My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-28-2022 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1950-2024
>
2022
>
03-28-2022 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/24/2022 1:46:50 PM
Creation date
5/24/2022 1:45:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, March 14, 2022 <br />6:00 o’clock p.m. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Page 5 of 8 <br /> <br />BIG ISLAND DOCK LICENSE REQUEST – JOE THULL – Continued <br /> <br />Mr. Thull replied in the affirmative, noting it is a straight pathway and connects to the interior roads. <br /> <br />Johnson made it clear in the past that it is important to him that the City does not have an expense. In his <br />mind they are bending over backwards to help create a solution. He sees in the packet that along with 15 <br />years of dock installation and storage the City’s investment is about $34,905 and he is not in support of <br />any taxpayer money going to subsidize a dock that only allows for one slip. The burden of expense must <br />fall completely on the dock user. Johnson asked to understand the $12,000 expense for engineering and <br />surveying with Bolton and Menk. <br /> <br />Barnhart replied in the application with the LMCD the City was required to provide a survey. They <br />surveyed three dock sites to mark boundaries and generated a document; unfortunately through his own <br />interpretation of the LMCD rules he had to update the document a couple of times. That is where the <br />expense comes from. <br /> <br />Edwards noted the initial survey was about 84 hours of effort for three access points and the adjoining <br />right-of-way network. <br /> <br />Johnson walked through the various expenses associated with the site, noting the City investment is <br />approximately $8,500, including $1,000 each year for installation and removal. Johnson’s proposal is that <br />the Applicant must cover the City costs and also a yearly fee. <br /> <br />Mayor Walsh replied it would be like going out and renting a slip at a marina on the lake, which would be <br />approximately $7,500 for the summer. <br /> <br />Crosby agrees they need to focus on recuperating costs and packing in a generous depreciation rate. <br /> <br />The City Council discussed the item, including potential fees, dates for application, and the first option to <br />renew. <br /> <br />Crosby thinks around $6,000 per year is a good number, noting at a marina one receives electricity and <br />other amenities. He stated by the second year the City would be positive in costs. <br /> <br />Attorney Mattick stated tonight they are looking for direction regarding the language of the license <br />agreement and it will be brought back before the City Council. <br /> <br />Alice Reinmann, 440 Big Island, asked to speak. She represents her husband John and neighbors Jeff and <br />Olivia Hornig at 450 Big Island. Both families are on either side of the access point being considered this <br />evening. After much misinformation, they now understand that the dock is to be 20 feet long and 3 feet <br />wide and that the Thull lot is an unimproved, inland lot with no access to water or sewer and without a <br />structure. The Reinmanns and Hornigs have been misled and misdirected multiple times. In the fall they <br />were assured all seven right-of-way locations were being surveyed which did not happen. The Hornigs <br />attended a City Council meeting in 2021 opposing access for the dock and at the meeting they were told <br />by the mayor that he was unsure why they attended the meeting because their side of the island was not <br />being considered for access. The Hornigs asked why the Minnetonka Squadron was not brought up as a <br />viable solution for the Thulls and landlocked owners as there is a clear path to walk to their property. This <br />option costs the City zero time, zero money, zero maintenance, and removes safety issues for pathways to
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.