My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Re: variance application
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
N
>
North Shore Drive
>
2640 North Shore Drive - 09-117-23-13-0009/42 0007
>
Correspondence
>
Re: variance application
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 5:48:56 PM
Creation date
10/11/2017 1:35:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
House Number
2640
Street Name
North Shore
Street Type
Drive
Address
2640 North Shore Dr
Document Type
Correspondence
PIN
0911723130009
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
View images
View plain text
Mike Gaffron <br /> From: Kent Hodder[kent@methodder.com] <br /> Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 12:51 AM <br /> To: Mike Gaffron <br /> Cc: Christine Mattson; Dave Pemberton <br /> Subject: 2640 North Shore Drive/Zoning Application#12-3559 <br /> Attachments: admin@ci.orono.mn.us_20120531_093255.pdf <br /> Hi Mike, <br /> I received the request for more information to complete the application for the variance <br /> consideration for the building of an accessory building on my residential property today. <br /> While I think I understand the spirit of the request and the fact that the city's intent is to <br /> enforce the rules for the good of the city and it's residents and the community as a whole, I <br /> am hoping there is another way to accommodate those goals. <br /> To fulfill what I and the survey company believed to be the requested documentation, I have <br /> already spent a great deal of mo�ey towards this variance process. As far as I can tell, the <br /> only reason I even need a variance is because the rules don't take into account that although <br /> my home is 2/10 of a mile from the street, and since I don't live on a waterfront- I must <br /> request a variance to construct the accessory building between my home and the street- <br /> despite the logical nature of my placeme�t request based upon the long narrow nature of my <br /> 3.5+ acres. <br /> While disappointing, this makes some sense that I am getting snagged by a rule desig�ed to <br /> prevent issues that wouldn't necessarily take situations like mine into account. I understand <br /> it's the way these things work. <br /> But what I don't understand is the need to do these additional survey details on the entire <br /> property when only a portion seems impacted by my proposed accessory building. I've been <br /> told that this detail is going to drive my survey investment even higher and likely miss the <br /> application deadli�e. <br /> I understand that my survey company is surprised too, as they tried to be thorough in what <br /> they produced - including discussing the project with the city prior to doing the current <br /> survey work. <br /> Dave Pemberton, the surveyor from Sathre- Bergquist in Wayzata, is planning to contact <br /> your department today and see if there is a way to accomplish what the planning department <br /> i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.