Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Thomas Paschke <br />August 31, 1999 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />5. The applicant may attempt to argue that the great expense of removing the illegal portions <br />of the deck justify the issuing of the variance. However, the definitions of hardship that are <br />accepted in Minnesota specifically state that economics are not to be a consideration when <br />decisions are being made on variances. <br /> <br />I feel that there was no effort made to design a deck that would minimize the need for a setback <br />variance. It is our recommendation that the applicant be required to pUT!':ue various options that <br />would allow the deck to be constructed without the need for a setback variance to place the deck <br />closer to Lake Josephine than the existing home. I believe that your ordinance also requires <br />applicants to make this effort. <br /> <br />Please provide me notice of the outcome of this hearing as soon as a decision is made. The city's <br />action should be fully documented with findings of fact dealing with their review of hardship and <br />consideration of alternatives. <br /> <br />Thank you for giving the DNR the opportunity to comment on this matter. Please contact me at <br />651-772-7910 should you have any questions concerning these comments. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />l&~J. ~ <br />;;:~;h Richter <br />Hydrologist <br /> <br />c: Rice Creek Watershed District <br />Charles Kadrie, 1225 Josephine Road. Roseville, MN 55113 <br />