PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA June 27, :00pm

Transcription

1 1) Call to Order a) Approval of Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA June 27, :00pm b) Approval of Minutes May 23, ) Public Hearings a) VARIANCE: Application from David G. Opheim for a front yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 35 feet to 12.7 feet and a side yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 15 feet to 9.5 feet to replace an existing one story home with a new two story home at 5370 Eastview Avenue; R- 1 Low Density Single Family Residence Zoning District; PID# b) VARIANCE: Application from David & Catherine Olson for a side yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 15 feet to 11 feet for a screened porch and deck addition at 3415 Warner Lane; RDB Douglas Beach Single Family Residence Zoning District; PID# c) CODE TEXT AMENDMENT: The City of Minnetrista will consider Ordinance 439, an amendment to city code section definition of lakeshore setback, an amendment to city code section subd. 3 appeals from administrative decisions, and an amendment to city code section subd. 8 (b) Riparian view shed protection. The current draft ordinance will redefine how the lakeshore setback is measured to include only lakeshore on the property for which a building permit is being applied. It will clarify details with regards to the administrative appeal process. Lastly, it will rewrite the riparian view shed protection setback to include properties within 300 feet of the subject property and what is considered the forward most protrusion. 3) Business Items a) CODE TEXT AMENDMENT: The City of Minnetrista will consider an amendment to City Code regarding the regulation of sober homes. 4) Informational Items a) Staff Reports b) Council Reports 5) Adjournment - The agenda packet with all background material is located at the back table for viewing by the public. - Published agenda subject to change without notice. - Information and materials relating to the above items are available for review at city hall by appointment. The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 23, :00pm 1) Call to Order Chair Sandholm opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. In attendance: Commissioners Chair Sandholm, Vice Chair Michael Molitor, Sylvia Allen, Gary Pettis, and John Tschumperlin; Council Liaison Mark Vanderlinde; Staff: Associate Planner Nick Olson and City Clerk Kris Linquist. Absent: Peter Vickery arrived at 7:04 p.m. a) Approval of Agenda Motion by Allen, seconded by Pettis to approve the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5-0. Absent: Vickery b) Approval of Minutes of April 25, 2016 Motion by Tschumperlin, seconded by Pettis to approve the minutes from April 25, 2016 as presented. Motion passed 5-0. Absent: Vickery Commissioner Vickery arrived at 7:04 p.m. 2) Public Hearings: a) VARIANCE: Application from Caryl Ann Morgan Rev Trust to reduce the required lakeshore setback from 75 feet to 25 feet for an addition to an existing deck on the property located at 4772 Crane Island, R-1 Low density single-family residence zoning district, PID# Associate Planner Olson presented the staff report found in the Planning Commission packet dated May 23, Highlights included in the presentation were: The applicant is requesting a Variance for the property located at 4772 Crane Island. The applicant purchased the property in February of The reason for the expansion of the deck is to accommodate a standard patio and chairs. The existing house is already within the 75 foot setback. The variance is for a 50 foot variance of the 75 foot setback regulation. Notices were sent out to all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Staff received multiple s in support of the variance. Staff has made the following findings of fact: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission May 23, 2016 Page 1 of 4

3 1. The request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning code; 2. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan; 3. Expanding an existing deck by 3 ft 4 inches to accommodate a patio table and chairs is reasonable; 4. The Applicant purchased the property in its existing condition with the home and deck in their current location; 5. The existing home and deck are already located within the required 75 foot lakeshore setback; and 6. Replacing an existing deck with one that is 3 feet 4 inches larger will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Based on the above findings of fact, staff recommends approval of the front yard, rear yard, and wetland setback variances with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the City and other applicable entities with jurisdiction prior to any construction; 2. The proposed grading should maintain existing drainage patterns or improve the existing drainage of the lot and adjacent lots; 3. The Applicant is responsible for all fees incurred by the City in review of this application; 4. The variance approvals are valid for one year from the date of approval and will become void and expire unless a building permit has been issued for the site; and 5. Any other conditions discussed by the Planning Commission. Pettis asked for clarification of the request. Olson explained the intent of the application and that the existing home was built prior to current zoning regulations. Caryl Morgan, 5808 South Drive, Edina, Applicant was present for any questions. Allen asked if the oak tree was staying. Ms. Morgan stated that they would be building the new deck around the 100 year old oak tree so that it will stay preserved. Chair Sandholm opened the Public Hearing for the Variance at 7:07 p.m. No one was present to speak on this item Chair Sandholm closed the Public Hearing at 7:07 p.m. Motion by Allen, seconded by Tschumperlin to recommend to the Council to approve a lakeshore setback variance to reduce the required setback of 75 feet to 25 feet to expand an existing deck at 4772 Crane Island based on the finding of facts and contingent upon the conditions outlined in the staff report dated May 23, Motion passed 6-0. The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission May 23, 2016 Page 2 of 4

