Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MINUTES FOR MARCH 20, 2000 <br /> • <br /> (#2551 Thomas Randgaard, Continued) <br /> Randgaard stated he currently does not have enough room for his boat. <br /> Berg inquired whether the second dock owned by the Applicant will be removed. <br /> Randgaard stated the second dock is primarily a swimming dock, noting he is unsure whether he <br /> will be putting the dock in this year. <br /> Hawn inquired whether there was a requirement that docks be limited to one per parcel of property. <br /> Weinberger stated each dock requires a permit. Weinberger noted the second dock has not been <br /> issued a permit and should be inspected to insure that the dock does not encroach into the <br /> channel or setbacks. <br /> Hawn indicated in her view the Applicant should obtain a permit for the second dock. <br /> There were no public comments regarding this application. <br /> Hawn indicated to the Applicant that his neighbors did appear on a prior occasion when this <br /> application was before the Planning Commission and expressed a number of concerns regarding <br /> the dock extension as well as the number of parties that appear to be taking place on this property. <br /> Hawn stated she would like to see the Applicant take steps to improve the situation and become a <br /> better neighbor. <br /> • Nygard commented the LMCD does govern how many docks are allowed per feet of shoreline. <br /> Randgaard stated he owns approximately 600 feet of shoreline, with the second dock being permitted <br /> according to the LMCD. Randgaard indicated he will not be parking a boat permanently on the <br /> north side of the dock extension. <br /> Berg encouraged the Applicant to become a good neighbor. <br /> Nygard commented he personally measured the area and found approximately 75 feet between the <br /> dock and the opposite shoreline, and questioned whether the Applicant felt there would be problems <br /> with navigating the channel. <br /> Randgaard indicated in his view there should not be any navigational problems in the channel. <br /> Lindquist moved, Hawn seconded,to recommend approval of Application #2551, Thomas <br /> Michael Randgaard, 2765 Shadywood Road, granting of a conditional use permit to allow <br /> a 14 foot extension to an existing dock subject to the conditions outlined in the March 20, <br /> 2000 City Planner's Report. <br /> Weinberger stated he will assume the maximum boat kept on this dock will not exceed 40 feet. <br /> Hawn commented in her opinion the boat could not be larger than that without causing navigational <br /> problems. <br /> Kluth amended the motion, Hawn seconded, to require a permit be obtained on the <br /> second dock. VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br /> • VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION: Ayes, 5, Nays 0. <br /> Page 2 <br />