Laserfiche WebLink
Thank you Christine for your reply and laying out the options. Matt and I will discuss it when he gets back from <br /> him business trip on Friday and let you know how we intend to proceed. <br /> Jennifer <br /> Sent from my iPhone <br /> On Sep 26, 2017, at 10:39 AM, Christine Mattson<CMattson@ci.orono.mn.us>wrote: <br /> Jennifer, <br /> Thanks for your email. I do understand your frustration, and hopefully we can resolve the issue as soon <br /> as possible. <br /> One option would be to apply for an after-the-fact variance to keep the concrete pad in the current <br /> location. As of September 1st variance applications are $275. After-the-fact variances require a double <br /> fee, $550. Attached is a variance application packet. One of the required submittals of a variance <br /> application is the Practical Difficulties Form. You would need to state your practical difficulty or <br /> hardship. In past we've found other property owners struggle with practical difficulties for accessory <br /> structures/improvements. <br /> The other option would be to contact the MCWD and see if they are willing to adjust the buffer in that <br /> area or are willing to do any buffer averaging on your property. We have a call into the Watershed <br /> district to see if this is an option, or you can contact Heidi Quinn yourself at 952-641-4504. <br /> Christine <br /> From:Jennifer Nyquist [mailto:nyquistil@gmail.com] <br /> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 2:59 PM <br /> To: Christine Mattson <CMattson@ci.orono.mn.us> <br /> Cc: Melanie Curtis<MCurtis@ci.orono.mn.us>; Denny Walsh <dwalsh2@ci.orono.mn.us> <br /> Subject: Re: 1125 Pine View Drive/2016-01339 <br /> Christine- <br /> I received your email about our concrete pad. I do not want to shoot the messenger on this but <br /> your email was most upsetting. <br /> Over the past 3 years, we have worked with the city, MCWD, the developers, had countless <br /> surveys and as-builts performed, had engineers and the city discuss, and analyze our backyard, <br /> gone through vacation easement proceedings and city council meetings to jump through all the <br /> hoops we are supposed to and NEVER once in all those discussions, meetings, reviews did <br /> ANYONE every mention or place on a survey or as-built the fact that there is a buffer to the <br /> MCWD buffer. The only concern ever stated or placed on the surveys or as-builts or in <br /> association documents has been the MCWD wetland buffers. The fact that there is a buffer to the <br /> buffer is ridiculous. <br /> 2 <br />