Laserfiche WebLink
February 9, 1999 <br />Mike Gafron <br />City of Orono <br />Post Office Box 66 <br />Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 <br />RE: 465/485 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD <br />Mike: <br />U nited Properties <br />miiiiiiiuiHmimammmsmnm <br />Bruce VV. Palmer, CCM <br />Senior Vice Pre^KJcnl <br />Construction Manaccrreni Serv ices <br />3500 West SOih Street Minneapolis. Minnesota 55431 <br />6I2S93-SS2I Fax 612 <br />e mail: hpalmertL* upropemes.com <br />The purpose of this letter is to request permission to hook up the properties referenced <br />above to the City sewer system. We are making this request because we believe that the <br />property meets the City ’s criteria as outlined by you last fall. The criteria is as follows: <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />4. <br />Property must be an existing residence; the Hamm family has owned and resided at <br />this property since 1948 and plan to continue to own the property for many years to <br />come. <br />The existing system needs to be failing; per the City ’s reports dated July 23, 1998, <br />the septic systems on the site have, in fact, failed. <br />Property must be adjacent to the sewer; this property is within one block of a <br />sewer connection which, as we understand it, would be located at the intersection of <br />Barrett Avenue and Dickenson Street. <br />No other alternatives must be available on the property; per a report from S-P <br />Testing, Inc. dated December 23,1996, Steve Shirmer had recommended a location <br />for a new mound system for the property. Since that time, as indicated in S-P <br />Testing’s letter dated February 4,1999, this location is no longer suitable due to the <br />fact that equipment has driven over the area to remove trees after the storm that <br />occurred last spring. Also, in S-P Testing’s letter dated February 4, 1999, they <br />indicate one possible area south of the driveway or northeast of the main house. <br />However, these locations are very near the residence and would require removal of <br />several large trees in order to accommodate an acceptable system to the City. We <br />don ’t believe that these locations would be satisfactory to the City or the Hamm <br />family and would not be a permanent solution to correcting this problem. As <br />indicated in S-P Testing’s letter, there is no other area on the property that could be <br />considered for a mound system due to slopes and also the fact that the property has <br />quite a bit of wetland associated with it.