09-25-2010 Council Work Session Packet

Home Browse Search

C legaily binding before the most recent sale of that property and that sale price reflected that distinction from prior safe prices for that property. You also mentioned the option of issuing the homeowners in question a license to have the dock—but if that is not permanent—it really doesn't change the current dilemma. And how would that differ from the taxes we currently pay for use of the shore which we do not own? We would hope that a resolution can be found that would resolve the issue for us but would not necessarily have to change the status of the defined neighborhood and they would,therefore,not need to sign off on the resolution. Is it possible to take a"quiet title action"for a permanent easement for the three properties? If anyone does protest,it can then be explained that this action is simply formalizing what has been practiced for many,many years and that it does not change their status.And we have to note here,once again,that the other homes off the lake in the defined neighborhood do not utilize the type of access that is possible for them {picnicking on the shore,launching a kayak or row boat,etc.) because such�ctivities are more practical and enjoyable at lake locations that have public facilities-but if they choose to do so—there is nothing preventing them and the docks do not in any way hinder this type of access. I think we all recognize that without some formalization of how things have been for some time—and in today's market/economy,these houses could return to a"lakeshore slum"—the values would decrease as well as the tax revenues. This formalization is logical and beneficial to all concerned—the city,the three homeowners,and with no negative impact on the defined neighborhood. Again,we would like to sincerely thank you and the City of Orono for its efforts to resolve this issue. Kind regards, �°.�,��,i �,�-�"� Yousry and Karen Elshazly 3415 Crystal Bay Road Orono, MN 55391 952-471-8012 952-288-6239(Karen Cell)