Laserfiche WebLink
Envelope Concept-Staff Feasibility Review, Page 2 <br />4} Fees could be charged by square footage of space occupied <br />by the dock structure to include maneuvering space between <br />dock sections, space between dock and shore and the area <br />beyond docks opening lakeward 1.5 times slip length. <br />Results of implementing the Dock Envelope proposal; <br />1) It would allow multiple dock licensees to make changes to <br />their dock configuration and BSU sizes and locations <br />without LMCD approval. <br />2) Licensees with grandfathered densities could change slip <br />sizes, and enlarge or add walkways within the envelope, <br />but not increase BSUs. <br />3) Inspections would be simplified, invoxving mainly boat <br />counts and conformance with setbacks, eliminating slip <br />measurements and checking BSU locations. <br />4) It would reduce multiple dock regulations and <br />restrictions. <br />5) LMCD would have to require as-built certified surveys of <br />all multiple docks, seasonal and permanent, which maximize <br />their envelope use to the setback and length limits, to <br />verify that the dock structures are within the DUA setback <br />and length limits. <br />6) A new as—built certified survey would be required each <br />time changes affecting the perimeter of dock envelope were <br />made to verify that the structure still meets setback and <br />length requirements. <br />7) This proposal would allow licensees to increase slip sizes <br />to the extend space is available within the envelope. <br />This could result in an increase in larger boats stored, <br />reducing the number of slips available for smaller boats. <br />Larger boats are known to contribute to the existing wake <br />problem. <br />8) Municipal licensees have substantial potential dock <br />envelopes into which they could expand. Mound Commons <br />docks could be assessed on a BSU basis rather than <br />envelope due to the unusual circumstances of their <br />extensive commons shoreline. <br />9) The fee structure would need to be changed. Resulting <br />fees would likely be reduced due to reduced staff time. <br />This would free staff to concentrate on other existing <br />priorities. Once the multiple dock income is reduced, it <br />may require additional sources of income or increase the <br />municipal obligations to fund these existing priorities. <br />Off—lake storage could be assessed on a per boat stored <br />basis as is presently done.