Re: home occupation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

March 4, 2003 City of Orono Orono, MN Dear City of Orono: We are writing this letter as requested to inform the city of Orono that there is no home occupation operated at our a�idres�: ?QQS �'nur.ry Rnad 6, Orone, MI�T. None of the home occupation regulations apply to us. According to the regulations listed in section 10.63, subd. 3, we are not doing the following: • We have no employees or associates working on the premise • We have no customers • We have no hours of operation • We have no shipments or deliveries • We do not sell or store products • We have no signage • We have done no alterations or modifications to change the appearance of our dwelling unit or accessory structures • We have no home occupation income ��:��u:�S+O �'.iT'L�'.�:IlY *2'��rlr rark?rl at n]_]r T�SlC�P7lCe, VVe COritaCteC�tlle Clty O�fiCe prior to the purchase in the spring of 2000. The man in charge told us "it was ok to park one such vehicle on our property, as long as we were the owner or operator". After we were given permission, we proceeded to buy the dump truck. We were contacted last fall regarding a home occupation. We again called the city office and spoke with Matt, and he again assured us "that it was permissible to park the truck on our property". We were sent a copy of the ordinances, including 10.61 with section G highlighted. In section G, it states, "one such vehicle may be parked at the residence of the owner or operator of said vehicle". I, Chuck Timm, work as owner/operator of the dump truck. I work for a broker, and earn a paycheck from that broker. We hope this letter will clarify any remaining questions to the city of Orono. T�ar��:you, iil adva�ice, fur your time and eifurt involved with our issae. Sincerely, � .�� ,,u .P.��' I,�' �i,��.�.=� Gerry and Chuck Timm 2885 County Road 6