Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRe: garage addition/no permit zikl 0 k 0 7 =,�r r ;. CITY of ORONO �Pi ` ?t !�r Municipal Offices t i• 1' \1 4> Street Address: Mailing Address: 1(E$K02750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 November 22, 2005 Brian Kerber 740 Orchard Park Road COpy Long Lake, MN 55356 RE: Garage Addition without Permit Dear Mr. Kerber, I have discussed your garage addition with the zoning department and found the following issues. When the City granted you a variance to build a pole barn larger than allowed, you agreed to limit accessory buildings on the property to one 22' x 24' garage and one 36' x 60' pole barn (see attached resolution). Therefore, permit #P08573 was issued in error and is hereby revoked. You may request a refund in writing. Secondly, the City passed a new wetland ordinance in August of this year that classifies the wetland on your property as a "preserve" wetland. This requires a 50' buffer and an additional 20' structure setback from that buffer, for a total setback of 70'. After a site visit, it was determined that the roof extension and fence recently erected on your property does not meet the required 70' wetland setback, and actually lies within the 50' buffer (only your existing structures has a legal non-conforming status with the new wetland rules). Therefore, a deadline of December 19, 2005 has been established for removal of the structure. If this deadline is not met the City may initiate legal action. It is the zoning departments opinion that it is highly unlikely that a variance would be granted based on the substandard wetland setback, the agreement in resolution #4505, and the commercial use on a residential property. If you have questions regarding the variance process you can contact Janice Gundlach in this office at 952-249-4623. If I can be of further assistance please feel free to contact me. Si cerel Ly Oman Building Official LO/dml cc. Mike Gaffron and Janice Gundlach Enclosures Telephone(952)249-4600 • Fax(952)249-4616 www.ci.orono.mn.us •-,;;›,_14 '.'. ,..., , CD Brian Kerber RECENEC. 740 Orchard Park Rd. ��` 0 9 2005 Orono, Mn. 55356 December 8, 2005 ^,TY OF °RC* To the City of Orono, I ask that you please stop making me feel guilty about fixing up my property. When I purchased it, this place was a dump site. I removed 12 dump trucks full of junk, including 9 rusty old appliances and 10 dog houses, and list could go on. I have cleaned this place up, landscaped it very nicely, planted over 50 trees and have kept it very well maintained. Before I bought this property there were 2 different landscape companies running their businesses out of here on a lease from the previous owner,who themselves ran a commercial vegetable stand here. (The Ponderosa.) Before I made an offer to purchase this property five years ago, I went to City Hall to see if 1.) I could run a small landscape business out of here, and I was told I could. (This is a small husband & wife Lawn & prairie seeding business that is only open for 45 days in the spring and 45 days in the fall, in a good year. With the rain this year it was only 65 days total) We leave in the morning and return in the evening.(just like anyone else.) 2.) I also inquired as to how many square feet of out buildings I could have. I was told I could have up to 4000 sq. ft. I then purchased this property. I asked for a permit to build a 24' x 32'(768 sq. ft.) hobby shop, as I was going to destroy a 22' x 24'(528 sq. ft.) building that existed on the property, because the location did not work for me. I also asked to put up a 60' x 40' building (2,400 sq. ft.) Your own rules say that I could have put up 2-2,000 sq. ft. buildings, but that is not what I wanted. I wanted one alittle larger and one a lot smaller. I was denied both buildings. I applied for a variance, and after much time in meetings & money, finally you agreed to allow me to put up a 60' x 36' (only 160 sq. ft. over your 2,000 sq. ft. per bldg. limit) and said I could only rebuild the same size building I was taking down 22' x 24'. That was a mockery of your own rules. If you have a problem with your own 4,000 sq. ft. rules then change them. I bought this property based on those rules. On 5/10/05 you granted me a permit to build a deck and a 12' x 12' shed. It states that the shed must be 26' from the wetland. Because of this permit I have already purchased all of the materials for the shed. And I have added a number of additional tools to my hobby shop, anticipating that I would have a 12' x 12' shed to hold the items that would have to be moved to make room for my new tools, (band saw, table saw,jointer, router table and several others). I was temporarily storing things between my shop and