Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05/15/2013
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA May 15, 2013 7:00 P.M. Apple Valley Municipal Center 7100 — 147th Street West This agenda is subject to change by deletion or addition to items until approved by the Planning Commission on the date of the meeting. L CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF May 1, 2013 4. CONSENT ITEMS A. Andrews Covered Entry Addition Setback Variance — Consideration of a variance from the 30' front yard setback requirement to allow for a covered entry addition to be set back 25.5 from the front property line. (PC13-25-V) LOCATION: 12091 Gantry Ct. PETITIONER: Steve Andrews 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS --NONE-- 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. PD-703 Ordinance Amendments — Consideration of proposed planned development ordinance amendments to allow for driveways off streets with raised medians and single-family residential driveway widths greater than 14 feet within the street right-of-way. (PC13-12-Z) LOCATION: Cobblestone Lake Development PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley B. Dalseth Accessory Building Setback Variance — Consideration of a variance from the 75' shoreland setback to construct 24' x 16' (384 sq. ft.) accessory building with a 245 sq. ft. wrap- around deck 26' from the OHWL of Farquar Lake. (PC13-23-V) LOCATION: 4869 Dominica Way PETITIONER: Jennifer and Pascal Dalseth 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of upcoming schedule and other updates. 8. ADJOURNMENT NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS Wednesday, June 5, 2013 Regular Scheduled Meeting - Public hearing applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, May 8, 2013 -Site plan, variance applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Monday, May 28, 2013 Wednesday, June 19, 2013 Regular Scheduled Meeting - Public hearing applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, May 22, 2013 - Site plan, variance applications due by 9:00 a.m. on Monday, June 10, 2013 NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS 7:00 P.M. 7:00 P.M. Thursday, May 23, 2013 Regular Scheduled Meeting 7:00 P.M. Thursday, June 13, 2013 Informal 5:30 P.M. Regular Scheduled Meeting 7:00 P.M. Regular meetings are broadcast live on Charter Communications Cable, Channel 16. Agendas are also available on the City's Internet Web Site http://www.cityofapplevalley.org. CALL TO ORDER The City of Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Melander at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Tom Melander, Ken Alwin, Tim Burke, Paul Scanlan, David Schindler, and Brian Wasserman. Members Absent: Keith Diekmann Staff Present: City Attorney Sharon Hills, City Planner Tom Lovelace, Planner Kathy Bodmer, Assistant City Engineer David Bennett and Department Assistant Joan Murphy. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 1, 2013 Chair Melander asked if there were any changes to the agenda. Hearing none he called for a motion. City Planner Tom Lovelace noted there were several Mankato State University students from the Urban Planning and Management extension class to observe the process of the Apple Valley Planning Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Alwin moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke, approving the agenda. Ayes - 6 - Nays - 0. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES APRIL 17, 2013. Chair Melander asked if there were any changes to the minutes. Hearing none he called for a motion. MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Schindler, approving the minutes of the meeting of April 17, 2013. Ayes - 6 - Nays — 0. 4. CONSENT ITEMS A. Consistency of Cemetery Expansion with 2030 Comprehensive Plan — Consider resolution finding that the acquisition for the expansion of the Lebanon Cemetery is consistent with the Apple Valley 2030 Comprehensive Plan. (PC13-24-P) LOCATION: Lebanon Cemetery, SE corner of Pilot Knob Rd and CSAH 42 PETITIONER: City of Apple Valley MOTION: Commissioner Burke moved, seconded by Commissioner Wasserman, approving Resolution No. 2013-01 finding that the acquisition of the real property for the CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 2013 Page 2 of 4 expansion of the Lebanon Cemetery is consistent with the Apple Valley Comprehensive Plan. Ayes - 6 - Nays - 0. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS --NONE-- 6. LAND USE/ACTION ITEMS A. Dog Day Getaway — Finding of similar use for dog daycare facility in an "I-1" (Limited Industrial) zoning district (which are deemed permitted uses in "1-2" (General Industrial) zoning district), and consideration of conditional use permit to allow for 15' x 54' (810 sq. ft.) outdoor pet relief area in conjunction with a dog daycare operation. (PC13-11-C) LOCATION: 14607 Felton Ct. PETITIONER: Dog Day Getaway and Hebert and Associates, Inc. Planner Kathy Bodmer stated the petition was for zoning interpretation of "Finding of Similar Use" for dog daycare facility in an "I-1" (Limited Industrial) zoning district which are deemed permitted in the "I-2" (General Industrial) zoning district and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a 15 x 54' (810 sf) outdoor pet relief area in connection with a dog daycare facility at 14607 Felton Court. She stated the owners of Dog Day Getaway would like to move their existing pet daycare business into the newly constructed Apple Valley Business Campus at 14607 Felton Court. The new facility would allow the owners to expand their business from 6,600 sf presently to approximately 9,000 sf in the new location. The Apple Valley Business Campus property is located within the "1-2" (General Industrial) zoning district which allows any use listed as a permitted use in the "I-1" (Limited Industrial) zoning district. The I-1 zoning district allows animal clinics as a permitted use, with outdoor pens allowed by conditional use permit. Carey Edwards and Nicole Boe, Dog Day Getaway, provided additional information. Discussion followed. MOTION: Commissioner Alwin moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke, approving a Finding that a dog daycare facility is a use similar to an "animal clinic" as an enumerated permitted use in "I-1" (Limited Industrial) zoning districts which are deemed permitted uses in "1-2" (General Industrial) zoning districts. MOTION: Commissioner Alwin moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke, approving a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a 15' x 54' (810 sf) outdoor pet relief area in connection with a dog daycare facility at 14607 Felton Court, Suites 101 to 103, subject to compliance with all City ordinances and the following conditions: CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 2013 Page 3 of 4 a. Approval of the conditional use permit is subject to a finding by the City Council that the dog daycare use is a similar use to an animal clinic which is a permitted use in the "I-2" (General Industrial) zoning district. b. An outdoor pet relief area is permitted at 14607 