Laserfiche WebLink
ADRIAN A. KEARNEY III 2S5 South Brown Rood <br />Long Lako, MN 55358 <br />(612) 473-4112 <br />TO: Mr. Charles Schroeder <br />Chairman: Orono Planning Commission <br />FROM: Adrian and Pam K'o.irney <br />Residents of 265 S. Brown Road <br />RE: Application j’M930 for variances to 255 S. Brown Road <br />May 5, 1994 <br />Dear Planning Commission, <br />We have lived in this house for ten months. Before we wrote <br />our purchase agreement, we did our homework on the lot for sale <br />ne.xt door. We accepted the fact that somebody would be interested! <br />in buying the lot. We found that the specific limitations placed <br />upon this lot would insure that the new owner would have to <br />construct a small enough house to comply with the guidelines set <br />forth by the D\R and the City of Orono. To us, this meant the <br />least amount of intrusion upon our property and privacy. We feel <br />that abiditig by these specifications is imperative to the <br />preservation of the protected tributary to Lake Minnetonka, and the <br />nature of the property itself. <br />Therefore in reviewing the oroposad plans of Mrs. Cost, we <br />have concerns regarding the follcwing: <br />1. 100* setback from the Long Lake Creek. <br />.As all rivers do, this one meanders and curls. With water levels <br />changing from season to season and year to year, we fear that a <br />building constructed within the 100 foot setback will be damaging <br />to the integrity of the creek. A more reasonably sized house would <br />fit into the space without the need for a varianve. Although this <br />is a five acre lot, a majority of it is wetlands, and these plans <br />show a disproportionately large house for the limited building <br />site. <br />Loss of trees due to the septic system insta11 at ion. <br />to preserve as many trees asIt is in both our best interest <br />possible to provide a visual barrier in between the two houses. <br />Specifically, there is one large, mature maple tree that would be <br />destroyed in the proposed septic site. Again, a smaller house <br />would require a smaller septic site, therefore fewer trees would be <br />lost. Witn everything scaled down in size, the least amount of <br />impact would occur, both to the property and to the neighbors.