the fence behind the shop under tarps. If you would have denied the 12'x 12' shed from the start this would not have been such a problem. But is would still have been a mockery of your own rules of the 4,000 sq. ft. total. But it is now too late to change the series of events that this permit started. In May of this year I went to City Hall to get a permit for some fences I wanted to put up. I was shocked to find out I did not need a permit, but learned that there were height restrictions on Cty. Rd. 6 (42") and Orchard Park Rd (6 ft). I rented a post hole digger in June and dug all my holes, and in early July (when my business is slow, as it is too hot to seed) I put up my fences. Including the one behind my hobby shop. A 0 I have always checked on the rules and regulations either by coming down to City Hall or calling to make sure I am doing things right, for my hobby shop, my barn, my deck, my fences& new septic system that I upgraded,(even though it did not have to be until 2010) and the shed. I have spoken to Lyle about questions I have had many times over the 5 years I have been here. I admit that I make a mistake when I put up a lean-to roof from my shop to the fence 6 ft. behind the shop. I was just trying to prevent the things I was storing out under tarps from getting wet. At the time I did not think of it as a building because it was only a fence with a cover, and I did not need a permit for the fence. I was stunned when someone from the city knocked on my door and said I needed to go down to City Hall and get a permit for it. I understand now that it would be considered a structure since it is connected to the shop and has a roof. I was going to remove the roof, until I heard that the legal permit, that was signed for the 12' x 12' shed was done in error,your error. I already have bought the materials for and planned around the 12' x 12' shed for 5 months. If you had denied this from the start, this would not be such an issue, but the shed already exists, it is just not yet assembled. The fact of the matter is that even after this 12' x 12' shed my total out buildings would add up to 2,800 sq. ft. (1,200 less than legally allowed). Now I am the one getting screwed here. But like I previously said I do not want buildings everywhere on my property. But I should not be denied of what is legally allowed. I found that the lean-to behind my shop would do the job just fine instead of a 12' x 12' shed. And is not seen as another building to look at because it is fenced off anyway. I also understand that you have changed your wetland setback to 50 ft. +20 ft. in August and I appreciate that (I know the value of a wetland as I restore vegetation for a living). But that does not apply to me concerning the fence that was put up behind my shop in July, or the shed permit which was issued in May. I have spoken with 2 attorneys about this matter, and I do not wish to get into a legal battle over this, but I will fight for what is fair if I have to. I checked into what was legally allowed before I ever purchased this property and what I am asking for is not at all unreasonable. It is well below your own allowances. It seems now that I should have built 2-2,000 sq. ft. bldgs. to begin with,then subtracted sections to get down to what I wanted. I am asking that you allow me to either leave the lean-to roof on the back of my shop, or to put up the 12' x 12' shed that you had issued the permit for in May. I can fix my mistakes, but I can not fix yours, therefore the lean-to roof will remain up past the Dec. 19th deadline to remove it, until this issue is resolved. I am not the bad guy here. I have always done my best to comply with all of the ordinances of the City of Orono. I would think you would appreciate all the improvements I have made to this property in the past 5 years, and that I did not want to put up 2-2,000 sq. ft. bldg. I ask only that you work with me, not against me on this issue. Sincerely, Brian Kerber � OHO Brian Kerber 740 Orchard Park Rd. RECEIVE® Orono, Mn. 55356 January 17, 2006 JAN 1 9 ?006 To the City of Orono, CITY OF ORONO I want to thank you for getting back to me with your letter on January 4m. I have read it over and find that you skipped over the most important issue, the permit for the 12 x 12 shed. I have no problem with the removal of the Lean to roof, as you determined it was not legal, and it is the roof for the 12 x 12 shed anyway. But when you tell me to take it down and then take away the legal permit for the 12 x 12 shed,what am I supposed to do? As I stated in my last letter, I have already purchased this shed. I feel you are ignoring this fact. You have put me in a very bad situation that I feel I do not deserve to be in, nor should I have to be