Felton Court, Suites 101- 103, at the location on the property specifically depicted in the Site Plan dated April 26, 2013, and attached hereto as Exhibit A. c. The 15 x 54' outdoor pet relief area shall be permitted only in conjunction with the continued operation of a dog daycare facility. d. The outdoor pet relief area shall be constructed in accordance with the drawing "LH1 - Suites 101-103 Plan and Details" dated April 25, 2013, and attached hereto as Exhibit B. e. The outdoor pet relief area shall be constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with the Outdoor Pet Relief Area Construction, Operation and Maintenance Requirements, attached hereto as Exhibit C. f. A sanitary sewer fee shall be charged for the storm water that enters the City's sanitary sewer system. The sanitary sewer fee will be calculated by the City Engineer, based upon average annual precipitation in the region, which will be set annually. The additional sanitary sewer fee will be charged and payment will be collected with the City's quarterly municipal utility billing. The outdoor pet relief area shall be screened with a minimum five foot (5') tall maintenance-free fence such as vinyl clad or wood composite, but not chain link. h. Any dog in the outdoor area must be accompanied by an adult attendant. No dogs shall remain unattended in the outdoor pet relief area. i. The business operator shall ensure that the dogs do not bark when they are outside [subject to a revision by City Staff to further define "excessive" or "nuisance" barking]. j. The outdoor pet relief area and exterior area immediately adjacent to this use shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition at all times. All solid waste must be removed a minimum of once per day and disposed of in a sanitary manner. The liquid waste shall be managed by flushing the outdoor area with water and sanitizing the area once per day using an environmentally sensitive cleaning and sanitation product. k. The exterior of the premises outside the fenced area shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner with all solid waste removed each day and disposed of in a sanitary manner. 1. The outdoor pet relief area shall be used only as an outdoor pet relief area and shall not be used as an outdoor kennel, dog run, materials storage, or any other use not specifically identified in the conditional use permit. Ayes Nays - O. 7. OTHER BUSINESS A. Review of upcoming schedule and other updates. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dakota County, Minnesota Planning Commission Minutes May 1, 2013 Page 4 of 4 City Planner Tom Lovelace stated that the next Planning Commission meeting would take place Wednesday, May 15, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further comments from the Planning Staff or Planning Commission, Chair Melander asked for a motion to adjourn. MOTION: Commissioner Schindler moved, seconded by Commissioner Burke to adjourn the meeting at 7:22 p.m. Ayes - 6 - Nays - 0. pectfully Submitted, Approved by the Apple Valley Planning Commission on CITY OF APPLE VALLEY PROJECT SUMMARY ANDREWS COVERED ENTRY ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE 4A Agenda Item: Case Number: PC13-25-V Staff Reviewer: Thomas J. Lovelace Applicant: Steve Andrews Application Date: May 3, 2013 Meeting Date: May 15, 2013 Petition for: • Front yard setback variance to allow for construction of a covered entry addition. Purpose: The applicant is requesting a setback variance of 4.5 feet from the required front yard setback of 30 feet to allow for the construction of a 4.5 ft. x 7 ft. covered front entry. The site is located at 12091 Gantry Court. Summary of Issues: The dwelling unit is a colonial style house whose architecture is symmetrical and square and in many cases will have a decorative crown above the front door. The proposed 31.5 sq. ft. covered entry will add some depth to the front elevation and will be consistent with the building design elements of this house style. There is currently a 4 ft. x 4 ft.-3 in. concrete stoop in front of the front door and a 3 ft. wide sidewalk that extends from the stoop to the driveway. The width of the stoop will be increased by 3 feet and depth by 3 inches. The increase in impervious surface will be negligible. Included in this staff report are photos of two existing dwellings in the applicant's neighborhood that are similar architecturally and have a roof above the front door, which is supported by decorative columns. These provide a visual example of what the applicant's front elevation will look like with the covered addition. City code currently allows patios and decks less than 18" in height from grade with no railing and handicap access ramps to extend up to 8' into the front yard setback area. Because the entry is covered with a roof that is attached to the dwelling, it is considered part of the structure; therefore it cannot extend beyond the minimum front yard setback area without first obtaining a variance. A variance is a legally permitted deviation from the literal requirements of the City code. A variance may be granted in instances where strict enforcement would cause undue hardship, the circumstances are unique to the individual property under consideration, and the granting of the variance will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the applicable ordinances, goals and policies of the comprehensive plans, and will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. It appears that the proposed variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan's goals and policies that encourage residents to make improvements to their homes. Also, enhancements such as front entryways have been encouraged as a way to help update the city's existing housing stock. The proposed variance request is consistent with similar front additions that have been approved by the City. Furthermore, building setbacks are established to provide adequate space, light, and air, as well as safety from fire and for aesthetic reasons. The City has established setbacks in the "R-3" zoning district based upon abutting uses and their impact to adjacent properties. It does not appear that granting this variance will have a significant impact on the neighboring properties. Recommended Action: If the Planning Commission concurs, staff is recommending approval of a variance of up to 4.5 feet from the required front yard building setback of 3'0 feet in the "R-3" (Single Family Residential) zoning district to allow for the construction of a 4.5 ft. x 7 ft. covered front entry at 12091 Gantry Court due to the following: 1. The granting of the variance will not alter the general character of the locality. 