Laserfiche WebLink
Larkin <br /> /POHOPI s>y� Larkin Hoffman <br /> 11ATTTOca NN..E�Y SS <br /> est. 19 5 8 8300 Norman Center Drive <br /> Suite 1000 <br /> Minneapolis,Minnesota 55437-1060 <br /> GENERAL: 952-835-3800 <br /> FAX 952-896-3333 <br /> wte: www arkinhof nan.com <br /> July 20, 2018 <br /> The Honorable Mayor Dennis Walsh and <br /> City Council Members <br /> City of Orono <br /> 2750 Kelley Parkway <br /> Orono, Minnesota 55423 <br /> Re: Opposition to Sketch Plan and Proposed Variances for William and Susan Dunkley for <br /> Property at 2709 Walters Port Lane <br /> Dear Mayor Walsh and City Council Members: <br /> This letter is written on behalf of Greg and Kelli Hueler in opposition to the above matter. As <br /> you know, the Huelers are immediately adjacent to the Dunkley property and have testified on a <br /> number of occasions regarding their significant concerns about the development proposed by the <br /> Dunkleys. This letter is written to set forth their objections to the current sketch plan, as well as <br /> the illegal expansion of use of the private driveway. <br /> Discussion <br /> As noted in the City staff report,the Dunkleys were unsuccessful in obtaining a lot line <br /> rearrangement which required a number of variances and was not supported by the Planning <br /> Commission or City Council. This application, submitted last year, was withdrawn by the <br /> Dunkleys who then pursued the combination of the two parcels into one property record at <br /> Hennepin County so they could expedite permitting of a massive addition to their existing home. <br /> Still, the addition required variances to the average lakeshore setback,the 75-foot setback and <br /> hard cover limitations. <br /> Now, a year later, the Dunkleys are again pursuing a plan that is similar to the plan that was not <br /> supported by the Planning Commission or City Council in 2017. There is no legal basis for a <br /> variance to create the new lot with a nonconforming house pad because the actions of the <br /> applicant created the need for the variance. As a matter of law, a practical difficulty or hardship <br /> cannot be created by the actions of the applicant. <br /> Legal Analysis <br /> A lawful variance requires a showing of unique circumstances not created by the landowner. See <br /> Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6(2) (holding that"practical difficulties"requires the landowner to <br /> show"the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property[.]"); see also <br /> Continental Prop. Grp. V. City of Wayzata, No. A15-1550, 2016 WL 1551693, at#1 (rejecting <br />