LMCD/application/variance/meeting minutes. etc

Home Browse Search

Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Regular Board Meeting August 28, 2002 Page 3 canopy and dock structure would comply with Code for side setback requirements for both the dock and the canopy. • Two Code Sections apply to the proposed variance applications. First, Code Section 2.01,subd. 1 requires that docking and watercraft storage be contained within the authorized dock use area for these sites. He reviewed the Code requirements for these sites, noting that none of them were fully contained within their authorized dock use areas. Second, Code Section 1,07 allows the Board to consider applications for variance from Code, provided the application of the Code causes the applicant a practical difficulty or a physical hardship. A dock length, side setback, and adjusted dock use area variance is required for the Pacovsky site. The proposed adjusted dock use area variance has been supported by the Hendrickson/Windenburg site; however, there has not been direct communication ftom the abutting neighbor to the east, Paul Blomberg. A dock length and side setback variance is required at the Hendrickson/Windenburg site. A dock length variance is required at the Finney site. • The City of Orono and MN DNR were provided a copy of both variance applications. The City of Orono stated that they recommended approval of the proposed variance applications, provided the neighbors can agree on an altemative site plan. No feedback had been received from the MN DNR. • In considering the proposed variance applications, the Board should take into consideration the written comments from Mr. Blomberg. If the Board is comfortable with the proposed variance applications as submitted, staff�lieves that the Board could direct LeFevere to prepare Findings of Fact and Order for approval of the applications as submitted. He recommended those Findings of Fact and Order should be prepared for each site individually. • He entertained comments or questions from the Board. Wert asked if each of these sites had a primary residence. Nybeck stated that each site had a primary residence. Foster asked for comments from the public on the proposed applications. Mr. Paul Blomberg, 3180 North Shore Drive, stated that he was the abutting property owner to the east of the Pacovsky site. He reviewed comments he e-mailed to the District on 8/3/02 and 8/4/02, noting that he had some concem about the proposed variance applications for the three abutting sites to his west. At the Pacovsky site, he was not opposed to the proposed dock; however, he would prefer that the boat be stored on the west side of the dock rather than the east. He reviewed Code pertaining to the authorized dock use area for his site, noting that he believed it would be within his authorized dock use area if a boat were stored on the east side. He believed that there were altemative dock arrangements that would allow the three neighbors to achieve what they desire,which he stated that he would support. He expressed support that his authorized dock use area would take the brunt of the adjusted lot lines needed for the proposed variance applications. He asked the Board if they had any questions for him. Skramstad asked Blomberg if the dock with four slips in the 8/3/02 e-mail was hypothetical. Blomberg stated that this dock was hypothetical; however, he would be allowed to install it based on his review of the Code without a need for a variance. He added that installing the dock as proposed in the hypothetical would not work with the proposed variance application for the Pacovsky site. Foster stated that the District has established the jurisdiction in the past to adjust extended side site lines when concave conditions exist, noting that it sometimes involves the adjustment of several properties.