Correspondence re LMCD variance application

Home Browse Search

, / Eric 8� Laurie Berg Public Hearing Memo, 11/9107, Page 3 Staff believes that the problem is partially created by the applicant because the proposed width of the dock and boat lift is excessive for a lot with 20' of shoreline and the applicant had purchased the property approximately 30 years after the LMCD side setback regulations were first adopted.A dock and boat storage can be continued from this property if at least one of the adjoining site owners agrees to adjust the side setback requirements or even agrees to maintain a common dock between the two properties. LMCD Code Section 2.01 Subd. 2b, allows the authorized dock use area in cases of sites 50' in width or less in existence on February 2, 1970 may be expanded to a side setback limitation of five feet, provided that such setback in no way impairs access to neighboring docks. There are many sites around the lake that qualify for this side setback exception and appear to be maintained in a safe manner that does not interfere with adjacent dock use areas or activities. Staff was able to find a couple similar situations where there were lots platted after the 1970 "grandfather" date that were granted side setback variances by the LMCD Board to reduce the side setback requirements from 10'-15' to 5'. With these approved variances,the LMCD Board restricted the width of the dock, width and length of the boat and only allowed one boat to be stored on the dock. The variances also stated that the dock constructed at the sites must be a single straight dock with no "L" or"T". 3. Code Section 2.02 outlines the number of restricted watercraft that can be stored at a residential site based on the amount of 929.4' shoreline and the ownership of the watercraft. Specifically, it allows: 1) General Rule-one restricted watercraft for each 50'of shoreline(without reference to ownership), 2) up to two restricted watercraft may be kept at a dock for a residential site in existence on 8/30/78 (without reference to ownership), antl 3)three or four restricted watercraft are allowed at a residential site if#here is one and no more than one single family residential structure at the site and all watercraft are owned and registered to the resitlents of the site. Prior to the replat,the original 100' lot would have only been allowed two restricted watercraft for both houses on the lot because it would not have qualified for the four boat rule. The replatting of this site 1978 benefited these two new lots from a boat density standpoint. Staff is unsure how many watercraft the applicant is proposing to store at the proposed dock. The site plan shows a 10'X 14' lift located on the south side of the dock. Staff has requested dimensions of the proposed boat to be stored on the tift but the applicants have not provided these details. In the past,the Board has typically restricted the number of restricted watercraft that may be stored at a site that requires a variance from LMCD Code. I believe that this should be the case in this proposal and the Board should decide how many and the size of the restricted watercraft that is appropriate at this site. Staff believes that the width of the proposed dock and lift is excessive for a lot that was created in 1978 with 20'of shoreline, Staff maintains that this is not a legal, non-conforming use. However staff is supporting the most generous side setback requirement of 5'. Anything greater should to be done through mutual consent from the adjacent neighbors.