My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-21-1980 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1980
>
07-21-1980 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2023 12:06:12 PM
Creation date
2/15/2023 12:04:47 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
U. » . -V • —• 4 <br />.# <br />UA80N C. BECKER <br />2700 WHITE OAK CIRCLE <br />LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA S93S8 <br />•«U9M <br />wjmcBoumJuly 8, 1980 <br />REGISTERED -- RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED £Xt4* iC <br />Mayor Wm. Brad Van Nest <br />City of Orono <br />P. 0. Box 66 <br />Crystal Bay, Minnesota S5323 <br />Dear Mayor Van Nest: <br />At the Council meeting on June 30, 1980, you indi <br />cated that even if the easements held by Hannah and <br />Stewart were legal and valid as adjudged by a court <br />of law. Jack Rhode should still be allowed to build <br />on the lot at 1410 Bohns Point Road. You may recall <br />that when I asked why this issue was not being re <br />vetted to the Planning Commission for discussion, <br />there was a lot of "hemming and hawing" and Bruce <br />Malkerson made the statement that "the easement issue <br />did not ever come before the Planning Commission." <br />Jim Swenson, attorney for Mr. Rhode, noted at this <br />point that the matter had come before the Planning <br />Commission. <br />I believe it is procedurally incorrect for this <br />matter not to be referred to the Planning Com <br />mission for the foTlowing reasons; <br />a.I believe the minutes of the Planning Com <br />mission meetings will show that it was <br />discussed. <br />b.Mr. Rhode is really asking for a new variance <br />There are a number of changes in the original <br />variance which are substantial. As a new <br />variance, it is required by Code to go to <br />the Planning Commission (Sec. 32.330). <br />c.Even if the Code did not specify that new <br />and revised variances should be submitted <br />to the Planning Commission, it is only fair <br />that the Commission, in making its recommen <br />dation to the Council, consider the fact that <br />the easements which the City of Orono declared <br />i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.