHERE THE CURBING WON'T.
MY TRUCK OR A LONGER GOING ONE, IT WOULD PROBABLY STILL JUMP THE CURB.
HOWEVER, IT WOULD MAYBE HELP WITH SOME OF THE SMALLER VEHICLES AND HELP THAT ASPECT OF DEFINING.
THE PRIMARY JUSTIFICATION FROM A CITY PERSPECTIVE IS TO PUT IT IN TO DEAL WITH THE STORMWATER.
JUST LAST YEAR, PUBLIC WORKS CAME AND DID A, I THINK IT WAS LAST SPRING.
[00:10:04]
SUMMER, WE DID A RESTORATION OF THAT SHOULDER JUST TO THE NORTH OF THERE.BECAUSE WE HAD VEHICLES COMING OFF AND CAUSING A WHOLE BUNCH OF RUT LIKE THAT ALONG THE EDGE OF THE ROAD.
THAT FIX, AFTER SPENDING A WHILE WORKING ON IT, OUR DEPARTMENT CAME AND PARKED A FIRE TRUCK THERE AND SUNK UP TO THE AXLE.
SO IT'S GOT A LONG HISTORY OF NEEDING SOME IMPROVEMENTS.
PARKING SIGNS ALONG WHERE THE PURPLE IS THERE, THE VERTICAL ONE, ARE THOSE GOING TO STAY? IS THAT THE IDEA FOR THE NO PARKING SIGNS TO STAY? YES, I BELIEVE SO.
AND I WOULD JUST ADD THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE CURB SECTION THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THIS WOULD BE A SLOPED-FACED CURB, SO NOT THE VERTICAL, SO IF VEHICLES DID MANEUVER AROUND IT AND...
THEY COULD FEEL THEMSELVES KIND OF RISING UP ON THE CURB RATHER THAN JUST HITTING IT.
AND THEN I'D ALSO JUST NOTE THAT BECAUSE OF THIS RADIUS HAS KIND OF GROWN OVER THE YEARS, IT IS PROPERTY NOW.
WE'D LIKE TO KIND OF ERODE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND SO THEY'VE BEEN MORE THAN PATIENT TRYING THESE DIFFERENT FIXES OVER THE YEARS, KNOWING THAT IT'S BEEN KIND OF...
SO HOPEFULLY THIS CAN BE THE PERMANENT FIX.
IT WAS THE INTENTION BACK WHEN THE ASPHALT CURB WAS PUT IN, AND THAT'S JUST DISINTEGRATED, AND IT'S BARELY NOTICEABLE.
DO YOU TYPICALLY DO THE SLOPED CURB AND GUTTER AROUND A CURB LIKE THIS? BECAUSE THE OTHER CURB AND GUTTER IN THAT AREA IS NOT SLOPED ON CASCO.
THERE'S DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS FOR EACH OF THE METHODS, BUT I WAS TOLD THAT WE WOULD TRY ON THIS OCCASION.
I WOULD AGREE, BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT AREA, HAVING TOURED IT A COUPLE TIMES TODAY, IS, AGAIN, IT'S QUITE A NATURAL AREA, AND I THINK THAT HARD ANGLE IS NOT NECESSARILY REALLY IN KEEPING WITH THAT.
THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAN BE DONE TO MITIGATE VEHICLES COMING OVER THAT POINT ON THE END THERE, THAT CURVE? WE'VE TRIED SOME THINGS IN THE PAST WORKING WITH THE HOMEOWNER ROCKS AND THERE BUT SHORT OF WHICH WE DON'T REALLY ENDORSE IT PUTTING SOME KIND OF HAZARD REALLY CLOSE TO OLDER THIS YOU KNOW THE ONLY OTHER THING YOU KNOW TO SEASONALLY DO OR THINK BUT AGAIN, THOSE AREN'T GOING TO STOP YOUR DUMP TRUCK OR YOUR SEMI-TRUCK.
ON THAT, WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO, I KNOW THE HOME BUILDER ACROSS THE WAY WHO CAUSED SOME OF THE DAMAGE, DO WHAT THEY'RE ESCAPING TO HELP KIND OF MAKE IT LOOK LESS INVITING TO PEOPLE TO DRIVE THROUGH.
WITH THE CURB THERE, WHERE IS THE STORMWATER? OKAY.
SOME OF IT IN HEAVY RAINS DOES MAKE IT ACROSS.
AND I THINK ULTIMATELY, CONES HOPEFULLY GOT...
DRIVER'S ATTENTION A LITTLE BIT, BUT I THINK ULTIMATELY THIS IS A BEHAVIOR ISSUE OF JUST PEOPLE.
IT'S A TIGHT CURVE, AND I CLEAN IT UP WITH THIS HAZARD.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, ANYBODY WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OR DENY? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS AT CARMEN AND FREDERICK STREETS.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
[11) LA26-000015, 1200 Wildhurst Trl, Waiver of the 6-month application resubmittal waiting period, After-the-Fact Variance and Conditional Use Permit, Resolution 7696]
NEXT WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 11, WHICH IS 1200 WILD HARES TRAIL, WAIVER OF A SIX-MONTH APPLICATION, RESUBMITTAL WAITING PERIOD.AFTER THE FACTS, VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
[00:15:01]
THAT'S RESOLUTION 7690.THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR 1200 WILD HORSE TRAIL.
THERE ARE SEVERAL COMPONENTS TO THE APPLICATION.
THE FIRST IS A WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH WAITING PERIOD TO CONSIDER THEIR REVISED CONDITION PERMIT APPLICATION.
AND AFTER THE FACT, SIDE YARD AND AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR THE SHED THAT IS LOCATED WITHIN LAKE YARD AND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE AMENDED LAKESIDE RETAINING WALLS.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVALS TO ALLOW THE LAKE YARD SHED TO REMAIN AS CONSTRUCTED 3.7 FEET FROM THE SIDE LOT LINE WHERE 9.2 FEET ARE REQUIRED AND APPROXIMATELY 100 FEET LAKEWARD OF THE AVERAGE LAKE SHORE SETBACK LINE.
ALSO REQUESTED IS AN AFTER THE FACT CUP FOR TIERED RETAINING WALLS CONSTRUCTED WITHIN 75 FEET OF THE LAKE.
THE WALLS ARE CONSTRUCTED BUT THEY WILL BE MODIFIED TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIRED FIVE FOOT SETBACK SO ELIMINATING THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE WALLS IN ADDITION TO THE CUP.
AT THEIR JUNE 15TH MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING, REVIEWED THE REVISED APPLICATION, AND VOTED 6-1 ON A MOTION TO APPROVE THE WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH WAITING PERIOD, APPROVAL OF THE RETAINING WALLS AS MODIFIED ON THE PLAN TO MEET THE SETBACK, SUBJECT TO AN INCLUSION OF MORE NATIVE PLANTINGS FOR COMPLETE SCREENING.
DENIAL OF VARIANCES FOR THE SHED WITHIN THE AVERAGE LAKE SHORE SETBACK AND SIDE YARD SETBACK AREA COMMENTS FOR THE FROM THE PUBLIC WERE RECEIVED AND WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKETS BASED ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION STAFF PREPARED A RESOLUTION FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND TONIGHT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER ADOPTING THAT RESOLUTION 7696 I THINK WE DO HAVE THE HOMEOWNER HERE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CARE TO MAKE A COMMENT.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I'M BRIAN ROTH AT 1200 WILDHURST TRAIL.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO CONSIDER MY APPLICATION FOR A CUP FOR A RETAINING WALL AND A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A STORAGE SHED.
THE FIRST MATTER TONIGHT CONCERNS AN AFTER-THE-FACT CUP REQUEST FOR LANDSCAPE RETAINING WALL.
THE DESIGN BEFORE YOU PROPOSES TO MODIFY THE EXISTING WALL TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CITY CODE.
NOTE, LIKE MELANIE SAID, THE APPLICATION DOES NOT REQUEST A VARIANCE FROM THE CODE.
BECAUSE THE WALL IS ALREADY IN PLACE, YOU HAVE HAD THE BENEFIT OF EVALUATING THE ACTUAL PROJECT RATHER THAN RELYING ONLY ON CONCEPTUAL PLANS.
THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR COMING OUT.
SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN OUT MULTIPLE TIMES.
THANK YOU FOR COMING OUT TO SEE FOR YOURSELF THE APPEARANCE AND THE SITE CONDITIONS.
THROUGH THIS REVIEW PROCESS, WE CONSULTED WITH CIVIL ENGINEERS AND OTHER PROFESSIONALS WHO ALL AGREE THE BEST AND MOST APPROPRIATE WAY TO ADDRESS EROSION ISSUES IS WITH A RETAINING WALL.
IN YOUR PACKET, YOU WILL SEE AN ENGINEER'S LETTER EXPLAINING HOW THE RETAINING WALL MANAGES ARE GRADE CHANGES AND CONTRIBUTES TO SLOPE STABILITY.
THESE PROFESSIONALS ALSO HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THE RETAINING WALL WAS CONSTRUCTED USING APPROPRIATE MATERIALS AND METHODS TO MEET COMMON ENGINEERING STANDARDS AND TO ENSURE LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS.
IMPORTANTLY, THE WALL DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
IT HAS BEEN LANDSCAPED, IT IS SCREENED FROM MANY VIEWPOINTS, AND IT MAINTAINS THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS IS ADDITIONAL SCREENING, LIKE MELANIE SAID, ADDITIONAL SCREENING ON THE NORTH SIDE AND OTHER PLACES WHERE SOME PLANTINGS DID NOT GROW AS ANTICIPATED.
DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF THE CURRENT PICTURE THAT I SENT TODAY? NO.
SO YOU CAN SEE THAT MOST OF THE WALL IS SCREENED.
THERE ARE SOME PLANTS THAT JUST DID NOT.
SO WE ANTICIPATE PUTTING, REPLACING THOSE IN THE FRONT TIER THERE.
ULTIMATELY, THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU IS WHETHER THE CUP CRITERION HAVE BEEN MET.
AFTER REVIEWING THE PROJECT, CITY STAFF CONCLUDED THAT THEY HAVE.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION REACHED THE SAME CONCLUSION AND VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THE COUNCIL ALSO APPROVE.
[00:20:02]
WITH THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS.BEFORE I TALK ABOUT THE SHED, I'LL PAUSE AND HAPPILY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COLLECTIONS.
THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE, BRIAN, IS FROM A TIMING STANDPOINT, IF THIS WERE TO BE APPROVED, HOW QUICKLY WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO HAVE THE WORK DONE SO THAT IT'S NO LONGER ENCROACHING AND IT'S IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CODES? YEAH, SO THE SAME LANDSCAPER THAT DID THE WALL TO BEGIN WITH HAS BEEN...
HE KNOWS EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS AND IS READY TO JUMP ON IT AS SOON AS IT'S POSSIBLE.
I HAVE NOT TALKED TO HIM SPECIFICALLY OR NAILED HIM DOWN TO A DATE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE WERE SOME MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE MADE TO THE PATIO.
AND AS SOON AS WE GOT THE THE PATIO OR THE PERMIT FOR THAT PATIO, THEY WERE ABLE TO JUMP ON IT.
I GUESS I DON'T KNOW IF I SHOULD DIRECT THIS QUESTION TO STAFF OR TO THE PRESIDENT, BUT MAYBE TO STAFF.
IT WAS DENIED ON MARCH 3RD, COMPLETELY DENIED.
AND NOW IT'S COMING BACK IN FRONT OF US.
SUPPOSEDLY THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE A MODIFICATION TO THE WALL.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S IN HEIGHT.
I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE BRINGING IT IN FIVE FEET FOR THE SETBACK, BUT NOW YOU'RE GOING TO ADD MORE RETAINING WALLS ON THE SETBACK.
AND YOU HAD A TREE IN THERE THAT YOU SAID YOU PUT THE SLOPE UP TO SAVE THE TREES THAT WERE DOING JUST FINE BEFORE YOU PUT THE WALL UP.
THE WALL YOU PUT UP WITHOUT A PERMIT, WITHOUT PERMISSION.
AND I'M HAVING A REALLY HARD TIME NOW, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAYING, OH YEAH, THAT'S FINE NOW, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO COVER IT UP WITH SOME VEGETATION.
THERE WASN'T AN EROSION PROBLEM BEFORE.
I WOULD ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT.
BUT I'M REALLY HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THIS ONE.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME WHY THERE WAS A HARDSHIP HERE TO BEGIN WITH.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOW SAYING, OH, EVERYTHING'S OKAY, NOW HE'S GOING TO COVER IT UP WITH SOME TREES AND BUSHES.
THERE WAS AN EROSION PROBLEM BEFORE THE WALL WENT UP.
BY WHOM? A CERTIFIED ENGINEER.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY PICTURES THAT SHOW THAT THERE WAS AN EROSION PROBLEM.
IN FACT, WE SAW SOME PICTURES.
BEFORE FROM YOUR NEIGHBORS THAT SHOWED GRASS THERE, NO EROSION, AND THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF VEGETATION THERE ALREADY THAT YOU REMOVED.
IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WERE A LOT OF WILD PLANTS AND STUFF.
BUT I STILL DON'T SEE WHY ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE GOING FROM A MARCH 3RD OR MARCH 9TH DENIAL TO A COMPLETE CHANGE.
SO AT THAT TIME, WE HADN'T RECEIVED ANY REVISED PLANS FROM MR. ROTH, AND THE DEADLINE FOR ACTING ON AN APPLICATION WAS APPROACHING.
SO IT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE YOU KIND OF AS AN EXISTING, WITH THE EXISTING INFORMATION THAT WE HAD, AND AT THAT TIME WE WEREN'T ABLE, THE APPLICANT HADN'T MODIFIED THE WALLS TO REMOVE THE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SETBACK.
THERE WAS NO CHANGE FROM WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD DIRECTED FOR SOME MODIFICATIONS OR CHANGES TO THAT.
SO THE DENIAL WHILE LISTING ALL OF THE CONDITIONS AND GOING THROUGH THAT ANALYSIS PRIMARILY WAS THERE WAS NO, WE DID NOT RECEIVE AN AMENDED PLAN THAT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
SO THAT WAS WHY WE BROUGHT IT FOR DENIAL.
AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT IS MODIFYING THE PLAN TO MEET THE SETBACK, I BELIEVE IT'S AMENABLE TO ADDITIONAL SCREENING.
SO IT REMOVED THE VARIANCE ASPECT, SO THERE WAS NO HARDSHIP OR PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY COMPONENT TO THE WALL ANY LONGER.
IT'S STRICTLY BASED ON THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE CODE FOR ALLOWING RETAINING WALLS WITHIN THE LAKE YARD.
SO IF THIS PLAN HAD BEEN IN PLACE IN MARCH? YOU COULD HAVE CONSIDERED IT, YES.
WE WOULD HAVE STILL HAD TO CONSIDER IT.
COME BEFORE US, THOUGH, IS THAT RIGHT? YES, ABSOLUTELY.
OR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, NOT FOR A VARIANCE.
[00:25:01]
SO THERE ARE NO PHOTOS OR ANY HISTORY TO DEMONSTRATE TO COUNSEL.THAT AN EROSION PROBLEM EXISTED AT THE TIME.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE ANY IN PROGRESS OR ANY PICTURES LIKE THAT, BUT THE APPLICANT'S ENGINEER DID MAKE A STATEMENT TO THAT.
THEY MADE A STATEMENT TO THAT.
BUT THERE ARE NO PHOTOS FROM LANDSCAPE OR THE FOLKS DOING THE WORK ON THE WALL TO DEMONSTRATE THE EROSION.
NO, IN OUR TIME I DIDN'T THINK.
TO CLARIFY, TOO, OUR CODE DOESN'T REQUIRE PICTURES.
OUR CODE REQUIRES A CERTIFIED.
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER TO CERTIFY THAT THE WALL IN THE LAKE YARD REQUIRED.
SO THIS ENGINEER LOOKED AT THE PROJECT BEFORE THE WALLS OR AFTER AND SAID THAT, YEAH, THERE WAS PROBABLY EROSION.
I DON'T KNOW WHEN HE DID, BUT HE PUT A NAME TO THE RECORD.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S ONE OF MY QUESTIONS TOO.
WHEN DID HE ACTUALLY WRITE THIS REPORT? WAS IT AFTER YOUR WALL WAS ALREADY UP? HE WROTE THE REPORT AFTER THE WALL WAS ALREADY UP.
SO FOR HIM TO SAY THAT THERE WAS AN EROSION ISSUE IS...
I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THERE'S A CURRENT EROSION ISSUE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PATH.
I'M HAPPY TO HAVE YOU OVER AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT EROSION.
OF THE PATH? WELL, THERE'S A PATH THAT GOES UP DIAGONALLY RIGHT THERE.
AND ON THE LEFT SIDE, THE SAME SLOPE HAS EROSION ISSUES.
WHERE YOU HAVE ALL THE LILIES? IS THAT WHAT I'M LOOKING AT? SO YOU COULDN'T PUT DIFFERENT PLANTS IN TO HOLD THE EROSION BACK? AND WITH THE PATH PUT IN AT THE SAME TIME AS THE...
THAT'S MY PLAN RIGHT NOW IS TO KEEP GOING WITH THE DAYLILIES THERE.
I ALSO KNOW THERE WAS SOME EROSION ON THE TOP.
TREE ROOTS ARE EXPOSED ON THAT SIDE.
I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH THIS ONE.
THE NEIGHBORS WERE ABLE TO REMOVE IT ON THEIR PART.
THEY WERE ABLE TO PLANT GRASS, AND THE GRASS IS ALL GROWN IN NOW.
AND THEY HAD TO, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY FEET WERE THEY IN? SO THEY REMOVED 11 FEET 3 INCHES OF YOUR RETAINING WALL.
THEY REMOVED IT AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE OR WITH THEIR OWN MANPOWER.
I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH THIS ON A SECOND LEVEL, AND I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO WHAT COUNCILMAN PERSHING HAD TO SAY.
YOU HAVE DRAGGED YOUR FEET THROUGH THIS PROCESS FOR TWO YEARS, AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE GOING TO GRANT YOU A CUP AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE YOU AT YOUR WORD THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET THIS COMPLETED.
