Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-12-31 Letter, Septic System Curently OKV 1 CITY4^0R0N0 Post Office Box 66*Cry8tal Bay. Minnesota 5532.1 •Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka December 31, 1985 Ken Daniels 2905 Fox Street Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Septic System Dear Mr. Daniels: I met with Carl Widmer on Friday, December 27, 1985 to review the current status of your septic system. We obtained a meter reading and made a visual inspection of the drainfield area. In general, the system appears to be holding its own. There was no observable flow down the side of the mound as there has of fhe mound, a small puddle of effluent was open to the air (4'*-6" diameter) which indicates that the mound is still full of water but seems to be keeping up with the inflow from the residence. In reviewing your metered water use, there appears to be a marked decrease in water use in 1985 (averaging 880 gallons per day) versus your 1984 water use (1135 gallons per day), a de­ crease of about 22%. Mr. Widmer tells me you have fewer people living in the house this year, which may account for part of the decrease. Have you also made an effort to consciously cut down? I have had absolutely no complaints from the Farview neigh- ^ least a year now, and during my various visits to the neighborhood in the last year have never observed any water entering the street. It would seem that you have managed to contain and control your sewage within your property. I am still somewhat concerned about the mound being full of effluent to the top. This is an unusual condition and does not allow the aerobic conditions which would normally occur in the mound system. I can only guess at how this will affect the system in the long run, but it would seem to be an unfavorable condition. Note that we have never seen the water level decrease in this system. BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7 J57 • ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION A riNANCE - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Ken Daniels December 31, 1985 Page 2 I mentioned to you some years ago that the trench portion of your drainfield system might function better if the depressions over each trench were filled in, to remove these low spots where rainwater and run-off can collect and add to the load on the drainfield. This is still advisable. To summarize, in my opinion, the mound system installed by Widmer Brothers was installed according to code standards based on the best information available at the time, and is performing well considering the amount of use it is getting. Your metered water use has decreased during 1985, which I'm sure has helped reduce or eliminate any overflows from the mound. The mound was designed to handle 700-750 gpd, and it was sized for that capa­ city before the magnitude of your household water use was known. Your water use is still unusually high for a residence. With an average of 880 gpd, there will be days your water use is less than the average and days when it is much higher than the average. It remains to be seen whether your combined trench/mound system can handle these peak flows indefinitely. We will continue to monitor this system and would encourage you to continue your efforts to limit water use rates. As I noted above, some landscape work should have a positive effect on the system. Please contact me if i can be of further assistance. Sincerely, 7 << Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator Cc. •. C-Arfi.L^