Laserfiche WebLink
<br />George A. LeTendre <br />Attorney at Law <br />386 North Wabasha Street <br />Suite 600 <br />St. Paul, MN 55102-1308 <br /> <br />Telephone (651) 227-8751 <br />Facsimile (651) 227-0411 <br /> <br />April 25, 2001 <br /> <br />SENT VIA FACSIMILE & U. S. MAIL <br /> <br />City of Roseville <br />Attn: Thomas Paschke <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Roseville, MN 55113 <br /> <br />Re: Joel & Lori Cheney <br />Setback Permit Application <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Paschke, <br /> <br />This letter responds to your telephone request of today concerning what other <br />issues my representative would raise at the ORC hearing pertaining to the above <br />referenced matter. Your concern was that the issues would require research on the part <br />of yourself or the DRC. The issues that will be raised will not require research, but will <br />question, among other things, the applicants' responses in the application. As an <br />example, the condition of i0.L is that: "The final building mass is consistent with that on <br />contiguous properties." Applicant responds with: "Yes - ramblers to the east, west and <br />north." Applicants proposed home is nearly twice as large as the home directly to the <br />east, and it is much larger than the homes to the north and west. Also, applicant has <br />stated that there will be living space on the second floor of the structure. This <br />statement, and the drawings of the home, show that the proposed home is not a <br />rambler and has considerably more building mass than homes on contiguous <br />properties. My representative will argue that condition i0.i. has not been met by <br />applicant. <br /> <br />Other issues that will be raised will be similar to that above. Also, I reserve the <br />right of my representative to raise additional issues in response to new information, <br />which may be provided by participants at the hearing. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />~B- <br /> <br />George A. LeTendre <br />