AND I HAVE A VERY HARD TIME WITH THAT BECAUSE EVERY TIME SOMEBODY HAS GIVEN YOU SOME TIME, YOU HAVE NOT.
FILLED YOUR PART OF THE BARGAIN.
WE NEED TO HAVE SOME GOODWILL FAITH IN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS DONE.
I'VE HAD TO RELY ON OTHER PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF MY CONTROL.
I'VE HAD TO RELY ON YOUR SCHEDULE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULE.
SO OUR SCHEDULE AS A COUNCIL MADE YOU NOT BE ABLE TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE? IS THAT WHAT YOU JUST SAID? YES.
YOUR SCHEDULE, WITHOUT GETTING INTO A LOT OF DETAIL, THE EXTENSION OF TIME TO GET INFORMATION IN WOULD HAVE EXPIRED A DAY BEFORE YOU GUYS MET.
THEREFORE, I WAS NOT ABLE TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT PLAN, AND WE HAD TO BRING IT TO YOU IN MARCH.
IF YOU HADN'T HAVE DENIED IT, THEN THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE BY NOW.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SURVEY.
THE SURVEY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, IS THAT A SURVEY THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLETED? WHEN WAS THAT SURVEY COMPLETED? WHAT YEAR? AND WHEN WAS THE WALL, THE WALL WAS BUILT IN 2021? I DON'T KNOW.
AND THE FIRST COMPLAINT OR ISSUE THAT CAME IN ABOUT THIS WALL WAS IN 2024? IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT? SO IT TOOK A YEAR TO GET A SURVEY? IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT? IT DID.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID DIRECT HIM TO GET A SURVEY OF THE WALLS SO THEY BETTER
[00:30:01]
UNDERSTAND.WHEN WAS THAT? WHEN THEY APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SUMMER OF 2025? AND SO THE SURVEY WAS DONE HOW MANY MONTHS AFTER IT WAS REQUESTED? I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK IT WAS IN AUGUST WHEN I WAS IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION REQUESTED THAT IT WAS DONE ABOUT A COUPLE MONTHS LATER.
THERE WAS NO SURVEY WORK DONE PRIOR, WHICH IS PART OF THE REASON THAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WASN'T AWARE THAT THE WALL HAD GONE INTO SOMEBODY ELSE'S.
THIS WAS DONE ESSENTIALLY WITHOUT A SURVEY.
IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? IT'S A FAIR STATEMENT, YEAH.
THAT'S NOT THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SETBACK, ESPECIALLY NEXT TO THE HOUSE.
SO WE HAVE A FIVE-FOOT SETBACK.
HOW IS IT? I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK.
SO IF HE HAS A FIVE-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR, HOW IS EVERYTHING IN THAT SURVEY INSIDE THAT FIVE-FOOT SETBACK? PART OF IT LOOKS LIKE IT GOES ON HIS NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY AS WELL.
I GUESS I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING.
WHAT FIVE-FOOT SETBACK ARE YOU? YOU HAVE A SIDE SETBACK.
YOU JUST TOLD US IT'S FIVE FEET.
RETAINING WALLS OVER TWO FEET IN HEIGHT MUST MEET A FIVE-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT'S NOTED IN RED ON THE SURVEY.
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PATIO AREA? BECAUSE THAT STILL EXISTS TODAY.
BUT YOU'VE REMEDIATED THAT, HAVEN'T YOU, WITH THAT PATIO? YEAH, I THINK WHAT SHE'S REFERRING TO IS THE FACT THAT THE CITY OF ORONO IN 1976 APPROVED THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS HOUSE WHEN I WAS THREE YEARS OLD.
TO BE INSIDE THE REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS PART OF MY HOUSE, A CORNER OF MY HOUSE THAT'S WITHIN THAT SETBACK.
THAT WAS ALL THERE WHEN YOU MOVED IN, BUT DIDN'T YOU DO SOMETHING WITH THE PATIO? I HAVE NOT TOUCHED THE STRUCTURE OF OUR HOUSE.
WE EXTENDED THE PATIO, AND WE REMEDIATED OR MODIFIED THE PATIO TO BRING IT BACK TO...
CODE, ACCORDING TO THE PERMIT.
PART OF THAT PATIO OR THE EROSION ISSUE, IF YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S AN EROSION ISSUE, WHEN I WAS THERE TODAY, BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES, YOU COME UP THE STAIRS FROM THE HOUSE, THERE IS NOW A LANDING.
AND I ASKED MR. ROTH ABOUT IT TODAY, AND HE SAID THAT INDEED THERE WAS A LANDING THERE.
SO I WAS ABLE TO CONTACT A REALTOR WHO GOT ME PICTURES OF THE ORIGINAL MOS.
THERE WAS A LANDING THERE, BUT THE OLD LANDING IS PAVERS, BUT THEY RUN WITH THE ELEVATION.
SO THE HILL GOES LIKE THIS, AND SO DO THE PAVERS.
NO, I SENT YOU THE PICTURES TODAY.
I SHARED THEM WITH YOU AS WELL, BRIAN.
I'M TELLING YOU, IT WAS A FLAT LANDING.
I DON'T KNOW WHY ANYONE WOULD HAVE A LANDING THAT WENT LIKE THIS.
AND I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT IT MATTERS RIGHT NOW.
WELL, I GUESS WHAT MATTERS IS YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF EROSION BECAUSE OF THIS HILL.
AND YOU'VE ADDED, I SAW THE EROSION TODAY, YOU'VE ADDED TO IT BY MAKING MODIFICATIONS ON YOUR PROPERTY, AND NOW YOU'RE ASKING US FOR A VARIANCE.
AND I'M HAVING A VERY HARD TIME SAYING YES TO THIS BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT WAS DONE AND HOW IT'S DONE, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROOF THAT THERE WAS AN EROSION ISSUE THAT YOU HAD TO PUT THESE WALLS IN.
YOU HAVE A REPORT FROM AN ENGINEER THAT CAME IN AFTER THE WALLS WERE BUILT.
WHY WOULD I HAVE A REPORT FROM AN ENGINEER BEFORE THE WALL WAS BUILT? BECAUSE IF THERE WAS AN EROSION ISSUE, I WOULD THINK YOU'D WANT THE ENGINEER TO TELL YOU THAT YOU NEEDED TO BUILD THE WALL.
YOU JUST TOLD US THAT REPORT WAS WRITTEN AFTER THE WALLS WERE PUT IN.
I HAVE EROSION ISSUE DOWN BELOW AND THAT'S WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED.
AND THEN AFTER THE FACT, DURING THIS PROCESS IS WHEN I WENT BACK AND ASKED FOR A FORMAL LETTER.
[00:35:06]
I'M NOT ASKING FOR A VARIANCE.I'M ASKING FOR A CUP APPROVAL ONLY ON THE RETAINING WALL.
THE VARIANCE IS WITH RESPECT FOR THE SHED.
THE PATIO DIDN'T NEED YOUR APPROVAL, JUST NEEDED STAFF APPROVAL, AND IT WAS NOT A VARIANCE EITHER.
I WANT TO JUST PARAPHRASE WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT FOR THIS ASPECT OF THIS RESOLUTION, THIS PORTION FOR THESE RETAINING WALLS, BASED UPON THE MODIFICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO THE CITY AS AN UPDATE TO THE EXISTING RETAINING WALLS, IF THEY ARE COMPLETED AS PRESENTED, THIS WILL NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE.
IT WOULD BE WITHIN CODE, AND WE'RE JUST SIMPLY APPROVING A CUP.
I WOULD PROPOSE WE HANDLE THIS SEPARATELY, AND WE CAN, I THINK, DEAL WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CUP, PERHAPS THE WAIVER.
SIX-MONTH WAITING PERIOD SEPARATE FROM THE SHED ISSUE.
SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT WITH RESPECT TO THE BIFURCATED ISSUES, THE CUP AND THE WAIVER.
IN MY EYES, I SEE IT THAT I WILL MAKE A MOTION FOR LA-26-00015 AT 1200 WILDHURST TRAIL.
TO APPROVE THE WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL WAITING PERIOD AND DENY THE AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION? CAN YOU RESTATE THE MOTION, PLEASE? I'LL JUST DO THE FINAL PART.
TO APPROVE THE WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL WAITING PERIOD, AND TO DENY THE AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? I WANT TO SHARE MY THOUGHTS ON THIS, BECAUSE HAVING READ THE ENGINEERING REPORT AND HAVING SEEN HOW THIS HAS UNFOLDED, THESE WALLS ARE INSIDE THE 75-FOOT.
I AM NOT CONVINCED SEEING EROSION ISSUES IN OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY, SEEING SLOPE FAILURES IN SOME OF OUR PUBLIC PARKS, BIG ISLAND BEING ONE OF THEM, THAT THIS ISSUE COULDN'T HAVE BEEN REMEDIATED WITH VEGETATION FIRST, AS SOMETHING THAT COULD BE TRIED AT LEAST, AND THAT THIS PROBLEM BEGAN BECAUSE OF THE REMOVAL OF VEGETATION.
WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS NATIVE IS NOT REALLY THE POINT.
THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT HAS SNOWBALLED.
AND I DON'T APPROVE OF THIS TYPE OF APPLICATION COMING BEFORE US FOR CUP WHEN WALLS WERE BUILT WITHOUT THE CORRECT PROCESS AND THAT THERE WERE NOT OTHER WAYS OF MITIGATION HAPPENING HERE.
I DON'T WANT TO USE MY VOTE TO REWARD OR ENCOURAGE THIS TYPE OF SITUATION HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE, WHICH IS WHY I'M VOTING NO ON THIS ONE.
THE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I'M LIKELY TO VOTE AGAINST THAT MOTION.
I THINK WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE ROTH HAS ATTEMPTED TO AND ACCOMPLISHED MITIGATION OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD HERE.
AS I'VE BEEN OUT THERE SEVERAL TIMES IN THE AREA, IF WE ARE BASICALLY SAYING YOU'VE GOT TO TAKE THAT WHOLE WALL OUT, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME SERIOUS EROSION PROBLEMS AT THIS POINT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'D BE ACCOMPLISHING OTHER THAN...
RIGHT, AND THE IDEA IS NOT TO PUNISH.
THE IDEA IS TO PREVENT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN THE FUTURE.
AND AGAIN, HAVING STUDIED AND SEEN MANY OTHER PLACES IN THE CITY THAT ARE MUCH MORE SLOPED THAN THIS ONE, THAT HAVE BEEN REVEGETATED SUCCESSFULLY, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO BE SEEING MORE OF THIS.
TYPE OF PROJECT IN THE FUTURE COMING BEFORE US, WHICH IS WHY
[00:40:01]
I JUST DON'T SUPPORT THIS ONE.AND I BELIEVE IT COULD BE REMEDIATED.
FURTHER DISCUSSION? VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION, VERY, VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION.
TWO NEIGHBORS IN REGARDS TO THAT AND TO WHAT HAPPENED IN REGARDS TO THE LENGTH OF TIME IN REGARDS TO THAT.
BUT I FEEL THE SAME WAY THAT TO THE TIMELINE I'M FINE WITH AND I WOULD.
ANY COMMENT, OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST, SHOULD WE CALL THE QUESTION? I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT ABOUT IT, JUST BECAUSE OF WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY WITH LISTENING TO OUR CITIZENS WHEN THERE'S COMPLAINTS AND HOW QUICKLY WE CAN SOLVE THEM.
THIS COMPLAINT CAME IN TWO YEARS AGO, AND I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY IT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN BEFORE US A LONG TIME AGO.
BRIAN, IF YOU'RE SAYING IT WAS OUR FAULT BECAUSE THAT YOU COULDN'T GET THIS IN EARLIER, THEN I...
I'M NOT PLACING BLAME ON ANYONE.
I'M JUST, I LISTED SOME OF THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WHY IT HAS TAKEN A WHILE.
TWO YEARS IS A LONG TIME TO TRY TO GET SOMETHING DONE HERE, AND I JUST, I KIND OF LOST FAITH THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF.
I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO NOW, BUT...
THIS TIMELINE IS VERY, IT'S JUST, IT'S WAY TOO LONG FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS TO HAVE BEEN DRAGGED ON.
ALL RIGHT, I'LL CALL THE QUESTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE SIX-MONTH, WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH RESUBMITTAL WAITING PERIOD AND DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH RESPECT TO THE RETAINING WALLS.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER MOTIONS TO BE MADE ON THIS OR SHOULD WE GO ON TO THE NEXT ONE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
I WILL MAKE A MOTION ON THIS TO APPROVE THE WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH WAITING PERIOD AND ALSO APPROVAL OF THE CUP FOR THE RETAINING WALLS SUBJECT TO INCLUDE MORE NATIVE PLANTINGS FOR SCREENING.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING THAT SPECIFICALLY SAYS THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE WITHIN A THREE-MONTH TIME FRAME.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECOND.
BUT CAN WE GET THAT THREE-MONTH TIME FRAME? IS THAT DOABLE BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO GET A PERMIT ISSUED? THE WORK HAS TO BE DONE WITHIN THREE MONTHS.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IF THE WORK ISN'T DONE IN THREE MONTHS? IT CERTAINLY CAN BE.
IT WOULD BE THIS MOTION CALLS OUT FOR INCLUDING MORE NATIVE PLANTINGS FOR SCREENING.
CAN STAFF CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANS? WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THESE WALLS IS GOING TO BE SCREENED? ALL OF THEM? IS IT GOING TO BE YEAR-ROUND? IT WAS THE INTENT OF STAFF TO REQUIRE ADDITIONAL NATIVE PLANTINGS THAT WOULD FULLY SCREEN THE WALL YEAR-ROUND.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT IS AWARE OF AND IS IN AGREEMENT WITH.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT, BUT I WILL RELY ON STAFF.
YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK IF WE GET A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF PLANTINGS AND IF WE KNOW WHAT THEY ARE AND KNOW WHAT THEIR MATURITY IS GOING TO BE, I THINK IT'S REASONABLE IF YOU'RE WILLING TO.
YEAH, THE EXPECTATION IS NOT THAT I TAKE OUT EXISTING PLANTINGS, CORRECT? NO.
I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY THIS POINT SO THAT THERE'S NOT CONFUSION GOING FORWARD.
SO I WOULD LIKE, FOR THE RECORD AT THIS TIME, TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR WITH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT ABOUT WHAT EXACTLY IS GOING TO BE TAKING PLACE WITH THESE PLANTINGS ON THOSE WALLS.
SO ARE WE CLEAR ON THAT, STAFF, APPLICANT? I DON'T, WHAT I REALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE.
IS QUESTIONS AFTER TODAY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T KNOW OR STAFF HASN'T SAID ANYTHING, I THINK THIS IS THE TIME TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR ON THE EXPECTATIONS OF THESE PLANTINGS.
SO AS LONG AS THAT'S BEEN DONE, THAT'S ALL I HAD.
I WILL HAVE QUESTIONS ON THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT A NATIVE PLANT.
[00:45:03]
ABOUT SCREENING YEAR-ROUND ALL OF THE WALLS.I THINK PART OF YOUR RESOLUTION, YOU HAD TWO PLANTS YOU MENTIONED WEREN'T NATIVE, BUT THEY WERE.
THE PLANTS THAT HE PROPOSED AND HAS PLANTED NOW ARE APPROPRIATE FOR OUR CLIMATE, WHICH IS GREAT.
BOTH STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION WANTED ADDITIONAL NATIVE PLANTS INTEGRATED INTO THAT THAT WOULD ALL SCREEN YEAR-ROUND.
BUT NEITHER STAFF NOR PLANNING WAS REQUIRING NON-NATIVE? NO.
SO I'VE HEARD STAFF AGREE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HELP THE APPLICANT, AND THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO BE TAKING DIRECTION FROM STAFF, BUT AGREES WITH THOSE CONDITIONS.
THAT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
TO APPROVE THE WAIVER OF THE SIX-MONTH APPLICATION WAITING PERIOD, RESUBMITTAL PERIOD, AND THE CONDITIONAL USE OF PERMITTING.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT? SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THIS IS NOT DONE IN THREE MONTHS? I THINK OUR APPROVAL GOES AWAY.
IS THAT CORRECT, STAN? YES, SIR.
IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS...
CUP IT COMES BACK FOR VACATION.
FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
MOTION CARRIES THREE VOTES TO TWO.
OKAY, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE OTHER PART OF THIS, WHICH IS THE AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE FOR THE SHED.
SECOND MATTER TONIGHT RELATES TO THE LOCATION OF A SMALL STORAGE SHED.
MY PROPERTY POSES CHALLENGES IN FINDING A SUITABLE LOCATION FOR A SHED TO STORE MY LAWN TRACTOR, LAWNMOWER, AND OTHER LAWN TOOLS.
A FEW YEARS AGO I CONSTRUCTED A SHED LOCATED IN TREES ON THE LAKE ON THE EDGE OF THE LAKESIDE YARD.
THE SHED IS NOT LOCATED WITHIN THE 75 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE LAKESHORE BUT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK.
I KNOW THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK, OR ALS, RULES IN ORONO HAVE BEEN MUCH DISCUSSED LATELY.
THE INTENT OF THE RULE IS TO PROTECT THE SIGHT LINES TO THE LAKE.
MY REQUEST TONIGHT IS FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK RULES.
THE FIRST REASON IS THE SHED HAS NO IMPACT ON NEIGHBORS' VIEW OF THE LAKE.
DUE TO THE STEEP SLOPE OF OUR LAKESIDE YARD, THE TOP OF THE SHED IS 13 FEET.
BELOW THE FOUNDATION OF MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE, THE ONLY NEIGHBOR IMPACTED BY THE SHED LOCATION.
DO YOU HAVE THAT DIAGRAM? YEAH.
OKAY, SO THAT IS THE CROSS SECTION.
YOU CAN SEE THE SHED LOCATION TO THE LEFT.
IT'S 13 FEET, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
TO THE ELEVATION WHICH MATCHES THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOUSE AT 1214 WILDHURST TRAIL, WHICH IS MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
MY HOUSE IS 1200 WILDHURST TRAIL, SLIGHTLY IN FRONT OF THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
BOTH OF THEM ARE WELL ABOVE THE TOP OF THE SHED.
