HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A Placement of Personal Docks
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #:
PREPARED BY:
AGENDA ITEM:
DISCUSSION:
""'\';<
4646 Dakota Street S.E.
Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MARCH 17,2008
9A
JANE KANSIER, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A POLICY GUIDING THE PLACEMENT OF
PERSONAL DOCKS IN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to request approval of a pOlicy guiding the
placement of personal docks in the City of Prior Lake.
History
The City Council created a Dock Task Force in September, 2007, consisting of
two members of the Planning Commission (Alan Billington and Dan Ringstad)
and two members of the Lake Advisory Committee (Harry Alcorn and Dan
O'Keefe). The purpose of the Task Force was twofold: 1) draft a policy
regarding dock placement for noncommercial property, and 2) consider how
the language regarding marinas might be clarified for enforcement purposes.
The Task Force met three times over four months to discuss this issue. The
attached draft dock policy is the result of these efforts. The draft policy was
considered by the Planning Commission on February 11, 2008. The Lake
Advisory Committee was also scheduled to review the policy in March, but the
meeting was cancelled.
The Planning Commission recommended there be public input on the
proposed policy. A public information meeting was conducted on March 5,
2008. Sixteen people attended the meeting, and four people provided input.
The following bullet points summarize this input:
. The major concern seemed to be the idea of docks and boats encroaching
into the area in front of other lots. There should be some sort of
mechanism for resolving disputes between neighbors.
. The number of boats should be based on the amount of shoreline.
. Some consideration should be paid to views and open space.
. An ordinance requiring a minimum amount of lakeshore width for a dock
should be adopted.
. Use the "bay method" to determine extended lot lines.
The staff also received written comments from Rick Keeney, suggesting an
ordinance requiring a conditional use permit to allow more than one dock (see
attached).
Current Circumstances
The policy, as drafted, is intended to be advisory, rather than regulatory. It is
not enforceable by the City. The policy is also intended to be general enough
lbJE:
www.cityofpriorlake.com
"Ph6W~~5~:44'7. ~8~O)Y) Fax 952.447.4245
"""'<"";"
to address most but not all circumstances.
The basic premise is that one riparian property owner may not infringe on the
rights of another. It establishes a dock setback of 5 feet from the side lot line,
measured at the ordinary high water elevation. It also restates the current
Zoning Ordinance requirement that boat lifts and rail systems must be located
at least 10' from a side lot line. If this same setback is applied on the lake side
of the lot, it means the lift would have to be located away from the side lot line,
but a moored boat could actually project over the extended lot line (see
illustration below). This setback attempts to assure the dock itself does not
cross over the extended lot line. With some of the narrow and pie-shaped lots
around the lake, this may be the best that can be hoped for.
5'
10'
r:>ock
:4
LiB
F=--"~,C_-~~
The policy also parrots the DNR rules, which place the number of mooring
places on a dock to six boats. Any dock for more than six boats requires a
DNR permit. The good news is this does provide a maximum number of
watercraft per dock. The bad news is that it does not limit the number of docks
per property, so a property owner could install multiple docks. Finally, the
policy does not limit watercraft on private docks to those owned by the
property owner, so if this policy is read alone, without the Zoning Ordinance or
DNR rules, it may appear that mooring boats owned by others, or renting
mooring space at single docks is permissible.
The Task Force concluded the best way to try to manage the rental issue, at
least initially, would be through an educational process. We can use the
Wavelength, the City website and other resources to advise dock owners that
renting dock space is considered a commercial use, and would require a
permit from the DNR and the City.
ISSUES:
For the most part, the proposed policy is not an enforceable guideline; it is
essentially a "good neighbor" policy and relies on cooperation by all property
owners. In some instances, where there is a public health and safety issue
with the placement of docks, the City can call on the DNR conservation officer
to review the dock placement and order any necessary changes. In other
instances, especially where the issue is more aesthetic or nuisance related, it
may be more difficult to resolve the issues. At the public informational
meeting, Lake Advisory Commissioner Harry Alcorn seemed to suggest the
LAC would be a place to voice those issues and try to resolve those disputes.
Implementing the policy will also require publication. Some of the ways staff
intends to notify the public of the policy include:
. Notice in the Prior Lake American
. Notice and policy on the City website
. Inside City Hall
. E-News announcement
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
As long as the proposed policy is not adopted as an ordinance, there is little or
no financial impact. Should this be adopted as an ordinance, there would
more than likely be staff costs involved in the enforcement of an ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Council has the following alternatives:
1. Approve the Draft Dock Policy as written or with any suggested changes.
2. Deny the policy.
3. Continue this item, and provide the staff with direction on the issues that
have been discussed.