2. The granting of the variance would be consistent with the comprehensive plan's goals and policies that encourage residents to make improvements to their homes as a way to help update and enhance the city's existing housing stock and livability. Attachments: Location Map Certificate of Survey Proposed Side Elevation Comprehensive Plan Map Picture of Front Elevation Pictures of Existing Homes Zoning Map Proposed Front Exterior Elevation Property Location Legal Description Comprehensive Plan Designation Zoning Classification Existing Platting Current Land Use Size Topography Existing Vegetation Other Significant Natural Features Adjacent Properties/Land Uses ANDREWS COVERED ENTRY ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE PROJECT REVIEW Existing Conditions 12091 Gantry Court Lot 11, Block 1, BRIAR OAKS OF APPLE VALLEY 2 ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota "LD" (Low Density Residential/2-6 units per acre) "R-3" (Single Family Residential/1 1,000 sq. ft. min. lot) Platted Single family dwelling unit .39 acres The lot slopes downward from the house. Vegetation typically associated with suburban residential development Wooded back yard NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST Single Family Dwelling Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use Single Family Dwelling Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use Single Family Dwelling Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use Cedar Avenue Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use "LD" (Low Density Residential/2-6 units per acre) "R-3" (Single Family Residential/1 1,000 sq. ft. min. lot) "LD" (Low Density Residential/2-6 units per acre "LD" (Low Density Residential/2-6 units per acre Public Street Right-of-Way Public Street Right-of-Way "R-3" (Single Family Residential/11,000 sq. ft. min. lot "R-3" (Single Family Residential/11,000 sq. ft. min. lot) ANDREWS COVERED ENTRY ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST "IMP 0 , lip 1, --aut °C i lIl l tlIIi '± willIPW; !Ma gia villa .... h E lm tom, 910 4 ig --, . ra 64 M .... —a, - j a di miiiW ANDREWS COVERED ENTRY ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST EXISTING COMP PLAN DESIGNATION "LD "(Medium Density Residential/ 2 -6 units per acre) mfg i "%y% o w l go r vifiglikatal pirtawri mirizrwm soot fitikria � � fir. I mir Ad wi ri a mr ar isietz ANDREWS COVERED ENTRY ADDITION SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST ZONING MAP "R -3" (Single Family Residential) CONSULTING ENCHNEERS, R BE PLANNERS and LAND 5WIVEVORS ENGINEERING COMPRNY, INC. 1000 EAST 146th STREET, BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55337 PH 43Z CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Legal Description: za r //, .67Z' eA'/AT o'44<7 mzz 4P ,412 4 .09 V1PA '0 10- q) N SCALE : 1 = 30' (6 DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION (/ 0 ) DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION INDICATES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE /0ezi = FINISHED GARAGE FLOOR ELEVATION /6/843 = BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION • /0Z6 = TOP OF FOUNDATION ELEVATION ORA I Al 116E AND / (`) UTILITY 64 5 X * N07 REM/Iv/A/ a 0141,1 ,e9 C64/5,7,fe.c762) AS bK7& /4ig-642eo FIE 671/40e1Q N 82° /45, /3 I hereby certify that this is a true and correot representation of,a tract luncA, alQwn, .and deocribod horeon. As prepared by me this Zwo d 424Reil 19 2- 3- 5 -yz._ oy,e..0 /)) g Proposed Covered Entry Addition Location 5 -5too6, a/ de. /‘6 4;5 „Adiff■ility 30 p7: F/eav ,541/ 41: SE7g4e. Z, /A/6 Minn. Reg. picture drawing drawing picture picture 0$ 000. 00110. •000 •00 CITY OF Apple „ MEMO Valley TO: Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners FROM: Thomas J. Lovelace, City Planner DATE: May 10, 2013 CASE NO.: PC13-12-Z AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6A Planning and Development Department SUBJECT: Proposed Amendments to Article 28, Appendix F of Chapter 155 of the Apple Valley City Code (Planned Development Ordinance No. 703) Related to Driveways in the Cobblestone Lake Development. Attached for your consideration is a draft of proposed amendments to Planned Development Ordinance No. 703 that would permit a driveway access from 158 Street West, a street with a raised median, to the property located at 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway. The proposed amendments, which are in bold type and underlined in the draft document, would continue to restrict driveway access from structures to streets with raised medians with the exception of the lot located at 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway. That property would be allowed a driveway from 158 Street West subject to the following requirements: • Only one driveway access to this property is permitted. • The principal dwelling structure on the property shall front Cobblestone Lake Parkway. • Any attached garage to the principal dwelling unit shall be oriented on the property so the door(s) for vehicle access into the garage are facing east or south. • The structure existing in the southeast corner on the property as of April 15, 2013 shall be existing on the property on the date a building permit application for the principle dwelling unit is filed with the City and said structure shall remain on the property thereafter and be converted for use as a detached garage. This amendment is being considered because of an existing condition on the property. The single-family lot located at the northeast corner of 158 Street West and Cobblestone Lake Parkway is the former location of a building that was used as a sales office. A parking lot was constructed that had a driveway off both Cobblestone Lake Parkway and 158 Street West. The sales office building, which is located in the southeast corner of the lot adjacent to 158 Street West, was approved as a temporary use with the expectation that it would be converted to a detached garage at the time of construction of a dwelling unit on the lot. The driveway along 158 Street West was expected to be removed after the sales office ceased operations and a dwelling unit was constructed on the property. The location of the sales office/garage has made it a challenge to place a house on the property and make use of the existing accessory structure as a garage without having a driveway off 158 Street West. This amendment would allow the owners of the property to gain the most direct access to an existing structure that was once used as a sales office that will be converted to a detached garage as part of the construction of a single- family dwelling on the lot. Synergy Land Company, the current property owner, has someone interested in purchasing the property who has in turn retained Johnson Reiland Builders & Remodelers to design and construct a home on the lot. They have submitted a sketch that shows the location of the proposed dwelling and attached garage, which places the attached garage on the south side of the dwelling. This will allow for access to the attached and detached garages from one driveway off 158 Street West. The existing drive approach along 158 Street West to serve the sales office will continue to be the driveway location. The raised median in 158 Street West directly in front of the driveway will remain, which will result in the driveway access being limited to right in/right out movements only. The driveway has been designed to allow vehicles to turnaround on the property, which will discourage vehicles from backing