IN YOUR PACKET, YOU'LL FIND A LETTER FROM THE IMPACTED NEIGHBOR AT 1214 WILDHURST TRAIL, WHOSE PROPERTY LINE IS ADJACENT TO THE SHED.
THEIR WRITTEN COMMENTS ARE THAT THEY DO NOT OBJECT TO THE SHED STAYING AS BUILT.
THEY SUBMIT THAT ITS CURRENT LOCATION IS PREFERRED TO ANY OTHER PLACE ON OUR PROPERTY.
SO THE PARTY, THE ALS RULES EXIST TO PROTECT AS WAIVED ANY CONCERNS.
DO YOU HAVE THE PICTURES THEN TOO? YEAH.
DO YOU HAVE THE OTHER ONE? YEAH.
SO THAT IS A PICTURE FROM THE FOUNDATION, AGAIN, OF MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE OF 2014.
AND YOU CAN SEE JUST BARELY THAT THE SHED STICKS OUT JUST TO THE LEFT THERE.
YOU CAN SEE HOW FAR BELOW GRADE, BUT BELOW THE FOUNDATION THAT IS.
[00:50:01]
RIGHT? RIGHT.SO IF WE WERE TO REQUIRE YOU TO MOVE THAT OUT, IT WOULD BE STICKING OUT OF THAT GROVE OF TREES, CORRECT? A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, YEP.
HOW CLOSE TO THE BOUNDARY IS IT? FOUR FEET.
SO WE'RE JUST TALKING ONE FOOT.
WE COULD, I'LL GET TO THAT NOTE HERE.
SO THE SECOND REASON TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE IS THAT THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER CRITERION IS ACTUALLY BEST MET AT THIS CURRENT LOCATION.
THE SHED SITS IN A TREED AREA, SCREENED FROM THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH, AND HIDDEN FROM THE LAKE.
THE AERIAL PHOTO SHOWS IT WELL CONCEALED IN THE WOODS.
RELOCATING THE SHED TO A CONFORMING STREET-SIDE LOCATION, WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE IT MORE VISIBLE TO THE NEIGHBORS.
THE THIRD REASON RELATES TO THE UNIQUE PHYSICAL CONDITIONS OF OUR PROPERTY.
THE LOT IS NARROW, IRREGULAR, AND BURDENED BY AN UNUSUALLY LARGE ALS AREA THAT COVERS THE ENTIRE LAKESIDE YARD AND IS ON A SIGNIFICANT SLOPE.
STAFF ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE LARGE ALS AND THE SLOPE ARE SPECIAL.
MY POSITION IS THAT THESE CONDITIONS COMBINED MAKE THE WOODED SIDE YARD LOCATION THE MOST REASONABLE AND LEAST VISIBLY DISRUPTIVE SPOT FOR A SMALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, AND THE CONFORMING STREET SIZE ALTERNATIVES ARE INFERIOR ON ORONO'S ORDINANCE'S OWN SCREENING AND CHARACTER GOALS.
THE FACT IS THAT THERE IS NO IDEAL LOCATION ON OUR PROPERTY FOR A SHED, BUT ITS CURRENT LOCATION IS AS GOOD AS ANY FOR THE REASONS I MENTIONED.
DURING THEIR MEETING, SOME PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ARGUED THAT THE STREET-SIDE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE COMMON ALONG WILDHURST TRAIL, AND THEREFORE IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO RELOCATE OUR SHED TO THE STREET-SIDE YARD.
BUT TWO THINGS TO CONSIDER WITH THAT ARGUMENT.
FIRST, ALL PROPERTIES ARE NOT THE SAME.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PROPERTY MAP, WE HAVE A VERY LITTLE YARD STREET SIDE, WHEREAS MOST LOTS ALONG WILDHURST ARE WIDE ENOUGH TO FIND A GOOD LOCATION FOR A SHED.
ALSO, PLEASE NOTE THAT MANY OF THE EXAMPLES CITED FROM OTHER STRUCTURES ALONG THE WILDHURST TRAIL ARE THEMSELVES NON-COMPLIANT.
THEY'RE TOO CLOSE TO THE ROAD.
THEY ARE ABLE TO BE HIDDEN WITHOUT LOOKING OUT OF PLACE.
THE ONLY CONFORMING AREA NEAR THE STREET ON OUR LOT IS SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR YARD.
HERE IS A SATELLITE VIEW OF OUR FRONT YARD.
YOU CAN SEE TO THE SOUTH THERE IS OUR DRIVEWAY.
NORTH IS THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE GREEN IS THE PROPERTY LINES.
THE RED AREA I'VE MARKED OFF IS...
IS 15 FEET PLUS 10 FEET FROM THE ROAD, WHICH IS WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO TO BE IN COMPLIANCE.
I ALSO, TO BE IN COMPLIANCE, CANNOT PUT A SHED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE HOUSE.
SO THAT LEAVES ME VERY LITTLE AND AWKWARD AREA FOR A SHED TO BE LOCATED.
WHILE WE PREFER TO LEAVE THE SHED IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION, WE DO NOT HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM WITH RELOCATING THE SHED TO THIS STREET SIDE AREA IF A REASONABLE LOCATION IS FOUND.
THERE'S ANOTHER PICTURE IF YOU SHOW.
THIS IS A SATELLITE PICTURE AND THEN, YEAH, NOPE, NOPE, WELL, THAT IS MY, THAT'S OUR FRONT YARD.
AND THAT'S OUR VIEW WHEN YOU PASS BY ON WILDER'S TRAIL, AND THERE'S WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE WITH THE SHED THERE.
THERE'S ANOTHER PICTURE THAT HAS THE LINES IN IT THAT'S SIMILAR TO THAT.
I RISKED MY LIFE, LIVING LIFE, TO GET UP TO THE TOP OF OUR ROOF AND TAKE THAT PICTURE.
YOU CAN SEE THE YELLOW IS WHERE...
TO BE CONFORMING, I WOULD NEED TO PUT THE SHED IN THE WHITE.
I BUILT A PVC FRAME THAT IS THE SIZE OF THE CURRENT SHED, WHICH IS 10 FEET BY 11 THAT'S
[00:55:01]
WHERE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LOCATED OR FURTHER DOWN THE PICTURE.WHAT THE X MARKS ARE ARE WHAT WE WOULD THINK IS MORE REASONABLE LOCATIONS FOR THE SHED IF IT IS RELOCATED TO THE FRONT.
THE TOP X IS RIGHT BEHIND THOSE LILIES OR THOSE LILACS THAT ARE STREET SIDE AND THEN THE X DOWN BELOW IS RIGHT AT THE END OF THIS LITTLE PARKING SPOT WHICH WOULD BE A NICE LOCATION FOR A SHED AS WELL INSTEAD OF RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.
THAT WOULD BE AS I UNDERSTAND ANOTHER REQUEST FOR A BARRIER.
YES, I'M SORRY THAT WOULD BE REQUIRE A VARIANCE BECAUSE IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE YELLOW AREAS.
ONE LAST NOTE, LIKE BOB SAID, THE SHED IS ALSO CURRENTLY LOCATED WITHIN THE SIDE SETBACK.
IF A VARIANCE FROM THE ALS IS APPROVED, THEN WE WOULD MOVE THE SHED INTO COMPLIANCE RELATIVE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK BY MOVING IT FURTHER AWAY AND BY ROTATING OR SOMEHOW MODIFYING THE SHED SO THAT WE CONFORM TO THE NINE.
A VARIANCE IS USED WHEN A STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE CITY CODE RESULTS IN AN UNREASONABLE CONCLUSION.
THE CITY HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT IT'S WILLING TO GRANT ALS VARIANCES FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS WHEN THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCE'S PURPOSE AND THE IMPACTS ARE LIMITED.
TONIGHT, I REQUEST YOU TO RELY ON YOUR DISCRETION AND REASONABLENESS NOT A STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE, AND USE THE VARIANCE TOOL TO SUPPORT AN OUTCOME THAT ALLOWS A STORAGE SHED, ONE THAT'S SMALL AND HARMS NO ONE, TO BE LOCATED IN A SPOT THAT IS REASONABLE AND IS LEAST VISIBLY DISRUPTIVE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT HERE? OKAY, DISCUSSION? THANK YOU.
SO THE TREES DOWN THERE AT THE LAKE ARE DECIDUOUS, WHICH MEANS THEY LOSE THEIR LEAVES IN THE WINTER.
SO I DON'T AGREE THAT IT HARMS NO ONE.
THERE'S A DIFFERENT VIEWSHED IN THE WINTER AS IN THE SUMMER.
AND I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF AND PLANNING ON THIS ONE.
LOTS ARE NOT ALWAYS DESIGNED IN A WAY THAT MAKE EVERYTHING CONVENIENT.
I DO KNOW IN TALKING TO STAFF THAT AS IT RELATES TO POOL TOYS, THIS TYPE OF CONVENIENCE THAT LOCK BOXES ARE, AVAILABLE TO BE PLACED DOWN AT THE LAKESIDE FOR THAT TYPE OF CONVENIENCE, BUT LAWNMOWERS AND SUCH NEED TO BE IN GARAGES OR IN SHEDS THAT ARE CONFORMING, AND THIS ONE ISN'T.
SO FOR ME, THIS IS A FAIRLY EASY ONE, AND THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN THERE THAT LONG AND THAT WE'VE DISCOVERED IT AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, IT'S A GOOD TIME TO GET IT INTO CONFORMANCE, IN MY OPINION, AND STAFF AND PLANNING RECOMMENDED THAT, SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THEM ON THIS ONE.
I WAS GOING TO SAY, I'D AGREE WITH WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BENSON SAID.
AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT AS WELL.
AND SO I WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY THE VARIANCE WITH THE SHOVEL AND THE ALS AND SIDE YARD SETBACK.
FURTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH, I GUESS AS I LOOK AT THIS, MAYBE THE CURRENT OWNERS OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY THE NEXT OWNERS DON'T COME IN DOWN THE STREETS AND ALL THIS THAT'S MY YOUNG THING ANY OTHER COMMENTS OKAY, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE AYE ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES THANKS VERY MUCH FOR COMING TO THE MEETING AND
[12) LA26-000029, 3125 Casco Circle, Variance, Resolution 7697]
PLAYING YOUR POSITION ALL RIGHT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 12, WHICH IS ANOTHER VARIANCE REQUEST, AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE REQUEST, FOR 3125 CASCO CIRCLE.AND MR. CARNEY HAS THAT ONE, SO WHY DON'T YOU PLEASE GIVE US SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS.
MAYOR AND FELLOW CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, MATTHEW CARNEY WITH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WALKING YOU THROUGH THIS VARIANCE AT 3125 ESCO CIRCLE.
[01:00:06]
THIS IS AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE.THIS IS FOR THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH INCLUDE A POOL, A PATIO, AND RETAINING WALLS.
THEY ARE NOT LOCATED WITHIN THE LAKESHORE, BUT ARE WITHIN THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK AS ESTABLISHED.
TO SPEAK BROADLY TO THE AFTER-THE-FACT PORTION OF THIS REQUEST, IT IS AT NO FAULT OF THE APPLICANT.
IT WAS AS A RESULT OF STAFF APPROVING NOT ONLY A NEW RESIDENTIAL HOME PERMIT AND A POOL PERMIT IN ERROR WITH GRADE CHANGES THAT ULTIMATELY ALLOWED FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO BE PLACED GREATER THAN 42 INCHES ABOVE THE EXISTING GRADE.
WHICH TRIGGERS THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK.
IT'S NOT THE GRADING ITSELF THAT TRIGGERS THAT ORDINANCE, IT'S THE PLACEMENT OF STRUCTURES ON ANY GRADE THAT'S HIGHER THAN 42 INCHES ABOVE THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITION AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.
TO SEGUE, THIS IS WHAT THE PROPERTY LOOKED LIKE BY SURVEY AT THE TIME THE NEW HOME PERMIT WAS APPLIED FOR IN 2025.
WHAT WE CAN SEE HERE IS THAT THE, WE'LL CALL IT THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SITE, CONTAINED A MUCH SMALLER HOME THAN WHAT IS THERE PRESENTLY, AND FAVORING THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
WHAT YOU CAN SEE ON THERE AS WELL, AND I'LL TOUCH ON A LITTLE BIT LATER, IS THAT THERE WAS AN EXISTING PATIO AT AN ELEVATION OF 950 FEET.
WHILE ESTABLISHED, THAT ELEVATION IS BECAUSE 950 FEET IS ALSO THE ELEVATION OF THE PRESENT IMPROVEMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTED HOME.
AND JUST A FEW PHOTOS TO WALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THESE PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS, SOME OF WHICH HAVE BEEN SUPPLIED BY THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS TO HELP PROVIDE A LITTLE ADDITIONAL CONTEXT AS TO WHAT THE PROPERTY LOOKED LIKE PREVIOUSLY.
THE BOTTOM RIGHT-HAND PHOTO IS MORE OF AN OVERHEAD VIEW FROM HENNEPIN, MORE OF AN OBLIQUE VIEW TO THE LEFT SHOWING THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS.
THE RIGHT-HAND PHOTO IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A LEFT-HAND VIEW.
SHOWING THE HOME MISSION BEFORE.
HOW HIGH WAS THAT PATIO WALL PREVIOUSLY FROM THE GRADE? IF I GET THE ACTUAL VERSION OF THIS OPEN WHERE IT'S A LITTLE LESS CHOPPY ON THE ELEVATION VALUES, I COULD MORE THAN LIKELY FIND THAT FOR YOU.
IN TERMS OF APPROVED CONDITIONS.
STAFF REALLY DID HAVE TWO CHANCES AT THIS AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS APPLIED FOR A NEW HOME PERMIT WHERE GRADING WAS PROPOSED, AND AGAIN WITH THE POOL PERMIT, AGAIN SHOWING MORE OF THE COMPLETION OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS.
THIS PARTICULAR SURVEY SHOWS WHAT THE IMPROVEMENTS WERE BEGINNING TO LOOK LIKE AT THE TIME THAT THE POOL WAS APPLIED FOR WITH SOME SCREENING METHODS SHOWN ON THE NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN WALLS AS WELL.
THE IMAGE THAT WE HAVE IN THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER IS PERHAPS A SNAPSHOT OF A FEW MONTHS AGO, I BELIEVE, FROM THE MOST RECENT AERIAL IMAGERY THAT WE HAVE WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY.
IN TERMS OF PROJECT INFORMANTS, THIS IS A GRAPHIC THAT I PUT TOGETHER FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
VERY LOW LEVEL, BUT ENOUGH TO SHOW GENERALLY THE DEPARTURE FROM THE APPROVED GRADES OF THE PROJECT.
WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IN GREEN, STAFF BELIEVES, IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CODE.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT MORE THAN 42 INCHES OF INCREASE FROM THAT EXISTING GRADE AT THE TIME OF THE NEW HOME PERMIT.
IT'S CLOSE, BUT STILL NOT WITHIN CONFORMANCE.
ORANGE AND PINK ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A DEPARTURE FROM THAT EXISTING CONDITION.
WE'RE LOOKING AT AT LEAST THREE FEET IN CONTRAST TO THE EXISTING CONDITION.
BUT SPECIFICALLY THE PHOTO THAT WE HAVE HERE.
SHOWS THE AS CONSTRUCTED CONDITION.
THE LANDSCAPING HASN'T BEEN COMPLETED YET.
THE HOME IS FINALED ESSENTIALLY, BUT THE LANDSCAPING AND THE COMPLETION OF THE WAKE YARD ISN'T DONE.
THIS IS A PRESENT PHOTO OF THE PROPERTY AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW SHOWING FROM THE LOWER WALL HERE.
IT'S THIS UPPER WALL HERE THAT I'LL CALL TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT IS UPWARDS OF 8 FEET HIGHER THAN THAT EXISTING GRADE.
THE WALL WAS PROPOSED TO BE 42 INCHES ABOVE THE PROPOSED GRADE.
HOWEVER, THE TOP OF THE WALL IS UPWARDS OF 8 FEET HIGHER THAN THAT PRE-EXISTING GRADE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT NOTATION FOR YOU.
MATT, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT THAT PHOTO? GO FOR IT.
WHEN YOU HAVE THE GREEN THAT'S ON THE LAKE SIDE, IT CONFORMS WITH ALS AND CITY CODE, SO I'M CONFUSED.
SO YOU SAID AT THAT POINT, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT'S ONLY
[01:05:01]
42 INCHES ABOVE THE ORIGINAL GRADE? YES.I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR ON THAT.
BECAUSE I KNOW THAT I'VE HEARD THAT THE PROPERTY WAS LOWER THAN THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR TO IT, SO I JUST WANTED TO...
AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, JUST WITH...
THE CONTRAST THAT WE'RE SEEING HERE, SOME OF THE CLOSER VALUES ARE ON THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE OPPOSED TO THE NORTH.
THERE WAS A HIGHER ELEVATION ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE, BUT IN GENERAL, THIS WAS DEFINITELY SITTING A LOT LOWER, AS WAS THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AS WELL.
SO IN TERMS OF THE AS-BUILT CONDITIONS, THIS IS ALONG THE LINES OF THE SURVEY THAT WE WOULD RECEIVE FROM THE APPLICANT AT THE COMPLETION OF THE HOME PROJECT.
THIS WAS SUPPLIED FOR THIS APPLICATION, REALLY SHOWING THE PRESENT CONDITIONS THAT WE ARE SEEING OR WHERE THE CONDITIONS WOULD BE COMPLETED ULTIMATELY IF LANDSCAPING IS COMPLETED AND THE GRADES ARE BROUGHT TO WHERE THEY WERE PLANNED WITH THE PREVIOUS SURVEYS.
I DON'T HAVE TOO MANY COMMENTS HERE BECAUSE REALLY THIS IS...
THE SCREENSHOT OF THAT WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL, BUT WE CAN TOUCH ON THIS SURVEY AS NEEDED.
AND I HAVE UPWARDS OF 40 PHOTOS.
THERE'S, I WANT TO SAY, AT LEAST A DOZEN OR SO PROVIDED BY THE NEIGHBORS AS WELL THAT WE CAN CYCLE THROUGH AS NEEDED IF MORE VIEWPOINTS ARE DESIRED.
BUT THESE TWO, I THINK, ARE PROBABLY TWO OF THE MOST CRITICAL.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK, IT'S FROM THE CLOSEST LAKEWARD PROTRUSIONS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
ALTHOUGH I'M NOT ON THE DECKS THEMSELVES, I'M STANDING BELOW THE DECKS WHICH CONSTITUTE THE CLOSEST LAKEWARD PROTRUSIONS ON THE ADJACENT LOTS AND TRYING TO CAPTURE WHAT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE AT AN ANGLE ACROSS THE YARDS OF THOSE APPLICABLE NEIGHBORS.
IN TERMS OF VARIANCE REVIEW, WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY CRITERIA AND HOW THE VARIANCE DID OR DID NOT MEET IT.
I THINK WITH THE VOTE BEING 4-3, THAT THERE WAS ENOUGH DISCUSSION ABOUT STAFF'S FINDINGS, THAT PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES WERE MORE OR LESS ESTABLISHED, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS ABLE TO SUPPORT AS WELL.
I THINK THERE WAS SOME DIFFICULTY WITH A FEW OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT THEY DIDN'T FEEL THAT THE PRACTICE WAS AS GOOD AS IT WAS.
PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY WAS ESTABLISHED AND WHETHER THAT'S BECAUSE IT WAS BEING APPLIED AFTER THE FACT OR BECAUSE THERE WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT IT PRIOR TO THE WORK BEING DONE I'M NOT TOO SURE BUT THE DISCUSSION REALLY FOCUSED ON THE ABILITY OF THE APPLICATION TO MEET THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY CRITERION I BELIEVE THEY VOTED HOW THEY FELT IN THAT MATTER BUT IN TERMS OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION GOING THROUGH THE CRITERIA OF APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THESE POINTS REALLY FROM THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND REALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT A 50-FOOT DECREASE FROM CASCO CIRCLE ALL THE WAY TO THE LAKESHORE.
IT'S A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE, BUT WITH THE HOUSE BEING WHERE IT'S LOCATED, IT'S USING THAT SAME WALKOUT ELEVATION OF THE PREVIOUS HOME, WHICH IN MANY ASPECTS IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD ENCOURAGE TO UTILIZE THE EXISTING CONDITIONS TO THE BEST EXTENT POSSIBLE TO REALLY LIMIT THAT DISTURBANCE.
HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A VERY SMALL HOME THAT DID INCREASE IN SIZE IN A PERMITTED FASHION.
IT MEETS REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK.
BUT IN THAT REGARD, ADDITIONAL GRADE NEEDED TO BE ADDED ON THAT NORTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE TO ALLOW FOR A HOME OF THAT SIZE.
IN GENERAL, BASED ON THE PHOTOS THAT WERE TAKEN, REALLY FROM THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS WELL AS DOWN AT THE LAKESHORE DOCUMENTING THE PROPERTY, STAFF BELIEVES THAT THE SIGHT LINES OF THE LAKE ARE MINIMALLY IMPACTED.
REALLY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A 160-FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE EDGE OF THE RETAINING WALLS AT THE POOL AND THE LAKE ITSELF.
THEY'RE FAIRLY DEEP LAKE YARDS FOR THE MOST PART, AND SIGHT LINES TO BE IMPACTED INVOLVES LOOKING PRETTY SUBSTANTIALLY OVER A NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY IN ORDER TO DO SO.
IN GENERAL, AS I TOUCHED ON, THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE LOCATED WELL OUTSIDE OF THE LAKESHORE, AND IN GENERAL, WE'RE FINDING THAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NOT ALTERING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THESE IMPROVEMENTS REALLY COULD BE PROPOSED ON MANY OF THESE DEEPER LOTS IN CASCO THAT DO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY OUTSIDE OF THE LAKESHORE IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE TYPES OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
I DON'T THINK THAT ALL THE PROPERTIES WOULD HAVE THE TYPES OF CONSTRAINTS AS THIS PROPERTY WHEN IT COMES TO GETTING THAT LEVEL WALKOUT GRADE FROM A HOME.
IN GENERAL, WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT GRADING IS NECESSARY IN SOME FORM TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE ACCESSORY IMPROVEMENTS, BUT ALSO TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE.
KNOWING THAT THERE IS THAT SIGNIFICANT SLOPE COMING FROM THE STREET.
AND ADDITIONALLY, AS I SHOWED IN THE POOL PERMIT SURVEY, WHICH WOULD BE THE APPROVED
[01:10:02]
PLAN FOR THIS APPLICATION, THAT THERE ARE TREES PROPOSED ALONGSIDE THAT PATIO TO SCREEN THAT SPACE FROM ADJACENT NEIGHBORS AS WELL.SO IN SUMMARY, THIS IS AN AFTER-THE-FACT AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, INCLUDING A POOL, PATIO, AND RETAINING WALLS.
SPECIFICALLY, THE PORTIONS THAT ARE MORE THAN 42 INCHES ABOVE THE EXISTING GRADE AT THE TIME OF THE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE NEW HOME.
IN TERMS OF PUBLIC COMMENTS, I PROVIDED YOU SOME PAPER COPIES OF SOME THAT WE'D RECEIVED OVER THE WEEKEND AND TODAY.
I BELIEVE TWO ADDITIONAL FROM CASCO CIRCLE AS WELL AND THE NEIGHBORS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH THAT BOTH SPOKE AT THE MEETING.
AS WELL AS A NEIGHBOR, TWO HOUSES TO THE NORTH SPOKE AT THE MEETING BUT DID NOT SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION.
IN GENERAL, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE, AS DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ON A VOTE OF 4-3.
AND WE ASK THAT COUNCIL ACTS ON THE DRAFTED APPROVAL RESOLUTION THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET.
I DO BELIEVE LAURA HAS A FEW WORDS THAT SHE'D LIKE TO SHARE REGARDING THIS.
I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE A NOTE FROM MATT'S PRESENTATION.
AFTER THE FACT, APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE REVIEWED BASED ON ANALYSIS OF THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY STANDARDS, AND THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE REVIEWED AS IF THE IMPROVEMENTS ESSENTIALLY HAVE NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED YET ON IF THIS PROJECT MEETS THE MERITS OF PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES.
THE AVERAGE LAKE SHORE SETBACK INTENT IS INTENDED TO PROTECT NEIGHBORS' VIEWS OF THE LAKE.
ANY VARIANCES FROM THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT SHOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHETHER OR NOT VIEWS OF THE LAKE ARE IMPACTED.
YOU ALL KNOW, I'M FAMILIAR WITH, THE CITY REGULARLY RECEIVES REQUESTS FOR VARIANCES FOR AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK.
IT'S A COMMON, AND IT IS COMMON THAT SITE GRADING AND LAND ALTERATION IMPACTS HOW IMPROVEMENTS ARE PLACED WITHIN THE AVERAGE LAKESHORE SETBACK.
RECENT DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COUNCIL HAVE IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES WITH THIS REGULATION, AS YOU ARE ALL AWARE.
AN ELEMENT OF THIS APPLICATION IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO REQUESTED TO WAIVE THE APPLICATION FEE.
SINCE THIS WAS COME TO LIGHT BASED ON STAFF ISSUING A PERMIT IN ERROR, IT IS SOMETHING THAT APPLICANTS HAVE ASKED FOR IN THE PAST AND IS SOMETHING THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER AS PART OF A MOTION ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU'D LIKE TO WAIVE THE APPLICATION FEE ON THE APPLICANT FOR THE LAND USE APPLICATION.
LASTLY, WHILE MATT WAS GIVING HIS PRESENTATION, MAYOR TUNHEIM, THE ORIGINAL WALL, THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THAT HOUSE.
SO THAT CIRCULAR PATIO FROM EXISTING GRADE TO THE TOP OF PATIO IS ROUGHLY SIX FEET TALL, JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE.
AND I KNOW MATT HAS PLENTY OF PHOTOS AND OTHER INFORMATION HE CAN SHARE WITH YOU AS YOU WORK THROUGH YOUR DISCUSSION.
AND THAT PATIO, THAT OLD PATIO, WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE...
IT'S THE GREEN SPACE, KIND OF OVER THE POOL.
SO ALL THAT POOL, THAT GREEN SPACE OVER THE POOL KIND OF SHOWS THE EXISTING, THE ORIGINAL PATIO LOCATION.
SO JUST LOOKING AT THIS, AND THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, IT'S HELPFUL.
I DO QUESTION WHY, AND I CAN UNDERSTAND AN AVERAGE LAKESHORE VARIANCE FOR BUILDING THIS TYPE OF STRUCTURE.
AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER, IF ONE OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS CHOSE TO...
BUILD AT THIS TIME A STRUCTURE OF 42 INCHES OR BELOW THAT FAR OUT, WE COULD APPROVE THAT.
MY STRUGGLE WITH THIS IS THAT WE ARE NOT JUST GRANTING A VARIANCE, BUT THESE HEIGHTS EXCEED, THEY EXCEED THE 42 INCHES.
AND THAT'S WHERE I COME INTO A PROBLEM.
I UNDERSTAND IN THIS SORT OF QUASI-JUDICIAL ROLE, WE ARE WORKING WITH THE CODE AND THE ORDINANCES THAT WE HAVE.
WE HAVE, I WOULD CALL IT A CONSISTENT LACK OF SUPPORT WITH SOME OF THESE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, MULTIPLE LETTERS AND PHONE CALLS, WHATNOT.
AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A PLAN HERE AGAIN, WHERE IT'S NOT JUST AN ALS VARIANCE, WE ARE EXCEEDING THE 42 INCHES.
SO THAT IS WHERE I STRUGGLE WITH THIS.
AND I DON'T THINK IT'S BEING...
OVERLY CRITICAL IN THESE INSTANCES.
AS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, I'M NOT A BIG, I DON'T REALLY FAVOR MORE MASSING AND MORE STRUCTURE IN THESE AREAS ON THE LAKE.
SO I PERSONALLY PREFER TO DISCOURAGE THAT TYPE OF BUILDING.
AND WHEN WE WANT TO MAXIMIZE THOSE THINGS AND WE GO OVER, THEN I DO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT.
SO THAT'S WHERE I'M STANDING RIGHT NOW.
[01:15:01]
WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDUCE SOME OF THIS.IS THAT CORRECT? OR WOULD IT HAVE TO BE DONE AWAY WITH? WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE? BECAUSE WE ARE EXCEEDING IN THESE AREAS FOR THESE WALLS, FOR THESE RETAINING WALLS.
ALL THE AREAS IN GREEN, ANYTHING WITH THE GOAL ABOVE THE ALLOWED AVERAGE, WE, IF DECIDED TO MOVE, WOULD THEN ADD.
THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS NOT, IN MY OPINION, A BLACK AND WHITE EITHER OR.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE TYPES OF THINGS ARE ALLOWED.
I HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING BEHIND THAT.
THOSE ARE MY INITIAL THOUGHTS.
WHAT IS PLANNED FOR THAT AREA TO THE NORTH OF THE POOL? PATIO, I GUESS IT'S GOT PATIO BRICKS ON PART OF IT, NOT ALL OF IT.
RIGHT ABOUT HERE? I BELIEVE THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE TURF OR LANDSCAPE.
IF THERE'S WAYS OF ALL SOMEHOW BE BECAUSE AT THAT CURRENT HEIGHT STANDING IN THE NEIGHBORS WALK OUT PATIO AREA IT DOES OBSTRUCT THEIR VIEW IT'S SIGNIFICANT I VISITED THE SITE TODAY AND WALKED AROUND THE ENTIRE AREA AND THE ENTIRE AREA BECAUSE OF THAT GREAT CHANGES OUT I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE QUITE HIGH UP THERE GIVEN THE PROPERTIES NEXT TO IT.
SO IN THAT WAY ALSO I WOULD SAY IN MY ESTIMATION THIS IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE SURROUNDINGS.
SO UNDERSTANDING THAT WE CAN DO CERTAIN THINGS IN THIS AREA, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THE OVERAGE.
OTHER COMMENTS OR WE COULD ASK THE PROPERTY OWNER TO COME PLEASE.
I AM HERE REPRESENTING 401 EAST LAKE STREET, WISSETA, MINNESOTA, 55391.
I AM HERE REPRESENTING THE BUILDER, NIH HOMES, WHO'S ALSO HERE, AND THE HOMEOWNER.
HI, JEREMY SKOKWIST, NIH HOMES, 6840 213TH AVENUE NW, THAT'S IN ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA, 55330.
YOU CAN PROBABLY GO TO THE FIRST SLIDE.
SO I HAD SOME AERIAL SHOTS TAKEN OVER THE WEEKEND.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S THE NEW HOUSE.
YOU CAN SEE THE POOL IN PLACE.
THE PRIOR PATIO WAS AT THAT ELEVATION.
THE PRIOR PATIO ACTUALLY DID STICK OUT ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE POOL CLOSER TO THE LAKE.
IT WAS SIX TO SEVEN FEET HIGH WITH A CONTINUOUS WALL ALL AROUND IT.
THERE'S A LITTLE SECTION OF POOL ON THE NORTH SIDE.
THAT WHERE THE PATIO WAS NOT THERE.
SO IN DESIGNING THE PLAN TO HAVE A PATIO AROUND THE POOL, WE BROUGHT UP THE GRADE ON THE NORTHERN SIDE, AND INSTEAD OF HAVING A SEVEN-FOOT WALL THAT WAS THERE BEFORE, WE TERRACED IT AND BROUGHT IT DOWN NICE AND GRADUAL.
FOR THE TIP OF CASCO, WE'RE AT 1.25 ACRES.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS AERIAL SHOT, IF YOU WERE TO STAND IN THE MIDDLE, THE BACK SIDE OF THE HOUSE TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH, AND YOU LOOK TOWARDS THE LAKE, YOU'RE NOT SEEING THE POOL AND PATIO.
IF YOU ARE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTIES.
SO, YEAH, I SHOULD HAVE PUT SOME LINES ON THERE.
BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S A REFERENCE OF...
OUR SITUATION, AGAIN, AS MATT MENTIONED, WE WERE APPROVED TWICE.
THE LANDSCAPE WALL WAS IN THAT PLAN.
THE SLIDE ON THE LEFT IS PRIOR TO NIH GETTING INVOLVED.
THAT'S WHEN THE HOMEOWNERS WERE LOOKING TO MAKE A PURCHASE OF THE HOUSE.
YOU CAN SEE SOME SIGNIFICANT FOLIAGE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE AND YOU CAN SEE THE BACK OF THE
[01:20:02]
PATIO RETAINING WALL THAT'S SIX TO SEVEN FEET HIGH.ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE NEW HOUSE AND I SAW IT PUT IN.
BUT THIS IS A GREAT FIT FOR THE TIP OF CASCO POINT.
THIS IS A TIMELESS HOUSE DESIGN.
AND WE HAVE SOME BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPING PLANNED.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE PRIOR HOUSE WAS IN DISREPAIR, HAD BEEN SITTING VACANT FOR ABOUT 10 YEARS, AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A HOARDER HOUSE.
IT WAS SAD, BUT WE THINK WE'VE MADE A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THIS IS OUR THIRD HOUSE THAT WE'VE BUILT ON CASCO POINT.
WE BUILD IN MANY COMMUNITIES AROUND THE TWIN CITIES, AND ALL THE RULES VARY.
SO THAT'S WHY WE RELY ON THE PERMIT PROCESS AND GET FEEDBACK AND GET PERMITS APPROVED.
SO WE WEREN'T TRYING TO AVOID THIS.
IF WE KNEW WE NEEDED A VARIANCE FOR THIS SETUP, WE WOULD HAVE APPLIED FOR IT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.
THE RETAINING WALL IS SHOWN ON THE ORIGINAL PERMIT APPLICATION.
THE GRADING PLAN WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED.
THE POOL PLAN WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED.
THE SITE'S SLOPE AND DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS DICTATED THIS ELEVATION TO ACCOMMODATE THE POOL AND THE PATIO.
IT WAS NOT A DESIGN BY CHOICE.
WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WATER COMING DOWN.
IT'S, AGAIN, A 50-FOOT CHANGE IN TOPOGRAPHY THAT STARTS AT THE STREET AND COMES ALL THE WAY DOWN.
SO WE HAVE TO HAVE PROPER DRAINAGE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
AND I KNOW THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH HAS MADE AN ISSUE WITH SOME ISSUES DURING CONSTRUCTION, AND WE'VE TRIED TO FIX THOSE DURING CONSTRUCTION WITH DRAINAGE.
AND WE'VE LET HER KNOW IF THERE'S ANY DAMAGE TO HER LANDSCAPING, THAT'LL GET FIXED.
BUT THIS IS WHY, YOU KNOW, WE DESIGNED IT THE WAY WE DID, BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE DRAINAGE, AND TO MAKE THE HOUSE WORK.
YOU CAN'T HAVE A 40-FOOT-HIGH HOUSE.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAD TO ACCOMMODATE EVERYTHING, AND WE THOUGHT WE DID IT ALL RIGHT.
SO THIS WAS AN HONEST STAFF ERROR, BUT THERE'S A WELL-ESTABLISHED PATH TO RESOLVING IT.
AND I KNOW THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH BROUGHT UP A COUPLE CASE REFERENCES FROM NORTH OAKS AND ST.
WE DON'T NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE CASES.
WE HAVE SITUATIONS RIGHT ON CASCO WHERE THIS HAS COME UP.
OKAY, SO THE FIRST ONE IS JUST DOWN THE SHORE.
3001 CASCO POINT ROAD, FULLY APPROVED PLAN, GOT BUILT, THEN SOMEBODY BROUGHT IT UP.
OH, THAT FOUR-SEASON PORCH IS IN THE ALS SETBACK, BUT IT'S AN AFTER-THE-FACT ISSUE APPROVED BY STAFF.
THAT GOT APPROVED BY A VARIANCE.
I DON'T KNOW THE DETAILS, BUT IT GOT APPROVED.
THE OTHER ONE THAT'S AN INTERESTING REFERENCE IS JUST TWO DOORS TO THE SOUTH, WHERE THAT WAS APPROVED FOR AN ALS LINE SETBACK ON A NEW BUILD.
