re shed on wrong property - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1677 Long Lake Road New Brighton, Minnesota 16 September 1994 Mr. & .Mrs. Herman Laue 594 Park Lane Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Laue, I am sure that you already luiow, the variance request presented to the City of Orono Planning Commission and the City Counsel has been approved for the Lots East of your property. What you may not be aware of is that all requiremeots requested by the Planning Commission of the applicants have been fulfilled, including a resolution of the dispute concerning the survey discrepancies. As per our conversation after the planning commission's meeting in August, we contacted our surveyors and pointed out your concerns about the property line between your east lot and our west lat. At our request, our surveyors, Demars-Gabriel Land Surveyors Inc. contacted Schoe❑ & Madson Inc., and a representative of each business met at the lots site to review the discrepancy. According to Demars-Gabriel representative Mr. David E. Crook met with Schoell & Madson representative Mr. Ted Kemna. Both Mr. Crook and Mr. Kemna reviewed their data and discovered that the Scholl & Madson survey was in error. Both individuals double cbecked their data and discovered an error of three (3) inches by the Demars-Gabriel survey (prorated equals one (1) inch for each of our three (3) lots.) What this all comes out to, is that the survey that Demars-Gabriel Inc. conducted, and the one presented to the Planning Commission and City Counsel, is the latest and correct survey to date. We understand that Mr. Kemna went and spoke to Mrs. Laue to report on the finding and errors of the original Schoell & Madson survey. They even went out and reviewed where the property line is located. With the correct property line now firmly established, it is evident that your utility shed is clearly on our property. ( To your East.)