4 e) CODE TEXT AMENDMENT: Ordinance 438 Sober Homes. Associate Planner Olson presented the staff report found in the Planning Commission packet dated May 23, Highlights included in the presentation were: The City sporadically deals with sober homes and similar types of treatment facilities. In past practice, the City chose to address the requests via conditional use permit. The City Council determined it is time to develop an ordinance to address sober homes and similar treatment facilities. A draft Ordinance was presented to the Planning Commission for review. Tschumperlin questioned if the ordinance was approved, would sober homes still be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Olson stated the homes would be processed on an administrative level so that the use would be associated with the property owner and not with the property as a CUP would be. Tschumperlin questioned if the application process would change. Olson stated the city would use a general service application which is similar to a land use application but it would not grant rights to the property. There would be required submittals. Tschumperlin questioned if they would be approved by city council. Olson stated that if the application was straight forward and there were no objections that it would most likely be handled on an administrative level. Tschumperlin questioned the mailing radius to neighbors. Olson stated that State Statute requires a 350 foot mailing radius but with land use applications the city does send, as a courtesy, to a 500 foot radius. Tschumperlin had questions about the 1,320 feet distance requirement. Olson stated that equates to a quarter mile. He stated that the ordinance was drafted by the City Attorney. The attorney looked at St. Paul, Minneapolis and Minnetonka s ordinance and created the draft ordinance based on what he found in those three ordinances. Vickery questioned if someone didn t follow the new ordinance, what could be done. Olson stated that they could still fall under the Federal Law. Molitor brought up that there was nothing mentioned in the ordinance regarding the number of residents per home. Olson commented that each application would be unique and would have to be evaluated as such. Molitor commented that he would like to see the ordinance setting parameters for bedrooms, bathrooms and parking for the number of people residing in the home. There was some discussion on other types of facilities. The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission May 23, 2016 Page 3 of 4

5 There was discussion on where sober homes should be located and fit within the neighborhood character. Pettis stated that he would like to see an ordinance with more grit in it. Chair Sandholm opened the public hearing for the Code Text Amendment at 7:37 p.m. Elizabeth Schreiner, 7530 Susan Lane, stated that she spoke with the local HUD director and the federal fair housing act only applies to housing not to a business. She commented that she liked the definition of sober home in the proposed ordinance. Chair Sandholm closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Pettis commented would like to see St. Paul s ordinance before making a decision. Chair Sandholm requested that the City Attorney be present at the next meeting to answer any questions that the planning commission may have. Motion by Molitor, seconded by Pettis to table Ordinance 438 Sober Homes until the next planning commission meeting to allow staff to review the following requested items: 1) Notices to 500 feet for consistency 2) possibly setting a capacity amount for a home such as bedrooms, bathrooms, and parking 3) a process for complaints and 4) corrective actions. Motion passed ) Informational Items: a) Staff Reports Associate Planner Nick Olson Trista Day Thursday, May 26 Comprehensive Plan Visioning Meeting Next Comp Plan meeting is before next Planning Commission in June b) Council Reports Mark Vanderlinde Water Treatment Project is on schedule Mader Property development 4) Adjournment Motion by Vickery, seconded by Allen to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 p.m. Motion passed 6-0. Respectfully Submitted, Kris Linquist Kris Linquist, CMC City Clerk The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission May 23, 2016 Page 4 of 4

6 CITY OF MINNETRISTA PUBLIC HEARING Subject: Prepared By: VARIANCE: Application from David G. Opheim Jr. for a streetside setback variance to reduce the required setback from 35 feet to 12.7 feet and a side yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 15 feet to 9.5 feet to replace an existing one story home with a new two story home generally in the same footprint at 5370 Eastview Avenue; R-1 Low Density Single Family Residence Zoning District; PID# The streetside setback variance is from the north property line where there is platted right-of-way of Eastview Avenue that extend towards Lake Minnetonka. Nick Olson, Associate Planner Meeting Date: June 27, 2016 Overview: David G. Opheim Jr. (the Applicant ) is requesting a side yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 15 feet to 9.5 feet and a streetside setback variance to reduce the required setback from 35 feet to 12.7 feet to replace an existing one story home with a new two story home generally in the same footprint at 5370 Eastview Avenue (the Property ). The streetside setback variance is from the north property line where there is platted right-of-way of Eastview Avenue that extend towards Lake Minnetonka. Background: The Applicant purchased the Property in December of 2013 with the intent that in the future the home would be demolished and replaced with a new home. The existing home is currently non-conforming with respect to the streetside and side yard setbacks. Nonconforming structures may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion. The new home proposal from the Applicant is to replace the home generally in the same footprint, but add a second story. The expansion of the second story is within the required setbacks and thus requires variances. Variance Request: City Code Section Subd. 9 allows the City to issue variances from the provisions of the zoning code. A variance is a modification or variation of the provisions of the zoning code as applied to a specific piece of property. A variance is only permitted when: Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

7 a. It is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this ordinance Section outlines the purpose and intent of the city s zoning ordinance. The variance request is consistent with the purposes and intent described in this section. The proposed use of the property is a single family residence, which is proper for the zoning district and the proposed home is compatible with other homes in the area. b. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variance is for the construction of a two story single-family residence, a use consistent with the current guided land use. The proposed second story will not have an impact on neighboring views as the height of the home will be within the requirements of city code. The lot is also heavily wooded and the existing views will not change significantly. The proposed home also does not change the density of the shoreline or create a sense of overcrowding. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes there are practical difficulties in complying with this ordinance. Practical difficulties, as used in connection with granting a variance, means: 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this ordinance. The proposed home is located generally in the same footprint of the existing home, which is located within the required setbacks. The new home the Applicant is proposing will include a second story that the current home does not have. This proposal is reasonable given the existing location of the home and the proposed two story home is within height restrictions. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The Property is a narrow, non-conforming lot. There is also right-of-way of Eastview Avenue along the north property line, which requires a 35 foot setback. Along with the 15 foot required side yard setback requirement from the south property line, the building pad for the Property is very narrow and essentially unbuildable without a variance. The proposed home does not encroach into any setbacks further than the existing home. 3. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. Many of the homes in the neighborhood do not meet the required side yard setbacks. This is likely due to the age of the homes, which were built prior to the city adopting zoning regulations. Many of the homes along Eastview Avenue have similar existing setbacks to those of the proposed home. Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