AND THE NEIGHBOR, WHICH IS THE NEIGHBOR JUST TO OUR SOUTH, PUT UP A LAWSUIT TO STOP THAT.
AND I DID TALK TO THE ATTORNEY WHO WAS REPRESENTING THOSE OWNERS, AND HE SAID THAT OBJECTION FAILED.
I MEAN, I HAVE NO OPINION ON THE SITUATION, BUT THAT ONE WAS HELD UP.
SO WE HAVE TWO INTERESTING SITUATIONS RIGHT ON CASCO, AND THEY BOTH HELP OUR CASE.
WE'VE GOTTEN A VARIANCE BEFORE FOR AN ALS.
WE DID IT AT 3600 CASCO AVENUE.
THIS IS COMMON, OKAY? AND YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE MORE COMING IN, BUT IT'S VERY COMMON ON CASCO.
WE'RE 165, 170 FEET FROM THE LAKE WHERE THIS WALL IS, OKAY? THIS IS A LONG WAY, AND WE DID THE TERRACING BECAUSE TO LOWER WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
THE PATIO WALL WAS 6 TO 7 FEET.
NOW WE DID ONES, WALLS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN 42 INCHES IN HEIGHT.
STAFF HAS, YOU KNOW, DONE THE SITE VISIT AND LOOKED AT THE, YOU SAW SOME
[01:25:02]
OF THE PHOTOS FROM STAFF.I KNOW THIS ALS IS COMING UP, YOU KNOW, IN A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS.
THERE'S A STUDY GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
THERE'S NO RESTRICTIONS ON LIVE PLANTINGS FOR HOMEOWNERS.
SOMEBODY CAN COME IN AND DO A FULL ROW OF ARBORVITAES ALL THE WAY TO THE LAKE AND YOU CAN GET THOSE 20 FEET HIGH.
THERE'S NO AOS PROTECTION ON THAT.
SO JUST A THOUGHT AS THESE AOS DISCUSSIONS COME INTO PLAY.
SOME BACKGROUND AGAIN ON THAT ORIGINAL PHOTO.
YOU CAN SEE THE BRUSH ON THE LEFT.
I CALLED THE TREE PERSON THAT WAS HIRED BY THE HOMEOWNERS WHO I CONNECTED THEM WITH, WHO DOES A LOT OF WORK IN ORONO, AND HE SAID IT WAS 20 TO 30 FEET OF BUCKTHORN, ASH, TREES, AND A DEAD ELM.
THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH DID NOT HAVE A VIEW OF THE LAKE BEFORE WE GOT INVOLVED.
HE TOLD MY CLIENTS AND OUR TREE PERSON HE WAS THRILLED WITH HOW HIS VIEW GOT OPENED UP.
SO THE NEXT SLIDE, OH, WELL, THEN I CAN SEE THAT'S THE PHOTO YOU ALREADY SAW ON THE RIGHT, THE OPENED UP VIEW.
SO TONIGHT, IF IT'S DENIED, THAT IS NOT GOING TO IMPROVE THE VIEWS BECAUSE REMOVING THAT POOL WALL WILL REQUIRE 100 TRUCKLOADS OF FILL, WHICH I'M TOLD IS PER CODE, TO MAKE A GRADUAL SLOPE DOWN.
IT WOULD ALSO REQUIRE EXTENDING THE WALL ON THE NORTH SIDE, AND THAT IS CODE.
THE ADDED FILL WOULD INCREASE GRADE HEIGHTS, RESTRICTING LAKE VIEWS MORE THAN TODAY'S CONDITION, NOT LESS.
THE VARIANCE ON THE TABLE TONIGHT IS THE BEST OPTION THAT SERVES EVERYONE, INCLUDING THE NEIGHBORS.
THIS IS A LITTLE SUMMARY OF THE STAFF.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPROVALS THAT IT MEETS ALL 12 OF THE CRITERIA.
SO THIS WAS FULLY APPROVED BY THE CITY AND BUILT IN GOOD FAITH.
A DENIAL FORCES SIGNIFICANT UNNECESSARY EXPENSE TO UNDO WORK TO ISSUED PERMITS.
THE OWNERS ARE READY TO MOVE IN.
WE'D LIKE TO GET THE LANDSCAPING COMPLETED.
WE'RE ASKING FOR THE APPROVAL THIS EVENING, CONSISTENT WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF JEREMY HAS ANY COMMENTS.
I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL.
WHY DON'T YOU RUN US THROUGH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN? SO AS YOU SAW THE WALLS THERE NOW, THE WALLS ARE THERE.
THERE'S A WALL ON THE NORTH SIDE AND THERE'S GONNA BE A WALL LINING THE SOUTH SIDE.
THE PLAN WAS TO PLANT ARBORVITAES ON THE TOP OF THE BOTH SOUTHERN WALL AND THE NORTH WALL TO HELP SCREEN THE POOL AND THE THE PAPER AREA, DECKING AREA.
THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, AS MATT MENTIONED, WAS FURTHER TO THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE.
THIS HOUSE IS MORE CENTERED ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
AS BRIAN MENTIONED, THERE WERE SOME WATER ISSUES DURING CONSTRUCTION ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
WHILE THE ORIGINAL HOUSE MOVED TO THE SOUTH, ALL THE WATER WAS MADE TO DRAIN AROUND THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
WHEN WE CUT THAT DRIVEWAY IN, WE WERE GETTING READY TO LAY ASPHALT ON THE DRIVEWAY, AND IT CREATED A NEW SWALE COMING ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE THERE, WHICH BLEW, WE HAD A HARD TORRENTIAL DOWNPOUR, AND IT BLEW RIGHT THROUGH THE SILT FENCE, SO WE WERE THERE TO FIX IT RIGHT AWAY.
I WAS IN ICELAND WHEN MRS. MARKS CALLED.
I HAD HER LABOR OUT THERE RIGHT AWAY TO FIX IT.
AND I MENTIONED TO HER THAT IF ANY GRASS IS WRECKED, WE ALWAYS TELL OUR LANDSCAPERS TO FIX ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE THAT'S WRECKED ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
THAT'S WHAT ANY NEIGHBORHOODS BUILD.
SO NOW THE PLAN IS TO, WITH ALL THAT WATER COMING DOWN THAT DRIVEWAY, WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO A RAIN GARDEN ON THAT KIND OF WHERE THE CORNER OF THE PICTURE MEETS THE ASPHALT DRIVEWAY THERE ON THE BE TO THE SOUTHEAST SIDE
[01:30:01]
OF THE HOUSE TO COLLECT A LOT OF THE WATER COMING DOWN, WHICH WILL HAVE A DRAIN TILE TRENCH DOWN IN THERE, WATER TO PITCH TO THE BACKYARD TO HELP WITH MORE WATER COMING DOWN THAT SOUTH SIDE.DO YOU HAVE A CURSOR OR SOMETHING WHERE YOU CAN SHOW US THAT? I WAS WONDERING WHY IT WASN'T ON THE WRONG.
I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE SOMEBODY POINT TO THIS.
RIGHT WHERE THE CORNER, KIND OF UP ON TOP THERE WHERE IT'S LEVEL OFF WHERE IT STARTS DROPPING DOWN THERE, ON THE EDGE OF THE ASPHALT DRIVEWAY AND THE ORIGINAL DIRT THERE, WE'RE GOING TO PUT A RAIN GARDEN THERE WITH A DRAIN TILE IN THE GROUND THERE TO HELP EJECT THE WATER FROM THERE DOWN TO THE BACKYARD.
DO YOU NEED ANY SORT OF PERMITTING OR AUTHORITY FROM THE WATERSHED DISTRICT TO DO THOSE SORTS OF THINGS? NO, WE'RE WAY OUTSIDE OF ALL THAT.
I WAS TRYING TO HELP WITH GETTING THE WATER TO ANY TRENCH, BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, THERE'S 25 FEET OF PITCH FROM THE ROAD TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, WHERE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS 20 OR 25 FEET LOWER THAN THE FRONT OF THE ROAD.
SO ALL THAT WATER IS MADE TO DRAIN DOWNHILL THERE.
SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CATCH A LOT OF THAT WATER SO IT DOESN'T GO ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY BECAUSE A SMALL SWALE, TYPICALLY, THAT YOU PUT ON A PROPERTY LINE THERE IS NOT GOING TO CATCH THOSE TORRENTIAL DOWNPOURS COMING DOWN THAT HILL.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO CATCH SOME OF THAT SO IT DOESN'T GO ONTO THE NEIGHBORS ON THE TORRENTIAL DOWNPOURS.
ANY ISSUE ON THE NORTH SIDE WITH WATER? NORTH SIDE THERE, NO, BECAUSE THERE'S MORE.
WE'VE GOT TO GET A SWALE AROUND THERE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO CATCH IT ALL TO COME DOWN ON THIS SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE AS WELL.
SO THE LANDSCAPING PLAN CONSISTS OF, IS IT SEVEN ARBORVITAE? YES.
YOU'D BE MORE HAPPY TO DO MORE.
THERE'S SEVEN ON EACH SIDE THERE.
I'M JUST WONDERING BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND WE DON'T NEED OR WANT BUCKTHORN, BUT ASH HAS, YOU KNOW, NEEDED TO BE DONE.
IN MY ESTIMATION, BEING THERE TODAY, THERE'S ONE TREE IN THE BACKYARD AT THIS POINT.
YEAH, NO, I UNDERSTAND, BUT IF THERE'S BEEN TREE CLEARING ON THIS LOT, I THINK WHEN I HEAR LANDSCAPE PLAN, MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT IT'S GOING TO BE MORE THAN JUST PROVIDING SCREENING.
THAT'S WHY WE TALK ABOUT LAKE HEALTH A LOT, AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT HERE REGARDING STORMWATER AND OTHER THINGS, AND I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, AND IT'S SIMPLY BEING USED AS A SCREENING.
YOU'RE NOT AMENDING OR ADDING TO THE LAKEYARD ENVIRONMENT IN THE BACKYARD.
YEAH, SO WHEN I TALKED TO THE TREE GUY TODAY, AND AGAIN, A VERY REPUTABLE CONTRACTOR, I USED HIM ON, HE SAID HE DIDN'T TAKE DOWN ANY BAD, ALL THE GOOD TREES STAYED.
THERE WERE TREES THAT WERE HOLLOW.
HE TOOK PICTURES, DISEASE TREES, ASH, LOTS OF BUCKTHORN ON THAT.
BUT IF THAT'S A CONDITION TO ADD MORE TREES, I THINK WE COULD WORK WITH THAT.
WHAT ABOUT THE WALLS? THERE'S A THEME TONIGHT WITH WALLS AND SCREENING.
THOSE WALLS ARE HIGH, THEY'RE VERY LARGE.
AS I STAND THERE AND I ALWAYS THINK ABOUT THE FOLKS LOOKING IN FROM THE LAKE, THEY'RE VERY, VERY LARGE.
AND THAT'S WHY I, AGAIN, STRUGGLE WITH THIS TO ME IS NOT...
SOMETHING THAT LOOKS PARTICULARLY NATURAL IN ANY WAY.
THERE'S NO SCREENING PROVIDED FOR THOSE WALLS, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT'S WRITTEN INTO OUR CODE.
I'M JUST LIKE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.
WELL, WE COULD PROVIDE SOME SCREENING FOR THE WALLS IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO, IF THAT COULD BE APPROVED TOO.
THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO MAKE THIS WORK, LIKE BRIAN MENTIONED, IS PART OF THAT NORTHERN TOP-TIERED WALL.
IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK AND SKATE THE LINE, PLEASE.
PART OF THAT TOP-TIERED RETAINING WALL ON THE NORTH SIDE, PART OF THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT.
AND THEN THERE'S A NORTH, WHEN HE'S GOT HIS CURSOR ON THERE, ON THE NORTH WALL THERE, WE COULD MAKE THAT TO CODE.
LIKE I SAID, WE'RE WITHIN A FOOT NOW, I BELIEVE HE SAID.
WE COULD RUN THAT WALL, EXTEND THAT WALL, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S ONLY 30 FEET LONG OR SO.
WE CAN EXTEND THAT WALL ALL THE WAY DOWN THE WHOLE PROPERTY LINE.
THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE APPROXIMATELY 100 LOADS OF FILL TO COME IN, AND THE SLOPE WOULD HAVE TO START TERRACING FROM THE EDGE OF THE PAVER PATIO DOWN TO THAT LOWER WALL.
BUT THEN THE NEIGHBOR'S GOING TO HAVE TO RETAIN A WALL ALONG THIS WHOLE PROPERTY LINE, GOING OUT TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT ALL THAT SOIL THAT'S GOING DOWN, BECAUSE WE WOULD SLOPE THE FILL DOWN TO THAT WALL THEN.
WE CAN BUILD THAT WALL ON THE NORTH SIDE THERE.
42 INCHES ABOVE EXISTING SOIL AND HAVE A 42 INCH WALL ALL THE WAY DOWN THERE TO HELP SUPPORT THIS BUT IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE 100 LOADS OF FILL AND IT'S GOING TO BE A BIGGER RETAINING WALL ALONG THE WHOLE NORTH PROPERTY LINE WE WERE HOPING WE WOULDN'T
[01:35:02]
HAVE TO DO THAT BECAUSE AGAIN IT'S IT'S GOING TO COST THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO BRING 100 LOADS OF TRUCK FILLING NOW, AND WE HAVE TO RE-ENGINEER TAKE THAT RETAINING WALLS OUT GET EQUIPMENT BACK THERE.SO YOU'RE SAYING IF YOU REMOVED A FOOT OF THE RETAINING WALL, YOU HAVE TO BRING IN 100 LOADS OF FILL? NO.
WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO IS, MATT, COULD YOU PUT YOUR CURSOR ON THE CORNER OF THE PAVERS, ON TOP OF THE PAVER? WE WOULD HAVE TO START SLOPING THE SOIL DOWN FROM WHERE HIS CURSOR WAS THERE DOWN TO THE LOWER RETAINING WALL ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE THERE.
ALL THAT FILL WOULD HAVE TO GET ADDED IN BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S A BIG ELEVATION CHANGE.
THE RETAINING WALL IS SUPPORTING THAT FILL.
I'M HOLDING THE POOL PAVER UP, POOL AND PAVER PATIO UP, AND THEN IT DROPS DOWN THREE AND A HALF FEET, AND THEN IT'S LEVEL, AND THEN IT DROPS DOWN AGAIN.
WELL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BRING ALL THAT FILL IN TO BE ABLE TO TERRACE THAT SO WE DON'T GET TO WASH OUT ONTO THE NEIGHBORS.
THAT'S REMOVING THAT ENTIRE FIRST WALL? YEAH, AND THEN WE HAVE TO PUT OUTCROPPINGS IN TO HELP SUPPORT THE SOIL SO WE DON'T GET IT TO WASH OUT TOO.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THE NEIGHBORS FEEL ABOUT IT, BUT I MEAN, KIND OF WHERE THE OTHER PATIO, YOU LOOK AT IT, ESPECIALLY FROM THE NEIGHBORS, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS PRETTY MUCH IN LINE WITH WHERE THEIR PATIO LINE WAS.
THE ROUND CIRCLE LINE, HALF MOON IS THE OLD PATIO.
SO WHEN I SAW IT, IT KIND OF MIMICKED THE LINES OF THE PEOPLE NEXT DOOR.
BUT I GUESS WHEN WE WENT TO THE SECOND TERRACE, THAT SEEMED A LITTLE HIGH TO ME, AND I WAS WONDERING IF THAT COULD BE DROPPED DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
SO RIGHT NOW THE NORTH SIDE IN BLUE IS WITHIN A FOOT.
THE SOUTH SIDE IN GREEN IS ALL WITHIN THE 42 INCHES.
I HATE TO SAY IT, IT'S JUST THAT IT'S ALL, YOU'VE GOT A BEAUTIFUL WALL THERE, I MEAN, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT'S GRABBING YOUR EYE, RIGHT? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THE NEIGHBOR NEXT TO IT HAS LIKE THREE DIFFERENT LEVELS.
SO YOURS JUST LOOKS MORE PROMINENT AND SHOWS ITSELF MORE BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, THE WALLS.
WHICH UNFORTUNATELY, THAT DOES TAKE OUT A LITTLE OF THE VIEW.
BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT IS THE SAME.
IT IS THE LEVEL THAT IT NEEDS TO BE, ACCORDING TO MATT'S SURVEY.
YEAH, IT WAS SIX TO SEVEN FEET HIGH BEFORE.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE'VE IMPROVED IT, BUT WE HAD TO BRING IN GRADE ON THE NORTHERN SIDE WHERE THAT ORANGE AND PURPLE IS.
AND RIGHT NOW, IF YOU BACK UP WHAT, SORRY, MATTHEW, THAT LANDSCAPE PLAN, TOP OF THE WALLS ON THE POOL TERRACE.
I BELIEVE, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, HE'S NOTING A 950 ELEVATION, AND I BELIEVE THAT 950 ELEVATION WAS THE OLD WALKOUT ELEVATION, OR WAS THE OLD PAVER, THE GREEN AROUND HALF MOON CIRCLE, WAS THE OLD PAVER ELEVATION AS WELL.
SO THAT'S THE 950 MATCHES THERE FROM THE EXISTING.
HOW MUCH FILL WAS BROUGHT IN? YOU TALK ABOUT ANOTHER 100 TRUCKLOADS.
HOW MANY TRUCKLOADS HAVE ALREADY BEEN BROUGHT IN? WE DIDN'T BRING ANY IN.
IT LOOKS LIKE FILL WAS ADDED, BUT YOU'RE PROBABLY JUST MOVING IT AROUND.
FORTUNATELY, WE JUST DID A POOL FOR OUR CUSTOMERS.
WE JUST SOLD ON DUNWOODY, AND WE HAD TO EXPORT ALL THE FILL OUT OF THAT.
AND NOW WE HAVE TO BUY THE FILL SOMEWHERE ELSE NOW BECAUSE WE JUST EXPORTED ALL THE FILL OUT OF THE OTHER ONE.
SO THIS, IT'S JUST, AND I WAS THERE, BUT IT'S VERY HARD TO GRASP.