The staff recommends Alternative #1.
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
A motion and second approving the "Policy Guiding Personal Docks in the City
of Prior Lake."
DRAFT
March 10,2008
POLICY GUIDING PERSONAL DOCKS IN THE CITY OF
PRIOR LAKE
This policy is intended to guide the size, location and use of single docks or
mooring areas located on individual riparian lots on Prior Lake and on the portion
of Spring Lake within the Prior Lake city limits. Multiple docks, such as
homeowner's association docks, and commercial docks or marinas are regulated
under the City of Prior Lake Zoning Ordinance and the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources rules. Multiple and commercial docks require permits from
the City, the DNR, or both entities before they can be established.
RIPARIAN RIGHTS I GOOD NEIGHBOR
Under most circumstances, lakefront properties have a right to reasonable
access to the water, including placing modest docks and watercraft lifts in the
water to provide that access. These are referred to as riparian rights, using a
legal term for shoreline. Access can only be limited for important public reasons,
such as safety, navigability, etc. All riparian properties share the right to a
reasonable dock space. Access to the water may not be limited or impaired by
the placement of docks and lifts. This policy provides guidance to help neighbors
share the shoreline and maintain the right to a reasonable dock area.
DEFINITIONS
Dock: A narrow platform or structure, whether temporary or permanent,
extending toward the water from the shoreline, whether floating or not, including
all "Ls," "Ts" or posts which may be a part thereof, whether affixed or adjacent to
the principal structure. A dock may provide access to moored watercraft or
seaplanes or to deeper water for swimming, fishing, or other water-oriented
recreational activities. (Minnesota Rules 6115.0170, subp. 7)
Single Dock: An authorized dock which abuts a single family residential site, for
the storage of six or fewer restricted watercraft. .
Multiple Dock: Any dock or mooring area constructed or maintained for the
storage of seven or more restricted watercraft, other than commercial docks.
Homeowner's association docks are included in this category.
Commercial Dock: A dock or dock structure used in conjunction with a
commercial or other revenue producing business enterprise including a private
club.
Marina. Either an inland or offshore commercial mooring facility for the
concentrated mooring of seven or more watercraft or seaplanes wherein
1\07 files\07
D
March 10,2008
commercial ancillary services common to marinas are provided. (Minnesota Rules
6115.0170, subp. 20)
Watercraft: Any vessel, boat, canoe, raft, barge, sailboard, or any similar device
used or useable for carrying and transporting persons on the lake.
Restricted Watercraft: Any boat or vessel for use on or stored on the public
waters on the Lake except for unrestricted watercraft as defined in this section.
Unrestricted Watercraft: Any boat or vessel for use on or stored on the public
waters of the lake which is:
a. 16 feet or less in length and unmotorized; or
b. 16 feet or less in length and which uses a motor of 10 horsepower or less;
or
c. 20 feet or less in length and unmotorized, and which is propelled solely by
human power.
Boat Lift: A structure or device, without walls that is designed to lift watercraft
above the level of the public water or ground elevation when not in use. This
definition also includes rail systems or track systems extending from the land bed to
the shore. A boat lift may be designed to include a watercraft canopy. (City Ordinance
1101.400)
Riparian Lot: A lot directly abutting a lake or waterway.
INSTALLATION GUIDELINES ApPLYING TO SINGLE DOCKS
The rule of straight line extension of property lines into the water will provide
good guidance in some situations, especially where the shoreline is relatively
straight and the lots are platted with regular boundaries. However, this method
fails to balance the lake access rights of all owners in situations of sharp
shoreline curves, inlets, coves, bays, channels, or in situations of unusual
property plats. On Prior Lake, these unusual situations are very prevalent due to
the shape of the lake and the nature of the original platting of much lakeshore
property in the late-19th and early-20th centuries. In these situations, the method
of extending the property lines, perpendicular to shore, or to the center of the
lake or bay may provide better guidance. In this method, lot boundaries are
determined by estimating an extension of the lot boundary into the water
perpendicular to the shore from the point where the lot line reaches the shore.
In all cases, these rules only offer guidance. The absolute rule is that all riparian
lot owners have a right to access the water and a reasonable use of the
shoreline, including placing docks and watercraft lifts to gain that access. These
rights must be respected by all riparian lot owners when establishing access to
the water. This policy establishes limits and rules for size, setbacks, and uses of
1\07 files\07
2
D FT
March 10,2008
dock structures that are in compliance with DNR rules, and respect the rights of
riparian property owners.
