Laserfiche WebLink
August 25, 1987 <br />Michael Fahey, Mayor <br />City of Little Canada <br />515 Little Canada Road <br />Little Canada, Mn. 55117 <br />VipratlY1 <br />AUG 26 1987 <br />CITY OF <br />LITTLE CANADA <br />I am sending this letter in response to your mailing concerning an <br />assessment hearing associated with improvement 86 -15. <br />The property description is lots 1 thru 10 except the North 72.35 <br />feet and all lots 11 and 48, all in block 11, North Heights, Ramsey County, <br />Minnesota. <br />I do not believe that this property is assessable based on my under- <br />standing of the ordinances of the City of Little Canada. This concern was <br />voiced at an August, 1986 Council meeting and on two subsequent occasions <br />to Mr. Chlebeck, the City Clerk. On all of these dates I was promised that <br />a city engineer would have to survey my property and the city would contact <br />me with their findings. I have never been contacted, nor has anybody ever <br />looked at my property as far as I know. <br />The following is (was) the basis of my objection: <br />A variance was granted to subdivide Lots 1 thru 11 and lot 48, Block 11, <br />North Heights, Ramsey County, into two approximately equal lots 72.35' by <br />269'. The northernmost lot was subsequently sold and I constructed a <br />residence on my lot - the property in question. The variance was required <br />because the divided lots were not the minimum 75' frontage as required by <br />city ordinance. It was granted, however, because the square foot require- <br />ment of a minimum of 10,000 sq. ft. was met. It is my contention that my <br />back property cannot meet this aforementioned square foot requirement. <br />Without the aid of a survey, it is my belief that to obtain 10,000 sq. ft. <br />minimum lot, the back lot line would be too close to my residence. It is <br />my understanding that a permanent residence (house) must have a minimum <br />30' setback according to City Ordinance. I do not believe that this <br />property can satisfy city ordinance - (10,000 sq. ft. minimum, 30' setback). <br />The original variance was granted based on the fact that the lot did meet <br />at least the square foot requirement. Further variances would render the <br />property substandard in width, depth and square footage - virtually all of <br />the city's requirements. <br />For these reasons, I argued for a judgement that this property not be <br />considered a buildable lot. <br />Your response is greatly appreciated. <br />Page 12 <br />Yours Trul y, <br />� <br />/ <br />(1/1) ¢g3-/“,9 U <br />