My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Re: code violation
Orono
>
Property Files
>
Street Address
>
P
>
Park Lane
>
601 Park Lane - 06-117-23-41-0048/1
>
Correspondence
>
Re: code violation
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2023 5:27:59 PM
Creation date
6/14/2018 2:57:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
x Address Old
House Number
601
Street Name
Park
Street Type
Lane
Address
601 Park La
Document Type
Correspondence
PIN
0611723410048
Supplemental fields
ProcessedPID
Updated
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
, , <br /> , � <br /> Christine Mattson <br /> From: Christine Mattson <br /> Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 10:51 AM <br /> To: 'Kris Rudd' <br /> Subject: RE: Rudd 601 Park Lane <br /> Kris, <br /> I understand you have a copy of what you believe is the "final survey". This is not consistent with the approved <br /> plan on file with the City. The resolution which was recorded with Hennepin County and filed with the chain of <br /> title is the final approved plan in the City's opinion (previously attached). This survey is attached to the <br /> resolution document you signed following the Council approval. Based on documentation in our file, this is the <br /> correct and final approved plan. Staff does not have the discretion to agree with you and allow the building to <br /> remain based on your survey. In short, because it is not in compliance, the shed must be removed by May 1, <br /> 2011. <br /> If you would like to appeal staff's interpretation of this document before the Council you must submit a letter in <br /> writing to Melanie Curtis along with $100 appeal fee. Your letter must be received two weeks prior to the <br /> desired Council meeting date (Council meets the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month), we would present your <br /> appeal letter to Council and staff would prepare a report. You will have an opportunity to speak directly to the <br /> Council about the situation. <br /> As I stated above, unfortunately staff does not have the authority to change the official plan and in our opinion <br /> the plan attached to the resolution is the official plan. <br /> Please let me know if you have any further questions. <br /> Christine Mattson <br /> Planning Assistant <br /> 952-249-4620 <br /> � / <br /> �i� ,M�ba� <br /> -----Original Message----- �� 1 � Y ' (� <br /> From. Kris Rudd [mailto.krisrudd@mchsi.com] '� �`` j/� <br /> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 2:11 PM � <br /> To: Christine Mattson � \1 � (�i � <br /> Cc: Melanie Curtis �� � � " . <br /> Sub�ect: Re: Rudd 601 Park Lane S k� � �I� C�� <br /> �� � �3v - <br /> Christine, 1 <br /> As I believe I stated in my previous email to Melanie, the si � be <br /> the same as the 'final' survey in my files. To my understanc ,� qeen <br /> included in the resolution. I am attaching a copy of that surv .,�� areas that <br /> were removed. <br /> Looking through my files, it appears that on November 20, 200, .�.,e did an inspection prior to allowing us to <br /> proceed in pouring the footings. According to my husband, he and Bruce inspected the deck that was <br /> removed, as well as all of the brick walkways/patio portions that were removed. Our shed was in its present <br /> location when that inspection occurred. We never had intentions of removing our shed and I don't believe we <br /> would have been allowed to proceed in pouring our footings if our shed was suppose to be removed and we <br /> had not removed it. <br /> i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.