8 Neighborhood Comments: Staff sent notices to all residents within 500 feet of the subject property. To date, staff has not received any comments or concerns with the variance requests. Conclusion: The Planning Commission should review the staff report and hold a public hearing regarding the variance request. After closing the public hearing, Planning Commission should consider the entire record before it as it relates to the specific variance request. Findings of fact should be established as to why the variance should be granted or denied. A summary of the findings of fact made by staff are as follows: 1. The variance request is consistent with the purposes and intent of the city s zoning ordinance; 2. The variance request does not further clutter the shoreline or impact views for neighboring properties, consistent with the city s comprehensive plan; 3. The Property is non-conforming with respect to width which makes it difficult to fit a reasonable home on the Property without a variance; 4. There is unimproved Eastview Avenue right-of-way along the north property line, which requires a front yard setback. This requirement further shrinks the buildable area of the Property; 5. The Applicant is proposing the new home in generally the same footprint as the existing home, which maintains the current non-conforming setbacks; and 6. The proposed home has similar setbacks to that of other homes in the neighborhood. Recommended Action: Motion to recommend the city council approve the requested streetside and side yard setback variances based on the findings of fact outlined in the staff report, with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the City and other applicable entities with jurisdiction prior to any construction; 2. The proposed grading should maintain existing drainage patterns or improve the existing drainage of the lot and adjacent lots; 3. The Applicant is responsible for all fees incurred by the City in review of this application; 4. The variance approval is valid for one year from the date of approval and will become void and expire unless a building permit has been issued for the site; and 5. Any other conditions discussed by the Planning Commission. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Survey Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

9 4. Proposed Elevations Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

10 5370 Eastview Avenue 1 inch = 94 feet June 16, 2016 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates

11 5370 Eastview Avenue Variance Request Questions and Answers June 6, 2016 Please provide a separate answer for each of the lettered items listed below (answers must be submitted in both hard copy and electronic form): 1. A list of all current property owners (if individually owned), all general and limited partners (if a partnership), all managers and directors (if a limited liability company), and/or officers and directors (if a corporation) involved as either applicants or owners. a. David G. & Teresa L. Opheim, 5370 Eastview Avenue, Minnetrista 2. A listing of the following site data: legal description of the property (including lot/block, plat name, and parcel identification number), parcel size (in acres and square feet), existing use of land, and current zoning. a. Lot 1, Block 3, Eastview Park b. PID: c. Parcel Size: 0.47 acres (20,542 sq ft) d. Residential Lakeshore e. R-1 3. State the provision(s) of the Minnetrista City Code for which you seek a variance. (For example, Section Subd. 2. Lot area, depth, width, coverage, setbacks, and height standards) a. Variance request is Provision Section Subd. 2. Side year setbacks, and height) 4. A specific written description of the proposal and how it varies from the applicable provisions of Minnetrista City Code. a. Proposal is to remove existing 1953-built single-story home from site & build a new home with a second story comprised of 2 small bedrooms and bathroom within the existing foundation envelope including existing sideyard setbacks of 9.5 feet on the south property line and 12.7 feet on north property line. All other aspects of the project are fully compliant with current code. 5. A narrative regarding any pre-application discussions with staff, and an explanation of how the issue was addressed leading up to the application for a variance. a. Owner discussed plans with staff prior to application and was advised that a new home build within the foundation of the existing home was without known issues and also fully possible without variance as an approved non-compliant residential project. Staff also clarified any expansion of the existing foundation (westward) would need to be compliant with city code which is the case here. Owner was not aware that adding a small second story within the existing foundation envelope would require variance approval. Project drawings & calcs have been completed & submitted by Everlast Construction (Jim Cleary) and also discussed with staff. 6. Explain how the proposal is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of Minnetrista City Code and how proposal is consistent with the current Minnetrista Comprehensive Plan.

12 a. The proposed project has no adverse impact on neighbors, the neighborhood, the city, the lake, the environment, nor on neighboring site lines. Existing mature pines, oaks and ash trees surround the property and home site. To the north of site, the trees and woods along the Eastview Avenue extension fire lane create a visual boundary, and the row of tall coniferous/pine trees on the southerly lot line also isolate the site and views from the homes to the south. b. The project is consistent with the growth objectives within the City s Comprehensive plan, and the project will support the economic growth goals of the city moving forward. As mentioned the project has no impact on neighborhood views, the neighbors I have spoken with have no objections to the variance approval request and other non-abutting neighbors are supportive of the request. 7. Explain how there are practical difficulties in complying with Minnetrista City Code. Practical difficulties means: The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by Minnetrista City Code; or the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality. a. The adjacent unused fire lane creates a narrowing of this parcel as compared to others in Block 3, Eastview Park creating a hardship in designing a new home appropriately sized and reasonable for the parcel, the neighborhood and future families owning the property. The project will result in a small 2-story, 3 bedroom home typical of the Eastview Avenue neighborhood as well as other Minnetrista and western lakeshore legacy home rebuild projects. Proposed plan is reasonable and side yard setback variance is reasonable and has been approved by staff and City at other nearby residential projects. 8. Provide justification that the variance request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. a. Variance approval request is based on requirement to build a reasonable home properly sized for the lot and neighborhood without any adverse impact on neighbors, neighborhood, city, or the environment, especially Lake Minnetonka. Project will also include correction of plugged stormwater culvert pipe that owner frequently clears out to the best of his ability. 9. Justify that the granting of the requested variance will not: I) adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood; 2) impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties; 3) be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood; 4) increase the congestion on public streets; 5) endanger public safety; 6) or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. a. Approving this request for a small second story will have zero impact on health & safety of any residents or workers; nor have any impact at all on the supply of light or air to adjacent properties due to the tall trees surrounding the new build site; nor will anyone or any entity be injured,

