Council hears concept plan for 2‑lot lakeshore division at 5212 Linwood Boulevard

At a council introduction required by city policy, Sarah Smith, the city planner, presented a concept for a two‑lot division of the parcel at 5212 Linwood Boulevard and introduced the property owner, Darren Kamier.

"I'm Sarah Smith. I'm the planner, and I'm going to introduce Darren Kamier," Smith said, describing the council‑introduction process as an early opportunity for public input and for the council to learn about a concept before formal land‑use or subdivision applications.

Kamier told the council he purchased the property recently and that the proposed north‑south split — yielding a lakeshore lot and a non‑lakeshore lot — “meets all the requirements” on the materials he provided. He identified one main complication: multiple recorded easements and a shared driveway that currently serves three houses. Kamier and Smith said the next step would be an updated survey (likely an ALTA) to identify easements, determine legal access and pin the front‑setback and lot‑frontage lines.

Planning details and shoreland rules: Smith reminded council that lakeshore lots must meet shoreland requirements described in the city’s implementation of state shoreland rules. She noted minimums cited in the concept review, including a typical minimum lakeshore lot size (10,000 square feet) and frontage requirements that will drive how a lakeshore lot is measured. Smith said the proposed lakeshore lot will not have frontage on an improved public street and would therefore need a variance or an access instrument such as a shared‑driveway easement.

Drainage and site constraints: Council members asked about stormwater and a rain garden for the downslope property; Kamier said there is a rain garden on the neighbor’s property and that the proposed layout could accommodate required stormwater controls and the ground‑cover requirements the city enforces for lakeshore lots.

Public outreach and next steps: Smith said the city mailed property owners within the required radius before the meeting and the applicant said he had informally discussed the plan with neighbors. The planner recommended survey work to clarify easements and rights, and she said that formal variances or legal instruments would be processed when the subdivision application is submitted.

Ending: Council took the concept under advisement; no formal approvals or votes on the subdivision were made. Staff will expect a surveyor’s ALTA, documentation of easements and a formal application if the applicant proceeds.