1994-02-03 Memo, LMCD App for Variance

Home Browse Search

••• The board finds that the variances 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 facility will not be 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 pined Revier and Amundson Sites will not create unreasonable congestion in the Mr. Runkle asserts that a variance may not be granted to Mr. Revier which allows him to install 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 line between the ' unkle and the Revier Sites. He argues that there is no hardship which justifies a vark .ce adjusting this lot line because a dock has been in place in the past which did not extend over the extended lot line. 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 line between the Runkle and Revier Sites. However, this dock was not in compliance with the requirements of the LMCD code and extended substantially into the dock use area of the Kauffman Site. Likewise, Mr. Runkle urges the board to plan agreed upon by Mr. Revier and Mr. Runkle in an attempt to resolve this hrough mediation. That agreement, however, also avoided crossing Mr. Runr s extended lot line at the expense of the Kauffmann Site, and Mr. Kauffmann apparently declined to approve the proposed settlement. CLL63201 L9110-4 3