Laserfiche WebLink
D) Approval of the use of an accessory structure such as a dock, <br />without a principal structure would establish a negative <br />precedent in dealing with a similar request for lots of similar <br />size. <br />20. The neighbor to the immediate east of Tract F, the riparian <br />portion of the property, already has a residential dock established on <br />the property. <br />21. Approximately 2 to 3 years ago, staff met with Mr. Gustafson, the <br />former owner of the property, to discuss the potential use of RLS <br />#1216 and the lot referred to as Exception. Mr. Gustafson was advised <br />that if all lots were combined that there was a potential for a <br />buildable lot as it appeared tha- the lot referred to as Exception had <br />appropriate lot width but that a survey was necessary to make such a <br />determination, in addition to the filing of the appropriate variance <br />application. <br />22. It was unknown at that time by the reviewing staff, that the <br />neighbor to the eaf.t not only encroached upon the Gustafson property <br />with a dock, but had constructed a portion of a garage and constructed <br />an access drive totally within the Gustafson's property. <br />23. The City Council reviewed this application at their July 11, 1988 <br />meeting and directed staff to draft a resolution of denial of the lot <br />area variance and further directed the City Attorney to review whether <br />the City h-^d the legal right to deal with the approval of the use of <br />the property for an accessory dock. Council further directed staff <br />that upon resolve of the legal issue they would further deal with the <br />matter of a reasonable use of the property that would now be deemed <br />unbuildable. <br />• <br />24. The property can be put to a reasonable allowed uss as the tracts <br />can be combined with the adjacent properties that remain under the <br />common ownership of the Gustafsons. <br />25. The applicants have failed to demonstrate by submitting <br />additional information to support their request, outside of the <br />original application, that would address the following concerns of the <br />City: <br />A) How will they achieve land access to the property and where <br />will they park their cars? <br />B) How will they protect the docks and the boats and equipment <br />stored at the docks? <br />Page 6 of 7