06-24-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r i. made a uniform fill in the basement cavity. There was mixed within some of the rock laker, the roadway a small amount of asphalt surfacing, but that asphalt surfacing had been on the roadway surfaces for a very long time, was very old and dried out and was also a very thin cover, not over an inch in most places. After all of that mi in the basement cavity had been pounded down with »he frost b^l the sides of the cavity were bulldozed in and black dirt was put over all of the fill to make a uniform surface. The basement fUl work was commenced on or about May 15,1991 and all of the cement destruction work and basement fill work had been completed by the 18th of May. It was a complete surprise and shock to be notified at the end of May by your Building Inspectors that an additional permit was needed. We wanted to write this letter to give you the history of what occurred here, to give you what we understand the meth^ which were employed by our contractor and its subcontractor in doing the actual cement work and fill work to fill in the excavation of the old dwelling house, and to assure you that our family was in all events doing everything which it had been informed it was supposed to do in connection with this demolition. We certainly feel that %vith all the conununication we had with the Long Lake Fire Department and all the communication they should have had with the City of Orono about the burning of the dwelling, and given the presence on or near t^ property of the Qty of Orono Building Inspectors both prior to the fire, and prior excavation demolition even to the extent of having been led through this dwelling house on a walk through by our contractor for the new house that we should have been informed by someone from the City Administrative Staff that an additional permit would be required. Under no circumstances did we have any intent to evade any permitting requirement. This letter summarizes, to the best of our knowledge, die procedurff that were used to destroy and fill in the basement excavation. We can get more detailed affidavits for the City from our contractors if that should be deemed appropriate. We fed diat we are without fault in this matter. We feel that the City had ample notice of what was going on with rcsp^ to this demolition, and failed to notify us. This site and the surrounding land is now owned by our family partnership, and there are no plans for rebuilding on the site. We are plaiming to pitnt the site in native prairie grasses and to maintain it as prairie. We Iwve been atturtti by our contractor and the subcontractor performing the foundation dtfnolition work tiiat no PCA Regulations were violated in connection with the demolition of the foundation, and that the only departure from your ordinances yffig leaving some part of the basement slab foundation and the crushed cement »nd diiomcy debris in the ground and adding thereto some of the old roadway surfacing which might not meet the definition of clean fill. Under the drcuimtances, it ippaan l> us to be both unfair and impractical to require tiiat this site be reexcavated It the proent time. We CO, however, recognize the concern expressed by Jeanne Mabusth of your Planning an»l Zoning Department that some notice should be given to possible