07-11-1977 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�---�—' � Page 33 � � � July 7� 1977 � Members of Orono City Council Orono, Minnesota � , Dear Council Membere: � � • , � When I return to secure final approval of my subdivision (Burger's Bayside) at 3700-3�50 Bayside Road (your file �255), I request � your approval of access rights to the lake for both parcels of land in this subdivision. Such approval will require reversal � of your earlier decision to allow such rights for only one of the two properties. My reasons for asking this reversal are: � t(�!;;d BUkGER , ;�uo ��,rstoE koao 1. Professional real estate appraisers indicate that the value � �_,��J;cf�c.;;E, F,INN. of the property Z wish to sell is diminished by $10,000 � - without this lake access right. This is an undue hardship -4351 for you to impose on me. � - -- 2. Owners on both sides of my subject properties, most of them � with much less acreage and r�ch Iess frontage or no frontage . at all on Bayside Road or the lake, have access rights. Specifically, to the east of ine, each of four lot holders with 2 or less acres each have docks in � or approved; two of these four property awners have no frontage on the lake or on the road at all. All four of their docks are within about 400 feet of ny S east property line. To the west of my properties, three private docks are within 400 feet of my west property line, and within the 400 feet of shoreline � just to the west of this, five more private docks exist. This means that within 1200 or so feet of the ends of the 500 or so feet of shoreline opposite � �y properties there are 12 private docks--roughly one dock per each 100 feet � or so. In these circumstances it seeuLs inequitable and an umaarranted incon- , sistency to deny either of my two properties access to the lake. � 3. I own and pay taxes on four platted lots on the Iake (south) side of County 84 � (Bayside Road) opposite my subdivision. I have paid taxes on these lots every year since I acquired them. My predecessor ot•�ner acquired these lots precisely � to assure access to the lake for this frontage. These Iots never have been • (and, in fact, cannot be) used for anything but access to the lake; they are under water. Access to the lake over these properties via a sctiall private � dock would seem to be a reasonable and proper use of the sites. Denying such use denies any reasonable use of the property to me. � 4. As a practical matter, because of the rock formations in the lake and the shal- � lowness at this point, our intention is to negotiate with the buyer of 3700 Bayside Road, now served by a dock, an arrangement to use that dock along with � him when the proposed house at 3750 Bayside Road is built and occupied. Such • an arraagement would avoid any additional dock construction. However, inde- pendent and segarate access rights are essential for both sites to meet any � contingency that would sake such an attempted arrange�nt impossible or im- practical to effect or to keep in effect in the future. � For these reasons, then, I respectfully request approval of allocation of lake � access rights for both of the tracts in Burger�s Bayside, 3700 and 3750 Bayside • Road. � Thanks in anticipation of your consideration and favorable action in this matter. � Sincerely, � � �