out onto the street. Driveway access to and from the property will be limited to right turns only, which may result in some U-turn movements at the intersections of158 Street West and Cobblestone Lake Parkway and 158 Street West and Diamond Way/Dry Meadow Lane. This raised a concern about potential pedestrian conflicts and safety with this type of turning movement, in particular at the 158 Street/Cobblestone Lake Parkway intersection, which is a three-legged intersection with a stop sign at 158 Street. It also allows pedestrian access from Cobblestone Lake's northeast neighborhood to pedestrian trails along Cobblestone Lake, the community pool, and a playground located to the west and south of the intersection. Generally, a U-turn movement is not typically expected by motorists and pedestrians at intersections, therefore a safety risk always exists. According to accepted traffic engineering standards, the single-family dwelling on the subject property will generate approximately 10 vehicle trips in a 24-hour period. This equates to 5 trips leaving and 5 entering the property. Not all those trips will generate U-turns. The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the traffic volume data for Cobblestone Lake Parkway and has concluded that there will be sufficient gaps in traffic to allow for the U-turn movement. It was also asked if the crosswalk at 158 Street and Cobblestone Lake Parkway could be marked. This request was reviewed by the Assistant City Engineer who indicated that the crosswalk could be marked if it fell within the City's policy for the installation of a crosswalk. City staff will review the intersection to see if it meets warrants. This will include the review of pedestrian volumes, crash history, school walking routes, and other items as outlined in the policy for evaluation. Another issue raised was approval of the ordinance prior to the private review process for single- family homes in the earlier Cobblestone Lake additions. This private review process includes review by an architectural review committee, the governing homeowners association, and Cobblestone Lake Master Association. Although, review and issuance of a building permit by the City is not contingent on this private review process, staff requested that the homebuilder make contact with Cobblestone Lake representatives to begin that review process. They have submitted building plans and are waiting to hear back from Cobblestone Lake representatives regarding a meeting schedule. Staff has included the building elevations with this memo as well as e-mails between the current owner, builder and Cobblestone Lake representatives, which indicate the level of communication between the parties over the last few weeks and commitment to get a dwelling built on the lot. Because the current owner and builder have someone interested in building a home on the subject property, they would like to get a decision on the proposed amendments as soon as possible. The original request also included a proposed amendment to maximum driveway width within the right-of-way, for single-family homes, which is currently 14 feet. Staff is not recommending any amendment to this requirement at this time and this item will likely come back in the future once staff had done a review of existing conditions to determine if there is a significant problem with the driveway widths. Staff Recommendation: If the Planning Commission concurs, staff is recommending the draft ordinance amendments to Planned Development Ordinance No. 703 to allow for the property located at 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway and legally described Lot 5, Block 2, COBBLESTONE LAKE 2 ADDITION to have driveway access from 158 Street West, subject to the following requirements: 1. Only one driveway access to this property shall be permitted. 2. The principal dwelling structure on the property shall front Cobblestone Lake Parkway. 3. Any attached garage to the principal dwelling unit shall be oriented on the property so the door(s) for vehicle access into the garage are facing east or south. 4. The structure existing in the southeast corner on the property as of April 15, 2013 shall be existing on the property on the date a building permit application for the principle dwelling unit is filed with the City and said structure shall remain on the property thereafter and be converted for use as a detached garage. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA, AMENDING TITLE XV CHAPTER 155 OF THE CITY CODE ENTITLED LAND USAGE BY AMENDING APPENDIX F, ARTICLE 28, SECTION A28-5 REGULATING DRIVEWAY ACCESS WITHIN PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION NO. 703. The City Council of Apple Valley ordains: Section 1. Chapter 11, Appendix F, of the Apple Valley City Code is hereby amended by changing Section A28-5(C)(2) to read as follows: (C) Residential site design: The following design elements shall be incorporated into Zone 1 of the planned development to assure an overall sense of harmony. (2) Driveways serving structures adjacent to streets with raised center medians shall be prohibited, except the property located at 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway, legally described as Lot 5, Block 2, COBBLESTONE LAKE 2 ADDITION, may have driveway access to the ro ert via 158 Street sub'ect to the followin re uirements: 1 I ATTEST: (a) Only one driveway access to this property is permitted. (b) The principal dwelling structure on the property shall front Cobblestone Lake Parkway. (c) Any attached garage to the principal dwelling unit shall be oriented on the property so the door(s) for vehicle access into the garage are facing east or south. (d) The structure existing in the southeast corner on the property as of April 15, 2013 shall be existing on the property on the date a building permit application for the principle dwelling unit is filed with the City and said structure shall remain on the property thereafter and be converted for use as a detached garage. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its passage and publication. PASSED this day of , 2013. Pamela J. Gackstetter, City Clerk Mary Hamann-Roland, Mayor �, �nTn t . ems# e, "? �,, r ;r:xt� ter• .-� a � .,,# � �. � �.o .., v.�_, �..s��...., wr_ .., �_. xe�.. u,`€ �__ �t�,.._. v,_ sS?�.:, .«_c...�,¢R�:,�'._...,s_��a:�3^ .......�.. �. <_, 4,. 1Y+:i <_.�;,.,3L..1,._.___..._ta w.s- -...:c 4- ,..w�. +�..,. .�...3rs:3 `t.�' '�� -AC ?�#.. �'�t�..'�,� ��r�- :,R.�';�c.,���`t,r,:>.re 3: :r.,r- �- �*�.•� :.•�C,:c'.kz......... ,.,1s:::�r :.. .,r.» 15798 COBBLESTONE LAKE PARKWAY LOCATION MAP `.T$' _ sm.' -;`1.4111.R'S, x'..0.11 'L:S�L�m F,':i S'LF!:3�:H '2!'(r�uS? '. ' »_Yl1A$'::' )3H�iC•"'.: f_:� Apple iN,V,]GVg ,1111n t _ AMNd H>IV1 aNaLsaamoD 86ZSI PuZ HNVI HNoisHiaaop - za SI HDNHCIISMI CLNIVNfICINVEI HI-I CINVIIHN 2 I 11, I 1-11i NOLIVIAILIOANI or l I ,;VNV, .I,1/ NNW CC 0 CC Z 0 N 7 4 5 111 CC 11 IV IF LI I I ( , Nd 1.7 )MNdVJ HNOISIMOD 86ZSI PuZ DEVI INOISTMOD Zg SI HaNHCIISHN GINVNfICINVCI ONVIIIN NOIIVINHOINI aor, EMMEN MEM f uJ (.5 z i CC Z N 71 Li cc 0 w 0 0 c\I I r: 110 II 1: 11= From: Brent His lop [mailto:brent.hisloo • S nergyLandCompany.