No dock, mooring or other structure, nor the watercraft using the structure, shall
be so located as to: (1) obstruct navigable waters, (2) obstruct reasonable use or
access to any other dock, mooring or other structure authorized under this
ordinance, (3) present a potential safety hazard, or (4) come within ten feet of
any other structure. No dock, mooring area or other structure shall be located or
designed so that it unreasonably or unnecessarily encroaches on other docks.
The following are DNR required limitations for the size of single docks. Any dock
exceeding the following limitations requires a permit from the DNR.
. The structure, other than a watercraft lift or watercraft canopy, is not more
than 8 feet wide and is not combined with other similar structures so as to
create a larger structure.
8'
8'
. The number of mooring slips on the dock is six or less.
The following are guidelines to be used for the placement of single docks:
. The dock should be no longer than needed to achieve its intended use: to
reach navigable water depth.
. The dock should be located at least 5' from any side property line, as
measured at the Ordinary High Water Elevation.
1\07 files\07
:3
FT
March 10,2008
BOAT LIFTS AND RAIL SYSTEMS
Boat lifts, rail systems and track systems installed after May 29,2004 must be
setback at least 10 feet from a side lot line (City Zoning Ordinance 1102.800).
1:\07 files\07
4
From: Rick Keeney [Rick.Keeney@efi.com]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 1 :33 PM
To: Ross Bintner
Cc: Jane Kansier
Subject: Regulating Docks via Conditional Use Permit
Ross,
The other night, I mentioned I had proposed the concept of regulating docks to default to a very strict "one dock,
centered" rule. What I had forgotten about my idea was that the process was based on Conditional Use permits:
1. Change the zoning so that residential docks are an "Allowed Use", but tightly restricted to something that will almost
never cause a problem. For example 20' set-backs from both sides. If a lot's frontage is too narrow for that (less than
50'), the permitted use would have an exception to always allow for at least one dock, but it would be required to be
substantially centered on the lot's shoreline and be limited to one boat slip or lift.
2. Additional dock use beyond the above setbacks or minimum limit for narrow lots would be a "Conditional Use" with
permits issued on a case by case basis.
3. Conditional Use Permits for docks would be issued by essentially the same process as other conditional use permits,
but the process would be streamlined. A simplified application form would be provided and could include a place for the
neighbors to indicate their support for the permit.
4. All applications meeting a well-publicized deadline would be reviewed at a dedicated meeting of the Lake Advisory
Committee or perhaps the Planning Commission each spring. Those without controversy (signed by the neighbors,
reviewed by staff) could be passed on a consent agenda with minimal delay. All others would be reviewed on a case by
case basis against some established criteria such as safety, public welfare, impact on the neighbors, environment, etc. .
5. Objections by neighbors could be heard at that time and taken into consideration and deliberation, but the reviewing
City body would maintain the actual determination of issuing the permit. Permission or objection of the neighbors
would not control - only provide information for the decision. I think this is an important legal requirement.
6. The Conditional Use dock permits could have a multi-year expiration to reduce the frequency they need to be renewed
and reviewed.
7. Enforcement would remain only on a complaint basis, so those people who have no issues with their neighbor
unofficially in all practicality would not have to hassle with getting a permit.
8. If there is a complaint and upon investigation by the enforcement officer, the offender does not have a conditional use
permit for the location oftheir dock, they could be cited and ordered to comply. If they do not move their stuff, the
owner could be fined at that point.
9. Alternatively, the owner who is the subject of a complaint could apply for a Conditional Use Permit at that time, and
the reviewing body could make a determination if the use merits a permit or perhaps some compromise or mitigating
requirements could be added. The public (complaining neighbors) would have a forum to make their case and an
administrative process would be in place to resolve 90% of the disputes.
10. As with other Conditional Use permits, they could be reviewed upon any complaints, and subject to revocation
should investigation indicate there be issues that would so warrant.
11. An application fee could be collected to help fund the process.
I think the process would meet all legal requirements:
The City is not unnecessarily depriving any property owners of their riparian rights - they are regulating the process so
as to prevent infringement on neighboring property rights and to ensure the well-being and safety of the public. In all
cases, riparian owners would be assured of access reasonable to the specific situation.
The City would be asserting its authority over the process through the use of the existing Conditional Use permit process
which has held up in the courts as being reasonable and legal tool to solve this type of problem.
The City can legally delegate its authority to issue the permits to a committee such as the LAC or Planning.
Denied applicants can appeal to the City Council and thence to the Courts if they wish to push it that far.
