Laserfiche WebLink
Members of the City of <br />Planning Commission <br />Ms. Jeanne i4abusth <br />City of Orono <br />P. 0. Box 66 <br />Crystal Bay, Minnesota <br />August 31, 1989 <br />Orono <br />55323 <br />Re: Proposed Fox Bend Development (The "Proposed <br />Development") in the City of Orono (the "City"), <br />Prelir nary Plat Arplication No. 1411 <br />Ladies and Gentlemen: <br />As owner,- of property located near the Proposed <br />Development, we are writing. in part, to express our disappointment <br />with the revised Preliminary Plat for the Proposed Development <br />submitted by Sussex Square Development (the "Developer"). The <br />Planning Commission reviewed the initial Preliminary Ptat at a <br />public hearing on June 19, 1989. A'-. that meeting, the Planning <br />Commission withheld approval of the Proposed Development and <br />instructed the Developer to revise the Prelimina-y Plat in response <br />to the numerous concerns raised at the meeting. ime of the more <br />prominent problems involving the Proposed Development dis:issed <br />at the meeting include: (i) the excessive number of proposed lots; <br />(ii) ti. poss_bility that many of the lots fail to meet the 200 <br />foot minimum -width requirement; and (iii) concerns regarling soil <br />erosion and runoff. Unfortunately, the reviser Preliminary Plat <br />ithe "Developer's Revised Plat"), which is sc-eduled to be reviewed <br />by the Planning Commission at a special mee ing on September 6, <br />1989, still falls `ort of addressing the problems raised at the <br />June 19, 1989 me,�.,.ig. <br />In an effort_ to provide the Planning Commission with <br />a plat that addresses the salient concerns of the surrounding <br />landowners, that complies with the letter and spirit of the Citv's <br />subdivision regulations, and that, we believe, continues to ser4t! <br />the interests of the Developer, we have retained Robert Kost, a <br />land planner with 9RV, Inc. mr. Kost is very famil-a:- with the <br />City's subdivision ►e3ulations, and with other dovelo^.nLnt projects <br />in the City. We believe that the enclosed plat (the "Preferred <br />Plan"), desi-ned by L�;r. Kost, is super to the Developer's Revised <br />Plat for the following reasons: <br />1. The Developer's Revise' Plat: comprises 17 lots. <br />The Preferred Plan, by contrast, redurpi the number of lots <br />for the Prcrosed Development from 17 Lu 1`. Although tLs <br />