04-24-2000 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#2549 - Lovelace, 220 Big Island April 21,2000 Page 2 access point. However, Access H has a recent severe erosion problem that will be addressed by staff in ihe near future, i.e. by doing some physical repair of the access and bringing to Council a proposal for limiting the use of this access point. The City received a letter from the Liljemark's, owners of Lots 34-35, on April 19 (Exhibit B) opposing the use of Access C as an access point for this applicant. That letter brings up a number of points worthy of comment: Access C is about 200 ’ from the NE comer of applicants property. Access D, the other location where docks for inland lots may be feasible, is about 300 feet from the SE comer of applicant’s property. Staff has no knowledge of the applicant’s intended building site within his property, which is about 150 wide and about 1000' long. -Staff has yet to find any record of formal Council action prohibiting motorized vehicle traffic on the Island, although such an action would seem appropriate given the apparently increased level of motorized vehicle traffic on the Island. The two residents referred to as “already using” Access C “who have property adjacent to the site” have no formal right to have a dock at Access C, nor have we received a request for such use. There was no “already permitted dock site” for applicant’s property at the time he purchased it. The only property for which the Cit>- has formally granted access under Section 10.31 Subd. 5 is the property at 230 Big Island (Parcel 3 on Exhibit D-1) at Access D. Staff has had a surveyor stake the north and south lines of Accesses C, D and H which are the three most used access points to the Island. It was found that the dirt road at access C is mostly on private property (Lot 39) and hence users of that access for vehicular access likely would be trespassing. This does not preclude the use of the access for 1 or 2 seasonal docks, and staff believes there is sufficient walking access adjacent to the wetland area to make this a viable dock location. Staff Recommendation It has been staff’s intent to not only reach a conclusion on the Lovelace request but to provide some direction for future access requests. Based on our review of the access sites, the topographic and other limitations of each site, and the locations of the inland lots which may request access in the future, staff recommends as follows; Inland parcels 1 and 2 (Scheftel, Lovelace) should be allowed dock access at Access C. Inland parcel 3 should continue to be allowed a dock access at Access D. Inland parcels 4 thru 8 should be assigned future access at Access D if they request it, subject to LMCD regulations. Inland parcel 9 could be served by a dock at either Access D or Access E; E is closer but presents more topographic difficulties.