13 damaged or impacted by the project; nor will there be any impact on street congestion or public safety; nor diminish property values in any way. In fact, approval of this proposal will enhance property values in Eastview Park and in Minnetrista in general. Thank you, Dave & Teresa Opheim 5370 Eastview Avenue Minnetrista, MN Cell) )

14

15 DESIGN COMIPANY P: EASTVIEW AVENUE MINNETRISTA, MN '-0" 1'-0" 1'-0" 1'-0 7/8" 1. These drawings are Design Drawings. The General Contractor has the right and responsibility to revise configurations and details depicted in the Designer's Design Drawings, as required, to properly construct a technically sound project. 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2'-0" 2. The General Contractor to notify the Designer when deviating from the Design Intent. 9'-1 1/8" 1'-0" 1'-0" 3. The General Contractor is responsible for verifying all covenants, zoning, building fire, heating, plumbing and electrical code requirements. 2'-0" 1'-5 3/8" PROPOSED ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR THE: OPHEIM RESIDENCE 5370 EASTVIEW AVENUE MINNETRISTA, MINNESOTA 1'-0" 1'-6" 1'-0" 1'-0" 8'-1 1/8" ISSUE Client Meeting REVISIONS Bid Issue Client Meeting Bid Re-Issue Add'l Bid Info Permit Issue JOB #25814 SHEET # A4 OF 5

16 DESIGN COMIPANY P: EASTVIEW AVENUE MINNETRISTA, MN '-0" 1'-0" 1'-0" 1. These drawings are Design Drawings. The General Contractor has the right and responsibility to revise configurations and details depicted in the Designer's Design Drawings, as required, to properly construct a technically sound project. 2. The General Contractor to notify the Designer when deviating from the Design Intent. 3. The General Contractor is responsible for verifying all covenants, zoning, building fire, heating, plumbing and electrical code requirements. 1'-0" 2'-0" 8'-1 1/8" 9'-1 1/8" 1'-0" 1'-6 3/4" 1'-4 7/8" 9'-1 1/8" 2'-0" 2'-6" 10'-9 1/8" 1'-4 7/8" 9'-1 1/8" 2'-0" PROPOSED ADDITION AND REMODEL FOR THE: OPHEIM RESIDENCE 5370 EASTVIEW AVENUE MINNETRISTA, MINNESOTA 1'-8 3/4" 1'-8 3/4" 2'-3 7/16" ISSUE Client Meeting '-10" 8'-0" 3'-6" 4'-0" 3'-6" 3'-0" 8" REVISIONS Bid Issue Client Meeting Bid Re-Issue Add'l Bid Info Permit Issue '-6" 3'-0" JOB #25814 SHEET # A5 OF 5

17

18 CITY OF MINNETRISTA PUBLIC HEARING Subject: Prepared By: VARIANCE: Application from David & Catherine Olson for a side yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 15 feet to 11 feet for a screened porch and deck addition at 3415 Warner Lane; RDB Douglas Beach Single Family Residence Zoning District; PID# Nick Olson, Associate Planner Meeting Date: June 27, 2016 Overview: David & Catherine Olson (the Applicants ) are requesting a side yard setback variance to reduce the required setback from 15 feet to 11 feet for a screened porch and deck addition at 3415 Warner Lane (the Property). Background: The existing home was built in 2002 after the original home was demolished. When the existing home was built, the property owners at the time requested and were granted a 5 foot variance to both of the side yard setback requirements. When this home was built, a ledger board was included for a future deck that, to date, has not yet been built. The Applicants are proposing to utilize the existing ledger board for a deck with a screened porch below which requires a variance to the side yard setback requirement. The Douglas Beach zoning district in which the Property is located has varying setbacks depending on lot width. This special provision is outlined below: RDB Residential-Douglas Beach Zoning District Subd. 5. Special Provisions (a) On lots which have a width of less than 55 feet, measured at the street line, the side yard shall be no less than 10 feet on one side and six feet on the other side. On lots which have a width of at least 55 feet, but less than 70 feet, measured at the street line, the total of the side yards shall be no less than 30 percent of the width of the lot, with the side yard being 10 feet on one side and the remainder of the 30 percent on the other side. Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

19 On lots which have a width of at least 70 feet, but less than 100 feet, measured at the street line, the sum of both side yards shall be no less than 30 percent of the width of the lot, but in no case shall a side yard on either side be less than 10 feet. On lots which have a width which equals or exceeds 100 feet, measured at the street line, the minimum side yard shall be 15 feet on each side. Accessory structures shall be aligned with the principal structure so that the accessory structure shall maintain the minimum setback of 10 feet on the same side or sides of the lot that the principal structure maintains the minimum setback of 10 feet. Variance Request: City Code Section Subd. 9 allows the City to issues variances from the provisions of the zoning code. A variance is a modification or variation of the provisions of the zoning code as applied to a specific piece of property. A variance is only permitted when: a. It is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this ordinance Section outlines the purpose and intent of the city s zoning ordinance. The variance request is consistent with the purposes and intent described in this section. The most common setback required in the Douglas Beach zoning district is 10 feet. Given that this requirement is being met by the Applicants, the variance request is reasonable. b. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan aims to protect the shoreline from development and protect neighboring views. The proposed deck and screened porch addition will not further clutter the shoreline and will not have impact on views because the home is set back much further than neighboring homes even with the proposed addition. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes there are practical difficulties in complying with this ordinance. Practical difficulties, as used in connection with granting a variance, means: 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this ordinance. Adding a deck and screened porch to the existing home is a reasonable request. The home was designed and built with a future deck in mind that has yet to be constructed. This location requires a variance because of the orientation of the Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

