My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-14-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
Orono
>
City Council
>
1988
>
03-14-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/12/2026 10:57:02 AM
Creation date
8/18/2025 12:54:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Administration
Admin Doc Type
Agenda Packet City Council
Section
City Council
Subject
regular meeting
Document Date
3/14/1988
Retention Effective Date
8/18/2025
Retention
Permanent After File Date
Protection
Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
274
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
(lAB 9u5 ne59 Services Inc (►' ► Z <br />353, West %81h Street Suite 22 <br />Eden Prairie Minnesota 55344 i / II <br />Telephone 612-942-9818 ,'rlI I !{ ki0 J <br />draneh Office <br />March 1, 1988 <br />Mr. William Hull <br />2445 Woodhaven Drive <br />Orono, Minnesota 55356 <br />Insured: City of Orono <br />GAB File No.: 56527-11884 <br />Date of Loss: 10-9-81 through 9-24-87 <br />Par Mr. Hull, <br />I attempted to contact you both on Febriary 24 and 25, 1988, <br />concerning the decision of your claim against the City of <br />Orono for your septic system. <br />The St. Paul Office was contacted and your claim must be <br />respectfully denied in its entirety for the following <br />reasons. 1. The failure of the septic system to accept <br />the sewage flow appears to be a direct result of high <br />seasonal waters on the sight. This was not reported by <br />the Sight Evaluator. If he had recognized the seasonal <br />high water table you would have likely designed a Mount <br />System for the sight. The City accepted his reported <br />soil type and the design of the system was acceptatle <br />based on the soil type. The City cannot be held re- <br />sponsible for approving a system that met the code <br />requirements. <br />Secondly, it is our decision tnat the City should not <br />be held liable for the ultimate installation of a septic <br />system or its components that were noted on inspection <br />reports, but never followed up on. In addition to this, <br />we do not feel that the City should be held liable for <br />damages to the property resulting from a missing septic <br />system component. Lastly, it is the decision of this <br />office that the Cities only responsibility is to corr- <br />ectly report conditions that exist and require appropriate <br />repairs if necessary to a septic system. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.