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:00 AM To: Lovelace, Tom; 'Dave Labno` Cc: Mark Reiland; 'Matt Reiland' Subject: RE: 158th street variance proposal Hi Dave — I represent the owner of the lot.... We & the builder would welcome a meeting this week with you &/or other HOA board/ARC members. We've been seeking resolution to this issue for several months and time is of the essence.... Are you available to connect this week? A few items of note — 2 separate & relevant items are at discussion: Land use/Zoning/Access: • One of the owner's manager's (Tom Theis) discussed the proposed access point from 158 street with Pete Scheldt a few weeks back. The direct feedback from that discussion is that he (Pete) saw some logic to the joint driveway on 158 street, however, he wanted to ensure that users of that driveway did not have to back up onto 158 street — we agree with his comment & relayed this info to Matt & Mark Reiland, the builder. • The builder has accommodated this concept into their site plan which was proposed to the City. The site plan allows turnaround movement interior to the lot — allowing the future homeowner to both enter and exit the lot "front forward" and eliminate any need to back onto the street. From a safety perspective, a right-in/right-out access movement is generally considered a good/low risk traffic movement by engineers. Please see the attached siteplan. • The lot is a legal, buildable lot with an approved existing structure which was anticipated in the early 2000's to ultimately be converted to an accessory structure including a detached garage element. The combined 158 shared driveway access point has several benefits: 1.. The city originally anticipated that the accessory building would have/need access from 15 8th 2. The proposed site survey/sketch plan shows appropriate turn around capacity interior to the lot (avoiding the need to back out onto 158 St. and therefore safer). 3. Access on 158 street does not create a safety issue. Generally, a single home doesn't generate many daily traffic trips AND a right in / right out is commonly considered a safer traffic movement. 4. 1 Driveway creates less impervious surface for the lot. 5. A rear load garage (non-front facing) is consistent with the Cobblestone Lake's development design intent of new traditional design.... This siteplan creates a unique, attractive access vs. another garage door visible from the Parkway. 6. Given the unique location/layout of the lot, access alternatives possess few benefits to the City, HOA, or the Owner/Builder: a. A garage left plan with a primary drive off Cobblestone would still require a secondary driveway on 158 to service the accessary structure garage as intended. It would also increase impervious surface within the lot. Arch. Review: b. A garage right home is not a viable option as it would force driveway access very close the corner of Cobblestone Lake Parkway & 158 creating a potential safety/traffic challenge. This would not be a positive Iocation to promote backing up onto the street by the future homeowner while pulling out of their garage. Accessing the detached garage would also be problematic in this scenario. 7. As mentioned above, the seller's property manager (Tom Theis) called the SF HOA president, Pete Scheldt to discuss driveway access. | understand Pete didn't have issue w/ the combined 158 driveway as long as it avoided any need for the owner to back out. ** For the above reasons, we believe the proposed combined access point on 158 the best alternative for legal access to this lot. It promotes use efficiency, a reasonable/attractive siteplan, minimizes safety issues. As you note below the builder is aware that Cobblestone Lake SF has an ARC review process. They are supportive of building a high-quality & architecturally attractive home which is consistent with other homes in the greater SF HO . This said, as a legaily platted lot, the property has the right to access public right-of-way. The unique circumstance of its Iocation, media ns, & pre-existing accessory structure is a city land use / zoning item -- which is why the city has forwarded the variance process. All in, 1 believe the bulider, the City, the HOA, & the property owner share common goals. We ook forward to taiking with you & would like to schedule a time to connect this week. Does tomorrow (Wed.) or Thursday late afternoon @ city hall work for you? Maybe 4:00 or 4:30? Thanks for your time & please let me know what day/time is workable. Brent His;op Managing Partner ��������= ����.��������� Land Development , Land Sales , & Land Consulting (612) 590 - 0811 Enjoy learning more at: loporod Lovelace, Tom From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hi Tom — In addition to the memo I sent you last week (attached), please ensure the HOA comments I noted in yellow" below are included in your staff report. Reiland understands that architectural review Please also mention our recent efforts: • Called the HOA pres — Pete — no objection so long as residents didn't have to back out onto 158 • 2 emails over the past 6 weeks requesting a meeting w/ the HOA. * Comments back from the ARC have been related to home/landscape issues, not opposing access to 158 street. At next week's PC meeting we need conclusive support to move forward & hope to be on the City Council's agenda for the 5/23 date. We began this process back in January and just looking to finalize the issue with support from the City. Thanks for your help & efforts. Brent Hislop , Managing Partner Land Development , Land Sales , & Land Consulting (612) 590 - 0811 Enjoy learning more at From: Matt Reiland [mailto:matthewreiland1©gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 06, 2013 11:09 AM To: Brent Hislop Cc: Mark Reiland; Lovelace, Tom Subject: Re: FW: 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway Brent Hislop <brenthislop@SynergyLandCompany.com> Monday, May 06, 2013 12:56 PM 'Matt Reiland' 'Mark Reiland; Lovelace, Tom RE: FW: 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway 15798 Cobblestone - access memo points.docx 1 Hi Brent and Tom, If you read this email from Eric of the ARC and HOA. If you read his last paragraph its indieates t are leaving 1he driveway access i up to the City. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks, Matt May 2 (4 days ago) eric hahn to me, Doug, Dave Hi Matt. Dave asked that I reply to your email, as he is currently unavailable to respond. First, | would like to say that Dave, Doug and I, as members of the Architectural Review Committee ARC, look forward to working with you on this build. We hope to make this process as quick and painless as possibl. As Dave stated in an earlier email, the futi finat process requires the property owner to complete a formal appIicaton with full blueprints of the home, exterior materias to be used, survey, and landscaping plans. These must be submitted as two copies to Community Developn and then approved by ARC, the Cobblestone Lake Single Family Home Owners Association and the Cobblestone Lake Master Association. Now that's a lot of work for you to complete on a plan t la ARC might require s nificant changes to. So instead ofcomp|eting all requirements for your forma application, it's often best to work with us early on in defining the style of the home, major architectural details and lot pacement, so that you don't need to "go back to square one" if we find issues. I suggest we start with the following, which will allow us to g,,t a better sense of what you intend to build. b will also provide 2 rneans for working together to deflne a'|ooK,or design that is an appropriate fit wth surrounding hornes. 