20 home in respect to the side lot line, which angle towards one another. As a result, the distance to the setback decreases at a faster over a short distance. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The lot is uniquely shaped in that it has a large width at the street and tapers down to a relatively small lakeshore width. Also, the existing property owners did not build the home in its current location or choose its existing orientation or floorplan. The Douglas Beach zoning district measures side yard setbacks based on the width of the lot at the street. Since the lot is significantly larger at the street ( feet) than at the lakeshore (59.02 feet), the lot is subject to 15 foot side yard setbacks. If the lakeshore width was utilized, it would be 10 feet on one side and 6 feet on the other meaning this project wouldn t require a variance. 3. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. Many lakeshore homes, including this neighborhood, have either a deck or a screened porch and sometimes both. Allowing for this addition will not impact the character of the neighborhood. Also, the Douglas Beach zoning is unique in how side yard setbacks are enforced which can vary from a minimum of 6 feet to a maximum of 15 feet. Neighborhood Comments: Staff sent notices to all residents within 500 feet of the subject property. To date, staff has not received any comments or concerns with the variance request. Conclusion: The Planning Commission should review the staff report and hold a public hearing regarding the variance request. After closing the public hearing, Planning Commission should consider the entire record before it as it relates to the specific variance request. Findings of fact should be established as to why the variance should be granted or denied. A summary of the findings of fact made by staff are as follows: 1. The variance request is consistent with the purposes and intent of the city s zoning ordinance; 2. The variance request does not further clutter the shoreline or impact views for neighboring properties, consistent with the city s comprehensive plan; 3. The variance request meets the most common side yard setback of 10 feet required in the Douglas Beach zoning district, which is a reasonable request; 4. The addition of a deck and screened porch is reasonable given the home was designed and built to accommodate future improvements; Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

21 5. The unique shape of the lot, which has a significantly larger at the street ( feet) than at the lakeshore (59.02 feet), requires the largest setback of 15 feet from the side yard; and 6. Many of the homes in the neighborhood have either a deck, screened porch, or both. Allowing for both will not impact the character of the neighborhood. Recommended Action: Motion to recommend the city council approve the requested side yard setback variance based on the findings of fact outlined in the staff report, with the following conditions: 1. The Applicants obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the City and other applicable entities with jurisdiction prior to any construction; 2. Any required grading should maintain existing drainage patterns or improve the existing drainage of the lot and adjacent lots; 3. The Applicants are responsible for all fees incurred by the City in review of this application; 4. The variance approval is valid for one year from the date of approval and will become void and expire unless a building permit has been issued for the site; and 5. Any other conditions discussed by the Planning Commission. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Site Plan 4. Deck Plan 5. Rear Elevation Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

22 3415 Warner Lane 1 inch = 94 feet June 16, 2016 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates

23 Variance Request Application for 3415 Warner Lane Written Statements a) Current property owners are David John Olson and Catherine Kelly Olson. b) Legal description: Lot 1 except that part there of described as follows: Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of said Lot 1, which is also the point where the Northerly line of the lot intersects the Westerly line of Warner Way. From this point in a Southwesterly direction following the Southeasterly line of Lot 1, 120 feet, more or less, to a point in said Southeasterly line which is equally distant from the Northeasterly corner and the Southeasterly corner of said Lot 1. From this point in a straight line to the shore of Lake Minnetonka to a point on said shore line which is equally distant from the Northwesterly corner and the Southwesterly corner of said Lot 1. From this point in a Northeasterly direction along the shore of Lake Minnetonka to the Northwesterly corner of the lot, which is also the point where the Northerly line of said lot intersects the shore of Lake Minnetonka and from this point in an Easterly direction following the Northerly line of said Lot 1 to the point of beginning, Block 12, Douglas. (This has been abbreviated in documents as Lot 1, Block 12, Douglas Addition, SLY 1/2 Front and Rear.) Parcel ID No.: Parcel size: 22,054 sq. ft.; acres Existing use of land: Primary residence of property owners Current zoning: Residential Lake Shore c) Seeking a variance for Minnetrista City Code Section Subd. 2. Lot area, depth, width, coverage setbacks, and height standards. d) The proposed structure (deck with screened in porch below) shown on the accompanying drawings extends four feet into the north lot line set back area. (The existing house was given a variance of 5.3 feet into the same set back area when constructed in 2002.) e) In discussions with Nick Olson, Associate Planner for the City of Minnetrista, he noted that a variance would be required prior to construction as soon as the proposed deck location was communicated. He provided guidance regarding where to find requirements and documents for the variance request. f) The proposed structure shown on the accompanying drawings is in harmony with city code in that it complies fully with the sight line and lakeshore set back requirements. It will extend into the north lot line set back area by four feet (less than the variance of 5.3 feet along this line that was granted for construction of the house in 2002). g) This request for variance is being made to allow construction of a usable deck (with screened in porch below) that takes advantage of existing house doors, does not block existing windows, and does not reduce transmission of natural light into the home s

