Forest Lake planning commission denies Tim’s Marina expansion, cites parking and water‑quality concerns
Loading...
Summary
The Planning Commission voted to deny Tim’s Marina’s request to add docks and reduce parking after staff recommended denial and public commenters raised concerns about parking shortfalls, lake congestion and water quality; staff had offered a reduced alternative the applicant said it would accept.
The Forest Lake Planning Commission on April 12 denied Tim’s Marina’s request to add two docks (72 slips) and a variance to cut required parking from 252 spaces to 115, following a staff recommendation against the full proposal and substantial public comment about lake congestion and water quality.
Michael Birchland, city planning staff, told commissioners the marina is a legally nonconforming use in a single‑family zoning district and that the city served as the responsible governmental unit for an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW). Birchland said the site currently has 96 boat slips and 103 parking spaces and that city code requires 1.5 parking spaces per slip plus 20 trailer stalls; staff calculated the applicant’s proposal would leave the site roughly 137 spaces short of code and found no submitted analysis showing it is infeasible to provide compliant parking. "Based on those findings, staff recommends denial of the request for 2 additional docks and the associated parking variance of a 137 parking spaces," Birchland said.
The applicant, Joe Maslow of Tim’s Marina, said the family has run the marina for decades and that the business has shifted toward season‑term pontoon slips. Maslow told the commission he welcomed staff’s reduced alternative and said, "We're not going to push for '72, and go against staff's recommendation." He also said the marina has contributed funds to the Forest Lake Lake Association and that the new docks would be limited to pontoons to reduce impacts.
Public commenters raising objections included Kenneth Wood, president of the Forest Lake Lake Association, who cited a membership survey (204 responses) showing 71% opposed the expansion as submitted and urged the commission to adopt staff’s reduced alternative. "We support the proposed reduction in parking variance from a 137 spaces to 83 spaces," Wood said, arguing the smaller change better protects water quality and reduces congestion. Multiple residents expressed concern about sedimentation, shoreline erosion, increased boat traffic, trash and the precedent created by expanding slips on a lake already above DNR recommended boat‑per‑acre guidance.
Commissioner Susan Young moved to deny the parking variance, saying the application did not meet variance findings of practical difficulty; the motion was seconded and carried on a voice vote. Young then moved to deny the conditional use permit amendment on the same findings; that motion also carried. Chair Gerard and staff noted the applicant may appeal the commission’s decisions to the city council, which would schedule a de novo public hearing with public notice if an appeal is filed within the appeal period.
The commission’s denials leave open the staff alternative the body had identified — adding a single dock (36 slips) with a smaller variance and specific mitigation conditions taken from the EAW, such as limiting new slips to pontoon boats with four‑stroke engines and implementing mitigation measures for sanitary sewer and stormwater management. Maslow told the commission his preference was to work with staff’s alternative rather than pursue the full expansion.
Next steps: the applicant may file a written appeal to the city within the local appeal window; if appealed, the city council will hold the hearing and make the final decision.