defending. To give me a permit for a 12 x 12 shed and then AFTER I buy it and plan around this space,you tell me you made a mistake is frankly just plain wrong and disrespectful to me. Obviously neither of us remembered the signing of Resolution 4504,or you would not have given me a permit for the 12 x 12 shed to begin with, but you did. And I was not trying to get away with something. If that was the case I would have put the 12 x 12 shed up immediately after the permit was issued. The fact is that Resolution 4504 was the City of Orono agreeing to deprive me of my legal rights of 4,000 sq. ft. total, because of 160 sq. ft. extra on one building and then limit my second building to 22 x 24 (528 sq. ft.) when I only asked for 32 x 24 (768 sq. fr.) I feel I should never have been deprived of this to begin with. Now I thank the city for allowing the 2,000 sq. ft. to be 2,160, and I paid for a variance. But I do not feel it is right for 160 sq. ft.extra to take away 1,300 sq. ft. from my total. I feel that the City of Orono is one of the best cities I have lived in and I appreciate that there are restrictions. Orono has a great group of people running things and Lyle you have always been very helpful on all my permits and questions on fences. I think I might have a simple solution to all of this. I am asking the city to allow me to add an upper level to my existing 22 x 24 hobby shop.This could solve the issue of additional space that I need and to use the materials I had already purchased for the 12 x 12 shed. This would not add any sq. ft. onto the footprint of the property. I am willing to take the lean to roof off right away, but I am not going to take it down until this problem is resolved, as it might turn out to be the solution.So I ask that you please stop with the deadline threats, I did not create this problem and I do not feel I deserve to be treated this way. I am just trying to be fair and come up with a solution we can all live with. Sincerely, Brian Kerber Brian Kerber ReCOVES 740 Orchard Park Rd. g 2�� Orono, Mn. 55356 pEC December 8, 2005Y OF OgOr1C To the City of Orono, I ask that you please stop making me feel guilty about fixing up my property. When I purchased it, this place was a dump site. I removed 12 dump trucks full of junk, including 9 rusty old appliances and 10 dog houses, and list could go on. I have cleaned this place up, landscaped it very nicely, planted over 50 trees and have kept it very well maintained. Before I bought this property there were 2 different landscape companies running their businesses out of here on a lease from the previous owner,who themselves ran a commercial vegetable stand here. (The Ponderosa.) Before I made an offer to purchase this property five years ago, I went to City Hall to see if 1.) I could run a small landscape business out of here, and I was told I could. (This is a small husband &wife Lawn & prairie seeding business that is only open for 45 days in the spring and 45 days in the fall, in a good year. With the rain this year it was only 65 days total) We leave in the morning and return in the evening.(just like anyone else.) 2.) I also inquired as to how many square feet of out buildings I could have. I was told I could have up to 4000 sq. ft. I then purchased this property. I asked for a permit to build a 24' x 32'(768 sq. ft.) hobby shop, as I was going to destroy a 22' x 24'(528 sq. ft.) building that existed on the property, because the location did not \'O work for me. I also asked to put up a 60' x 40' building (2,400 sq. ft.) Your own rules say ~--that I could have put up 2-2,000 sq. ft. buildings, but that is not what I wanted. I wanted one alittle larger and one a lot smaller. I was denied both buildings. I applied for a variance, and after much time in meetings & money, finally you agreed to allow me to put up a 60' x 36' (only 160 sq. ft. over your 2,000 sq. ft. per bldg. limit) and said I could only rebuild the same size building I was taking down 22' x 24'.That was a mockery of your own rules. If you have a problem with your own 4,000 sq. ft. rules then change them. I bought this property based on those rules. On 5/10/05 you granted mea permit to build a deck and a 12' x 12' shed. It states that the shed must be 26' from the wetland. Because of this permit I have already purchased all of the materials for the shed. And I have added a number of additional tools to my hobby shop, anticipating that I would have a 12' x 12' shed to hold the items that would have to be moved to make room for my new tools, (band saw, table saw,jointer, router table and several others). I was temporarily storing things between my shop and the fence behind the shop under tarps. If you would have denied the 12'x 12' shed from the start