Loading...
Correspondence - 2471 Black Lake Road - 5/28/2021HEAD, SEI FERT & VANDER WEIDE A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAw 333 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET SUITE 1140 MINNEAPOLI5. MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE (612) 339-1601 - FACSIMILE (612) 339-3372 October 9, 2007 Mr. Daniel Lemke 3812 Park Lane Spring Park, MN 55384 RE: Fence Dispute Dear Mr. Lemke: NANCY JENSEN BECK DIRELT DIAL: GI2-501-6196 E-MAIL THEBECKSROCK AOL.CO.M �a The Spring Park City Administrator asked me to write to you in response to your telephone calls to City Hall regarding your dispute with your neighbor, Paul Oare, regarding the location of Mr. Oare's fence. The Spring Park Zoning Ordinance requires an applicant for a fence permit to establish the boundary lines of the property by a survey prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor. As part of his application for a fence permit, Mr. Oare provided the City with a survey of his property dated July 26, 2007 prepared by Mark S. Gronberg of Gronberg and Associates, Inc. as required by the Spring Park Zoning Ordinance. The City was entitled to rely on this survey. It has no obligation to independently determine the accuracy of any survey. The City of Spring Park issued a fence permit to Paul Oare for the construction of a fence on his property based on his application and survey and in accordance with the Spring Park Zoning Ordinance. The permit was issued subject to certain conditions; one of which was that the fence was to be constructed entirely on Mr. Oare's property. It is my understanding that you believe that the fence was constructed on your property. Therefore, you have a property boundary dispute with your neighbor, Mr. Oare. The City of Spring Park has no authority to resolve property boundary disputes. The City is not in a position to determine the accuracy of a survey or, in the case of conflicting surveys, to determine which survey is correct. The City has no legal authority to determine where a property line is located. That is a matter for another forum. If the matter cannot be resolved by the parties, legal action may be required. It is my understanding that you have asked to be on the agenda for the next meeting of the City Council regarding this matter. However, as stated above, the City is not the appropriate forum for this dispute since it has no authority over the determination of property boundaries. Mr. Daniel Lemke October 9, 2007 Page 2 Therefore, this matter is not an appropriate item for the Council agenda. Of course, you may ask to address the Council in the public forum portion of the meeting. However, as the Council will not be able to resolve this matter, you may wish to direct your efforts elsewhere to resolve this matter. Very truly yours, Nancy Jensen Beck City Attorney I cc: Spring Park City Council Sarah Friesen , City Administrator #37412\05206\005\LTR Poor Quality"Document Disclaimer The original or copy of a document or page of a document presented at the time of digital scanning contained within this digital file may be of substandard quality for viewing, printing or faxing needs. no zl�e- �.t��� e., yeti' a„�d� �,.r��a-�-�l -�-, a� wry-�-� cors�A�s. w-� r� w-� Vie- rz+,� pC12,61 pkr�Ne � � t oh L * A41metotd February 8, 2008 Ms. Anne Marie Borne 2473 Black Lake Road Spring Park, MN 55384 RE: As -Built Survey, 2471 Black Lake Road Dear Anne Marie: In response to your concerns regarding placement of the new construction at 2471 Black Lake Road, the City requested an as -built survey be presented for examination. As -built surveys are surveys conducted after construction is complete. Ms. Baker, the owner of 2471 Black Lake Road, provided to the City the as -built survey dated January 3, 2008. Enclosed is a copy of this survey for your records. The City's setback requirements for single family residential dwellings in an R-1 district are ten feet from each side yard, 50 feet from the lakeshore and 30 feet from a city street. Upon examining the as -built survey, the City confirms the new construction was built, and does not encroach, into the allowable setbacks. The enclosed as -built survey is highlighted to show the conforming measurements. We believe part of your concern has been the placement of 2471's driveway. The City of Spring Park's zoning ordinances do not require driveways to be held ten feet away from property lines. Boundary line driveways are acceptable due to the small, irregular shaped lots that typify the majority of Spring Park's lots. We appreciate you coming before the City with your concerns. However, the City relies on certified documents presented to them to be correct. If there continues to be a dispute in this regard, the City categorizes this as a property -line neighbor dispute and accepts no responsibility in this regard. Sincerely, Sarah Friesen Administrator/Clerk/Treasurer Enclosure Cc: Sue Baker G�ty t f Or *9 Park 4349 WARREN AVENUE, SPRING PARK, MINNESOTA 55384-9711 - (952) 471-9051 - Fax: (952) 471-9160 Email: CityofSpringPark@mchsi.com _--- LZ XPER6 PA RK December 11, 2007 Ms. Sue Baker 2463 Black Lake Road Spring Park, MN 55384 RE: 2471 Black Lake Road Dear Sue: As you are probably aware, there is a dispute regarding lot line setback