24 living spaces. The request also minimizes the amount of landscaping required following construction. The house was originally designed with the inclusion of this deck in mind. As shown in the accompanying photos, there is an existing ledger in place where the proposed deck will attach to the house. The proposed structure is designed to utilize an existing patio door on the main level for access to the deck and an existing door on the lower level for access to the porch below the deck. These doors and the ledger dictate the logical location of the deck for access from the house without expensive modifications to the house. The width of the deck was selected to provide reasonable space for recreational activity without blocking access to or function of the main level kitchen window or the lower level bedroom egress window abutting the proposed structure. If the deck and porch are made more narrow, the function of the two windows would be impeded. If the deck and porch are made so narrow as to restore function of the windows, the deck and porch would be too small to support typical recreational activity. The width selected is a best fit for function and utility. The lot tapers from its maximum width of 120 feet at the street to 59 feet at the lakeshore. This taper along with the orientation of the house on the lot makes it impossible to extend a structure from the proposed corner without violating the set back requirement for the north lot line. This situation constitutes a plight of the landowner due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. We have worked the plan to minimize the size of the variance needed. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality because no structure will extend closer to the lot lines than the existing house which has stood on the lot for 14 years. It is not viable to center the deck and porch on the west side of the house. This approach would require extensive modification to the house for supporting the structure and would block natural light from entering the lower level family room. It would also interrupt sight lines to the lake from the main level living room. The only natural light reaching the family room comes through the windows and doors at its west end. h) This property is the primary residence of the property owners. The owners have no intention of selling or renting the property in the foreseeable future. The sole intent of the proposed structure is to enhance the personal recreational value of the property for the property owners. Any incidental increase in real property value is actually a dis-incentive for the owners to the extent that it will increase the real estate tax assessment for the property. i) The proposed structure is a typical deck and porch that will have no affect on health or safety of people. It will not affect sight lines, light transmission, or air circulation to adjacent properties. It will have no affect on property or improvements in the neighborhood it will only be visible to the two neighboring properties to the north and one to the south. It will have no affect on street congestion, public safety, or neighborhood property values.

25

26

27

28

29 CITY OF MINNETRISTA PUBLIC HEARING Subject: Prepared By: Ordinance No. 439 Amending Sections , and David Abel, Community Development Director Meeting Date: June 27, 2016 Recommended Action: Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt Ordinance No. 439 Overview / Background: In the fall of 2015 a building permit application to construct a new home on Lake Minnetonka was submitted to the city. Unique circumstances arose with this application which eventually brought to light some ambiguity in city ordinance language. Throughout the various steps this application has taken, both the Planning Commission and City Council have agreed that an ordinance amendment should be brought forward to address these issues. Direction to bring an amendment forward was given at the March 21, 2016 City Council meeting, and at the March 28, 2016 & April 25, 2016 Planning Commission meetings. City Staff has coordinated the revised language with the City Attorney which is outlined in the attached Ordinance No Specifically, there are three sections of the zoning ordinance which require amending. These include the following: Section the definition of Lake shore setback. Language was added to clarify that you measure from the lake shore of the lot upon which improvements are proposed. Section , Subd. 2 Board of Appeals and Adjustment. As the Commission may recall, at the December 14, 2015 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting there were questions raised of the validly of the appeal. At issue was the timing of the appeal. The current language in this section is ambiguous in regards to when the 20 day clock to appeal would commence. Language has been added and stricken in this section to try to best address those issues. Section , Subd. 8(b) Setbacks Riparian view shed protection. City staff surveyed all communities on Lake Minnetonka to determine how many have a riparian view shed ordinance in place. Not all communities responded but we do have results from 11 cities including Minnetrista. Of the 11 that responded, only 4 have an Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

30 ordinance in place, which includes Minnetrista. There are 7 cities that do not have a riparian view shed ordinance. Generally, newly constructed homes on the lake are placed as close to the ordinary high watermark as possible. So in many cases a riparian view shed ordinance is not necessary. It really depends on the age of each community s housing stock. Eliminating the riparian view shed ordinance in Minnetrista at this time seems unlikely given our current housing stock. As older homes (old cabins on the lake) are replaced it becomes more likely that Minnetrista will one day eliminate this secondary setback. That in mind, staff created language to reasonably balance current geographic features, lot sizes, and the current housing stock of the city as a whole. Upon further examination of our current language it was concluded that the whole section should be rewritten. The new language eliminates ambiguity but similarly follows the old method of determining a secondary lake shore setback. The goal of the new language is to get a sense of the neighborhood when determining if either clauses (1) & (2) of the section shall apply. Measuring out a specific distance from a proposed structure will eliminate the issues that arose with fire lanes, right-of-ways or other elements that might be prevalent on a lake. This ordinance has been a work in progress, analyzing different areas of the city, to best determine what a reasonable distance is. Lake lots vary in width depending upon what geographic area you are in. Some lots are as small as 50 feet in width while others are as large as 200 feet or more. Initially when the public hearing notice was published in the newspaper a distance of 200 feet was being examined. Further examination revealed that 200 feet did not represent a reasonable sense of the neighborhood. A later draft of the ordinance produced a distance of 400 feet. Further examination of this revealed that 400 feet was too large. Staff recommends a distance of 300 feet. This gives you a reasonable representation of the neighborhood, as you will see in the attached diagrams. Conclusion: The Planning Commission should review Ordinance No. 439 and hold a public hearing on the matter. Staff is recommending approval of the ordinance. Attachments: Ordinance No. 439 Examples Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

31 CITY OF MINNETRISTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MINNETRISTA CITY CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS , AND Section 1. The City Council of the City of Minnetrista hereby amends Section of the City Code by deleting the strikethroughs and adding the following double-underlined language: Lake shore setback means the mean horizontal distance between the natural ordinary high water mark on the lake shore of the lot upon which improvements are proposed and the allowable building setback line in the zoning district. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Minnetrista hereby amends Section , Subd. 8(b) of the City Code by deleting the strikethroughs and adding the following double-underlined language: Subd. 8. Setbacks. (b) Riparian view shed protection. To preserve the view sheds of adjacent riparian property owners, the least restrictive of the following shall establish a secondary lake shore setback (under no circumstances shall this requirement create a setback less than that which is established within the underlying zoning district); (1) A line which is drawn between the two closest riparian principal structures on either side (at the forward most protrusion ** toward the water) of a proposed building addition or new structure; or (2) The average setback of the two adjacent, riparian, principal structures on either side of a proposed building addition or new structure. For purposes of calculating the average, begin measuring at the forward most protrusion** toward the water. **protrusion will include any part of the principal structure, such as decks, part of the dwelling unit, porches. Protrusion will not include cement slabs, detached buildings and detached garages. For purposes of applying clauses (1) and (2), if the adjacent riparian principal structures are greater than 200 feet from the structure in question, these sections will not apply. (b) Riparian view shed protection v2 RHB MN