DESPITE HAVING BEEN THERE, TAKING MY OWN PICTURE, SEEING THIS NOW, YOU'RE SAYING YOU DIDN'T BRING ANYTHING IN, YOU TOOK AWAY, AND YET WE HAVE BOTH NEIGHBORS SORT OF SAYING THIS IS NOW A VERY ELEVATED PROJECT, AND IT FEELS ELEVATED TO ME ALL THE WAY DOWN.
IS THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY YOU'RE GRADING WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE? BECAUSE I FEEL THAT WAS THERE, AND THERE'S A HUGE HILL OUT IN FRONT OF THE OLD HOUSE, THE GARAGE THERE TOO, THAT WE HAD TO CUT AND DO WITH OUR SIDE GARAGE.
SO YOU'RE MOVING IT AROUND IN OTHER WORDS.
YEAH, IT MOVES AND FILLS FROM THE FRONT, YEP.
YEAH, SO THE PURPOSE WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT TO ELEVATE THIS HOME, TO HAVE A HIGHER STATUS, OR NOT STATUS, BUT VIEW.
NO, IT'S BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME.
IT WAS TO CENTER THE HOME SO IT WASN'T OFFSET LIKE IT WAS BEFORE.
IT IS STARK, AND I THINK THAT'S...
WHAT I'M STRUCK WITH WHEN I LOOK AT THERE, IT'S DARK.
I DON'T THINK IT FITS IN WITH THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO WITHOUT REDESIGNING, BECAUSE
[01:40:01]
PLANNING OBVIOUSLY HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND A SPLIT VOTE, WHICH I DON'T TAKE LIGHTLY, THAT SECOND WALL, NOT THE ONE THAT'S POOLSIDE, BUT THE SECOND ONE DOWN BY THE STAIRS, IT'S DARK.AND THAT'S WHY I ASK ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, TO LOOK OUT ONE'S PROPERTY AND SEE UM YOU KNOW, VEGETATION OR SHRUBBERIES OR WHATNOT IS QUITE DIFFERENT THAN LOOKING OUT AND SEEING A STARK WALL.
SO I GUESS WHERE I'M AT WITH THIS, AND I JUST WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN SOME THOUGHTS ON THAT, WHAT COULD BE DONE TO SOFTEN THAT VERY STARK STRUCTURE THAT IS PROTRUDING OUT, THAT IS NOTICEABLE? AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THAT AREA.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS WE COULD DO WITH IT.
TREES, SMALL TREES, AGAIN, TRYING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WITH THE NEIGHBORS, TOO.
THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS WE CAN DO WITH THE LANDSCAPING, SINCE WE'RE NOT FINISHED LANDSCAPING YET, TO BE ABLE TO HELP WITH THAT.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SCREENING FROM THE LAKE, RIGHT, NOT FROM THE HOUSE? YEAH, I MEAN, JUST IN OTHER WORDS, ESPECIALLY FROM THE LAKE, BUT I MEAN WITH THESE NEIGHBORS.
AGAIN, I'M AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THERE IS NOT A GREAT DEAL OF SUPPORT.
WE DO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN NEIGHBORS HAVE SUPPORT OR WHEN THEY HAVE ISSUES.
AND IN THIS CASE, YOU'VE GOT BOTH SIDES THAT ARE NOT SUPPORTING THIS, AND I UNDERSTAND IT MEETS STAFF CRITERIA, BUT BEING AS SOMEBODY WHO VALUES A NATURAL SHORELINE, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE HAVE GOING ON HERE.
IT'S HIGHER, IT'S DARK, THERE'S A LOT OF TURF, TREES HAVE BEEN TAKEN DOWN, WE'VE GOT ARBORVITAE COMING UP, AND WE HAVE A WALL.
SO WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS SOME...
I GUESS I'D SAY MITIGATION HERE.
IF WE WERE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT IS A VARIANCE, I WOULD RATHER NOT APPROVE THIS GIVEN THE WAY THIS LOOKS, EVEN THOUGH IT IS MEETING CRITERIA BECAUSE IT'S CONTENT.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH AS A COMMUNITY UP THERE, AND IT IS STARK.
SO I GUESS I'M LOOKING TO YOU TO PROVIDE US POTENTIALLY SOME OPTIONS AROUND THAT.
AND I THINK WHEN I SAY SCREENING, I DON'T MEAN SPACED, YOU KNOW, SMALL SHRUBBERIES WITH ROCK MULCH IN BETWEEN.
I'M TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT SOFTENS THIS LOOK.
SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING FROM THE BACK, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO REALLY SEE GRASS.
OKAY, SO IT'S GOING TO BE ALL GREEN DOWN THERE.
YOU KNOW, FROM THE LAKESIDE, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO SOME LANDSCAPING AND, YOU KNOW, GREEN IT UP.
THERE'S A LOT OF OPTIONS, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
I THINK MOST OF THAT WALL IS IN CODE.
THE SECTION IS A LITTLE BIT TOO HIGH.
I DON'T KNOW IF THEY GET WITHIN CODE, BUT THAT'S CODE.
OK, SO YOU CAN BUILD THAT WALL.
AND WE WE'VE DONE EVERYTHING AS NICE AS POSSIBLE ON THIS BUILD.
I DON'T MEAN I'M NOT I'M NOT IMPLYING THAT ANYTHING WAS DONE UNTOWARD HERE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THERE WAS A STAFF MISTAKE.
I JUST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE AND I'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR ON THIS HISTORICALLY.
THESE TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS AND WHEN WE'RE LOOKING FOR ASKS OF THIS COUNCIL IN TERMS OF VARIANCES, I'M LOOKING FOR WAYS TO MAINTAIN CHARACTER, MAINTAIN LAKE QUALITY, AND MAINTAIN VIEWS FROM THE FOLKS.
THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT ONE HOMEOWNER, IT'S ABOUT A COMMUNITY.
THAT'S WHY I PUT FORWARD THESE QUESTIONS TO YOU.
THERE'S NO IMPLICATION OF ANYTHING OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, GOOD INTENT.
I THINK THIS COULD BE IMPROVED SOMEWHAT BECAUSE IT IS, YOU'RE EXCEEDING THE LEVELS THAT WE ALLOW IN THAT AREA WITH THOSE WALLS.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU COULD RECOMMEND THAT WE COULD WORK TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH AN IDEA THAT COULD HELP FROM LAKESIDE VIEW? YES.
HOW ABOUT THAT TOP WALL? IS THERE ANY, WOULD YOU HAVE ANY ABILITY TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT OF THAT A LITTLE BIT? OR IS THAT JUST NEEDED TO BE AT THAT HEIGHT TO MAINTAIN THE...
RIGHT NOW, THAT TOP WALL IS AT THE 950 TO HELP SUPPORT THE PAVER PATIO THERE AND THE POOL.
SO TO HAVE THE PAVER PATIO SUPPORT THE POOL NORTH END, THAT RETAINING WALL IS NEEDED THERE TO HELP SUPPORT ALL OF THAT.
WE COULD SEE IF THERE'S A WAY WE COULD TRY TO WRAP IT TIGHTER IF WE NEED TO, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF WE'RE ABLE TO REDUCE ANY HEIGHT-WISE ON THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THAT.
950 ELEVATION NEEDED TO SUPPORT THE PAVER PATIO AND THE POOL.
DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW MUCH HIGHER YOUR TERRACE THAT'S CLOSER TO THE LAKE, HOW MUCH HIGHER THAT IS THAN THE NEIGHBORS WHO HAS THEIRS? IS IT PRETTY EVEN? OR IS IT A LOT HIGHER? SO IF YOU SEE RIGHT ON THE NORTH SIDE THERE, THERE'S A 938.4 UP WHERE IT
[01:45:02]
SAYS FENCE, RIGHT BY THE 0.1% THERE.OH, THE SOUTH SIDE? YEAH, I'M SORRY.
CAN YOU GO DOWN? WILL IT SHOW? IT'LL BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEEP.
I THINK SHE WANTS TO SEE THE SOUTH SIDE.
SO FROM THE SECOND WALL, WE HAVE OUR BOTTOM OF OUR WALL IS AT 938.5.
MATT, COULD YOU SHOW THE PICTURE WHEN...
THAT BRIAN HAD WITH ALL THE LANDSCAPING DONE AFTER THE FACT.
WERE THERE ANY TREES, WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THAT, WERE THERE ANY TREES WITHIN THE 75-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE LAKE THAT WERE REMOVED? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
I ASKED THE TREE GUY, AND HE SAID HE DIDN'T THINK SO EITHER.
BUT HE TOOK PICTURES, AND WE LEFT THE, I THINK THEY'RE OAKS THAT YOU SEE THERE DOWN BY THE WATER, AS WELL AS TREES BETWEEN THE SABRIT HOUSE AND THE ONE TO THE NORTH, THOSE WERE GOOD TREES.
SO THERE ARE STILL TREES THERE.
YEAH, YOU SEE THE FLAGPOLE? YEAH.
THOSE TWO, I THINK THEY'RE OAKS.
WE SHOULD FIND OUT IF THERE WERE OTHERS, BECAUSE I THINK WE NEED TO REPLACE TREES THAT ARE TAKEN OUT WITHIN.
YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK I'M HEARING.
YEAH, SO THIS STILL IS AN OPEN PERMIT AND SO AT CLOSE OUT OF THE FINAL AS-BUILT WE CAN CONFIRM AND GET THE INFORMATION.
ARBORIST, IF THERE'S ANY TREES IN THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE 70.
YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, A CONDITION OF A MORE EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPE PLAN, YOU KNOW, MATT ON THAT.
I MEAN, AGAIN, I JUST THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH THIS AFTER THE FACT.
AND THERE'S BEEN, UNFORTUNATELY, AT LEAST IN MY TIME, THIS IS NOT A USUAL, TYPICAL SITUATION.
SO I THINK WE'RE ALL TRYING TO WORK TOGETHER ON THIS AND MITIGATE WHAT'S POSSIBLE HERE, UNDERSTANDING THAT.
YOU KNOW, AS YOU SAY, YOU'RE ABLE TO DO THESE THINGS AND ALSO UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CLIMATE AROUND THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN DIFFICULT.
SO I WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE IN FAVOR OF MORE LANDSCAPING.
OUR LAKE COULD ALWAYS USE MORE HELP IN THAT AREA.
AND I DID NOTICE ON THAT FACT, I BELIEVE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORS WHOSE LAND WAS IMPACTED WITH SOME OF THE SILT RUNOFF.
THEY HAVE A SWALE THERE WITH A LOT OF NICE VEGETATION IN THAT AREA.
IS THAT CORRECT? BETWEEN THE TWO HOUSES THERE? YES.
SO THERE WAS THIS OLD, THE OLD SUBJECT PROPERTY HERE, THERE WAS AN OLD PATIO THAT ACTUALLY ENCROACHED ON THE NEIGHBOR, IS THAT RIGHT? YES.
SO THAT'S WHY A LOT OF THAT'S STILL DIRT ON THAT SIDE BECAUSE THAT GOT TAKEN OUT WHEN THE DEMO.
I THINK, OH, CAN WE GO BACK TO THE OTHER PHOTO, PLEASE? THIS WAS THE PREVIOUS.
TO THE OTHER PHOTO, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PHOTO TO THE RIGHT THERE SHOWING THE THREE HOMES.
SO THE HOME ON THE LEFT OF YOUR PROPERTY, OF THIS PROPERTY, IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO HOUSES, THERE'S A VERY NICE SWALE THERE WITH A LOT OF PLANTINGS IN IT, WHICH I WOULD IMAGINE MITIGATE THE RUNOFF AS WELL.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ANYTHING THAT YOU'RE, THAT'S ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY, I UNDERSTAND, BUT I THINK THAT'S GOOD TO SEE.
I'M GLAD TO HEAR THERE'S A RAIN GARDEN.
BECAUSE ALL THAT TURF GRASS, LIKE WE TALK ABOUT A LOT OF TIME, IS CERTAINLY NOT HELPFUL FOR A LOT OF THIS RUNOFF THAT WE'RE SEEING.
SO I LIKE THE IDEA OF THE RAIN GARDEN, APPRECIATE THAT, AND I ALSO LIKE WHAT I'M SEEING IN THAT SWALE.
OUR ENVIRONMENT NEEDS SOME HELP, OUR LAKE NEEDS SOME HELP.
SO WITH ALL THAT'S GOING ON HERE, I THINK MY PERSPECTIVE IS DO WHAT YOU CAN TO MITIGATE SOME OF THIS RUNOFF.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE BEEN DOING SOME OF THAT, BUT WE COULD ALWAYS DO MORE.
IS THAT GOING TO BE LIKE A DITCH IN BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES OR ARE YOU GUYS GOING TO LEVEL THAT OUT? TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH? YEAH, SO WE DO HAVE TO CREATE SOMEWHAT OF A SWALE SO WE'RE NOT DUMPING WATER ON THE PROPERTY.
WE'LL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A SWALE BEFORE THE PROPERTY LINE STARTS THERE TO MITIGATE RUNOFF TO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
[01:50:02]
BUT IT WOULD BE A SWALE TO STOP THE WATER FROM GOING ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.BECAUSE I WOULD JUST HATE TO SEE EVERYTHING JUST RUN INTO THE LAKE JUST BECAUSE OF...
YOU KNOW THE FERTILIZER AND EVERYTHING ELSE SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IF THERE'S SOMETHING TO STOP THAT BEFORE YEAH AND AGAIN MAYBE THEY'RE LIKE YOU SAID OPEN TO MORE LANDSCAPING IDEAS THAT RAIN GARDEN COULD COULD HELP YEAH BUT THAT THAT'LL BE UP ABOVE YEAH WE'VE BEEN TALKING WHICH IS RELEVANT HERE AND I'M NEVER GOING TO MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT UM NATIVE PLANTINGS, WE WORK WITH THE WATERSHED ON THESE.
WE'VE HAD A LOT MORE DISCUSSION AS A CITY ABOUT MITIGATION BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S CONCERNED ABOUT WATER QUALITY IN THE LAKE.
SO MY PERSPECTIVE ON THAT IS ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO PUT IN MORE DEEP-ROOTED PLANTINGS AROUND THOSE SWALES AS THEY MOVE TO THE LAKE, PLEASE CONSIDER, BECAUSE THAT IS VERY HELPFUL FOR...
THE WAY WATER MOVES INTO THE LAKE, AS YOU JUST SAID.
AND I KNOW EVEN IN OUR CITY HERE, FOR SWALES, WE'RE USING NATIVE PLANTING MIXES, WET DITCH MIXES.
SO IF YOU CAN DO SOMETHING WITHIN THIS PROJECT ALSO TO INSPIRE OTHERS, AS IT WERE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS CERTAINLY APPRECIATED BECAUSE THESE DO COME UP A LOT, AND I ALWAYS APPRECIATE ANY EFFORT THAT'S DONE TO MITIGATE RUNOFF.
ONE OF THE THINGS I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND, THAT PICTURE THAT HAS THE COLORS ON IT, THAT SHOWS THE PINK, THAT SAYS IT'S THREE FEET OR GREATER OUT OF CONFORMANCE.
MAYBE EXPLAIN THAT AGAIN TO US.
AND REALLY THIS IS A WAY TO COMMUNICATE THE GRADE INCREASE ON THE PROPERTY.
OR WHAT I COULD REASONABLY PROVIDE BASED ON THE CONTOURS ON THE SURVEY.
WHAT COULD I REASONABLY ESTIMATE AS A DEVIATION? AT LEAST ON THE PATIO PORTION, WE HAVE A VERY DEFINED 950-FOOT ELEVATION.
ANYTHING BELOW 946.5 WOULD NOT BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CODE.
THAT'S AT 940, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ELEVATION MAP THERE, BELOW THAT.
WAS PHIL BROUGHT IN TO MAKE THAT A 42-FOOT DROP, OR IS IT A BIGGER DROP THAN 42 INCHES AT THAT POINT? AT THE WALL THERE RIGHT NOW, IT'S 42 INCHES.
SO WE GRADED IT ALL UP JUST BEFORE, BECAUSE WE DID OUR PRE-CLOSED WALKTHROUGH OF THE CUSTOMER TWO WEEKS AGO.
SO AFTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, WE GOT THE EXCAVATOR OUT THERE JUST TO GRADE THE FRONT YARD UP, AND WE TOLD THEM JUST TO GRADE THE BACKYARD UP, KIND OF WHERE IT WOULD NEED TO BE FOR THE 42-INCH HIGH WALLS.
ORIGINALLY THERE WAS, AFTER THE GREEN THERE, THERE WAS A SIX FOOT DROP AND THEN IT STARTED SLOPING SO THAT'S WHERE AT 950 THERE WOULD BE A 940, IF IT WAS A SIX FOOT WALL, IT WOULD BE A 944 THERE, WHICH STARTED SLOPING DOWN TO THE 941-6 AT THE WALL THERE NOW ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 940 ON THE NORTH SIDE.
SO SINCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, YOU GUYS HAVE ACTUALLY LOWERED IT? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO, WE JUST GRADED IT UP JUST TO MAKE IT ALL LOOK...
KIND OF PER THE GRADING PLAN THAT WAS HERE.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW, AND THIS IS NOT A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, IT'S FOR STAFF.
I KNOW IT WAS A SPLIT VOTE ON PLANNING.
WE HAD THREE MEMBERS OF PLANNING WHO WERE NOT IN SUPPORT.
CAN YOU GENERALIZE WHAT THOSE CONCERNS WERE? I THINK THAT THEY BELIEVED THAT THERE WAS PERHAPS AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OR A LESSER DESIGN THAT WOULD HAVE LESS OF AN IMPACT.
RAISED MOTION ON DECISION ON I THINK ONE PERSON WAS STRUGGLING WITH DIFFERENCES AND STAFF HAD EVALUATED THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY CRITERIA THEY DIDN'T FEEL THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY CRITERIA WERE MET I BELIEVE THEY VOTED IN THAT MANNER WE ALSO DID HAVE THREE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE FOUR LETTERS IN TOTAL THAT WERE SUBMITTED AND THAT'S WEIGHED AT LEAST ANOTHER ONE OF THE...
