2011-00429-voided - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Melanie Curtis From: Melanie Curtis Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 11:33 AM To: 'Anna Hyland' Cc: Annas Husband Seamus Subject: RE: FW: 1815 Fagerness Pt Hello Anna. My responses to your questions are below in RED. MelAnie �uv�is � `�52.2�R.�62� � �ncuv}i5��i.ovono.mn.u5 From: Anna Hyland [mailto:annahyland42@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:44 PM To: Melanie Curtis Cc: Anna's contact Info; Annas Husband Seamus Subject: Re: FW: 1815 Fagerness Pt Melanie, Then your office is informing me that the contracted builder (from the of summer 2010) did not submit the deck plans with the original permit request to the Orono office. Another ball dropped by last year's contractor builder! I do have have some concerns regarding the copies you forward to me. I had not seen these before • The permit# 00410 copy you forward to me, which states that a site survey would be requested if there was additional build, was initialed by "CD" not me or my husband. The contractor builder's name is: Charles from KMS Associates. I question that a "contracted" employee can sign agreements for my property without my consent. This notation is not construed as an agreement. It is a courtesy advisory notification only. The signature is an acknowledgement by the builder that he has seen the advisory comment, not that he agrees to it on the property owner's behalf.The fact that the builder never provided the owner with a copy of the issued permit is between the owner and the builder. The fact that the City issued a permit with this advisory has no bearing on whether the owner is now required to provide a survey in order to obtain a permit for additional work not covered by the prior permit. • The permit# 00410 copy you forward to me has the owner listed as McKee, Mr. & Mrs. Melvin. This is incorrect. At the time of the permit request my husband and I were the property owner. The paperwork I have in my possession from KMS and Charles states "Hyland". The City's permit system defaults to the owner currently listed in Hennepin County tax records at the time of permit issuance. At the time, perhaps less than a month after you purchased the property,the County records probably still showed the prior owners' name. Perhaps we should have noted the inconsistency between what printed out on the permit and who was listed on as owner on the application. Perhaps the contractor should have also noted this inconsistency, as he was acting as the agent for the owners. Nevertheless, a permit was issued to the builder for the kitchen remodel including the addition over the existing deck. �