Enforcement of city zoning and Conditional Use permits is something the City already does.
Administrative application fees are a time-honored and legal method to help fund the process and enforcement.
February 11, 2008
Planning Commission Minute
impervious surface. Kansier replied they did and went on to explain w staff s
recommendation would be and what the Planning Commissio cally looks at.
MOTION BY BILLINGTON, SECOND B Z, ACCEPTING THE 2007
REPORT AND FORWARDING I THE CITY COUNCIL.
ed both summary reports will go before the City Council at their next
C. Dock Task Force Report.
Planning Director Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated February 11, 2008,
on file in the office of the City Planning Department.
The City Council created a Dock Task Force in September, 2007, consisting of two
members of the Planning Commission (Alan Billington and Dan Ringstad) and two
members of the Lake Advisory Committee (Harry Alcorn and Dan O'Keefe).
The purpose of the Task Force was twofold:
1) Draft a policy regarding dock placement for noncommercial property, and
2) Consider how the language regarding marinas might be clarified for enforcement
purposes.
The Task Force met three times over the last four months to discuss this issue. The
policy, as drafted, is intended to be advisory, rather than regulatory. It is not enforceable
by the City. The policy is also intended to be general enough to address most but not all
circumstances.
The basic premise is one riparian property owner may not infringe on the rights of
another. It establishes a dock setback of 5 feet from the side lot line, measured at the
ordinary high water elevation. It also restates the current Zoning Ordinance requirement
that boat lifts and rail systems must be located at least 10' from a side lot line. If this
same setback is applied on the lake side of the lot, it means the lift would have to be
located away from the side lot line, but a moored boat could actually project over the
extended lot line. This setback attempts to assure the dock itself does not cross over the
extended lot line. With some of the narrow and pie-shaped lots around the lake, this may
be the best that can be hoped for.
Any dock for more than six boats requires a DNR permit. The good news is this does
provide a maximum number of watercraft per dock. The bad news is that it does not limit
the number of docks per property, so a property owner could install multiple docks.
Finally, the policy does not limit watercraft on private docks to those owned by the
property owner, so if this policy is read alone, without the Zoning Ordinance or DNR
L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN021 I08.doc
7
February 11,2008
Planning Commission Minutes
rules, it may appear that mooring boats owned by others, or renting mooring space at
single docks is permissible.
The Task Force concluded the best way to try to manage the rental issue, at least initially,
would be through an educational process. We can use the Wavelength, the City web site
and other resources to advise dock owners that renting dock space is considered a
commercial use and would require a permit from the DNR and the City.
Comments from the Commissioners:
Perez - Why not limit of the number of docks on the property? Kansier explained the
task force felt if a person had a larger shoreline, why not be able to put more docks in?
Perez - Were there any comments from the City Council on the draft? Kansier said the
Council really didn't recommend any changes at the workshop. They asked the same
questions we struggled with on the task force and listened to the conclusions.
Lemke thanked Commissioners Billington and Ringstad for their services on the task
force and asked if they wanted to add any comments.
Ringstad said the whole process felt like an exercise in futility. First to answer Perez's
question, why didn't we have a limitation on the number of docks? The bottom line is
unfortunately this is a policy not an ordinance and unenforceable. It is also the same
questions the Planning Department has received over the past several years with
neighbors feuding over dock placement location. In many cases it's whoever the first one
out with their dock is the winner. Those things are still going to occur. But now we have
a policy they can refer to. The brutal reality is it's not enforceable. But it's a start.
Ringstad said it was nice to work with staff, Commissioner Billington and the LAC along
the process.
Perez as far as the process - Would we want public input at some point? Some kind of
workshop or open house? Kansier said it is wide open at this point.
Fleming wanted to point out a minor change above the first bullet.
Lemke said he was not sure what more public input would help.
Billington - I think the key is communication with the public and people understand what
the policy is. Make sure the news is out.
Lemke - If two neighbors want to place their boatlifts side by side on the property line to
maximum their beach, are they technically in violation? Kansier said they would be in
violation and could apply for a variance because it is part of the Zoning Ordinance.
Lemke - Is someone going around with a tape measure to regulate these? Kansier
responded we don't have any dock police. The only boat the City owns is a canoe.
Ll08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN021108.doc
8
February 11, 2008
Planning Commission Minutes
Lemke since we are on uncharted water here I am going to assume we are recommending
the policy and will forward this on to the City Council.
8.
Announcements and Correspondence:
None
9. Adjournment:
The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.
Connie Carlson
Recording Secretary
L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN021108.doc
9