SO HERE YOU CAN SEE IN THE BLUE THERE, SO THE TOP BLUE LINE, RETAINING WALL LINE ON THE NORTH SIDE, THAT'S THE WALL IF WE HAD TO GO BACK TO CODE, WE WOULD TAKE THAT BLUE RETAINING WALL ON TOP THERE AND CONNECT IT WITH THE BOTTOM ONE THERE AND BRING ALL THE FILL IN AND START SLOPING IT OFF WITHOUT CROPPINGS THERE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH CODE.
IT'S THE ONLY THING IT REALLY CAN DO, WHICH IS COME UP MORE.
RIGHT, WHICH WOULD NOT BE PLEASING TO THE NEIGHBORS.
IT'S HARD TO VISUALIZE, THOUGH,
[01:55:01]
WITH NO LANDSCAPING IN THERE RIGHT NOW.YEAH, IT LOOKS VERY STARK, YEAH.
HOW TALL IS THE BOULDER WALL ON THE SOUTH SIDE? I THINK I'M GETTING THE DIRECTIONS WRONG.
THE BOTTOM ONE? TO ME, WHAT I'M LOOKING AT ON THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE.
THE RIGHT SIDE HERE IS THE SOUTH SIDE.
SO THE NORTH SIDE, THE LEFT SIDE? YEAH, THE LEFT SIDE.
ON THE BOTTOM TIERED ONE ON THE TOP NEXT TO THE NEIGHBOR IS THAT WHERE WE'RE HAVING THE ONE ON THE VERY TOP THE POOL DECK IS THE ONE THAT'S IN QUESTION YEAH ON THE LEFT SIDE THERE.
THAT IS THE ONE THAT IS AGAIN, SET AT THAT 950 TO SUPPORT THE PAVERS OF THE POOL BASED OFF OF THE ORIGINAL PATIO THAT WAS SET AT 950.
SO IS THAT ALREADY SLOPING DOWN AS IT COMES AROUND THAT WALL? SO AGAIN, BRIAN HERE, WHEN BRIAN PUT THE GRASS IN THERE, JUST AI, IT DIDN'T TAKE THE SLOPE INTO CONSIDERATION EITHER.
SO IT DOES SLOPE DOWN TO THE LEFT HERE.
ACTUALLY, IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT SLOPES DOWN, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A VISUAL OF IT.
PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY THOUGH, RIGHT? ABOUT 10 FEET OR SO, OR NOT THAT MUCH? I DON'T SEE TO THE NORTH.
SO WE'VE GOT 946 AT THE BOTTOM OF OUR WALL AT THE TOP THERE, AND...
FIVE FEET WITHIN FIVE FEET? FIVE FEET.
WAS IT INTENTIONAL WITH THE DESIGN THEN TO, FROM THE OUTSET, FROM THE TIME THAT THIS PLAN WAS BORN, THE HOUSE ASIDE WITH THE POOL DECK AND THEN THESE TWO WALLS, I'LL CALL THEM RETAINING WALLS, WAS THE PLAN ALWAYS TO HAVE THAT SECOND LAKEWARD WALL? DID IT COME ABOUT BECAUSE YOU NEEDED TO MAINTAIN THE FILL OR WAS THIS SIMPLY, THIS WAS A DESIGN CHOICE, THIS WAS AN AESTHETIC? I THINK IT JUST, PART OF THE GOAL WAS THE TERRACING WITH A FEW DIFFERENT LEVELS VERSUS THE OLD PATIO WAS STRAIGHT UP.
IT CREATES SOME NICE LEVEL AREAS.
I ASK THIS BECAUSE I WAS HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH STAFF EARLIER ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE LANDSCAPING OR BUILDER COMPANIES NOW ADVERTISING.
ADVERTISING AND PROMOTING THE IDEA OF, AND THIS ISN'T A BLUFF PER SE, BUT UTILIZING AND FLATTENING OUT AREAS FOR FURTHER ENJOYMENT.
SO I'M WONDERING IF THIS WAS DONE AS AN AESTHETIC CHOICE OR AS A NECESSITY.
I THINK IT'S PROBABLY FOR MORE EASIER USE OF THE YARD, KIND OF LIKE THE NEIGHBOR TO THE SOUTH.
THEY HAD THEIRS TERRACED, JUST IN GRASS.
THEY DON'T HAVE A WALL, THOUGH.
I THINK PART OF IT, LIKE I SAID, WHAT I STRUGGLE WITH IS THAT SECOND WALL THAT'S LAKEWARD BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S NECESSARY, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE NEIGHBOR ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT I SAW TODAY HAS THOSE TERRACES, AND IT'S TURF GRASS ONLY.
SO THIS APPEARS TO BE AN AESTHETIC CHOICE.
AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M QUESTIONING.
WE'RE LESS THAN A FOOT AWAY FROM MAKING THAT NORTHERN SIDE WITHIN A CODE.
SO WE CAN DROP IT A FOOT TO BE ABLE TO GET IT TO CODE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN, OBVIOUSLY, FROM THE NEIGHBORS IS THE OTHER AREA.
BUT AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, THAT WAS DONE TO LEVEL A HOUSE, TO CENTER THE HOUSE, WHICH IS FINE.
AND THAT WAS NOT REQUIRING A VARIANCE OR ALS.
WHAT AM I TRYING TO SAY? NOT VARIANCE.
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE TONIGHT, AN ALS VARIANCE.
IT'S THIS OTHER WALL WHERE I'M, AGAIN, MY PERSPECTIVE ON THIS, HAVING SEEN A LOT OF THESE LAKEWARD PROJECTS, IS THAT IT'S VERY EASY OVER TIME TO BE ACCUSTOMED TO THE FACT THAT WE GET COMFORTABLE IN THE LAKEYARD AREA.
YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO CERTAIN THINGS.
WHAT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH IS PUSHING THE ENVELOPE.
SO IF THERE'S A WAY TO WORK WITH THIS APPLICATION TO SAY, SCREENING AND ALSO LOWERING TO BRING TO CODE, THEN THAT IS IMPORTANT TO ME AND I BELIEVE ALSO TO OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE CAN POINT OUT, WHICH HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, WELL, THEY GOT THIS AND THEY GOT THAT, THEREFORE I WANT THIS.
I WANT US TO ALWAYS REALLY DO OUR BEST WITH THESE APPLICATIONS TO BE FOLLOWING THE CODE.
[02:00:02]
FOR THE COMMUNITY AND FOR THE NEIGHBORS, THESE DETAILS ARE NOT INSIGNIFICANT.YEAH, WHAT ABOUT A CONDITION, LAKESIDE RETAINING WALL TO CONFORM TO CODE, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, GOING TO INVOLVE LOWERING IT.
LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH MORE NATIVE PLANTINGS, TREES, AND WORKING WITH STAFF FOR AN APPROVAL ON THAT.
HOW MUCH COULD YOU LOWER IT? I BELIEVE THOSE ROCKS ARE LIMESTONE.
THEY'RE 12 TO 18 INCHES THICK, I BELIEVE.
SO I'M JUST ASKING A QUESTION.
WHAT WERE YOU THINKING? ONE RULE WOULD BE THEY'RE GOING TO RANGE BETWEEN 12 AND 18.
WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT...
YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO DO OR THAT WOULDN'T BE TOO MUCH OF A HARDSHIP OR UM I I MEAN IT'S A LOT OF WORK I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT I'M JUST THINKING IT WOULD ARE YOU THINKING THE WHOLE WALL OR JUST THE NORTH SIDE TO GET IT WITHIN CONFORMING I WAS THINKING THE WHOLE WALL BUT I'M JUST GIVING SUGGESTIONS I'M NOT THE ONE OUT THERE WORKING ON IT OR REDESIGNING YOUR PLAN EITHER HOW WOULD THAT LOOK WHEN YOU'RE JUST WHEN YOU'D HAVE DIFFERENT LEVELS YEAH IT'S ANOTHER THING YOU TRY TO MAKE IT LOOK LEVEL FROM THE LAKE TOO.
THAT WOULD BE WEIRD FOR THE LAKE.
THE LAND DOES SLOPE, RIGHT? THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF A SLOPE, BUT THEN ONE THING IS CONSIDERING DO YOU TRY TO GET THAT PITCH STILL SLOPING, OR DO YOU SLOPE IT MORE TO THE LAKE AND HAVE A LEVEL LOOKING FROM THE LAKE? RIGHT NOW ALL THE WATER IS MADE TO DRAIN TOWARDS IT.
YEAH, WHEN I LOOKED AT IT, I HAD MORE OF A PROBLEM WITH THE SECOND RETAINING WALL RATHER THAN THE POOL SIDE.
YEAH, THE LAKE SIDE I HAD, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WHEN I STOOD AND LOOKED, IT KIND OF TOOK OUT A CORNER OF MY VIEW A LITTLE BIT.
I DIDN'T HAVE AS MUCH OF A PROBLEM WITH THE POOL.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE WILLING TO MAKE SOME ALTERATIONS.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST SAY WHEN I WENT OUT THERE AND LOOKED AT THE SITE AND KIND OF COMPARED IT TO WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE REALITY IS THEY WERE ISSUED PERMITS AND THEY DESIGNED IT AND BUILT IT BASED UPON APPROVALS.
AND IT CAME BACK AND IT WAS APPARENTLY DIDN'T HAVE TO AFFECT VARIANCE BASED UPON SOME THINGS THAT WERE APPROVED BUT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN.
YOU STAFF MAKES A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE SHOULD BE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS VARIANCE, AND SO DOES THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND SO, IN MY OPINION, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
YOU KNOW, I DO THINK THAT THE NEIGHBORS ON EACH SIDE, HOPEFULLY BASED UPON HOW THE WALLS ARE DESIGNED, I TRULY DO THINK WHEN THEY LOOK OUT, THEY'LL ALMOST NOT EVEN SEE THEM, IS MY SENSE BASED UPON WHERE THEY'RE AT TODAY.
BUT I DO THINK ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO REALLY TRY AND...
CREATE A WAY WHERE EVERYONE FEELS LIKE THEY'RE HEARD AND THAT THEIR LAKE VIEW ISN'T NEGATIVELY AFFECTED.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY REFER TO THAT AS KIND OF A PARK-LIKE SETTING.
I WOULD JUST HOPE THAT THEY WOULD CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN THAT.
THAT BEING SAID, I THINK THE PROJECT, IT LOOKS LIKE AN AWESOME PROJECT, TOO.
SO, I'M ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF ADOPTING THIS AND MOVING THE REQUEST.
AS I LOOKED AT IT, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DIDN'T SEE A MINIMAL AMOUNT.
I SAW A MINIMAL AMOUNT LOOKING AT THE AVERAGE LAKE SHORE SETBACK.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BRIAN BROUGHT UP IS, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE PUT VEGETATION ALL THE WAY DOWN THERE.
GIVE THAT NOT THAT THEY'RE GOOD ENOUGH BUT I'M JUST SAYING THIS IS THAT UH WHEN I LOOK AT THAT AND I LOOK AT THAT PIECE AND I GO AND IF WE NEED TO IF PART OF IT IS TO BRING THAT OTHER WALL THAT'S FORWARD LAKESIDE THERE IN COMPLIANCE UH IF THERE'S A WAY TO DO THAT I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT I ACTUALLY WOULD SAY I LIKE THE LOOK OF IT AND THE WAY THAT WHOLE THING IS, AND YOU SHOWED THAT, THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT BACK THAT PIECE WITH THE SOD IN THERE THAT HAD THE GRASS IN THERE.
[02:05:01]
I GO, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW, LOOKING AT IT RIGHT TODAY, AND THEN YOU SEE SOME OF THE PICTURES FROM LAST YEAR TAKEN WHERE IT WAS ALL BROWN.YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THAT LOOKS, IN MY OPINION, I THINK THAT LOOKS PRETTY NATURAL AND LOOKS LIKE IT'S, YEAH, IT'S DIFFERENCE ON THE TERRACE.
AND ALSO, COUNCIL MEMBER PERSHING SAID THEY WERE APPROVED.
THEY BUILT THIS BASED ON OUR APPROVAL.
AND WE DO MAKE MISTAKES, BUT IT WAS BUILT THAT WAY.
AND THE NEIGHBORS TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM AND SEE THAT.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I LOOK AT IT GOING, IT WAS BUILT WITH...
I GUESS I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT LOWER TERRACE DROP DOWN TO CONFORM TO THAT.
GREENING AND VEGETATION, A MORE FULSOME VEGETATION PLAN, TREES AND BEING SUPPORTIVE.
AND ONE THING I WILL ADD, I'M GRATEFUL TO OUR PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE GREAT WORK.
I MEAN, YOU GUYS DO A GREAT JOB.
IN A DIFFICULT SITUATION AND WHAT WENT ON THAT.
NOTHING WE'RE SAYING HERE IS MEANT TO THROW ANY SHADE ON EITHER PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND ALS IS SO SUBJECTIVE, AND YOU BROUGHT UP THREE CASES ON YOUR OWN WHERE WE GET COMPARED TO ALL THE TIME, WELL, YOU GAVE THIS GUY THIS, OR YOU LET THIS GUY DO THAT AND STUFF.
I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE BEEN VERY CAREFUL WITH THE PROJECT AND TRIED TO, YOU KNOW.
TO THE NEIGHBORS WITH THEIR CONCERNS RIGHT AWAY, SO I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
CAN WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT WITH THE MODIFICATIONS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, OR SHOULD WE SEND IT BACK TO GO WORK WITH OUR PLANNING STAFF TO COME BACK TO US WITH A REFINED PLAN? WELL, I WAS TRYING TO KEEP TRACK OF WHICH MODIFICATIONS WE HAD MAJORITY SUPPORT.
I BELIEVE WE HAVE MAJORITY SUPPORT ON LOWERING THAT LAKEWARD, LAKEYARD, AND LAKEWARD WALL TO CONFORMING, THE SECOND WALL, AND THEN ALSO SCREENING AND VEGETATION FOR THAT WALL.
AS LONG AS WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE ENOUGH DETAIL ON THE SCREENING SIDE OF THINGS, I THINK WE'RE READY TO APPROVE IT, APPROVE THE PROPOSED FINDINGS WITH THOSE TWO AMENDMENTS.
MATT, UNLESS YOU FEEL DIFFERENTLY.
THAT WOULD BE GREAT BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE HOUSE IS DONE.
WE WERE HOPING WE'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE VARIANCE PROCESS AGAIN IF WE GET IT ALL FIGURED OUT TODAY SO WE CAN GET IT GRADED UP AND GET THE HOMEOWNERS IN.
ANYBODY CARE TO MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT RESOLUTION 7697 TO INCLUDE THE TWO AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DISCUSSED, LOWERING THE WALL AND THE VEGETATION, THE BUILDER WORKS WITH CITY STAFF? MR. MAYOR.
THAT ELEMENT WAS NOT PLACED IN THE MEMO.
THAT WAS AN OVERSIGHT, SO OUR APOLOGIES.
IT WAS A REQUEST AS PART OF THE APPLICATION.
WAIVER OF THE APPLICATION FEES.
AND WHAT AMOUNT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? I BELIEVE IT'S $375 IS A LAND USE APPLICATION FEE.
OH, WE CHANGED THAT TO DOUBLE, SO $1,100.
$1,100, BECAUSE AFTER THE FACT, WE DOUBLE THE FEE.
SO A LAND USE APPLICATION FEE IS $550.
WHEN IT'S AN AFTER THE FACT, WE CHARGE A DOUBLE AS A DETER FOR AFTER THE FACT.
SO THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO WAIVE THE APPLICATION FEE IN THIS CASE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD THAT TO YOUR MOTION? YES, I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT WE WAIVE THE APPLICATION FEE TO THE MOTION.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? I'LL SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
[13) LMCD Budget Review]
THE MOTION CARRIES.WE ARE NOW UP TO ITEM 13, WHICH IS LMCD BUDGET REVIEW.
SO FOR THAT, MR. EDWARDS, ARE YOU GOING TO LEAD US THROUGH THAT? I'LL START IT OFF.
MAYOR, I'LL HANG ON AND LET THEM.
[02:10:04]
MR. MAYOR, MEMBERS OF COUNCIL, BEFORE YOU WE HAVE A REVIEW OF THE LMCD BUDGET.ANNUALLY THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE MEMBER COMMUNITIES A COPY OF THEIR BUDGET OR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR BY THE LMCD DID THAT.
THE BUDGET AS PROPOSED BY THE LMCD DOES REPRESENT AN 18% INCREASE IN THE LEVY THAT COMES TO THE CITY OF ORONO.
LMCD REPRESENTATIVE FOR ORONO, MR. ANDERSON, HAS BRIEFED YOU A COUPLE TIMES ON THE BUDGET AND CONCERNS WITH THE BUDGET AND IS HERE TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL FLAVOR TO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE LMCD BUDGET.
ALSO, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT STATUTE DOES ALLOW CITIES TO RAISE AN OBJECTION WITH THE LMCD.
IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY ALLOW US TO APPRECIATE.
WHEN PRESENTED WITH OUR BILL, WE HAVE TO PAY.
THE STATUTE DOES REQUIRE, THOUGH, THAT IF WE PROVIDE AN OBJECTION TO THE LMCD, THEIR BOARD MUST HEAR IT.
IT DOESN'T REALLY GO INTO MUCH MORE DETAIL THAN THAT.
I INCLUDED SOME REFERENCES IN THE BILL.
MR. ANDERSON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS? RICHIE ANDERSON.
I LIVE AT 3205 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD.
AND SO I APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY.
I GO TO BED THINKING ABOUT THIS, LIKE I DID WITH THE IMPROVEMENT OVER THE IMPROVEMENT FOR THE LMCD.
THAT'S OFF MY HEAD NOW BECAUSE IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
ON ANY ISSUE WITH THE LMCD IF I HAVE BACKING.
SO I'M TRYING TO GET BACKING ON THIS ISSUE BECAUSE THIS IS MY NEXT ISSUE THAT I HAVE WITH THE LMCD AS FAR AS JUST CHARGING US $71,000.
YOU MIGHT AS WELL THROW IT IN THE GARBAGE CAN BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S REALLY HAPPENING THAT'S ANYTHING SPECIAL TO ORONO.
