05-22-2000 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'e ■ We have been told by the city and the LMCD that rental of these boat docks is absolutely not allowed. • Despite knowing about the rental problem in 1984 and our reiterating the rental situation in 1999 and again this year, to our knowledge the city has never taken any action to restrict dock rental by non-resident dock owners. • We want the city to vigorously enforce the no rental restrictions beginning with the 2000 boating season. Docks Have Moved From Intended 198.S Daviime Recreational Use to Becoming Habitable Docks and EssentialtV Weekend Homes ‘il- Hi o • With the addition of electricity, the non-resident docks have v'eiy ’ large boats that are essentially used as weekend homes by many of the non-resident dock owners. • Shore power Enow's them to have the t>"pe of boats that can be used essentially as weekend homes and that ’s increasingly how the boats are used. ■ The larger more valuable boats allowed by shore pow’cr are also attractive targets for crime and tiiere have been numerous break-ins on the non-resident boats. Theft and crime were also referenced in the 1984 city memo. ■ Because of the crime attracted to our neighborhood by the large, expensive non-resident boats, they have installed a high intensity anti-crime light. • One of the boats, R Tonka Toy (owned by Ginther), in the past installed a motion activated burglar alarm. The alarm malfunctioned, causing it to go off at all hours of the day and night, completely disrupting the neighborhood. Since Ginther did not live in the neighborhood and we had no w'ay to contact him, the neighborhood was disrupted for weeks until he returned from vacation and turned off his alarm system. • There have been a number of instances of trees being diseased and d>'ing or trees coming dow’n by storm in the non-resident dock lots. Since their entire dock is in the 0-75 foot range, it is our understanding that legally these trees need to be replaced. None of the trees that were taken down or came down have ever been replaced. ■ In 1999, a flagp>ole was added to one of the non-conforming dock prop>erties. We’d like the flagpole removed since this clearly was not there in 1985 and is an expansion. One flagpole mav lead to others.• ■ Essentially, the addition of electricity has resulted in the non-resident dock owners being able to use their 35 plus foot boats as weekend homes on Lake Minnetonka while paying $200-$300 per year in property taxes for the privilege of having a “second home” on the lake. SPECIFIC ISSUES RELATING TO GINTHER AND AULT We feel the above information relating to the non-conforming dock lots and the long history of problems and issues is essential in looking at the specific issues related to Ginther and Ault. Our specific issues relative to this lot and the conditional use permit they’re seeking are as follows: ■ Two Boat Docks on One Non-Conforming Lot - It is our understanding that only one dock is allowed per non-conforming lot. If this is the ordinance in Orono, we would ask that a condition of the permit be that one of the two docks on this property be removed. ■ Boat Slip Rental - For many years, we understand Ault has rented his boat slip. We want the city to enforce a strict no rental policy’ on this dock property and actively and aggressively enforce this policy.