Laserfiche WebLink
7R0M Exhibit ^THU) 2. 10 ’00 14:42 OT. 14:26 NO. 2760044705 ? 2 <br />Page 1 of 3 <br />hiKSHAW & CULBEKl Sv. <br />AfrLnx)M.wiscoNSLN <br />ULLEV1LLE.ILUNOIS <br />•ItoOKPttlfi. WIVOOKSIN <br />CUAMTAION, ILLB<0I3 <br />CMlCAOO.ILUNOU <br />CRTSTAL I.AKI. lUINOlS <br />rr. LAUPVIOALt, FUORIDA <br />JaCKJOM VIUI, Fl/OWDA <br />lOLST, ILLOfOU <br />tttu,n.LWots <br />FLOitTDA <br />PimiAFFSArTOWMl <br />sumtioo <br />)sa aovni Mnnv <br />MINMEAP0U\ MEIHE3CTA IM« <br />hlbfax <br />Thonui J. Barrett <br />Dkect 612.334^676 <br />TB «cTftt<2ihin<^xMwlaw .com <br />MILWAUKW. WIBCON51H <br />MVHJrrmiuiKz>tAi4A <br />ftORWi,ILUWOI» <br />f nOKTO, <br />ROCICJORD.•T. Loui«. uaiouRt <br />JAN FFASC18CO, CAUTORNIA <br />APSmoFl£LD. flXIHOlS <br />TAiiPA,FlO»lI>A <br />WaUKIGAK. !LUN0U <br />January 6, 2000 <br />Rick J. Sheridan, Hsq. <br />Continental Property Group, Inc. <br />253 East Lake Street <br />Wayzata, MN 55391 <br />VIA FACSJUm ^ VNITF,T> STATES M4& <br />Re: Bradley Hoyt v. City of Orotto, et al. <br />Court File No.: 99-CV-I034 (JRT/FLN) <br />OttrFlle No.: 41288 ’75203J <br />Dear Rick; <br />This letter is written to further address the steps which your client should^e in order to <br />present iis case for a variance firom the requirementfl of the Orono City Ck)dc. rccjuircffien <br />Lises out of your cUem’s application for a Conditional Use Pennii for a waU w^t^hc constructed <br />near the shore of Lake Minnetonka without a permit. As wc hava dkeussed^e CxindiUonal Use <br />Pennit for which be made application requires conformity to aU parts of the City C^de. Smcc me <br />City Code prohibits hardcover or structures in the area of shore land wit^ 7 5 feet of the lake, it wmbe neceasary for your client to sock and obtain a variance from those ordinance in order to bnng the <br />retaining wall within the requirements of the Code. The Ordinances in question are; <br />Section 10.22. Subdivbbn I and 2 <br />Section 10.55. Subdbnskm 8 <br />Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(L) <br />Section 10.56. Subdivision 16(C)(5) <br />The Planning Commission, at its November 15,1999 meeting, recommended denial of the <br />• request for a Cbndhiinal Use Permit, because it concluded that the waU ^uld not have been <br />snuited a variance under the code and because it had difficulty understanding the nature of e <br />erosion problem which it was claioaed that the wall would prevent. The City Council remand e <br />to Planning Commission in order to allow yOur client to make an appropriate record of c <br />need for variance from the requirements of the Code. <br />The City of Orono has a long atanding policy against allowing hardcover or stnictura wiahm <br />75 feet of the lake. The City’s comprehensive plan also discourages devices like a wall on the <br />nCMDftV 479T/ 1<SM3142.v2 L'7/IOM A » AMWHIW IWaiJMMO mJflWIC»«Al. CDMOtATIOJO <br />Page 9 of 1 1