Farnes Combined - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

f) Approx 34.5 lakeshore footage at right of way in front of 230 does not conform to applicant proposal for 2 boats sharing 1 dock or two docks and two boats. Attached is LMCD ordinance, 210’s video/diagram submitted and mine. Summary: Applicant’s proposal for his 10 yr. 9K purchase transfers 130K wealth to ‘ him and tanks 35 yr. 45K purchase at 230 (intent of permit) down to 20K. I respectfully ask if his proposal to “revoke” 2038 may be harsh. It has no precedent, due diligence or communicating to affected neighbors etc. 2) 460 statement that it is a right of way with an access point used by all with lakeshore. a) See attached bona fide survey on the subject property. b) The right of way was conversion of a 10’ ally between 450 & 460 with no lakeshore. c) The strip (lot 2 and 3) is privately owned; was riprapped years ago in neighborhood project. Summary for applicant and planner for consideration in recommendation to deny/approve: Given a week for me to locate old relevant files and with planners help, this should be tabled if needed, denied and or applicant may withdraw application submitted with no diligence or data to validate it. From my perspective and observation the City has exhausted and gone above and beyond to facilitate application for a dock. Per 78‐567 (1) .permit application (did not) demonstrate a reasonable alternative and (does) unreasonably affect me at 230, other properties abutting right of way (six). I request planner to review llth hour work I submit along with others last week to deny a recommendation. It negatively impacts drainage and vegetation; includes mature trees for a permit, survey and proposal damage the established trench. Perhaps applicant may choose to review all the work and LMCD provided by neighbors to assess if his application is feasible And pursue to revoke 230 from a 35 year old permit assigned to 230 in unique situation since 1942 on grounds it is “harsh” language, etc. doing the neighborly thing to withdraw it. It may be wise for applicants to perform their own due diligence prior to official application submission. Hennepin site is friendly user BUT clearly states “as is”, not a survey or to be used as such….. 2038 Resolution is intended for 230 Big Island. Besides Hale family division in 1983 Orono was working to established ordinance 246 to increase lot size from 2 acres to 5 acres with 10.31 code attached. Nancy Farnes 230, 460 and 38 Big Island