2 Provide a d cum ent 2 DF format ks preferred , . h` i s the four el va ions o f the home. a e provide exterior � 5 '"9 & such '@ a& t 3 t� P' t� �•, proportion. � F f � of x _ sa h as P � s, doors,. si ig, i ri ` , etc., approximate t �; h n should also b e included on the elevations. CLSFHOA Board Me 3. Include anything else you response from us. he Email t°is information direc Hi Matt (cc: Mark 84 Tom L) — y Have you had any response from the HOA? Provide a sur ey, or top 'n view o f lot, which shows souse, g r ve ay be le pful for ;n al re £iew, hu 3 a - d d - eway placement. �s and two should be sufficient for a nee for fastest turn around. Please let me know if email is not possible. Again, please send me the elevations and survey ASAP and we'll begin reviewing thee. ARC will then respond with feedback, or suggestions, and can schedule a meeting to discuss if you'd find that helpful. Once the style, major architectural elements, and lot placement have been agreed to we can then move on to finer details such as blueprints, color selection, material selection, and landscape plans. Now in your email you l e y Terence to a May 7th deadline. l assume this deadline has something to do with city council approval for the driveway on I.58th If the city is willing to gr ant approval, that's great. You then covered and have the potential to build a driveway on 158. Please be advised that city approval does not necessarily mean that ARC will approve it, though, as we can only approve it in conjunction with the house and landscape plans. I hope this clears things up a bit and provides some direction. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks, Eric Hahn ARC Committee Member On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Brent Hislop <brent.hislop c synergylandcompany.conn> wrote: Brent Hislop , Managing Partner Kind Regards, Matt Hello Dave and Group, - • •••,,,••• • • Land Development , Land Sales , & Land Consulting (612) 590 0811 Enjoy learning more at: From: Matt Reiland [mailto:matthewreilandl©gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 9:44 AM To: Dave Labno Cc: Brent Hislop; Mark Reiland; Lovelace, Tom; Eric Hahn; Doug Bock Subject: 15798 Cobblestone Lake Parkway We have all the required preliminary content for HOA's/ARCS requirements. How soon can we get a meeting to review our initial submitted requirements. We will be very flexible setting a time for this meeting. Where can we meet to submit? Tom from the City said he could make a space available at City Hall if that worked. We are requesting this meeting on or before May 7th. 4 Dalseth Accessory Building Variance Agenda Item: 6B Case Number: PC13-23-V Staff Reviewer: Kathy Bodmer Applicant: Jennifer and Pascal Dalseth Application Date: April 30, 2013 Meeting Date: May 15, 2013 Petition for: Variance from the 75' "SH" (Shore land) overlay setback to construct a 24' x 16' (384 sq. ft.) accessory building with 245 sq. ft. wrap-around deck 26' from the ordinary high water level of Farquar Lake (899.2' elevation) at 4869 Dominica Way West by Jennifer and Pascal Dalseth. Summary of The petitioners, Jennifer and Pascal Dalseth, 4869 Dominica Way West, request the Issues: variance to construct an accessory structure which would provide storage of watercraft, including a boat, personal watercraft, and other sporting equipment. A wrap-around deck is proposed to be constructed along the north and east sides of the accessory building. The petitioners state that while the City Code has no exception for "water-oriented" structures in the SH district, the State DNR Shoreland Management rules have a provision for them. The subject property abuts Farquar Lake and therefore lies within the "SH" (Shoreland) zoning district. The City's SH zoning district provides that all structures must meet the 75' setback requirement. The one exception is for a DNR-permitted boathouse. A DNR permitted boathouse must be located within the DNR regulated portion of the lake (OHWL and lakeward). A boathouse would require a permit from the DNR for work in the beds of protected waters and a conditional use permit from the City. The Dalseth building is not proposed to be constructed within the lake bed, so this exception would not apply. Other than the boathouse exception, the City SH district has no provision or exception for water-oriented structures. DNR Shoreland Management Rules Chapter 6120, the chapter upon which the City's SH zoning district is based, contains a provision that would allow for water-oriented accessory structures, if allowed by local government controls. Shoreland management is the responsibility of local governments and may be more restrictive than the DNR rules. The petitioners request the variance based upon the DNR rules. Because the City rules do not contain an exception for the water-oriented structure, the variance would need to be considered in light of whether the petitioner has met the "practical difficulties" test, not the State Shoreland Management Rules. The DNR Hydrologist for Dakota and Scott Counties, Jeffrey Berg, notes that the City's SH zoning district is currently more stringent than the DNR rules and the DNR supports the City's more restrictive requirements. Mr. Berg reviewed the variance request, using the DNR Shoreland Rules as a guide, and found that the request meets most of the Shoreland Management rules with three exceptions: 1. The wrap-around deck would constitute a second structure and only one structure is permitted. 2. The additional deck area causes the accessory building to exceed 400 sq. ft. 3. A boathouse must be used solely for watercraft storage and related boating items, which would not include a deck. The fact that the DNR rules currently contain an exception for water-oriented structures and facilities does not compel the City to grant a variance. The City decided to not adopt that portion of the DNR rules. Instead of requesting a variance, the petitioners would need to make an application for an amendment to the City's zoning code to allow water-oriented structures within the 75' setback. Approximately 83 residential properties abut the three lakes classified as Recreational Development Lakes in the City's SH district, including Lake Alimagnet, Long Lake and Farquar Lake. Any code amendment to the SH district would impact and possibly allow for similar structures in these other properties. Variance In order to grant a variance, the City considers the following factors to determine whether Consideration: the applicant established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provision(s) of this Chapter: 1. Special conditions apply to the structure or land in question that are particular to the property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district or vicinity in which the land is located; 2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this chapter; 3. The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the owner/applicant; 4. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate practical difficulties in complying with the zoning provisions of this Code; and 5. The variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. Definition of "Practical difficulties": • The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning provisions of the code; • The plight of the applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the applicant; and • The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Recommended Staff is not prepared to make a recommendation concerning this request tonight. Staffs Actions: position is that the petitioners would need to request a zoning code amendment to allow for the use they are requesting. Staff seeks feedback from the Planning Commission concerning a potential code amendment. Staff would like the Planning Commission to consider the issues and then provide direction. Three alternatives for consideration: 1. Maintain the SH zoning district so that it is more restrictive than the Minnesota DNR Shoreland Management Rules, not allowing for water-oriented structures. 2. Modify the SH zoning district to allow for water-oriented accessory buildings. 3. Recommend a different approach. Existing Conditions Property Location: Legal Description: Comprehensive Plan Designation Zoning Classification Existing Platting Current Land Use Size: Topography: Existing Vegetation Other Significant Natural Features Adjacent Properties/Land Uses Development Project Review 4869 Dominica Way West Lot 1, Block 1, HESLI ADDITION LD-Low Density Residential (0-6 units/acre) R-1 Single Family 40,000 s.f. Platted Lot Single family residential 32,570 sq. ft. (0.75 Acres Landscaped urban lawn. Property abuts Farquar Lake and is located within the "SH" (Shore land Overlay) zoning district. NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST PROJECT REVIEW Farquar Lake Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use Comprehensive Plan Zoning/Land Use 2 Water/Pond Lake/Pond Lot 6, Block 2, FARQUAR LAKE ADDITION Lot 2, Block 1, HESLI ADDITION LLD-Low Density Residential (0-6 units/acre R-1 Single Family 40,000 s.f. LD-Low Density Residential (0-6 units/acre R-1 Single Family 40,000 s.f. Lot 8, Block 1, FARQUAR LAKE ADDITION LD-Low Density Residential (0-6 units/acre R-1 Single Family 40,000 s.f. Jennifer and Pascal Dalseth, 4869 Dominica Way West, request a variance from the 75 foot "SH" (Shoreland) overlay setback to construct a 24' x 16' (384 sq. ft.) accessory building with 245 sq. ft. wrap-around deck 26' from the OHWL of Farquar Lake (899.2' elevation). The petitioners wish to construct a "water-oriented" accessory structure which would be used to store watercraft and sporting equipment. The Dalseth property abuts Farquar Lake and is within the "SH" (Shoreland) zoning district. The City's zoning code states that the SH zone is a "zone on zone" district that provides more stringent regulations to provide environmental protection of protected waters. In the SH zoning district, structures must be set back a minimum of 75' from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of protected water body. In the case of Farquar Lake, the OHWL is at the 899.2' elevation. In addition to the OHWL elevation established by the DNR, the property also contains an easement for the 100-year flood elevation of 901.4' that is established by the City to allow for stormwater storage. Structures must be constructed with a minimum of three feet of "freeboard" to the lowest opening to prevent flooding. In other words, the lowest opening of the building would need to be set at a minimum of 904.4'. The City's SH zoning district currently requires all structures to meet the 75' setback requirement. One exception exists which would allow boathouses to be constructed within the protected waters of the lake provided a permit is granted by the DNR and a CUP is issued by the City. No other exceptions are provided for water-oriented accessory structures in the SH district. DNR Shore land Management Rules Chapter 6120, the chapter upon which the City's SH zoning district is based, contains a provision that would allow for water-oriented accessory structures, if allowed by local government controls. Shore land management is the responsibility of local governments and may be more restrictive than the DNR rules. The petitioners request the variance based upon the DNR rules. Because the City rules do not contain an exception for the water-oriented structure, the variance would need to be considered in light of whether the petitioner has met the "practical difficulties" test. Attachments: 1. Petitioner Letter 2. DNR Letter 3. Location Map 4. Zoning Map 5. Lot Survey 6. Site Plan 7. Building Elevations and Floor Plan 8. Survey of 100-Year High Water Elevation 9. Excerpt Chapter 6120 DNR Shoreland Management Rules 3 April 22nd, 2013 Community Development Department City of Apple Valley Dear Planning Committee, Sincerely, Jennifer and Pascal Dalseth a cal We would like to place a boathouse within the 75 ft setback from the 100-year high water mark. The following will highlight project details and address how the proposed boathouse meets the DNR's shore land management rules. In addition, the proposed boathouse will enhance the aesthetic of the property, adjacent property and views from the lake. As we enter into this project our goal is to provide additional storage space for a boat, personal watercraft, and other water-oriented sporting equipment. Item 6 of the DNR's shore land management rules state: As an alternative for general development and recreational development water bodies, water oriented accessory structures used solely for watercraft storage, and including storage of related boating and water-oriented sporting equipment, may occupy an area up to 400 square feet provided the maximum width of the structure is 20 feet as measured parallel to the configuration of the shoreline. Our boathouse will occupy an area of 400 sq ft and 16 ft will be parallel to the shoreline. We also have a great respect for the beauty of our property and the lake views. The proposed boathouse's architectural detail will enhance the views from the lake and from neighboring properties. We worked with an architect to develop a plan that is very thoughtful of the site and design. The structure mimics the architecture and materials of our home. The design goal of our home was to create a house that looks like it belongs on the site using high quality materials that come from the land. As you can see from the preliminary design the boathouse also achieves this goal. In summary, the proposed structure will enhance the aesthetic of both our property and the adjacent property with our selection of material, location and architectural thoughtfulness. Thank you for your time and consideration. 