AND YOU CAN SEE HERE, ADAM'S GOT A COUPLE CHARTS UP, WHICH I LOOKED AT, WHICH I ALSO HAVE.
BUT THEY STARTED WITH A FALSE PREMISE WHEN THEY SENT THIS TO ADAM.
IF YOU COULD SHOW WHAT THEY SENT TO US.
AND THE ONLY REASON, I WAS THE ONLY BOARD MEMBER THAT KNEW WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THE CITIES, BECAUSE ADAM SENT IT TO ME.
AND THIS IS THE CHART THEY PRESENTED TO THE CITIES.
CITY MANAGERS AND I THINK MAGGIE GOT IT ALSO.
SO THEY SENT IT TO CITY MANAGERS AND THE FINANCE FOLKS.
I HAVE KIND OF FLIPPED BACK AND FORTH EMAILING YOU GUYS THIS CHART.
THIS CHART IS VERY MISREPRESENTATIVE.
THIS IS THE CHART THEY SENT OUT.
YOU CAN SEE ON THE BOTTOM THERE IN 2014 TOTAL MISSED LEVY COLLECTED WAS $340,000.
BECAUSE COSTS RIGHT OVER TIME, YOU WOULD NEED TO AFFORD THE SAME COST WOULD BE $484, AND THEY'RE ONLY LOOKING AT GETTING $440. THIS CHART IS A BASTARD CHART AS FAR AS REPRESENTATION OF WHAT IT ACTUALLY IS.
YOU CAN SEE THE TOTAL AMOUNT LEVIED, AND THERE'S ANOTHER CHART THAT ADAM'S GOT.
IS WHAT WE'RE AT NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE NO AIS LINE ITEM, WHICH I WILL SHOW YOU.
I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME BECAUSE I'LL BORE YOU, AND WE'VE HAD A LONG MEETING.
BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THE LEVY TO THE CITIES, THEY HAVE A CHART FROM 2014.
2014, THEY SAID THAT OUR TOTAL LEVY WAS $340.
BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT BACK IN 2014 AND GOING FORWARD UNTIL I...
CUT THE LINE ITEM FOR THE $75,000 FOR AIS BECAUSE I SOLD THE HARVESTERS BECAUSE THEY WERE SPREADING A FLOWERING RUSH IN THE NORTH END OF CRYSTAL BAY, AMONG OTHER BAYS.
BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT LINE ITEMS, GENERAL LEVY, AIS LEVY, WHICH PAID
[02:15:02]
FOR ALL THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH AIS LEVY, PAID FOR ALL THE TRUCKING, ALL THE...BACK IN THE DAY THEY TRIED TO KEEP, THEY WERE HIGH ON KEEPING MILFOIL OUT OF HERE, THEY FAILED ON THAT.
THE LMCED, THANK GOD, GOT OUT OF THE AIS BUSINESS AND THEY'RE THINKING ABOUT GETTING BACK, BUT THAT'LL BE ANOTHER DISCUSSION IF I HAVE YOUR BACK, IF YOU HAVE MY BACK MORE LIKELY.
BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT IN 2021, $300,000 WAS A MAXIMUM LEVY THAT EVER GOT CHARGED.
AND IT WAS $375,000, THE CHART THEY REPRESENTED, BECAUSE IT WAS A $75,000 AIS LEVY.
I SOLD THE HARVESTERS IN 2021, MADE THE MOTION, FOUND THE BUYER, ONE BUYER IN THE WHOLE COUNTRY, AND WE GOT RID OF THEM.
I WAS THE TREASURER AT THE TIME.
I SAID, WELL, THERE'S NO REASON TO HAVE AN AIS LEVY IF WE'RE NOT DOING AIS.
THAT YEAR, I SAVED THE CITY OF ORONO $11,000.
AND THEN WE HAD 116% OF OVERAGE FOR OF.
SO WE CHOPPED THAT DOWN, KNOWING THAT WE WERE SHOOTING FOR A 35% THRESHOLD.
I SENSE YOU GUYS ARE SO, IF YOU READ IT, YOU MAY BE KIND OF FOLLOWING ALONG, AND I DON'T WANT TO REPEAT MYSELF.
BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WHEN I WAS TREASURER, I SAVED THE CITY OF ORONO $66,000.
NOW, THE VERY IMPORTANT PART IS THAT YOU CAN SEE IN 2021...
WE HAD A $315,000 PERSONNEL EXPENSE.
THAT IS, RATHER THAN WHAT THEY SAID WAS A 40% INCREASE, IT'S ACTUALLY AN 85% INCREASE FROM 2014.
SO THE CHART THEY SENT US, FOR US TO OPINE ON, WAS NOT FACTUAL APPLES FOR APPLES.
AND THAT REALLY BOTHERS ME BECAUSE THAT WAS PROFFERED AT AN OFFICER'S MEETING, WHICH I'M NOT AN OFFICER, BUT I SHOW UP AND YOU FIGURE STUFF OUT.
THAT WAS PROFFERED AT AN OFFICER'S MEETING.
I SAID, DOES THAT INCLUDE, IS THAT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT AIS? COULDN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION FOR OBVIOUS REASONS.
AND THEN THEY PUT THE CHART IN THE STUFF THEY SENT TO ADAM.
AND I'VE BEEN ABLE TO, AND AFTER HE SENT IT TO ME, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GOES, OH, I PROBABLY SHOULD SEND THIS OUT TO ALL THE CITIES.
AND THE BOARD ACTUALLY SENT IT TO THE CITIES, BUT THE BOARD MEMBERS HAD NO CLUE.
AND THEY STILL DON'T HAVE A CLUE.
I WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO OBJECTED TO THE BUDGET.
BUT IT'S RIDICULOUS TO HAVE FOUR, I MEAN.
$445,000, I LOOKED AT THE BUDGET FOR THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT.
$445,000 IS 85% OF OUR BUDGET.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT STUFF, AND I LOOKED AT ORONOS, I THINK WE'RE LESS THAN 50% FOR PERSONNEL.
IF I GOT THE NUMBERS RIGHT, I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK TO MAGGIE, BUT I LOOKED AT THAT TODAY.
I JUST, I WANT YOU TO SAY, BECAUSE WE CAN ASK FOR THEM TO COME IN AND GIVE AN EXPLANATION.
THEY CAN'T GIVE AN EXPLANATION.
WE'RE DOING LESS THAN WE EVER DID BEFORE.
AND I HAVE THREE COMPLAINTS IN FOR THE CITY OF ORONO RESIDENTS.
NOT A ONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN FINALIZED.
YOU SENT ME ONE, WHICH I'M WORKING ON.
ACTUALLY, LAURA PICKED UP THE BALL FROM THE CITY, WHICH IS VERY ILLEGAL TOO.
BUT ANYWAY, THERE'S TWO OTHER ONES.
HE TOLD ME TO GIVE ME AN ANSWER THE NEXT DAY WHEN I ASKED HIM, BUT TWO WEEKS LATER I SAID, WHAT DO YOU GOT GOING? I'M ON IT, BUT IT'S LIKE PULLING TEETH.
SO I WOULD JUST ASK THAT YOU OBJECT AND HAVE HIM COME IN AND EXPLAIN IT, AND THEN I'LL BE SITTING RIGHT HERE.
YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB OF EXPLAINING TO US WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR BUDGET.
THE OTHER THING IS, REALLY, QUITE HONESTLY, I GOT A JOB AND
[02:20:01]
I REPRESENT THE CITY OF ORONO.I AM NOT CONDEMNING ANY DECISION THAT YOU MAKE, BUT I CAN GET IT OFF MY PLATE IF YOU GO, NO, WE'RE GIVING THEM THE $71,000.
IF YOU WANT TO OBJECT, I GOT YOUR BACK.
SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE GIVING THAT TO THEM ANYWAY, BUT THE QUESTION IS WHETHER WE WANT TO OBJECT TO THE...
I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S THROUGH ISSUING...
YOU CAN GET IT OFF MY PLATE IF YOU DON'T OBJECT TO THE BUDGET, BUT IF YOU DO...
SO THIS LETTER THAT'S IN OUR PACKET, IS THAT...
GETTING A CLEAR ENDING AND EXPLANATION ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING OVER TIME.
THEY SENT IMPROPER INFORMATION TO MAKE OUR DECISION ON.
CHART THAT SAID THAT THE LEVY WAS ALL THIS, BUT IT WAS NOT THE GENERAL LEVY.
IS THAT $245,000 IN 2014 OR WHATEVER, AND $95,000 FOR AIS? WELL, IS IT POSSIBLE THEN TO AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT WE SEND THE LETTER TO HAVE A PRESENTATION TO GET SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, FROM LMCD EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR IN HERE TO EXPLAIN THIS TO US AS A COUNCIL? I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE TIME THAT I'VE BEEN HERE.
BUT THIS BEGS THE QUESTION, SINCE THIS BUDGET ISSUE IS GOING TO COME UP EVERY YEAR, WHEN DOES THIS BUDGET NEED TO BE APPROVED? 2027 BUDGET HAS BEEN APPROVED.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OBJECTING TO THAT AND GETTING AN EXPLANATION.
WE HAVE AN OPTION TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATION, AT LEAST.
YEAH, I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING I'VE CONSIDERED IN THE PAST.
I THINK AT THIS POINT, WHAT I'M HEARING, YOU'VE PRESENTED TO US MULTIPLE TIMES, WHICH I APPRECIATE, AND IT'S AN OPEN QUESTION FOR ME ABOUT WHERE THE FOCUS IS AND WHY THIS ISSUE WAS PRESENTED THIS WAY TO THE CITY.
BECAUSE AGAIN, IF WE'RE MAKING DECISIONS AS A CITY, WHATEVER THE ISSUE IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION WE'RE GETTING, NO, I DON'T APPRECIATE OUR STAFF OR OUR LMCD REP, YOU KNOW, TO DEAL WITH THAT KIND OF SITUATION.
I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE MORE TRANSPARENT OR CLEAR IN THE FUTURE.
IT'S A RUBBER STAMP BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS.
I GOT SHEETS ALL OVER MY WORKSTATION AT WORK, YOU KNOW, GOING BACK THROUGH THE DATA.
I WENT THROUGH BACK THROUGH EVERY FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT AND GOT THE PERSONNEL EXPENSES FOR THAT YEAR FROM 2014 TO CURRENT.
YOU KNOW, SO IT'LL BE HARD FOR A LAYMAN TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING.
DO YOU BELIEVE THEM TO BE OVERSTAFFED? NOT FOR 85% OF THE BUDGET FOR STAFF.
I MEAN, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I AGREE WITH RICHIE.
I THINK WE SHOULD BE SENDING A LETTER OF OBJECTION TO THIS.
I LOOK AT THE INCREASE JUST IN THEIR BUDGET ALONE.
THERE'S AN EXPLANATION FOR THAT.
YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK WE CAN, YEAH.
YOU KNOW, I TOLD THEM TO AMEND THE ONE BUDGET, AND IF THEY'D HAVE DONE THAT, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE SPENT $22,000 AND HIRED A NEW PERSON FOR $150,000 AFTER EXPENSES.
AND YOU CAN'T HAVE A DISCUSSION
[02:25:01]
AT THE CHAIR.WHEN WE WERE HAVING OUR BUDGET DISCUSSION, I SAID, HEY, AT THE END, I WAS WAITING UNTIL THE END, I SAID, I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
I SAID, YOU DON'T WANT TO DEBATE ME BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DEBATE ME.
AND THEN SHE TELLS ME AFTERWARDS, SHE CUT ME OFF.
THAT I JUST WANTED TO GET HOME AND WATCH THE BASKETBALL GAME, THE FINAL.
I MEAN, IT'S LIKE, THAT'S THE NATURE.
THEY DON'T SPEND THE TIME THAT YOU GUYS JUST SPEND HERE, HOURS, DISCUSSING SOME PLANS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME THAT WE CAN MOVE THROUGH THIS ISSUE AND HEAR AN EXPLANATION OR GET A PRESENTATION OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE WITHOUT A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND.
STAND, AND I WOULD LIKE MORE EXPLANATION, BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO THAT WE DON'T NEED TO BE ADDING TO ANY HERE, AND THAT'S NOT MY INTENT, BUT I THINK A LETTER OF OBJECTION ASKING FOR EXPLANATION, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH.
I THINK YOU HAVE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR THE CHAIR, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WILL COME.
WELL, AND WE'RE WHAT, SECOND LARGEST IN THE SECOND LARGEST AREA.
RIGHT, SO VERY FAIR AND REASONABLE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THAT CHART, WE'VE GOT 5,000 PEOPLE, AND LIZ GOT 245.
THEY HAVE THE SAME VOTE THAT WE DO.
TAKE IT THE NEXT STEP FORWARD, WE GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
HOWEVER, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND THE TIME.
IF YOU'VE GOT OUR BACK, WE'RE GOING FOR IT.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE CITY OF GREENWOOD.
I'VE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THEIR MAYOR.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, RICHIE, IN REPRESENTING THE CITY OF ORONO.
WAS ANYBODY PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION HERE? DID WE MAKE ALTERATIONS TO THE LETTER THAT WAS THE DRAFT LETTER THAT WAS PREPARED? I THOUGHT THE LETTER WAS WELL-WORDED.
I HAD JUST A QUESTION OF WHETHER WE WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO IT THAT SAYS WE WOULD WELCOME.
VISIT FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO INFORM US AS TO SO WE CAN BETTER UNDERSTAND.
SO I GUESS I WILL TAKE A STAB AT THIS ANYWAY, IF THE STAFF CAN REDRAFT THIS LETTER.
SO I MAKE A MOTION TO PROVIDE STAFF DIRECTION ON TO SUBMIT.
WELL, I SHOULD SAY TO DRAFT AN OBJECTION LETTER TO THE LMCD BOARD ON THE TWENTY TWENTY SEVEN LMCD.
BUDGET OBJECTING TO THAT AND ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION OR PRESENTATION FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR OTHER MEMBER OF THE BOARD.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? AND I SHOULD ASK, ARE YOU CLEAR ON THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE GIVING STAFF? YEP.
WE CAN MAYBE BETWEEN US WORDSMITH IT.
I WOULD LIKE THE UPDATE IN A PRESENTATION, IN-PERSON PRESENTATION. YEAH, I THINK WE'RE OWED THAT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT? WE NEED A SECOND, UNLESS WE GOT ONE.
WAS THERE A SECOND? I THOUGHT THERE WAS. OH, I DIDN'T HEAR IT. THAT WAS MY FAULT. OH, GOOD, VERY GOOD. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU FOR COMING. BOTH OF YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. CITY ADMINISTRATOR ENGINEER REPORT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING
[Mayor and Council Report]
ELSE FOR US, MR. EDWARDS? NO, NOT AT THIS TIME.ABOUT OUR COUNCIL, ANY UPDATES? NO? NO UPDATES.
GREAT. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORT. ANYTHING TO SHARE WITH YOU, JOHN? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SHARE OTHER THAN COUNCIL MEMBER RICKS' VERY EXCELLENT WORK. THANK YOU.
ANYTHING TO ADD? NO. YOU GUYS CAN ADD ABOUT THE BASEBALL GAME THAT I WORKED SO HARD FOR THAT I DIDN'T GET TO ATTEND. NO, I DON'T HAVE AN UPDATE. THE BASEBALL GAME WAS FUN. I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO UPDATE ABOUT THE BALL GAME. THANKS TO COUNCIL MEMBER REX. AND OUR STAFF AND THE GREAT COMMUNICATIONS AROUND THE EVENT BECAUSE THE BASEBALL,
[02:30:02]
I DON'T WANT TO STEAL YOUR THUNDER, ALL OF US HAD A GOOD TIME. YOU CAN GIVE DETAILS. IT WAS VERY FUN TO BE THERE. AND THE OTHER UPDATE I HAVE IN TERMS OF SHARING GOOD NEWS AND A COMPLIMENT FROM A RESIDENT OR COMMUNITY MEMBER IS THAT OUR PARKS DIRECTOR, JOE, SHARED WITH ME THAT WE GOT OUR FIRST COMPLIMENT ON THE UM, MONUMENT ROCK THAT HAS BEEN MOVED FROM A LOCATION THAT WAS NOT PROMINENT TO A MUCH MORE PROMINENT LOCATION AT BEATERWOOD THIS MORNING IN THE HEAT. AND THAT WAS ALREADY NOTICED. SO WHEN THESE PLANTINGS AND THIS OTHER KIND OF PRIDE IN THAT PARK START TO COME IN AND THE ADDED IRRIGATION OF THE FIELD, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY GREAT TO SEE. SO THAT WAS A REALLY POSITIVE THING. WELL, AND ON THOSE LINES, I HAD SEVERAL COMPLIMENTS, RE-SIGNING OUR SIGNAGE AT THE PARK. REALLY CLASSY.REALLY PASSED THAT ALONG. AND YEAH, THANK YOU FOR THE, YOU AND THE COMMITTEE FOR THE WORK YOU DID OR YOU CONTINUE TO DO ON OUR EVENTS COMMITTEE. IT WAS REALLY FUN, THE NIGHT AT THE SAINTS. MANAGED TO NOT EMBARRASS MYSELF THROWING OUT THE FIRST PITCH, ALTHOUGH I DID NOT GO THE EXTRA MILE AND ACTUALLY SING THE NATIONAL ANTHEM, AS WAS ALSO A REQUEST OF ME.
SO THERE I WOULD HAVE DEFINITELY EMBARRASSED MYSELF.
I THOUGHT JOE'S DAUGHTER WAS GOING TO SING WITH JOE. OH, OKAY. YEAH, YEAH. THE WHOLE THING WAS A BLAST, AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING TO... DO THINGS LIKE THAT MORE IN THE FUTURE AND PERHAPS AS IT BECOMES MAYBE AN ANNUAL THING WE CAN WE CAN GET MORE PEOPLE OUT MAYBE IF WE DID IT EARLIER IN THE YEAR. RACHEL AND CHRISTINE AND THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE DID A GREAT JOB OF TRYING TO GET THAT ALL SCHEDULED AND STUFF SO HATS OFF TO THEM. YEAH. ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO COME BEFORE THE MEETING? IF NOT, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, MOTION CARRIES.
WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 8.33.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.