Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRe: sewer service � � r � O� � �,� � ������ CITY of ORONO t ���� ����. ,�,�,. I� {?� ,,� .��,° � Municipal Offices •��� ,��,�!.d;� �, Pbst Oliice Box 66 '� �`��� G c�y�s8y,�ss3a3-ao� '�� , a 1":9' ,�,'�i kESH� _, August 17 , 1992 Mr. and Mrs. Lee Harren 175 Landmark Drive Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Re: Municipal Sewer Dear Mr. and Mrs. Harren: This letter is to clarify the City's position regarding your sewer service. During the initial sewer project planning, it was determined that the Kyle property (185 Landmark Drive) was less than 2 acres and had a failing septic system. That fact and the mere geographical location in relation to the entire project area, led to an early conclusion to serve your immediate neighborhood. In the normal situation, a sewer lateral would have been constructed within Landmark Drive, with stubs to serve your .property, the Evans' vacant lot, and an extension along Kyle's driveway outlot to serve their property. This lateral would have served your property at the southeast boundary but would have been extremely expensive to construct due to replacement of your private road. Further, the extension to the Kyle's along their outlot would be similarly expensive due to the extreme depth. In order to reduce the cost of the project (and therefore the cost to the property owners) it was determined that the lateral would be constructed along the old driveway along the west side of Evans' building site. This lateral would end at Kyle's property line and stubs would be placed to ser.ve all three properties. Your stub would have been at the southwest boundary of your property. Subsequent to this plan, you initiated discussions with various City staff and consultants regarding the extreme expense of connection to a stub at this location on your property. The main problem factors included having to follow a connection route northwest around the existing poo1, then soutti through the hill to get to the southwest corner. The location of your well was a factor which forced the TELEPHONE-473-7357•EAX-473-0510 r ._ � Mr. and Mrs. Lee Harren August 17, 1992 Page 2 connection to go around the pool, but which was not otherwise a limiting factor. The State Health Department requires that the . setback between a well and an air tested sewer line must be a minimum of 20'. You suggested that a more feasible and less expensive connection route would be around the east side of your driveway to the southeast corner of your property. It appears your connection could take either a southwest or southeast route and not affect your well or neighboring wells. City staff and consultants then investigated the feasibility of extending a stub to your southeast lot corner, and found that such a connection was very feasible, via an additional 120' extension of a lateral already proposed within Gardner's driveway which served Gardner and Anderson. A stub would be extended from that lateral to your southeast property boundary. In your April 29th letter you suggested an alternate route along the portion of Outlot D located west of Landmark Drive, but there is no 30'-40' clear outlot/easement along the west side of Outlot D. In fact, as the attached road plan indicates, the pavement abuts the west line of Outlot D for a good distance and there is a 20' clear area east of the road in which sewer might be constructed, but this sti 11 leaves the problem of having to replace a large portion of the cul-de- sac and cutting through the tiill to serve Kyle's. The City would be responsible for obtaining all necessary easements across adjacent properties to bring a stub to your property boundary from the east. The cost of providing service to your southeast boundary would be absorbed within the general sewer project and would not increase your assessment. During an executive session at their July 27th meeting, the City Council reviewed your concerns and the various connection options. Council directed that staff proceed on the basis that your property wi 11 be served by a stub extended to the southeast boundary of your property. A copy of the staff inemo from that meeting is attached. I hope this helps to clari�y the City's position on providing sewer service to your property. We can discuss these issues further at our meeting on the 26th. Sincerely�, �� � � ��i'`��1�'-��"_--� 7 Ron Moorse City Administrator RM/ch