4869 Dominica Way• Apple Valley, MN 55124 Phone: 952-423-4856 • E-Mail: jenn_pascal@yahoo.com Bodmer, Kathy From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Kathy, Regards, Jeff Berg Hydrologist DNR Division of Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road Berg, Jeffrey J. (DNR) <jeffrey.berg @state.mn.us> Wednesday, May 08, 2013 9:18 AM Bodmer, Kathy Jennifer Riley Dalseth (jenn_pascal @yahoo.com) DNR Review of Variance Request As requested, below are DNR comments regarding the proposed variance for the Dalseth property along Farquar Lake. We understand that the City of Apple Valley does not have a provision for Water Oriented Accessory Structure in your ordinance. Therefore the proposed structure does not meet the 75 feet setback, and a variance is needed. Note that DNR is supportive of more restrictive ordinances that provide additional protection for water resources of the community. With this in mind, we believe the City should evaluate this variance for conformance with the State Shoreland Management Rules (MN Rule 6120). We review this proposal with respect to `Accessory Structures' within the State Shoreland Management Rules, (6120.3300 Subpart 3 H), and find that this proposal meets these requirements in most respects including;. The structure setback is greater than 10 feet landward of the OHW of Farquar Lake. • The boathouse dimensions and square feet are substantially compliant with the State Shoreland Rule. It could be argued that the structure width parallel to the shoreline is 24 feet, however the boathouse is 394 square feet, and under the 400 square foot threshold for Recreational Development lakes. Though it is not noted in the plan, the structure height should be <10 feet in height. • l'he structure appears to include architectural material treatment to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands. This should also include . vegetation plantings to mitigate the view of the structure for the water. However the addition of the deck does not comply with the Shoreland Management Standards and should not be allowed for the following reasons. • The additional deck area will exceed 400 square feet of structure. • A deck is also a structure, and only one accessory structure is allowed. A boathouse must be used solely for watercraft storage & related boating items, which does not include a deck. For any variance, DNR is supportive of requiring mitigation to offset the variance. This could include items such as; buffer plantings, stormwater management features, vegetation screening and others. If you have question or comments of this review let me know. DALSETH ACCESSORY BUILDING VARIANCE LOCATION MAP R -4 DALSETH ACCESSORY BUILDING VARIANCE • Deno. iron monument O Denotes b3unci monument x ao0.o Denotes •existing elev. (000.0) Denotes proposed elev. Eltf Denotes existing arid proposed Denotes outface drainage 55439 David E Crook Edina, MN Phone:(763) 559-0908 Fax: (763) 559-0479 EAU, SUITE 209 PDF created with pdfFactory trial version dffacto corn Benchmark Top PM Hydrant Elovation..915.67 Data Minn. Reg. No. 22414 nie No. I hereby certi6, that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me DEMARS--GABRIEL or under rny carect supervision and that am a duly Registered Land LAND SUR ORS, INC. Surveyor under the Laws of the State a Minnesota. 6875 WASHINGTON AVE SO, 8o0*-Page 433/41 14044 C Seale PREPARED FOR; LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Block 1, HESLI ADDITION AREA: 32,570 SQ. FT. 0.75 ACRES map .11.‘ 311 1• X1.1 4 4 410 NO11011HISNO0 HOA sn ION 00 A1NO 2S0dElild AA21A31,1 ONV SN10018 dO NOIS3C1 AINNIIA11131:1d 4 4 4 4 DIN ' TA 144::1 V - 1 .1.4 / V7\ N(.2 \7V4 Z 30N3IS31:1 H136 1Va 1<-01141111, 0 9 0 V El U .11.‘ 311 1• X1.1 4 4 410 NO11011HISNO0 HOA sn ION 00 A1NO 2S0dElild AA21A31,1 ONV SN10018 dO NOIS3C1 AINNIIA11131:1d 4 4 4 4 106.1..11.1.1 0 )- CZ, < 0 <0 < • 0 Z Z 0 LU Z 0 Z N 0 a) t• I 0 " _J 03 • 0i TS • ct 0< 0 < 0 0 0 0) 0 —J - 9gT -- 06 . 0LZ . ----- 3„9&172%lON C 9 9 I Le*gL 90 0 „ I 3„00,0Z.COS C • ,-,b 1 '\ • - 5 13?) I t). DoWO\CP, \NP"( t\W151 I 5 , Z Z Z cc 0- wW mZ 0 00 0 z%*) 6120.2500 DEFINITIONS. 6120.3300 ZONING PROVISIONS. EXCERPT CHAPTER 6120 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SHORELAND MANAGEMENT RULES Subp. 2. Boathouse. "Boathouse" means a structure designed and used solely for the storage of boats or boating equipment. Subp. 20. Water-oriented accessory structure or facility. "Water-oriented accessory structure or facility" means a small, above ground building or other improvement, except stairways, fences, docks, and retaining walls, which, because of the relationship of its use to a surface water feature, reasonably needs to be located closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Examples of such structures and facilities include boathouses, gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses, and detached decks. Subp. 3. Placement and height of structures and facilities on lots. When more than one setback requirement applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet all setbacks. The placement of structures and other facilities on all lots must be managed by shoreland controls as follows: H. Accessory structures and facilities. All accessory structures and facilities, except those that are water-oriented, must meet or exceed structure setback standards. If allowed by local government controls, each residential lot may have one water-oriented accessory structure or facility located closer to public waters than the structure setback if all of the following standards are met: (1) The structure or facility must not exceed ten feet in height, exclusive of safety rails, and cannot occupy an area greater than 250 square feet. Detached decks must not exceed eight feet above grade at any point. (2) The setback of the structure or facility from the ordinary high water level must be at least ten feet. (3) The structure or facility must be treated to reduce visibility as viewed from public waters and adjacent shorelands by vegetation, topography, increased setbacks, color or other means acceptable to the local unit of government, assuming summer, leaf-on conditions. (4) The roof may be used as a deck with safety rails, but must not be enclosed or used as a storage area. (5) The structure or facility must not be designed or used for human habitation and must not contain water supply or sewage treatment facilities. (6) As an alternative for general development and recreational development waterbodies, water- oriented accessory structures used solely for watercraft storage, and including storage of related boating and water-oriented sporting equipment, may occupy an area up to 400 square feet provided the maximum width of the structure is 20 feet as measured parallel to the configuration of the shoreline. (7) Any accessory structures or facilities not meeting the above criteria, or any additional accessory structures or facilities must meet or exceed structure setback standards.