My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-01-1976 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1976
>
03-01-1976 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/21/2023 2:48:08 PM
Creation date
4/19/2023 3:33:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
55
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
- ,«v-- <br />r <br />t -M. <br />■ J <br />SAMUEL a MARFELD <br />3025 HARBOR LANE <br />MINNEAPOLIS, MMNESOTA 55441 <br />553-1717 <br />February 20, 1976 <br />tir. Hank Muhich <br />Building and Zoning Director <br />Citv of Orono <br />P. 0. Box 66 <br />Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 <br />Dear Hank: <br />I am writing in response to your February 16 letter. In order to make the plan <br />more understandable, as you have requested, 1 am having cross section B—B drawn <br />to scale, and I will be sending that to you in just a few days. <br />Other than redrawing cross section B-B, the plans submitted are more than adequate. <br />They furnish all the information you requested in your previous letter and contain <br />a great deal more information than was requested at the time we met in Court. <br />The engineering, in order to furnish you these plans, has cost me $321.35 to date. <br />It should not bo necessary for me to spend any additional money to have the plans <br />drawn to a larger scale. I would suggest that, if you need them drawn to a larger <br />scale, you have tliat done, and submit a copy to me for approval. I will be happy <br />to cooperate with yot in this regard, but T cannot spend anymore money on the plans <br />In your request for the plans, you did not state what scale you wanted. For you <br />now to ask to have the plans redrawn to a scale that was never requested by you <br />previously is nothing more than pure harassment* <br />• « <br />At the time ve met in the courthouse, it was never agreed that I would locate the <br />trees in the open area. Even the judge questioned that request. Since the bank <br />has been cut down, there is no need for trees to be located in that area. The <br />possibility of erosion has been cut down to a greater extent than from what it was <br />previously, even without the trees being located there. <br />In my letter of February 10, I expressed ihe same concern I had expressed previously <br />that the city might continue to prosecute me ’inder the various ordiMnees which <br />control the 75 feet next to the lake. Mention ;-’as mude at the meeting in the <br />courthouse that I could be prosecuted fc^ every day of violation. It might be <br />possible for the city to find that excavation was done on days other than those <br />.j i^ifl iiir IT~
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.