adherence between your new construction at 2471 Black Lake Road and your immediate neighbor at 2473 Black Lake Road. The dispute is that your new construction ended up being constructed closer than the ten foot allowable setback. According to our complainant, this discrepancy was brought to the attention of your builder during the actual construction phase and your builder was uncooperative. The City building official re-examined the measurements during the construction phase and a problem was not discovered, however it's likely the property markers had been disturbed and a true and accurate measurement was not possible. At this time the City of Spring Park is requiring an as -built survey be conducted, at your expense, in order to establish your new construction was indeed set on the lot according to the survey supplied with your building permit application. If it is determined that the new construction was wrongly constructed within the setback, you or your builder will be required to apply for an after -the -fact variance in order to rectify this situation. This is an unfortunate situation for all but definitely for the complainant who believes her property boundaries have been encroached as a result of your construction. Sincerely, Wendy Lewin Deputy City Clerk Cc: Ann Marie Borne 2473 Black Lake Road Spring Park, MN 55384 cty670CFR119Pelt 4349 WARREN AVENUE, SPRING PARK, MINNESOTA 55384-971 1 • (952) 471-9051 - Fax: (952) 471-9160 Email: CityofSpringPark@mchsi.com Memo to File: 2471 and 2473 Black Lake Road February 6, 2008 Sarah and I examined the two adjacent properties, 2471 and 2473 Black Lake Road in order to research Ann Marie Borne's (2473) claim that Sue Baker's (2471) new construction is too close to the property line. Sue Baker's surveyor provided an as -built survey dated January 3, 2008 in compliance with the city's request. Upon examining this as -built survey provided by Frank R. Cardarells Surveyors, all allowable setbacks between Baker and Borne seem to have been met. Baker's new construction is set back more than 30 feet from the street, 50 feet from the lake and 10 feet on each side yard. I believe part of Borne's concern has been Baker's new driveway encroaches too close to her property however, the City does not have an ordinance regarding boundary driveways so, as long as Baker's driveway is on her property, it is not encroaching on Borne's. Upon examining the files, it looks as though a previous owner to Borne's property was allowed to build a garage around 1982 that encroached on street and side yard setbacks. It appears as though a petition was circulated among neighbors soliciting their affirmation that a new garage was more desirable than no garage. There is also an opinion from the Mound building official dated 4-6-82 confirming a variance request to build the garage. As a result, Borne's property is legal non- conforming in terms of setback encroachment and gives one the impression that the neighboring property (Baker's) is closer than allowable. From what can be determined from what's been provided, city staff believes Baker's property is not in violation of encroachment. It will be suggested to Ms. Borne that if she still feels there is a breach of property boundaries, it will be up to her to pursue this civilly. /wl Reply to St. Paul March 13, 2009 MAR 16 2009 VIA FACSIMILE: 952-471-9160 The City of Spring Park ATTN: Sharon 4939 Warren Avenue Spring Park, MN 55384-9711 Re: Sandra Sue Baker vs. Anne Marie Borne Our File No.: 60554 Dear Sharon: As I indicated in our recent phone conversation, we represent Anne Marie Borne. We would appreciate receiving a complete copy of the City of Spring Park's file regarding property located at 2471 Black Lake Road, Spring Park, Minnesota from August of 2006 to the present. We would appreciate receiving a complete copy of the permit and inspection files, including but not limited to building plans, drawings, permits, inspection reports and notes, correspondence, handwritten notes, Certificate of Occupancy, memoranda, site maps and photographs. We would like a copy of all surveys that were done for that property at anytime. In addition, we would appreciate receiving a copy of all surveys which were done on the property located at 2473 Black Lake Road, Spring Park, Minnesota at anytime. Please advise us as to the cost of copying these documents. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Yours very truly, Mary J. Bus Paralegal mbuse(@-murnane.com MJ B/829o42.1 Minnesota Office 30 East 7th Street, Suite 3200 Saint Paul, MN 55101 4919 P 651 227 9411 F 651 223 5199 Wisconsin Office 1810 Crest View Drive, Suite 2B Hudson, WI 54016 P 715 246 3910 F 651 223 5199 www.murnane.com Established 1940 A Professional Association Andrew L. Marshall Attorney Certified Civil Trial Specialist Licensed in MN and WI 612.376.1623 612.746.1223 fax ondym®bassford.com June 1, 2009 Sandra Baker 2463 Black Lake Road Spring Park, MN 55384-9736 Re: Sandra Sue Baker v. Anne Marie Borne Court File No.: 27-CV-0812545 Our File No. 9836-900006 Dear Ms. Baker: BASSFORD REMELE A Professional Association 33 South Sixth Street, Suite 3800 Minneapolis, MN 55402-3707 612.333.3000 612.333.8829 tax www.bossford.com Enclosed please find an amended Order for summary judgment in your