Loading...
4. Zoning for boats moored at property CITYOF I ,.... I ,4 .„, ..,. _, ..,, , . CHANHASSEN 1 . T „if - :t ‘ , 40. 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 I . - (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORAND M NM 1f C OfitrItstIlifir I _ TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager dldorsed_ {. 11od:Wed Rejected I FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director Date d ib"° Date Submitted to Commission DATE: April 7, 1992 I � Date Submitted to Council SUBJ: Mooring of Watercraft I On January 13, 1992, the City Council adopted final reading for revisions to city ordinances pertaining to the mooring of watercraft. The major thrust of the ordinance was to ensure that boats were docked in front of an owner's parcel and not placed within the extended 10 I foot side setback. This was done to avoid situations that have occurred in the past whereby, boats are moored effectively in front of someone else's parcel and cause a hinderance to it's owners rightful use. I On February 10, 1992, this item was reconsidered at the City Council's request. At the last rY Y q moment, the Council changed provisions in the ordinance which pertained to a requirement I that boats operated on the lake be owned by the riparian lot owners. The Council changed existing provisions in the code which essentially mandated this to one wherein the owner I could allow other individuals to share his or her dock space as long as written approval was granted. The ordinance was published with this language and is now official. I The Council later received a number of comments to the effect that this change could result in greatly increased boat usage on city lakes with associated detrimental affects. Staff was recently directed to bring back revisions to the code which would eliminate this provision I returning it to original language wherein boats docked on the lake must be owned by the property owner. The City Attorney has prepared the requested revision. I Since this ordinance is not in the City Code, the City Council must open a public hearing and invite comment prior to considering adoption of the ordinance. 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council approve first reading of an ordinance amendment to 1 Section 6 -27(b) of the Chanhassen City Code. ATTACHMENTS I 1. Ordinance amendment. 2. Staff report and minutes. %./ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER CAMPBELL, KNU 1 SON, SCOTT & FUCHS, P.A. Attorneys at Law Thomas J Campbell (612) 452-51C' Roger N Knutson Fax (612) 452 -555 Thomas M Scott Gar\ G Fuchs James R \Valston Elliott B. Knetsch ' Michael A Brobacl March 31, 1992 Renae 0 Steiner Mr. Paul Krauss Chanhassen City Hall 690 Coulter Drive, Box 147 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 1 RE: Mooring of Watercraft ' Dear Paul: Enclosed is a draft of the ordinance concerning mooring of watercraft. 1 Very truly y• rs, ' C PBE'- , KNUTSON, SCOTT FUCHS, • 1 y: Roger N. Knutson RNK:srn Enclosure 1 1 1 1 1 APR 11992 i CY OF CHANHASSEN • Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan, MN 55121 1 1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 6 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 6 -27(b) of the Chanhassen City Code is • amended to read: (b) No watercraft shall be moored or docked overnight on the water of any lake unless it is currently registered pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 361 either in the name of the owner of the lakeshore site in front of which the watercraft is moored or docked or in the name of a blood relative of the owner. Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective immediately 1 upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this day of , 1992. ATTEST: Don Ashworth, Clerk /Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor I (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1992.) 1 1 r03/31 /92 City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992 MI Councilman Wing: Well I'm on that Board you assigned me to and I am too. I guess I'd like some direction from Council on what they would like to do. II That's a good point. Councilman Mason: Maybe after I've been here for 2 years instead of 1 I'll feel I ; a little more comfortable with a variance request. . Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Before I move on, I'd like to just back up. There's someone here who didn't realize that we had the Visitor Presentation portion and somehow missed it. I'd like to extend to them that opportunity to come forward at this time. As you all know, this is something we can't do anything with. It's just a presentation. We're more than willing to listen to what you have to say. VISITOR PRESENTATION: i Jacie Hurd: Thank you very much. I appreciate the right. My name is Jacie 1;6 Hurd. I live at 6695 Horseshoe Curve. I'm also the President of Lotus Lake Homeowners Association. I have a concern regarding a reconsideration of the zoning ordinance amendment concerning t ich took place 0 on February 10 1992 It was Section to stat that I'm not representing an option for or against the change but I am simply questioning the process that occurred. As a riparian owner of lakeshore on Lotus Lake I was never notified of the amendment. The changg made in the language of the amendment on February 10th allowing non - riparian boat owners to moor boats on city lakes seems contrary to the intent of the ordinance. As I question whether due process was observed, as no members of the Lotus Lake Homeowners Association were notified of this change, I ask that this amendment be reconsidered and put up for public discussion at the next meeting. Thank you very much. Councilman Wing: Well Mr. Mayor, as you know, we made a change that Roger ' recommended and it was somewhat definite. And then you considered it would be appropriate to make another slight change which didn't seem to make much difference. But then somebody brought up the issue that I have my own boat at my home and I happen to have one boat. But I let a friend keep it there. ' Another friend keep his boat there on my property but nonetheless by allowing a, shall we say public boat on my property, I've intensified the lake use. If ever you own, right now the way Roger had it worded, you have to own the boat in ' front of your home on your property registered to you and it's pretty clear cut. You can't have your friends and neighbors, people off the lake keeping their boat at your home. It was really fair, it was originally put that way to be fair as I understand it to the other neighbors and to keep the boat count down which had been a big issue in this debate. So by doing what we did in good faith, you allowed me to invite my friends to keep their boats at my home with no restrictions and I guess I'm seeing that as an intensification. I for one am ' clearing going to say no this next summer because I see the ramifications of it now. And I don't think anybody cares the way it was written as long as there's no complaints but if there are complaints there's teeth so I would guess, based ' on this last comments, I would having voted in the affirmative of that, consider a reconsideration of that particular portion of that ordinance. Maybe a little more information and background of what the pros and cons are but I do think it definitely does encourage intensification and welcome intensification and I 19 City Council Meeting - Fe` 'iary 24, 1992 think that's what we're trying to avoid here. And as a property owner I would concur that maybe, I didn't copy that. So if you were willing to consider reconsideration, having voted in the affirmative, I would support that. Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, if I may comment too that one of the reasons with what we just went through for the beachlots, non - conforming beachlots, that ' • was intensifying use but in view of the fact that we had just intensified the use for private homeowners, I didn't think it was quite fair to restrict the beachlots. We seem to be punishing them. ' Councilman Wing: Kind of talk out of both sides of our mouth. Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. ' Councilman Wing: So you picked up on the fact that we did? Councilwoman Dimler: Right. 1 Councilman Wing: Okay. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: And you introduced it. Councilman Wing: Well Roger wrote that ordinance for a purpose and then Mayor 1 Chmiel picked up on the fact that we wanted a little more flexibility. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, the only flexibility that I looked at is because of a son- 11 - in -law and his daughter living in an adjacent to his home and they did not have those lake rights. Under that particular circumstance, that's what I really picked up on. And it's probably a one in a blue moon that that's going to happen but nonetheless because he doesn't have a boat on his property, I didn't , see why the allowances couldn't be granted for a blood relative to utilize that. By allowing a friend to come on, that's a complete different circumstance. Although there are two whereas before with his there were none. Now it's only being put to one of which it-would normally be. Councilman Wing: If we went with the original ordinance as proposed by Roger, nothing ever gets said. If there's a complaint, then we could act on it and it would have to be enforced. The odds of a complaint would be just about nil is I think what we decided. And where'd we go wrong Roger? I mean the original one had teeth and then I really supported Mayor Chmiel in his interpretation but we • are increasing intensity at that point which maybe is inappropriate. Roger Knutson: I'll let you decide what went wrong. I don't get to vote on that. Just so we're clear. That language you're talking about was not a change. That's been in your ordinance for years. You can only have a boat in front of your own house and I think that's. Mayor Chmiel: That's registered. Roger Knutson: Yeah. About 2 or 3 years ago that was put in. 'Then the change ' was, well why can't I have my brother -in -law's or friend and give up the rights to one of my boats so therefore it would be equal? And the decision was made 20 , City Council Meeting rebruary 24, 1992 that that was appropriate and you certainly have the discretion to change your mind and reconsider. Mayor Chmiel: • Y I would like that. I would like to have a Little more discussion with other people before I would bring that up for a reconsideration at this time. Roger Knutson: Since the ordinance is, I believe been published? ' • Paul Krauss: Well we were just checking on that... Roger Knutson: The process I'd probably recommend, you wouldn't have to. Considering the stage you're at in it, would be if you decide you want to undo that or consider seriously undoing, of bringing the public back into it, although it's a little more painful, I'd recommend that you go back to the • Planning Commission. Hold a hearing there and bring it back up here. Councilwoman Dimler: To me the question is, did we violate the due process by ' reconsidering? I'm not real sure. Did we Roger? Roger Knutson: I'd have to review the process. ...you did not technically violate due process. As far as I know you didn't. ' Councilwoman Dimler: Okay. That would be my concern. I Roger Knutson: But this Council's been very strong in giving anyone an opportunity to be heard that wants to be heard and you go out of your way to do that more than anyone I know. So if you feel more input is appropriate, of course you can do that by sending it back to the Planning Commission and then '= bring it back up here. Councilman Wing: Don, can I just clarify this? Also, one of non - riparian lots ' commented that, it was an older gentleman who did not have a boat but his son did and so he was going to let his son have his spot at the non - riparian lot, which is the same thing. I mean we had requests for this easing up of this and then, as I mentioned, the Mayor quickly reacted and I thought appropriately. If we say lake registered in Minnesota to the property owner in front of his home, that's very restrictive. And I'll accept that as a homeowner. I think that's ' in the best interest of the lake. And then you're saying I can't have my daughter keep her boat there or I mean it's that restrictive. Or if we put in the word blood relative or are we still talking intensification? That's the issue here. Alright. Okay. ' Councilwoman Dimler: And I have one question too. Do we have a limit on the number of boats that a private homeowner can have in front? ' Roger Knutson: Yes. 3 I believe. Councilwoman Dimler: .Based on square footage? Front footage? ' Roger Knutson: Per lot... 11 21 City Council Meeting - February 24, 1992 1 Councilwoman Dimler: Well then it seems to me that would be simple by saying it can be a blood relative's boat without intensification of the useage. Councilman Wing: Then I'd go for the 2 for 1 also. If you are allowed 3 boats and you choose to have a relative, blood relative and then you give up your third boat. Right now there's a 2 for 1 basis which someone brought up. Councilwoman Dimler: Not allow any intensification. 1 Councilman Wing: I'm allowed 3 now. And let's say I allowed my daughter to keep her boat there. That would count as 2 boats. I would be happy with that. Frankly I'll go along with anything. I mean this is going to affect me and I'm pleased...whatever's passed. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. We'll move right along. 1 t "� DIRECT STAFF TO PUBLISH A NOTICE FOR NOMINATIONS FOR A SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY 9 P COMMITTEE. (j Councilman Workman: So moved. Mayor Chmiel: Paul, do you want to just touch briefly? 1 Paul Krauss: The next item on your agenda is consideration of plans and specs for the senior center. The Senior Commission is trying to pull%all the strings together so that when the doors open they can hit the ground running. There's a desire to have a working group outside the Senior Commission proper. The specific task is the well being and furtherance of the senior center. This group would also have the ability to go out and put the touch on people in the community to volunteer efforts and funds and what not for the senior center. And after reviewing a lot of different senior centers, it was felt an advisory board would be the best way to do that. Several members of the senior commission met with myself and Councilwoman Dimler to discuss the make -up of a senior commission and the the attempt was made to make sure that it's a wide variety of folks. Some Senior Commission, City Council rep, business people, church people, sch people, as well as over time probably increasing members support basis. The Chan Senior Club was also given a seat on this because they're going to be one of the primary users. So with that we'd recommend that you tell us to go ahead and publish it and get you some names. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: I just have one. It seems to me that there's 12 members recommended here instead of 11 as the report says. 1 Paul Krauss: There is and I know you wanted an odd number. Mayor Chmiel: We should have an odd number. 1 Paul Krauss: Well possibly we could do that by going. Councilwoman Dimler: Well we've got, if you add up the 1, 3, 1, 2, 2, 1, 2 it comes to 12. Paul Krauss: Would you be comfortable adding•a third senior citizen at large 1 22 1 1 City Council Meeting - 5ruary 10, 1992 RECONSIDERATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT. 11 ( Ilk Kate Aanenson: This is a reconsideration based on your request that the staff V l ook at the way the wording is written in Section 1 and that was raised the concern that riparian owners. The number of boats would still be limited to 3 as long as the owner had permission. Someone else could dock their boat there as long as there was no fee involved. So that language has been changed. I Mayor Chmiel: Good. Appreciate that. I would move it. Councilwoman Dimler: Second. II Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilwoman Dimler seconded to approve adoption of the new language for the proposed amendment for the Mooring of Watercraft. All voted in, favor and the motion carried. I Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, I thought that was a good catch. I Paul Krauss: Mr. Mayor, can I just ask a technical question of the City Attorney? This was already approved once and we published it once but it was never signed. Now we reconsidered it, do we republish that and then sign it? II Mayor Chmiel: No. We voted on it didn't we? Roger Knutson: What you have done tonight is you have voted' to reconsider. I That does not pass anything. All it does is put it back up on the table. You did not pass an ordinance by your motion to reconsider. You put it back up on the table. You have not passed an ordinance by your motion to reconsider. You I brought it back up on the table. Under your By -laws you're not supposed to act on it tonight. An ordinance itself. You're supposed to give everyone notice who had notice of the original, initial action. ' Aanenson: We did renotice this. Roger Knutson: You did renotice, okay. Then unless you want to wavie the II requirements of your By -laws, it has to come back on your Consent Agenda for your next meeting. I Councilwoman Dimler: Mr. Mayor, it was my understanding that we reconsidered it at our last meeting. Roger Knutson: Oh, you did reconsider it? Oh! II Councilwoman Dimler: So this is the time to do action. II Mayor Chmiel: You weren't here. I was going to say, you were absent. Roger Knutson: I was told to stay home. II Mayor Chmiel: Right, I wanted to save money. Roger Knutson: I said that because your agenda item says reconsideration. II II 23 II City Council Meeting - Febr. 10, 1992 Councilwoman Dimler: Oh, okay. Sure. But this is the report for the reconsideration that we approved last meeting. Mayor Chmiel: Yeah, we discussed it at the last meeting and that's why we brought it back. Roger Knutson: You reconsidered it at the last meeting and you're bringing it back now? Councilwoman Dimler: Yes. So this is the time to act on it. 1 Roger Knutson: Okay. Paul Krauss: So do we then just republish it with the correct language and have that signed? Roger Knutson: Yes. 1 REQUEST TO EXTEND VARIANCE, 9247 LAKE RILEY BOULEVARD, JAMES JESSUP. 1 Paul Krauss: There's no action required on this. Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thank you. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENT FOR NON - CONFORMING R1�1 RECREATIONAL BEACHLOTS OBTAIN A NON - CONFORMING USE PERMIT. 1 2a k Public Present: Name Address S.M. Knigge 3910 Glendale Drive Jerry L. Kortgard 3901 Glendale Drive Jerry Johnson 3940 Glendale Drive Michael R. Ryan 3850 Maple Circle Court MacFarlane 3800 Leslee Curve 1 Peter & Lola Warhol 3831 Leslee Curve Dan & Debbie Ament 4010 Crestview Drive V.R. Isham 4030 Leslee Curve G.A. Peters 4010 Leslee Curve Mark Rogers 3851 Leslee Curve Tom Merz 3201 Dartmouth Drive Dr. David Tester 3897 Lone Cedar Lane Mary Jo Moore 3231 Dartmouth Drive Bill Finlayson 6320 Fir Tree Avenue John Merz 3900 Lone Cedar Circle Ivan Underdahl 7502 - 77th Street Bernie Schneider 7501 - 77th Street Bob Hebeisen Lake Minnewashta Terry Johnson 3898 Lone Cedar Lane 1' 24 -_ - - - - -_- - - -- _ City Council Meeting - January 13, 1992 1 Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Workman seconded to table the appointment to the Youth Commission until the first meeting in February after the Council's II had a chance to advertise and interview candidates. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. 1 Mayor Chmiel: One other question I might have. How many nominations do we need j II for an adult representative? Is it 1 or 2? Don Ashworth: One. One each. One student and one adult. II CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: t b ; i3. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Concerning Development Contracts for Site Plan W)` Approvals, Final Reading. II d. Approve Readvertisement for Bids, Lake Ann Park Shelter. e. Approve Position Classification and Pay Compensation Plan. I g. Resolution 1192 -02: Amend Feasibility Study for Sanitary Sewer and Matermain Improvements in the Upper Bluff Creek District, Project 91 -17. 1 i. Approval of Accounts. 1 j. City Council Minutes dated December 9, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes dated December 4, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated December 10, 1991 1 Senior Commission Minutes dated December 13, 1991 - 1 m. Resolution $92 -03: Approve Resolution Requesting MnDot to Amend - 9 d 1992 97 Fiscal Year Highway Improvement Project to Include the Portion of TH 212 II between Lyman Boulevard in Chanhassen and TH 41 in Chaska. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. r( , A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT. FINAL READING. v Councilman Wing: 92(a), that's the new one right Roger? II Roger Knutson: That's correct. II Councilman Wing: This addresses dock setback zone and my only comment on this was that I think it's a good ordinance and I think it's going to go hand in hand with what the Planning Commission is working on with the recreation beachlots. II I "ink it's going to help make enforcement a lot easier of just what they're atte , opting to do. My only concern for staff is that with passage of this that it oe correlated with passage of the recreational beachlot ordinance. However that turns out so people are clearly aware of this ordinance and it's intent. 1 Although it's already in here, perhaps in a couple cases the violations I've . seen are in violation of the existing ordinance. This clarifies the existing 1 1 1 8 II City Council Meeting - January 13, 1992 ordinance and I guess my whole point here for Paul and his staff is communication of this ordinance to the people it's going to affect. Mayor Chmiel: Those that are existing with problems is what you're saying? Councilman Wing: No. Anybody that it may affect. Any recreational, actually it could affect anybody on the lake including a private owner but it's more likely to affect a crowded recreational beachiot situation. I just think it's important that they be aware of this is an updated, improved and is going to be enforced so they can make their spring plans accordingly. That's the only comment I had. Just the issue of communication to the public with this ordinance. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Would you like to make that a motion to accept item (a)? Councilman Wing: I make a motion for approval of 2(a). Councilman Mason: Second. ' Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the final reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning mooring of watercraft. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. H. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO WRITE SPECIFICATIONS AND RECEIVE BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF PUBLIC WORKS AND PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I just have a couple things that I would like to see or maybe you can answer on this. I'd like to get a little more background information on each of these respective items like maybe how old they are. What mileage we might have on those vehicles and take it from there because I'm sure that that's something that we should look at and be aware of. So maybe if you have Harold, do you have any background information with you that you can just hit each one of those. Harold Brose: Dump truck replacement, that's a 1976. There's probably 1 approximately 80,000 miles on that truck. The street sweeper is a 1986. We've got 6 years we did use that one. Flail mower's approximately 8 years old. The roll packer trailer, that is something we were going to purchase back when we got this pack back in 1986 but we never did. The front end loader forks. As manual statement here, what we're going to use it for on a 936 loader. We never had seen anything like this so it's something that we can use, well as they got on here. Culverts, trees, unloading pallets. In the parks, playground • equipment. Things like that. The weed sprayer, that's again a new item. The mid -size 4 wheel drive pickup to replace 701. That's a 1986 with about 90,000 miles on it and we transfer that into the garage. The one I'm using now is a 1978 Fairmont with 140,000 miles so that one's over the hill. And the mid - size 4 wheel drive pickup to replace 602, that's '86 Lynx. There's got to be about 80,000 miles in there and we put two different engines in that car so that one's definitely getting on the borderline. Anything in particular? Mayor Chmiel: No, I think that answers my perspective questions. Only because it doesn't really spell it out and Council should be aware as to what year's 9 11 1 CITYOF (D. _ CHANHASSEN 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 ' (612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739 MEMORANDUM TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager 1 FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planner II DATE: January 31, 1992 • SUBJ: Reconsideration of Zoning Amendment of Mooring of Watercraft g g BACKGROUND At the last City Council meeting on January 27, 1992, it was voted to reconsider a recently approved ordinance dealing with the mooring of watercraft. The Council directed staff to 1 review and come up with some different language for a portion to the proposed amendment regarding mooring of watercraft. The ordinance originated from concerns raised at the City Council, where a discussion of problems that are occurring from lakeshore owners whose docks and moorings were impacting adjoining properties ability to use the lake. Staff was asked to review the matter and propose an ordinance amendment that would aid in resolving the issue. This was conceptually reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council last fall. The proposed amendment to the ordinance was reviewed at the Planning Commission on November 6, 1991, and at the City Council on December 9, 1991, and January 13, 1992. During these meetings the major issue of concern was the dock setback zone. The other issue that has become a concern is limiting docking to only those watercraft currently registered in the ' name of the owner of the Lakeshore site in front of which the watercraft is moored or docked. Although this issue was not discussed at great lengths during these meetings it has become a concern to a number of the residents. 1 1 1 t41, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 1 Mooring of Watercraft January 31, 1992 Page 2 ANALYSIS 1 The way the proposed ordinance amendment reads is; "all watercraft being moored or docked overnight must be registered in the name of the owner of the lakeshore site in front of which the watercraft is moored of docked ". Currently, the City Code, Chapter 6, Boats and Waterways, regulates the number of boats � that can be moored or docked to any lakeshore lot. The maximum number of boats allowed is three. In addition, the ordinance states that no watercraft shall be moored or docked 1 unless the watercraft is registered in the name of the owner of a lakeshore site on the lake, or in the name of a member of the owner household. This stipulation has been a requirement since 1973 when it was implemented as a part of the Water Surface Usage 1 Ordinance (Attachment #1). Compliance with the ordinance is handled on a complaint basis. Staff has had almost no 1 complaints regarding mooring or docking of watercraft where they are not registered to the lakeshore owner. As we see it, the major area of concern is not the ownership f 111 � o the watercraft being moored but that the lakeshore owners permission has been given. It is our opinion that the number and location of boats is the issue and not ownership. Thus, we believe that the ordinance language should be clarified to eliminate the ownership requirement. In addition, any watercraft being moored must have the lakeshore owners permission as well as maintaining the dock setback zone. The City Attorney has drafted a new ordinance for your review. This new ordinance reflects the discussed changes (Attachment #2). RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending that the City Council adopt the new language for the proposed amendment for the Mooring of Watercraft. 1 Attachments 1. Existing Surface Water Management Ordinance 2. Proposed Ordinance regarding Mooring of Watercraft Manager's Recommendation: As noted above, the existing ordinance has been in place g P since 1973. To the best of my knowledge we have never prosecuted or forced to use the existing ordinance. The requirement for the boat being registered to the homeowner or a member his household has only provided an additional tool if a severe violation were to occur, i.e. the property owners leasing their dock space and such coming at the expense of neighbors. UJA II ' 11 CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. ' AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 6 AND 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 6 -27(b) of the Chanhassen City Code is amended to read: ' (b) No watercraft shall be moored or docked overnight on the water of any lake unless, (1) it is currently registered pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 361 in the name of the owner of the lakeshore site in front of which the watercraft is moored or docked, or (2) the watercraft owner has written permission from the owner of the lakeshore site in front of which the watercraft is moored or docked. ' The lakeshore owner may not receive or be entitled to any payment for the written permission. Section 2. Section 6 -27 of the Chanhassen City Code is 1 amended by adding subparagraph (c) to read: (c) Except as provided in Section 6- 27(b), no ' watercraft or boat lift shall be kept, moored, docked, or stored in the dock setback zone. Section 3. Section 20 -263 of the Chanhassen City Code is amended by adding subparagraph (16) to read: No watercraft or boat lift shall be kept, moored, docked, or 1 stored in the dock setback zone. Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately ' upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this day of , 1992. ATTEST: 1 Don Ashworth, Clerk /Manager Donald J. Chmiel, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on , 1992.) 1 1 EX 15T I N 1 § 6-24 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (2) Obstruct reasonable use or access to any other dock, mooring or other structure authorized under this chapter; (3) Present a potential safety hazard; or (4) Be detrimental to significant fish and wildlife habitat or protected vegetation. (Ord. No. 73, § 3.01, 7- 11 -83) Sec. 6-25. Construction and maintenance . enerall S Y Docks, moorings and other structures may be constructed of such materials and in such a ' manner as the owner determines, provided that they shall be so built and maintained that they do not constitute a hazard to the public using the waters of the lake and they shall be maintained in a workmanlike manner. (Ord. No. 73, § 3.07, 7.11.83) Sec. 6-26. Docks. 1 (a) No dock shall exceed six (6) feet in width and no dock shall exceed the greater of the following lengths: 1 (1) Fifty (50) feet; or (2) The minimum straight-line distance necessary to reach a water depth of four (4) feet. �1 (b) The width (but not the length) of the cross -bar of any "T" or "L" shaped dock shall be included in the computation of length described in the preceding sentence. The cross -bar of any such dock shall not measure in excess of twenty -five (25) feet in length. No dock shall encroach upon any dock set -back zone; provided, however, that the owners of any two (2) abutting lakeshore sites may erect one (1) common dock within the dock set -back zone appurtenant to the abutting lakeshore sites, if the dock is the only dock on the two (2) lakeshore sites and if the dock otherwise conforms with the provisions of this chapter. No more than one (1) dock shall be permitted on any Lakeshore site. (c) No person shall store fuel upon any dock. (d) No oscillating, rotating, flashing or moving sign or light may be used on any dock. 1 (e) No advertising signs shall be displayed from any dock. (Ord. No. 73, §§ 3.02, 3.03, 3.09, 3.10, 7- 11 -83) 1 • Sec. 6-27. Mooring, docking, etc., of watercraft. (a) Except for privately -owned commercial resorts or commercial boat landings estab- lished prior to July 11, 1983, no person shall moor overnight, dock overnight, or store overnight more than three (3) watercraft on any lakeshore site or upon the waters of any lake. 1 Docking of watercraft at any Lakeshore site or storage of watercraft upon any Lakeshore site is permissible however at any time other than overnight. 011 332 1 1 BOATS AND WATERWAYS § 6-30 (b) No watercraft shall be moored, docked or stored overnight on any lakeshore site or on ' the waters of any lake unless the watercraft is either: (1) Currently registered, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes chapter 361 in the name of the owner of a lakeshore site on the lake or in the name of a member of the owner's ' household; or (2) Currently registered as a guest boat at any privately-owned commercial resort or ' commercial boat landing located on the lake. ( rd. No. 73, §§ 3.04, 3.05, 7- 11 -83) ' • Sec. 6-28. Swimming rafts, ski jumps, diving taverns, etc. (a) Swimming rafts may only be located directly in front of a lake shore site owned by the raft owner or with the written approval of the owner of the lake shore site. All swimming rafts ' shall meet the minimum standards in this subsection. Their size shall not exceed one hundred forty -four (144) square feet. Swimming rafts shall project over the water surface not less than one (1) foot and not more than five (5) feet, measured vertically, above the surface of the lake. 1 Swimming rafts shall not be located in areas with a depth of less than seven (7) feet. Swimming rafts shall be reflectorized as provided in subsection' (b). Their distance from the ordinary high water mark shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet. ' (b) Swimming rafts. ski jumps, diving towers and other structures surrounded by the waters of any lake, whether floating or on posts, shall be lighted with a light visible in all directions. or have attached thereto sufficient reflectorized material so as to reflect light in all directions. The material shall be capable of retaining eighty (80) percent of its dry weather reflective signal strength when wet. (Ord. No. 73, §§ 3.06, 3.09, 7-11-83; Ord. No. 109.0 1, 9- 29 -89) Sec. 6-29. Fueling facilities. Installation of fueling facilities on docks, moorings and other structures shall be prohibit- ed. Any fueling facilities which were in active use prior to September 7, 1983, shall be deemed ' to be nonconforming uses. No such nonconforming fueling facility shall be enlarged or altered or increased or occupy a greater area than that occupied on September 7, 1983. Any noncon- forming fueling facility which is partially or totally destroyed by any cause, may be restored ' to its former use and physical dimension if said restoration is completed within one (1) year of its partial or total destruction. Maintenance and necessary structural repairs of a noncon- forming fueling facility are permitted provided that any such maintenance or repairs do not ' extend, enlarge or intensify such fueling facility. (Ord. No. 73, § 3.11, 7-11-83) • Sec..6.30. Removal of seasonal docks, moorings, etc. • All seasonal docks, moorings, and other structures shall be removed from the lake before 1 November 1 of each year. All nonconforming structures, except legally nonconforming docks and swimming rafts, once removed may not be returned to the lake. Legal nonconforming Supp. No. 2 • 333 City Council Meeting - Jar zry 27, 1992 1 that we can be thinking about at this time as well. Those are costly items in there. Maybe if some of those things can be brought up and discussed with developers, potentially see if there can't be some contributions towards that from the developers themselves who might pay. Okay, anything else on that Richard? Councilman Wing: No. Thank you. 11 Mayor Chmiel:- I guess the other thing that I had was the ordinance that we amended Chapter 6 and 20 of our Chanhassen City Code concerning mooring of watercraft. This we passed this past Council meeting which was January 23rd. One of the things that was brought up to me and I thought it was a very good point and I'd like this possibly to be brought back for reconsideration. Obviously a majority of voting on this as we all did in the positive. That's the reason I'm bringing this up again. As that Section 1, 627(B) of Chanhassen City Code is amended to read that no watercraft shall be moored or docked overnight on the water of any lake unless it's currently registered pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 361 in the name of the owner of the lakeshore site in front of which the watercraft is moored or docked. There is a specific dockage within the city of which a gentleman owns. Does not have a boat. He does not have a boat docked at his dock himself because he doesn't own one but his daughter and son -in -law just two houses down do not have lake rights, do use that dockage with their boat on his property. And somehow I'm sure that some of these situations will occur from time to time and I guess the reason I'm bringing it up is because I would like for us to look at this and see if there is someway that this can be brought up or consideration given for this kind of 11 situation because