1994-02-03 Memo, LMCD App for Variance

Home Browse Search

r_s are combined; and the board finds that a hardship exists within the meaning of code 1.07 even if the two sites are considered as one. The owners of the Revier and Amundson Sites have agreed to combine their dock use areas and use their combined shoreline for a single common dock facility of sufficient size to allow each to store one watercraft. The board finds that the use proposed by the applicant and the owner of the Amundson Site is reasonable. Given 41 feet of shoreline, it is reasonable to expect to be able to store two boats along a straight dock, 40 feet in length, as proposed by the applicant. The board finds that it would be unreasonable to require conformance to the ordinance given the converging lot lines which create a dock use area which is not sufficiently large, even by combining the two parcels, for reasonable dockage or boat storage. The difficulty of conforming to the ordinance is due to circumstances which are unique to the property. It is not created by a desire of the applicant, but rather results from the combination of the facts that the dock use area is defined under the LMCD code by reference to setbacks from lot lines extended into the lake and that the lot line extensions in this case converge as they enter the lake, resulting in a dock use area which is unreasonably small for 41 feet of shoreline. The owner of the Runkle property has objected to the granting of a variance on the ground, among others, that the hardship is created by the applicant. Mr. Runkle asserts that the applicant acquired his property after the LMCD code was in effect and therefore the hardship is self created. The board finds that the hardship is not self created in any sen3e that would preclude the board from granting a variance in this case, as more fully explained in the attached memorandum which is hereby made a part of this order. CLL63201 LK110-• 2