32 To minimize the loss of views from principal structures on adjacent properties, a secondary lake shore setback to be known as the riparian view shed setback is established. The riparian view shed setback is the less restrictive of the following: (1) a line drawn between the two closest principal structures located within 300 feet and on other lots on either side of the proposed new structure or building addition; or (2) the average setback from the ordinary high water mark of all existing riparian principal structures on other lots within 300 feet on either side of the proposed new structure or building addition. For purposes of this subdivision, 300 feet shall be measured from the outermost projections of the proposed new structure or building addition to the closest projection of the riparian principal structures on other lots. Projections shall be measured only from and to portions of principal structures which are enclosed and not from or to decks, exterior stairways, landings, lifts or other unenclosed portions of principal structure or detached accessory structures. The riparian view shed setback shall not apply in any case in which there does not exist at least one riparian principal structure within 200 feet on other lots on either side of the proposed new structure or building addition. The applicable lake shore setback for structures on riparian lots shall be the more restrictive of the lake shore setback established under section of this code or the riparian view shed setback established under this subdivision. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Minnetrista hereby amends Section , Subd. 2 of the City Code by deleting the strikethroughs and adding the following double-underlined language: Subd. 2. Board of Appeals and Adjustment A board of appeals and adjustments is hereby established which will consist of all the members of the planning commission and will have the following power and duties: (a) To review and hold public hearings on all applications for variances under the zoning ordinance or subdivision regulations and to make recommendations on said applications to the city council; (b) To hear and decide appeals from any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by the zoning administrator or any other administrative officer of the city in the interpretation or enforcement of this sectionthe zoning ordinance or subdivision regulations; and v2 RHB MN

33 (c) To hear and decide appeals by landowners who have been denied building permits due to the location of their land within an area governed by an official map duly adopted and filed by the city. Section 4. The City Council of the City of Minnetrista hereby amends Section , Subd. 3 of the City Code by deleting the strikethroughs and adding the following double-underlined language: Subd. 3. Appeal from Administrative Decisions (a) Time for appeal. An appeal may be taken to the board of appeals and adjustments by any person aggrieved by any order, requirement, decision or determination made by the zoning administrator or any other administrative office of the city in the interpretation or enforcement of this sectionany provision of the zoning ordinance or subdivision regulations. Such an appeal willmust be made by written notice to the zoning administrator within 20 days of the order, requirement, decision or determination, must specifically describe the facts involved and the basis for appeal and will must be accompanied by an administrative fee as prescribed by the city fee schedule ordinance. and will specifically describe the facts involved and the basis for appeal. The 20 days in which to appeal shall be measured from the time the aggrieved party received actual or constructive notice of the order, requirement, decision or determination. (b) ProceedingsAppeal to Board. Upon receipt of a notice of appeal, the zoning administrator willshall transmit the notice to the board of appeals and adjustments, together with all papers constituting a record upon which the action appealed was taken and will set a time and place for a hearing on the appeal. Such time will not be less than ten10 and not more than 30 days after receipt of the notice. Due notice of the hearing will be given to the partiesappellant and other interested parties reasonably known to the zoning administrator. (c) Decision and review. Within a reasonablethe time prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, section 15.99, after the hearing, the board will make its order deciding the matter and servesend a copy of such order upon the applicant by mail. The applicant or any other party aggrieved by the board s decision, including the zoning administrator, may within 30 days thereafter file with the city administrator ona written appeal to the city council from the decision of the board. (d) Appeal to Council. Upon receipt of an appeal from a decision of the board of appeals and adjustments, the city administrator shall schedule the matter to be heard by the city council. The city council may rely upon the record before the board of appeals and adjustments or take such additional oral or written testimony as it may deem appropriate in considering the appeal. The city council shall make its decision within the time prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, section and send a copy of its decision to the appellant by mail. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication v2 RHB MN

34 Adopted this day of, 2016 by a vote of ayes and nays. Lisa Whalen, Mayor Attest: Kris Linquist, City Clerk v2 RHB MN

35

36

37 CITY OF MINNETRISTA REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Subject: Prepared By: Sober House Ordinance Ron Batty, city attorney Meeting Date: June 27, 2016 Overview / Background: At its meeting on May 23, 2016, the planning commission considered a draft ordinance regarding sober houses, requested a few changes to the ordinance and continued its discussion to its June 27, 2016 meeting. Discussion: Everyone is well aware of the circumstances which brought sober houses to the attention of the city and there is no need to repeat details of the city s review of Redemption House. However, that experience impressed upon staff the desirability of having an ordinance specifically dealing with sober houses. The city council agreed and directed staff to prepare one for consideration. The draft ordinance is the product of that effort. The ordinance accomplishes three things. First, it provides a review mechanism specifically related to sober houses. With the previous application, the city had no off the shelf procedure for evaluating the request. The logical choices seemed to be either a variance or a conditional use permit, both of which run with the land. The proposed ordinance establishes a license-based approach which, with exceptions, is personal to the applicant and does not attach to the property. Secondly, the ordinance establishes a process for review of a request for accommodation which is arguably closer to statutory intent. There is no public hearing before the planning commission. The ordinance simply provides for the city council to consider and evaluate the request following receipt of staff s recommendation. Although notice is provided, there is no requirement that the council hold a hearing or even take testimony. The council will be able to use its judgment about the appropriate level of public input but this is intended to guard against making a decision largely based on neighborhood sentiment. Finally, the ordinance is purposely vague on limits which may be imposed on a sober house. The city only needs to grant an accommodation under federal law if the request is reasonable. What is reasonable depends on the specific circumstances and is not easily determined in the abstract. The ordinance includes a list of factors the staff and Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character v1 RHB MN415-1

