My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02614
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2600
>
pf_02614
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:59:13 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 12:12:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2614
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
1281 JOSEPHINE RD
Applicant
KADRIE, CHUCK
Status
APPROVED
PIN
032923120007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
174
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
<br />LAW OFFICES OF <br />PETERSON, BELL, CONVERSE & JENSEN, P.A. <br /> <br />Erwin A. Peterson <br />Robert C. Bell <br />Willard L. Converse <br />Roger A. Jensen <br />Kurt F . Walther <br />James C. Erickson*t <br />Carol A. Baldwin <br />Caroline Bell Beckman <br />Mitchell W. Converse <br /> <br />3000 Metropolitan Centre <br />333 South Seventh Street <br />Minneapolis, MN 55402-2441 <br /> <br />Telephone (612) 342-2323 <br />Facsimile (612) 344-1535 <br /> <br />NORTH SUBURBAN OFFICE <br />310 Rosedale Towers <br />1700 West Highway 36 <br />Roseville, MN 55113-4015 <br /> <br />January 26, 1996 <br /> <br />REPLY TO MINNEAPOLIS <br /> <br />Mr. Steve Sarkozy <br />City Manager <br />City of Roseville <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Roseville, Minnesota 55113 <br /> <br />Re: Claimant: <br />Our Pile No.: <br /> <br />Charles :Kadrie <br />1011.124 <br /> <br />Dear Steve: <br /> <br />Confirming my phone discussion with you, Judge Flynn did enter <br />an order for judgement which is completely in our favor, finding <br />that the partially completed deck is in violation of the Shoreland <br />Management Ordinance and of the Zoning Code, and that plaintiff <br />must remove it. I don't know whether plaintiff will appeal or not. <br />A copy of the complete Findings of the judge and a copy of my <br />letter to his attorney is enclosed. He has ninety days from entry <br />of judgement to appeal. <br /> <br />A word about Finding no. 12, holding that the previous <br />criminal matter is not a bar to Roseville's present civil action. <br />It might superficially appear as if two judges did opposite things. <br />But that isn't so. Judge Smith (who had the criminal trial) was <br />required to construe the ordinance strictly against Roseville, was <br />prohibited from considering the policy factors involved (ecological <br />and aesthetic considerations that are at the core of the Shoreland <br />Management Ordinance), and had to find beyond a reasonable doubt <br />that the on grade patio deck was not an appurtenance. All those <br />things make it a sometimes difficult task to win one of these cases <br />on a criminal basis. In this civil case, the court rightfully <br /> <br />* Also Admitted in Wisconsin <br />tCivil Trial Specialist, Certified by the Civil Litigation Section of the Minnesota State Bar Association. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.