this would not have been such a problem. But is would still have been a mockery of your own rules of the 4,000 sq. ft. total. But it is now too late to change the series of events that this permit started. In May of this year I went to City Hall to get a permit for some fences I wanted to put up. I was shocked to find out I did not nccd a permit, but learned that there were height restrictions on Cty. Rd. 6 (42") and Orchard Park Rd (6 ft). I rented a post hole digger in June and dug all my holes, and in early July (when my business is slow, as it is too hot to seed) I put up my fences. Including the one behind my hobby shop. I have always checked on the rules and regulations either by coming down to City Hall or calling to make sure I am doing things right, for my hobby shop, my barn, my deck, my fences & new septic system that I upgraded,(even though it did not have to be until 2010) and the shed. I have spoken to Lyle about questions I have had many times over the 5 years I have been here. I admit that I make a mistake when I put up a lean-to roof from my shop to the fence 6 ft. behind the shop. I was just trying to prevent the things I was storing out under tarps from getting wet. At the time I did not think of it as a building because it was only a fence with a cover, and I did not need a permit for the fence. I was stunned when someone from the city knocked on my door and said I needed to go down to City Hall and get a permit for it. I understand now that it would be considered a structure since it is connected to the shop and has a roof. I was going to remove the roof, until I heard that the legal permit, that was signed for the 12' x 12' shed was done in error, your error. I already have bought the materials for and planned around the 12' x 12' shed for 5 months. If you had denied this from the start, this would not be such an issue, but the shed already exists, it is just not yet assembled. The fact of the matter is that even after this 12' x 12' shed my total out buildings would add up to 2,800 sq. ft. (1,200 less than legally allowed). Now I am the one getting screwed here. But like I previously said I do not want buildings everywhere on my property. But I should not be denied of what is legally allowed. I found that the lean-to behind my shop would do the job just fine instead of a 12' x 12' shed. And is not seen as another building to look at because it is fenced off anyway. I also understand that you have changed your wetland setback to 50 ft. + 20 ft. in August and I appreciate that (I know the value of a wetland as I restore vegetation for a living). N' kA Wu Yv 1 tr -- I have spoken with 2 attorneys about this matter, and I do not wish to get into a legal lI\ JV' battle over this, but I will fight for what is fair if I have to. I checked into what was legally ,�P (�1+ S allowed before I ever purchased this property and what I am asking for is not at all unreasonable. It is well below your own allowances. It seems now that I should have built NLk) 2-2,000 sq. ft. bldgs. to begin with, then subtracted sections to get down to what I W wanted. I am asking that you allow me to either leave the lean-to roof on the back of my shop, or to put up the 12' x 12' shed that you had issued the permit for in May. I can fix my mistakes, but I can not fix yours, therefore the lean-to roof will remain up past the Dec. 19th deadline to remove it, until this issue is resolved. I am not the bad guy here. I have always done my best to comply with all of the ordinances of the City of Orono. I would think you would appreciate all the improvements I have made to this property in the past 5 years, and that I did not want to put up 2-2,000 sq. ft. bldg. I ask only that you work with me, not against me on this issue. Sincerely, Brian Kerber 4 Hennepin County Property Mapm- Tax Year: 2010 j The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor.The perimeter and area(squarefootage and acres)are approximates and may contain discrepancies.The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. it Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or Its derivatives. H SIXTII Ave ,I l k, ' f } }�,' 1rt' t 1 et d 4 x,* I. e Agony*. If ' il ' = - � -- -ainwr• _ _ i i lit:* .1frisritli, „, ---_- ,E„L_ ..,,,,„ ,, 4 ell t.. 11. .....,i,:.,,,, : . , ......t ..,- - cp. l''1' Selected Parcel Data Date Printed:4/30/2010 3:05:08 PM • Parcel ID: 32-118-23-22-0007 Current Parcel Date: 4/5/2010 Owner Name: BRIAN 3 KERBER I Parcel Address: 740 ORCHARD PARK RD, ORONO, MN 55356 � Property Type: RESIDENTIAL Sale Price: $232,000.00 Homestead: HOMESTEAD Sale Date: 06/2000 Ii Area (sqft): 204755 Sale Code: WARRANTY DEED Area (acres):4.70 ii A-T-B: ABSTRACT 1! Market Total: $361,000.00 i ', Tax Total: $3,368.48