Re: bldg permit fees - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

D ,� OCT 16 Scott K. Goldsmith ` ,`` L 265 Old Crystal Bay Road North Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 -y 14 October 1987 Mr. Tom Jacobs City of Orono 1335 Brown Road South P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: Building Permit # 000297 265 Old Crystal Bay Road North Dear Mr . Jacobs : On 8 October 1987 , I renewed the building permit for the construction of my residence at 265 Old Crystal Bay Road North. For the renewal , I paid a Base Fee of $1 , 228 . 00 , and a Surcharge of $208.75, for a Total Fee of $1, 436 .75. This additional fee represents an extreme financial burden to me . I also do not think that this result was intended by Section 12. 05, Subd. l of the Municipal Code. I recognize that the ordinance does state that a full new permit fee should be paid if a certificate of occupancy has not been issued. But that section also makes clear that the reason for the fee is "to reimburse the City for ongoing and more than normal number and cost of inspection services. " My original building permit fee ($2, 475. 00) fully covered the City' s costs for this work and these inspections. There have been no unusual requirements on the time of City inspectors and personnel on this project. Furthermore, only the footing and framing inspections have been performed at this time. Under these circumstances, my payment of any portion of this new fee represents a windfall to the City and just seems unfair to me . I could understand some additional fee if it could be shown that the City has been or would be subjected to the expenditure of costs or time beyond what it ordinarily would have had under the original permit. But I do not believe that is the case. Accordingly, I would respectfully request a full refund of the $1, 436 .75 fee. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours,