01-10-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The board finds that the veuriances granted do not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed dock is in a residential area, and the nature and size of the proposed faciUty will not bo out of scale with other residential dock and boat storage along the shoreline. The Runkle and Kauffmann Sites each have approximately 100 feet of shoreline. Therefore, adding storage for two boats at the combined Revier and Amundson Sites will not create unreasonable congestion in the ar^* Mr. Runkle asserts thst s variance may not be granted to Mr. Revier which aUows him to instal. a dock or store boats on the Runkle side of the extended line between the Runkle and Revier Sites. This question is more fully addressed in the attached memorandum. For the reasons explained in the memorandum, the board makes no finding as to the respective real property interests of the owners of the Runkle and Revier Sites. Mr. Runkle stated that he would agree to a dock plan which would not involve crossing the extended lot Une between the Runkle and the Revier Sites. He argues that there is no hardship which justifies a variance adjusting this lot Une because a dock has been in place in the past which did not extend over the extended lot Une. It appears to be true that a dock has been constructed in the past at the Revier or Amundson Site which did not extend beyond the extended lot Une between the Runkle and Revier Sites. However, this dock was not in compliance with the requirements of the LMCD code and extended substantiaUy into the dock use area of the Kauffmann Site. Likewise, Mr. Runkle urges the board to adopt a plan agreed upon by Mr. Revier and Mr. Runkle in an attempt to resolve this issue through mediation. That agreement, however, aiso avoided crossing Mr. Runkie's extended lot line at the expense of the Kauffmann Site, and Mr. Kauffmann apparently declined to approve the proposed settlement. CLL63201 UUlO-4