Laserfiche WebLink
Memo <br />July 21, 1992 <br />Page 2 <br />For Minnetonka Boat Works, complete changeover would be in <br />the range of $40,000 to $50,000 just for materials, and <br />significant additional expense for labor due to the <br />integration of services and utilities into the dock system <br />(electricity, water, gasoline, etc.). <br />The problems with breakup of styrofoam billets by ice action <br />might be minimized by proper management, i.e. pulling the <br />spud poles, careful monitoring of ice conditions, etc. <br />'n/ *■ <br />Comments from members of the public present indicated that they <br />agreed the styrofoam problem does exist. Leo Bullock suggested that <br />floating conta'*nment booms be required during the interim for those <br />marinas maintaining unprotected styrofoam. Robert Wilson commented <br />to staff after the hearing that his company installs docks, and has <br />had litter and disinteg^ ',tion problems with bead styrofoam on <br />occasion. <br />Please review the draft minutes of the public hearing. <br />t' <br />V: r*.Planning CcwBiasion Reconnendation <br />w-Planning Commission on a vote of 3 to 1 recommended that all <br />future use of non-encased styrofoam for dock flotation be banned. On <br />a vote of . in favor, 1 abstention. Planning Commission recommended <br />that existing users of such product ahould be required to eliminate <br />the non-encased styrofoam. <br />1; ■ <br />Planning Commission generally felt that there should be one final <br />deadline date, rather than incremental reductions each year, and <br />further suggested that five years would be a more reasonable ^ime <br />table • <br />Planning Commission agreed that the ordinance should be applied <br />to both private and commercial docks throughout the entire City and <br />that the ordinance apply all to floating structures, not just docks. <br />This would then include swim platforms, floating waDcways, etc. <br />Regarding enforcement. Planning Commission suggested that during <br />the five year "grace period", strong public relations and public <br />education efforts be commenced to inform residents and commercial <br />operators of the requirements and deadline dates. With a strong <br />information program, voluntary compliance is more likely and will lead <br />to less need for strict enforcement after the deadline. It was also <br />suggested that a fine be imposed for non-compliance, and for marinas <br />that licenses be withheld if compliance is not gained. <br />wm -- -J