Laserfiche WebLink
request a variance to construct the accessory building between my home and the street- <br /> despite the logical nature of my placement 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 designed 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 deadline. <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 /> needs-without revising the survey for the entire property. It is my hope that you & he will be <br /> able to come to a less expensive solution to fulfill the needs for the variance application. <br /> Thank- you for your time and consideration. <br /> - Kent Hodder <br /> Resident and applicant <br /> 2640 N Shore Dr, Orono, Mn. <br /> z <br />