case. This amended Order finalizes the summary judgment order previously issued on the property line issue. You should file this Order with the City so that it is contained in the house file for the property located at 2471 Black Lake Road. If you have any questions regarding this Order please let me know. ALM: mlr Enclosure Very truly yours, Andrew L. Mars .4 Full Srrn)icc Liligalinn Eirm w STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Sandra Sue Baker, Plaintiff, vs. Anne Marie Borne, Defendant. DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE TYPE: OTHER CIVIL Court File No. 27 CV-08-12545 AMENDED ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNT I OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND DISMISSING THE REMAINING CLAIMS AND COUNTER CLAIMS The above -entitled matter came on before The Honorable Marilyn B. Rosenbaum for hearing on November 17, 2008, pursuant to the Motion of Plaintiff for Partial Summary Judgment as to Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint. Andrew L. Marshall, Esq. appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. Wynn C. Curtiss, Esq. appeared on behalf of Defendant. On December 1, 2008, this Court issued an Order granting the motion for partial summary judgment as to Count I of Plaintiff's Complaint. As part of that Order, the Court indicated that the Plaintiff could request an Amended Order which contains the language "LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY." On April 24, 2009, the parties reached a Mediated Settlement Agreement. Paragraph 3 (handwritten Paragraph 4) of the Mediated Settlement Agreement contains the parties' agreement that the Court may enter an Amended Order on the property line issue, directing the entry of judgment. Pursuant to Plaintiff's request and the agreement of the parties, and based upon the files, records and proceedings herein, and being fully informed of the premises, the Court makes the following: ORDER 1. Motion of Plaintiff for partial summary judgment as to Count I of the Plaintiffs Complaint, is granted. There exists no genuine issues of material fact and Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 2. The southern boundary of the real property located at 2471 Black Lake Road, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota is determined to lie according to the surveys performed by Randy Stem of Frank R. Cardarelle Land Surveyors, attached as Exhibits 1-4 to his affidavit dated May 19, 2008 and as approved by the City of Spring Park, Minnesota. 3. The home constructed on the real estate at the address of 2471 Black Lake Road in Spring Park, Minnesota conforms to all applicable set -backs, including the 10 foot set -back ordinance of the City of Spring Park, Minnesota. 4. Pursuant to the parties' Mediated Settlement Agreement, all remaining claims and counterclaims are hereby dismissed with prejudice without costs or disbursements being awarded to any of the parties. 5. The Court's December 1, 2008 memorandum is incorporated here and by reference. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: , 2009 2 BY THE LOUPrr— Tfie Al As A . A A A-e�& At Honor le Marilyn B. Rosenbaum Judge of the District Court 0 30 60 90 SCALE IN FEET C( ADDRESS 2463 BLACK LAKE ROAD PID# 19-117-23-12-0026 EXISTING DESCRIPTION Lot 9 and the South 1/2 of Lot 10, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS ROSE HILL, Hennepin County, Mn. area = 11670sf/0.26 ac. PROPOSED DESCRIPTION The South 1/2 of Lot 10, and that part of Lots 8 / 9, SKARP AND LINDQUISTS ROSE HILL, lying I //and north of a line described as follows; Com-nencing at the Northeast corner of said Lot 9; thence southwesterly along the southeast line of said Lot 9 a distance of 44.4 feet; thence deflecting o the right 71°30' a distance of 162 feet to ake Minnetonka, / area = 11670sf/0.26 ac. h' / ADDRESS 2471 BLACK LAKE ROAD / PID# 19-117-23-12-0024 �� ry EXISTING DESCRIPTION That part of Lots 7 and 8 SKARP AND LINDQUISTS / ROSE HILL, Hennepin County, Mn., lying North of / line described as follows; Commencing at the VO Northeast corner of Lot 8, thence Southwesterly SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PER TITLE OR EASEMENT INFORMATION on the East line of said Lot 8, a distance of 26 feet; thence deflecting rightan angle of 59 (meas. 52°40') a distance of 166.5 feet to Lake Minnetonka. area = 9350sf/0.21 ac PROPOSED DESCRIPTION That part of Lots 7 and 8 SKARP AND LINDQUISTS ROSE HILL, Hennepin County, Mn., lying North of line described as follows; Commencing at the Northeast corner of Lot 8, thence Southwesterly on the East line of said Lot 8, a distance of 26 feet; thence deflecting right an angle of 59 (meas. 52040') a distance of 166.5 feet to Lake Minnetonka, and lying Southerly of a line described as follows; Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Lot 9; thence southwesterly along the southeast line of said Lot 9 a distance of 44.4 feet; thence deflecting to the right 71030' a distance of 162 feet to Lake Minnetonka, area = 11670sf/0.26 ac L- 0 -Dv c> v `- --� (n W bZ)0 �O VUZ� w � �zaC� I roLL.arn �Oz I V t w 64 (D0wrn W O� W� OJ `KW W (.1) Q) Ct, 0 a Wo- � azWO tna>w az.Z L o �' >WQO m d D w W <,. Z O O w N ¢� ^ L / J m Fo 3 WD a Z F- U U f U a_ ZLL) m0a~ � O > Li < 0 Q a o � =m�� L-