technically by law, this ordinance reads it's not permitted. Councilman Wing: I have a friend's boat at my house. What are you going to do about it? You're right. This is a case. The issue was the mooring in front of someone else's house and no ordinance to effect it and I think that's how Roger got to this point. I think we're looking for some way to remove a moored boat from in front of your home and I think there's a better way to do this. This is a very awkward paragraph and I think it could very definitely be reviewed and rewritten in an appropriate manner. Councilwoman Dimler: What you're saying Richard is you would want to initiate ' the complaint and then have this go into effect? Councilman Wing: Well, if we left it as it is, I don't think anything would , ever be said or done. This really gives some teeth to the City to be able to go out and enforce someone that arbitrarily moves in on somebody. On the other hand, I can see this being rewritten. I tell you it's going to be awkward. On Lake Minnetonka if I owned a lot, I can't rent or lease but I think that's all we have to put in here. You can't rent or lease that dock site but you can certainly have a friend or neighbor as far as I'm concerned. I have a friend and I didn't worry about this because it's not going to affect me. Nobody's going to complain but in your case, I agree Don. I think it could easily be rewritten to accommodate your concern and well worth reviewing. Mayor Chmiel: I would like to make that as a motion to have staff review and come up with some type of a solution to that specific problem. 1 16 1 City Council Meeting - - inuary 27, 1992 Councilman Wing: And I'll second that. Councilwoman Dimler: I don't think we can act on it because it's a Council presentation. We have to wait until next meeting. li t Councilman Workman: We're acting to modify the ordinance? Mayor Chmiel: Just to modify the existing ordinance. 1 Councilwoman Dimler: It has to have a public hearing doesn't it? ' Don Ashworth: I hear you say, and maybe this isn't what you're saying but you want staff to come back with a solution. Suggestions on how to do it so the action would be this. 1 Mayor Chmiel: No, that's right. I don't want any action to take place. Councilwoman Disler: It doesn't need a motion? 1 Mayor Chmiel: Well at least to direct staff to proceed with it. ' Councilman Wing: Just to review this. Mayor Chmiel: If everybody's in agreement, yes. Basically we're not going to need a motion. 1 ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: A. PLANNING COMMISSION GOALS, PLANNING DIRECTOR. • Paul Krauss: Basically in the past few years we've come before you with the 1 ongoing issues list from the Planning Commission. This is something that they update every month that they use as a tracking mechanism to know what they want to tackle in the year and•set some priorities. In the past few years we've been presenting this to the City Council for your comment. Just briefly going ' through it here, this is the most current list that we have. It starts out with the issue that Councilman Wing was discussing a little bit earlier which was the Highway 5 study corridor. This was originally the study area. It's been ' expanded to the corridor and that's what we were charged with doing when you adopted the Comprehensive Plan. So that's at the top of their list. There was also a desire to see the 1995 study area south of Lyman also defined so we have this big blank spot on the map that said study area and I think everybody would like to shoot for having some idea about what it's going to be before it's brought into the MUSA line. So that was one of the jobs to do. Again we've been going through these things. Rezoning the BF district. It's something that 1 they haven't gotten a hold on yet but that's that area down below the hill on old 212. There's a fair amount of discontent with the development we've had down there and the Planning Commission from time to time has thought about ' different approaches to suggest to resolve that. That's something they need to get a handle on and bring back to you. The sign ordinance. 11 Mayor Chmiel: Paul could I just? 1 17 1 . City Council Meeting - January 13, 1992 Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Workman seconded to table the appointment to the Youth Commission until the first meeting in February after the Council's 11 had a chance to advertise and interview candidates. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Chmiel: One other question I might have. How many nominations do we need , for an adult representative? Is it 1 or 2? Don Ashworth: One. One each. One student and one adult. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilwoman Dialer moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the following Consent Agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: c. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Concerning Development Contracts for Site Plan Approvals, Final Reading. d. Approve Readvertisement for Bids, Lake Ann Park Shelter. e. Approve Position Classification and Pay Compensation Plan. g. Resolution *92 -02: Amend Feasibility Study for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Improvements in the Upper Bluff Creek District, Project 91 -17. i. Approval of Accounts. j. City Council Minutes dated December 9, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes dated December 4, 1991 Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated December 10, 1991 Senior Commission Minutes dated December 13, 1991 m. Resolution *92 -03: Approve Resolution Requesting MnDot to Amend 1992 -97 Fiscal Year Highway Improvement Project to Include the Portion of TH 212 between Lyman Boulevard in Chanhassen and TH 41 in Chaska. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. i A. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT, FINAL READING. Councilman Wing: 92(a), that's the new one right Roger? , Roger Knutson: That's correct. Councilman Wing: This addresses dock setback zone and my only comment on this was that I think it's a good ordinance and I think it's going to go hand in hand with what the Planning Commission is working on with the recreation beachlots. I think it's going to help make enforcement a lot easier of just what they're attempting to do. My only concern for staff is that with passage of this that it be correlated with passage of the recreational beachiot ordinance. However that turns out so people are clearly aware of this ordinance and it's intent. Although it's already in here, perhaps in a couple cases the violations I've seen are in violation of the existing ordinance. This clarifies the existing 8 1 1 City Council Meeting - January 13, 1992 • ordinance and I guess my whole point here for Paul and his staff is communication of this ordinance to the people it's going to affect. Mayor Chmiel: Those that are existing with problems is what you're saying? Councilman Wing: No. Anybody that it may affect. Any recreational, actually it could affect anybody on the lake including a private owner but it's more likely to affect a crowded recreational beachlot situation. I just think it's ' important that they be aware of this is an updated, improved and is going to be enforced so they can make their spring plans accordingly. That's the only comment I had. Just the issue of communication to the public with this ' ordinance. Mayor Chmiel: Very good. Would you like to make that a motion to accept item (a)? Councilman Wing: I make a motion for approval of 2(a). ' Councilman Mason: Second. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approve the final reading of ' Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning mooring of watercraft. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. H. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO WRITE SPECIFICATIONS AND RECEIVE BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF PUBLIC WORKS AND PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT. Mayor Chmiel: I guess I just have a couple things that I would like to see or maybe you can answer on this. I'd like to get a little more background information on each of these respective items like maybe how old they are. What mileage we might have on those vehicles and take it from there because I'm sure that that's something that we should look at and be aware of. So maybe if you have Harold, do you have any background information with you that you can just hit each one of those. ' Harold Brose: Dump truck replacement, that's a 1976. There's probably approximately 80,000 miles on that truck. The street sweeper is a 1986. We've got 6 years we did use that one. Flail mower's approximately 8 years old. The roll packer trailer, that is something we were going to purchase back when we got this pack back in 1986 but we never did. The front end loader forks. As manual statement here, what we're going to use it for on a 936 loader. We never had seen anything like this so it's something that we can use, well as they got on here. Culverts, trees, unloading pallets. In the parks, playground equipment. Things like that. The weed sprayer, that's again a new item. The mid -size 4 wheel drive pickup to replace 701. That's a 1986 with about 90,000 ' miles on it and we transfer that into the garage. The one I'm using now is a 1978 Fairmont with 140,000 miles so that one's over the hill. And the mid -size 4 wheel drive pickup to replace 602, that's '86 Lynx. There's got to be about 80,000 miles in there and we put two different engines in that car so that one's definitely getting on the borderline. Anything in particular? Mayor Chmiel: No, I think that answers my perspective questions. Only because it doesn't really spell it out and Council should be aware as to what year's 9 City Council Meeting - December 9, 1991 B.C. "Jim" Burdick: Part of this week. 11 Don Ashworth: I would really like to have you meet with the new engineers. Have an opportunity to introduce to you. Let them show you the design that we showed to the HRA and City Council for that section of roadway. Why they're recommending it. They're going through some widening in the downtown area and would you be available Wednesday or Friday? B.C. "Jim" Burdick: No. I've got tomorrow, Tuesday or Friday. Well possibly Wednesday. Wednesday morning. Well, 10:00 would be okay. Don Ashworth: Charles if you could try to see what their schedule is and get back. 1 Mayor Chmiel: Good point. With that I'd like to move item (k). Is there a second? 1 Councilman Workman: Second. Resolution 1191- 100A -1: Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Workman seconded to ' approve the Resolution Reallocating Funds for West 78th Street Public Improvement Project. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. L. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CONCERNING MOORING OF WATERCRAFT, FIRST READING. Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, there's several issues before Planning Commission coming to Council having to do with recreational beachlots and the lake useage ordinance. The one that was presented this evening under (1), Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning mooring of watercraft, first reading, as I read it didn't meet the, I don't believe met the intent of the original amendment nor the Planning Commission's wishes. Two definitions here, dock setback. The dock setback portion of the ordinance states that a dock can't be within 10 feet of the extended property center line. The problem we're getting is people were putting their docks out on that 10 foot center line and then proceeding to moor boats, put on boat lifts and extend right over the property lines. So the intent was to keep 20 pounds of potatoes within a 10 pound bag if necessary. Nonetheless leave this sort of no man's land so this was rewritten today and presented by Roger. All I've asked for is that it basically stay the same other than no watercraft, dock, portion of dock, storage, mooring or boat lifts will infringe on that 10 foot dock setback so as they leave their beach, their docks their lifts, they'll in fact still be going somewhat going on their corner of the lake which has been one of the major problems and which prompted this amendment in the first place. So I believe that the copy that was given to us is the actual intent of what we were trying to accomplish originally with this amendment. Councilman Workman: Can you clarify precisely where those changes are on here? ' Roger Knutson: Change in Section 2 of the Ordinance. (c). Mayor Chmiel: Worded as? 1 5 1 ' City Council Meeting - Der ber 9, 1991 Roger Knutson: It stops at the setback zone and the prior draft had continued, in such a way that the watercraft or any part thereof extends across the extended side lot lines of any lakeshore lot. That was dropped out. And the reference to boat lift was added. Identical change was made in Section 3. ' Councilman Mason: Why are we dropping that off? Roger Knutson: The original draft would allow you to moor your boat in such a ' way that it extended all the way to your side lot line. Your dock must be 10 feet from your side lot line but your boat went out parallel to the shore, it could extend all the way to your property line. The change says you have to keep that boat moored so it's at least 10 feet from your property line. Mayor Chmiel: In other words so you're not encroaching on any adjacent property's water area. Roger Knutson: That's right. Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Richard? Councilman Wing: No, I'm very pleased with this. I think it almost resolves some of the recreational beachlot problems by itself. Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to make your motion to move this item? ' Councilman Wing: Yeah, with just one quick look at Mr. Krauss. Paul Krauss: No, that's fine. ' Councilman Wing: I would move then. Mayor Chmiel: Item (1). Councilman Wing: Item (1). Councilman Workman: Second. Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Workman seconded to approve the First Reading ' of Zoning Ordinance Amendment concerning Mooring of Watercraft. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. ' O. DEFINE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR TEMPORARY SALES /CHRISTMAS TREE SALES. Councilwoman Dimler: Item (o) having to do with temporary sales /Christmas Tree sales. When I first read this I guess I was looking for a reason why this was ' being enacted. So I thought the only, as I was reading through it, I thought the only concern I would have would be safety concerns that I could possibly see that we would want to do something like this. So I checked with Scott Harr to ' find out if there had been any safety situations in the past on any temporary sale at all. He assured me that there had been none at all, and even if in the future that would be a problem, that this can be taken care of current regulations through the safety hazards. 