38 ultimately the city council should consider when deciding whether a request is reasonable. It is likely that the proposed ordinance will disappoint some in not including more restrictions. What is important to remember is that the law is structured so that a disabled person may request an accommodation from ANY requirement which bars equal access to housing. That means that no matter how restrictive the ordinance, someone can request relief from it. The city cannot prohibit an individual from requesting an accommodation. One of the biggest risks we run from adopting a restrictive ordinance is that we fool ourselves into thinking we have insulated the city from requests for an accommodation. The city simply cannot take things off the table and prevent a request for an accommodation. Recommended Action: Motion to recommend that the city council adopt Ordinance No. 483 as presented and approve a resolution authorizing publication of the ordinance by title and summary. Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character v1 RHB MN415-1

39 CITY OF MINNETRISTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MINNETRISTA CITY CODE CHAPTER 5 REGARDING SOBER HOUSES Section I. The city council of the city of Minnetrista hereby amends section of the Minnetrista city code by adding the following definitions: Section Definitions Sober House means a dwelling unit occupied by more than three (3) unrelated individuals who are all in recovery from chemical dependency and considered disabled under the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 that provides a non-institutional residential environment in which the residents willingly subject themselves to rules and conditions intended to encourage and sustain their recovery. The residents of a sober house are similar to a family unit and share kitchen and bathroom facilities and other common areas of the unit. Sober houses are financially self-supporting. This definition does not include facilities that receive operating revenue from governmental sources. Sober houses do not provide on-site supportive services to residents, including but not limited to the following: mental health services; clinical rehabilitation services; social services; medical, dental, nutritional, and other health care services; financial management services; legal services; vocational services; and other similar supportive services. After the above definition is inserted into this section, all other definitions in this section shall be reordered accordingly. Section II. The city council of the city of Minnetrista hereby amends section of the Minnetrista city code by adding a new Subd. 16 as follows: Subd. 16 Sober Houses (a) It is the policy of the city, pursuant to the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, to provide reasonable accommodations in the application of its zoning regulations for persons with disabilities seeking fair and equal access to housing. Reasonable accommodation means providing an individual with a disability or developers of housing for an individual with a disability flexibility in the application of land use and zoning regulations or policies, including the modification or waiver of certain requirements, when it is necessary to eliminate barriers to housing opportunities. The purpose of this subdivision is to establish a process for making and acting upon requests for reasonable accommodation. (b) Any person who requests reasonable accommodation in the form of modification in v3 AMB MN415-1

40 the application of a zoning regulation which may act as a barrier to fair housing opportunities due to the disability of existing or proposed residents may do so on an application form provided by the community development director. Person includes any individual with a disability, his or her representative or a developer or provider of housing for an individual with a disability. The application shall include a detailed explanation of why the modification is reasonably necessary to make the specific housing available to the person(s), including information establishing that the applicant is disabled under applicable laws, as well as other information required by the community development director to make the determination. If the project for which the request is being made also requires an additional land use review or approval, the applicant shall file the request concurrently with the land use review. (c) The community development director shall review the request and make a recommendation to the city council. The request shall be evaluated under the following factors: 1. whether there is a qualifying disability; 2. whether the request is needed to allow a disabled person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling or to live in a particular neighborhood as a person without disabilities: 3. whether the request is reasonable, considering the potential impact on surrounding uses, the extent to which the accommodation meets the stated need, and other alternatives that may meet that need; 4. whether the request would constitute a fundamental alteration of the city s regulations, policies, or procedures; 5. whether the request would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the city; and 6. any other factor that may have a bearing on the request. (d) The city council shall consider the request following receipt of the recommendation of the community development director. Notice of the meeting at which the city council will evaluate the request shall be mailed at least 10 days before the meeting to the owners of all properties located within 350 feet of the property subject to the request. (e) An approved request is granted only to an individual and does not run with the land unless the city determines that the accommodation is physically integrated into the residential structure and cannot easily be removed or altered or the accommodation is to be used by another individual with a disability. (f) No sober house shall be located within 1320 feet of another sober house, as measured from the property lines closest to another. Section III. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption and publication in the city s official newspaper v3 AMB MN415-1

41 Adopted by the city council of the city of Minnetrista this day of, 2016, by a vote of ayes and nays. ATTEST: Kris Linquist, City Clerk Lisa Whalen, Mayor v3 AMB MN415-1

42 CITY OF MINNETRISTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO. BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Minnetrista has adopted Ordinance No., an ordinance amending chapter 5 of the Minnetrista city code; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section , subdivision 4 allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the city council believes that the below summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of Ordinance No.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Minnetrista that the City Clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The city council of the city of Minnetrista has adopted Ordinance No. amending chapter 5 of city code regarding sober homes. This ordinance adds language to address sober homes and similar treatment facilities which are currently absent from city code. The full text of Ordinance No. is available for inspection at Minnetrista City Hall during regular business hours. Kris Linquist, City Clerk BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Minnetrista that the City Clerk keep a copy of the ordinance in their office at city hall for public inspection and post a copy in a public place within the city. This resolution was adopted by the city council of the city of Minnetrista this day of, 2016, by a vote of ayes and nays. 1 Lisa Whalen, Mayor

43 ATTEST: Kris Linquist, City Clerk 2

44

45

46

47