2004 - Lk Mtka Cons. Dis. Public Hearing

Home Browse Search

e Kenneth Peterson Public Hearing Memo, 4/8/04, Page 2 necessary by the Board, does not adversely affect the purposes of this ordinance, the public health, safety and welfare, and reasonable access to or use of the Lake by the public or riparian owners". In the review of the proposed application for variance from Code, the Board should ensure that the applicant has proposed practical difficulties and/or particular hardships that are caused by the application of Code. In addition, the Board should apply the following decision standards in the review of the proposed variance application: • Is the proposed use reasonable? • Would it be unreasonable to require conformance to the ordinance? • Is the difficulty of conforming to the ordinance due to circumstances unique to the property? • Is the problem one created by the applicant? • Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? In review of the proposed variance application, staff believes that the proposed use is reasonable for a 180'+wide site. The adjacent property to the south was granted a dock length variance on 103' of shoreline for a dock with a similar length. Because of this, I believe that it would be unreasonable for the applicant to come in conformance with the dock length limitation of 100'from the 929.4'shoreline due to circumstances unique to the property.Additionally,staff does not believe that the proposed dock would alter the essential character of the area. The adjacent Ryskamp property was granted a dock length variance with the ability to store two personal watercraft and two boats that are larger than the boats that the applicant is proposing to store. In compliance with MN DNR General Permit 97-6098, the MN DNR and the City of Orono were provided a copy of the proposed variance application on 4/26/04, with comments due in the LMCD office by 4/8/04. To date, staff has not received feedback from the City of Orono or the MN DNR on the proposed variance application. RECOMMENDATION Staff believes that the Board could direct the attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for approval of a length variance with shallow water as a documented physical hardship. The Board may want to include a restriction that all watercraft stored at the dock must be owned by and registered to residents of the site.