1 6 q1 —l5 o' - CITY OF CHANHASSEN AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING NOTICE , STATE OF MINNESOTA ) i ss COUNTY OF CARVER ) I, Karen J. Engelhardt, being first duly sworn, on oath ' deposes that she is and was on April 15 , 1992 , the duly qualified and acting Deputy Clerk of the City of Chan- 1 hassen, Minnesota; that on said date she caused to be mailed ' a copy of the attached notice of Public Hearing Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment to require that boats moored in front of lake front parcels be owned by and registered in the name of the lake front property owner to the persons named on attached Exhibit "A ", by enclosing a copy of said notice in an envelope addressed to such owner, and ' depositing the envelopes addressed to all such owners in the United States mail with postage fully prepaid thereon; that the names and addresses of such owners were those appearing as such by the records of the County Treasurer, Carver County, Minnesota, ' and by other appropriate records. • Kar J.; Engel4'! rdt, Deputy Clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this 15th day of April , 1992 �_ VICTORIA E. CHURCHILL 1 NOTARY P CARVER C MINNESOTA • COUNTY My oomnisNon =Pim 9.598 Notary Public v 1 1 1 1 1 1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ' PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Chanhassen City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, April 27, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in Chanhassen City Hall, 690 Coulter Drive. The purpose of this hearing is to amend the Zoning Ordinance to require that boats moored in front of lake front parcels be owned by and registered in the name of the lake front property owner. 1 All interested persons are invited to attend this public hearing and express their opinions with respect to this proposal. 1 1 Paul Krauss Planning Director Phone: 937 -1900 (Publish in the Chanhassen Villager on April 16, 1992) 1 1 1 1 MR CHRIS ENGEL 11 MR MIKE WEGLER MR RAY BARTON COLONIAL GROVE HOA CARVER BEACH HOA CHRISTMAS LAKE HOA 7016 SANDY HOOK 6630 MOHAWK DRIVE 5915 CHRISTMAS LAKE RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 II CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SHOREWOOD MN 55331 MR WILLIAM ENGEBRETSON GREENWOOD SHORES HOA MR KEVIN SHARKY MR RICHARD M NIELAND II 7120 UTICA LANE LAKE RILEY HOA LAKE SUSAN HOA CHANHASSEN MN 55317 380 DEER FOOT TRAIL 8510 GREAT PLAINS BLVD.' CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MR STEVE DECATUR MS BOBI MURRAY MR KEN HANNEMAN 1 LOTUS HOA LOTUS LAKE ESTATES HOA MINNEWASHTA CREEK HOA 6645 HORSESHOE CURVE 15 CHOCTAW CIRCLE 6580 JOSHUA CIRCLE CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55317 II MR GERRY SCHWERE MR BILL FINLAYSON MR JAMES P SENST II MINNEWASHTA HEIGHTS HOA MINNEWASHTA HEIGHTS HOA MINNEWASHTA MANOR HOA 6330 FIR TREE AVENUE 6320 FIR TREE AVE 2820 WASHTA BAY ROAD . EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 II MS DORIS HANSON MR MARK ROGER MR MIKE RYAN MINNEWASHTA SHORES HOA PLEASANT ACRES HOA PLEASANT ACRES HOA 6210 CYPRESS DRIVE 3851 LESLIE CURVE 3850 MAPLE CIRCLE II EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 MR GREG DATTILO MR CHARLIE ROBBINS MR RON GESLIN II RED CEDAR POINT HOA SUNRISE HILLS HOA SUNSET HILLS HOA 7201 JUNIPER AVE 7340 LONGVIEW CIRCLE 7311 DOGWOOD I . EXCELSIOR MN 55331 CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 DR DAVID TESTER MARK ROGERS II TROLLS GLEN HOA PLEASANT ACRES 500 WEST 79TH STREET 3851 LESLEE CURVE II CHANHASSEN MN 55317 EXCELSIOR MN 55331 II 1 • II II II II It 1 , i 4, I I ,; 11,:'75-_-115.1-/w -i.d C-0 5 / /�;c. ,446 ■ , l 1 i , ES . /' Co 51 A: l E , 4 7.J C a e , P c , o F as/2 i ill i (3 (co I 1 1 ,l G ©s`i 73/. 51 V 1 tri j /1I 4srSs. 3 3, !,F 1 1 1 1 IL 1 ;! II" �i C .. i . __? - a s ? , ' i Cc7 i- 753,11 1 ;'^ 1 ) 0 r.1vo1 Amy. a . Tat -c- 1.,c. /,s0 1 1 1 1 AO- fi, — /, 3G1, 3q ?F-d, f - (r ne s I Cd s I- 7</S. � 9 1 r i C) cf 7. 1 TO 4 t 7. . 1 ! I 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 0_0 , eie Ai 5 4 i. Fcyg„ . , . . . u ft . , , 7 .. 1 Aric40 ce= 0 I • (Y .541 . . .(0.P/ , e err° a 44°,44 . . . Dagr S- t wk . „ 7 5 c454. Co oedch) • Ft /204.W , /4¢-S! Tpsd.ue a. c71144419.<*tirtk C 4567 P , , „ . 7r1, 4-Iff e 1 Lo `r 1 / PO e‘s. c-4 1 eV t.tf ifSltyttJer7 60 4 LA-f a 4 e ,/ Or -P°, (71) M• FP-02.7 17111 _ . • I Vile r 4 1. ) ,11 IV, r ■Illo:. l '-•- lth . • .. COOR . i i/ '` -X)) ..::. . jk--4 I trA 1 I I I I 1 4 L' 1411 I i II II - JTJ 11 41 1 P \-5 1 Th. s •••••-• .;"... ' -_„,,_--------_;,, A .... " 4______, . . ,..., i - ...„... _..._ . _ , . .... k... ,.... . —._,....„.. j o i . _ 4, isc.mmuNic. , ... . .,.._,...,;..:. ., , , 1...—: 1 .. •...6, I • . . . _ .-. ' - BE KEWAY la ' DESIGN .. - _ 4 I i te 0% State of Minnesota Department of Transportat;on I BIKEWAYS 20 1 Feb. 8. 1933 TYPICAL.. BICYCLE & RIDER DIMENSIONS 1 CHARACTERISTICS DIMENSION (Feet) • " Width 2.00 1 �, Length (handlebar width) 4 N � 5.75 iit u Ore Height 7.40 minimum 1 ' c 0.50 � Vertical Pedal Clearance - MI 5.8 ft. 1 FIGURE D 1 1 1 2.0' • 8.0' 2.0' Dasira W 2 1 [ straots \,. 0.5' .02 _ _ 4 :1 \ ••... O— r able 2 1 mut 1 pl Ditch if required for drainage NOTE: 1 The bikeway width should be maintained across bridges and through underpasses. FIGURE E 1 Feb 8 1983 BIKEWAYS -25- URBAN DESIGNS .RURAL DESIGNS See Bridge Design Manual - Fig. D 5- 392.203 See Bridge Design Manual - Fig. C 5- 392.203 On Road Bikeways C Roadway C Roadway 12' 10' 1„ 12' 12' i Bikeway Concrete & Fence , 'i . Bikeway Concrete &Fence Bikeway Railing ! Bikeway Railing A . BRIDGE DECK SECTIONS ' A c, Roadway C Roadway L 12' t _ '� 10' .}.4' 12' 10'.5' — I Bikeway I i 1 Bikeway 6:I 6:1 APPROACHING ROADWAY SECTIONS A , ) Off Road BikevXs A c. ��, R :.� Roadway 10 O C Roadway h0 ' 10' 8' Min. L 12' 12' . A i ti Bikeway I 1 T Bikeway Concrete & Fence Metal Concrete & Fence Metal Bikeway Railing 03 Bikeway Railing Bikeway Railing © Bikeway Railing BRIDGE DECK SECTIONS _ -- -- /'' 10' D e:. 30' or m ore desirable 1 : Des I Roadway © Roadway r ---�.• 1 10' q ► 8' Ma . 12' 10' 1.5' 8' Min. Oa Bikeway Bikeway O 6 1 Q 6 : 1 ,C2 I -_- Var iable :1 . 0.5 APPROACHING ROADWAY SECTIONS osj NOTES: © .02 ft./ft. slope 3 Q Minimum width. Includes provision for pedestrians. ' © If shoulder wi is > 6' no fence is requir on top of barrier. See section F, WIDTHS AND CLEARANCES for explanation of bikeway width. ` FIGURE L :n il DESIGNS FOR BRIDGE DECKS WITH BIKEWAYS 1 ♦ 7CI j s - .- 4- g 1 , E 0 „., — \ \ s „Ai_ ... s, \ ..... ... _.."- -,e" i t DEL I: { " o 0 0 � '� ` . , ,fir: .\ ; :4 /- \.. '- .. - - --- -- ..... . ,.. , , ., i I $1 , - R , • f ~.1 d i p: " . 2- M . .7'�_ .,, \ \ -............ t . ic>. l t—_ PX C) �t N 1 i / ' ) \ 1 \ ,�: I L Q.i. "X- -� g W w(D °C {1 • ° I ` 1 Y < _.... j f f- , (n jC "' Z 1() ..1 t N I t ' o f w fits f / Ct .. • -• , N ..win"'` cr W Q.. °., �. € in t ,. 1- Q w O: o = w 1,6' GRAVE ® I / r• , ' — ---4 ,--61 >• Li—,, - t,......,ifE „ g :: :y 3 t • i ...1 -1 J r jm } • O• V u a. > Q Y �� .Z ` , � G6:b6 +L =O A it , ,ao cr U o_cr =ww , ;. o r 1 W % i n i� • m � QI— � a 1 6.- w , • - . • 1 ,., i 'lll CO W Q Y • W ! \ ' Ir , ; s.✓ U / cc W lt_ CO .. (n � .)y� �'*' 1 8 8 Z , — .s t, t• ' ; 1 licc ? U w p }�� U U U w= ��.� _ J ` • .. ! .4,-- t, ,,.� '' °r, 1 __I W W �T fl_ Z W w �' M J 4 � o r A I sw , f 1 . (1}.,,1- I- ft (1..... • .1- F- U > ', '♦ Z :1' '�:^ \' f . z1 ' ti �/ - - - :. *: Ir . : (r) I i': OH • .' ; 0.. : I - /7 : :. i ,.</' \ 1 ---. W a 1 ° w L.' 1 J U ; III ,,. } .. • tc :-.. LI --.}. Ir - . (. 1 1 1:.,...,. FT . ... , , . i . . .,, -..-,-›, . _.....pc I— i, i 7' I I • : 4 ; • $' ! Ill r'll ( 5