re dock - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. t Mark Prueter/Richard Anderson Memo, 90120106, Page 2 2. Code Section 2.01, subd. 1 prohibits a person from using any area of the Lake outside an authorized dock use area for docking and storage of watercraft. An authorized dock use area is defined as "that area of the Lake which may be used for docks, moorings, boat storage, swimming floats, ski jump storage or diving towers, or which may be enclosed on three sitles for any of these purposes". These three sides are further defined by Cotle for maximum dock length and side setback requirements. The proposed permanent dock is not contained within the authorized dock use area of the combined site. Specifically, a portion of the swim platform on the west side of the dock does not meet the required 15' setback.The applicants have stated that they will remove this part of the dock this winter on the ice prior to de-icing the area. 3. Code Section 2.01, subd. 3 allows two or more adjoining site owners by mutual agreement adjust the side setback requirements between such adjoining sites or may use their combined authorized dock use areas for a single common dock subject to the following conditions: 1) combination is only permitted between or among owners of two or more non-commercial docks for the private non-commercial use of the site owners. 2) Only one dock structure may be constructed on the combined dock use areas. 3) No more restricted watercraft may be stored by any owner of a combinetl dock facility than woultl be permitted at that owner's site. Combination of dock use areas for a common dock requires continuing agreement between neighbors and can be removed at by either neighbor at any time. In this situation, residents typically install seasonal docks in the event their neighbor moves or their relationship changes. If either neighbor removed this agreement, each property owner would have to adhere to dock use area regulations for their separate lots. Staff has not traditionally approved permanent docks that require consent of neighbors to waive setback requirements. This is because it is more difficult and costly to remove or relocate permanent docks rather than seasonal. Staff has approved a few permanent docks for residents that own multiple residential parcels that do not meet the individual parcel setbacks. The applicants have stated that if the land were ever sold,the separate parcels would not be separated. It was explained that if the lots were sold separately,the permanent dock might have to be removed to meet the common lot line setback for dock installation and boat storage. A condition on these licenses is that the dock is only approved if the lots remain under common ownership. This permanent dock license should only be granted subject to continued mutual agreement between the adjoining site owners. 4. Code Section 2.09 Subd. 1 states "it is unlawful for any person to install, operate, maintain or use deicing equipment on Lake Minnetonka without a special license issued in accordance with this section ". 5. Code Section 2.09 Subd. 11 states that"Deicing Permits may be issued only for: a) Commercial docks; b) Dock facilities that were issued deicing licenses for the winters of 2002/2003, 2003/2004 or 2004/2005; and Permanent docks initially issued permanent dock permits between August 17, 2003 and August 17, 2004 ". Mark Prueter was issued an LMCD De-icing License for the winters of 1997/1998 to 200312004 and also the winter of 2005/2006 but they have expanded the dock from what was installed during those years. This Code Section does not address how to handle existing sites that expand their structure. This expansion may have minimal effect on the adjacent property owner to the east since this separate parcel is also own by Richard Anderson and the proposed dock is meeting a 75' setback.