Laserfiche WebLink
. � <br /> Lake Minnetonka Conservation District <br /> Regular Board Meeting <br /> August 22, 2007 Page 9 <br /> Curtis Midthun stated that they had approximately 90' of lakeshore frontage. <br /> Babcock stated that the dock use area at the Midthun property, based on LMCD Code, would <br /> extend the same distance that they have lakeshore frontage, providetl it does not exceed 100'. <br /> Page asked the Midthun's if they would be agreeable to maintain the current extended side site <br /> lines and to allow for a five foot side setback from their common extended side site line with the <br /> Berg's. <br /> Curtis Midthun stated that he and his wife would agree to that. <br /> Harper stated that the neighbors could annually agree to a reduced side setback through a mutual <br /> consent agreement rather than an approved variance process. <br /> Seuntjens stated that although comments have been received from the applicants and the public, <br /> he believed it made sense to keep the public hearing open. This would allow the app►icants to <br /> consitler changes to their proposed site plan, in addition to allowing for further comments from the <br /> applicants and the public on any amendments. <br /> Babcock agreed with Seuntjens assessment; however, he believed that it would be beneficial to <br /> provide the applicants some guidance or direction on where the applicants might consider some <br /> alternatives to the current variance application. Alternatives recommended by Babcock included: <br /> 1) a reduced five foot side setback makes sense because the lot was created by a subdivision as <br /> a result of a governmental agency, 2) if an adjusted dock use area was proposed, the brunt of the <br /> adjustment should be made to 2967 Casco Point Road since these two lots were one until 1978, <br /> 3) the length of the dock should be between 50' and 60', with no "L's"or"T's", 4) there should be <br /> one boat at the dock with no canopy allowed, and 5) mutual consent for side setback adjustments <br /> should be allowed to continue for combined docking situations. With the amendments to the <br /> proposed plan that follow these five alternatives, he believetl that he coultl support this variance <br /> application. <br /> Tanner stated that it sounded like there was discussion that needed to take place relating to <br /> establishing boundaries for docking and boat storage, With the 2007 boating season nearly over, <br /> he believed that it might make more sense for the applicants to withdraw their variance application, <br /> work out the boundary issues with the abutting neighbors, and re-apply for a variance from LMCD <br /> Code during the winter months. <br /> Babcock stated that another option for the applicants to consider would be to sign an intlefinite <br /> waiver to the 60-day rule. <br /> Page asked Babcock to clarify what he would comfortable with regards to a side setback variance <br /> at this site. <br /> Babcock stated that he woultl be comfortable with a five foot sitle setback variance from both <br /> extended side site lines, similar to past policy action by the Board. This would not preclude the <br />