05-24-1999 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9 WINSTON LAW OFFICE • •C~H April 14,1999 Charles Kelly Compass Capital Management . 706 Second Avenue South, #400 Minneapolis, MN 55402 RE: James R. Renckens Subdivision Application Dear Charlie: I am writing to you, as you might have anticipated, to discuss with you further the James R. Renckens Subdivision Application and the outlot requirement imposed Monday night. The Coundl's decision has been troubling to my client and me ever since the vote went against us on the 50-foot oudot at the rear of the property. While I have appeared before the Orono City Council enough times to know the process, and while I have participated in the process, I always come away dissatisfied that a City Council hearing is not a good place to engage in a meaningful dialog vdth. respect to the issues that the Council may face on any particiUar evening. I would much rather sit down with Council members in a less formal environment with proponents and opponents alike and try to talk things out around a conference room table. That setting was not afforded us Monday night by reason of the process, and I understand the legal requirements that you are up against. Thus, let me take this opportunity to corrunence a less formal dialog. The rear outlot is a disaster for the property. You have heard our expressions of concern Mth respect to privacy, safety and security. You will also see copies of my letters to the other Council members, and partiailarly my letter to Mr. Flint where 1 again state my concern as a neighbor of the property. Further concerns involve our now hawng to leave the rear 50 feet untouched, as this area is to be a separate outlot, and carmpt be developed. That situation is exacerbated by our h.. dng to compute setbacks from the Southerly line of the outlot. Further, Mth this being a rear lot, my understanding is that the setback becomes 150% of the normal setback, and that, in this case, that would amount to 75 feet. In effect, the City’s taking of the 50 feet for outlot purposes creates a 125-foot wide no man’s land at the rear of the subjea property. But it is not just the loss of 125 feet or the resulting loss of use of the aaeage involved. What I would like you to do is to go back to Mr. Renckens' letter that is part of the City’s record. Jim's April 2 letter, copied herewith, well sets forth the arguments against the oudot. I would like you to focus on those aspects of the letter 4-120 IDS Center, 80 SoulK 8lli Street, Minneapolu, MX 55402 Tel: 6l2.341.9800 F«: 612.338.6351