Laserfiche WebLink
WINSTON LAW OFFICE <br />April 14,1999 <br />Charles Kelly . <br />Compass Capital Management. <br />706 Second Avenue South, #400 <br />Mirmeapolis, MN 55402 <br />RE: James R. Renckens Subdivision Application <br />Dear Charlie: <br />I am writing to you, as you might have anticipated, to discuss with you further <br />the James R. Renckens Subdivision Application and the outlot requirement imposed <br />Monday night. The Council's decision has been troubling to my client and me ever <br />since the vote went against us on the 50-foot oudot at the rear of the property. <br />\Vhile I have appeared before the Orono City Council enough times to know <br />the process, and while I have participated in the process, I always come away <br />dissatisfied that a City Council hearing is not a good place to engage in a meaningful <br />dialog with respect to the issues that the Council may face on any partiodar evening. <br />I would much rather sit down with Council members in a less formal envirorunent <br />with proponents and opponents alike and try to talk things out around a conference <br />room table. That setting was not afforded us Monday night by reason of the process, <br />and I understand the legal requirements that you are up against. Thus, let me take <br />this opportunity to commence a less formal dialog. <br />The rear outl t is a disaster for the property. You have heard our expressions <br />of concern Mth resj. ect to privacy, safety and security. You will also see copies of my <br />letters to the other Council members, and partiailarly my letter to Mr. Flint where I <br />again state my concern as a neighbor of the property. <br />Further concerns involve our now having to leave the rear 50 feet untouched, <br />as this area is to be a separate outlot, and cannot be developed. That situation is <br />exacerbated by our having to compute setbacks from the Southerly line of the outlot. <br />Further, with this being a rear lot, my understanding is that the setback becomes <br />150% of the normal setback, and that, in this case, that would amount to 75 feet. In <br />effect, the City’s taking of the 50 feet for oudot purposes creates a 125-foot wide no <br />man’s land at the rear of the subject property. <br />But it is not just the loss of 125 feet or the resulting loss of use of the acreage <br />involved. What I would like you to do is to go back to Mr. Renckens' letter that is <br />part of the City’s record. Jim’s April 2 letter, copied herewith, well sets forth the <br />arguments against the oudot. 1 would like you to focus on those aspects of the letter <br />4420 IDS Center, 80 SoutK 8tK Street, Minneapolii, MN 55402 Tel: 6l2.341.9800 Fax: 612.338.6351