Letter_from_Donald_Schumacher.pdf

Donald Schumacher 10326 Highway 10 Dickinson, ND 58601 01-320-3671

July 26, 2017

Nick Reynolds

USDA-NRCS

220 East Rosser Ave Bismarck, ND 58501

Nick, As we talked a little about yesterday, I will put a little of what we talked about in writing. I know some things were said and some not, but also found that some of the contractors either did not hear what was said or some missed the initial conversation because they were late.

I was asked more than once about the fence in the back as to whether it should be replaced or not. The answer is yes because it is a boundary line between the two properties. The fence should be reconstructed to the barbed wire option presented in your construction specifications. The fence should extend from the cross-fence on the USACE property to its existing end point just beyond the mowed portion of our lot.

In terms of the road coming in to the property, it will be maintained back to its original condition and if any new potholes occur they will be fixed. The drivers’ speeds are asked to be slow and when the project is finished that a layer of gravel be placed back on to the road. It would be appreciated that if there was any substantial rain during the process to stop and restart when less damage would be done to the road. It would also be appreciated if they could bore under the section of gravel where the drive turns to lead to the house. We would prefer not to have any ground sinking in that area (which we have seen in the past when contractors have dug lines through the road where it comes off of Sibley Drive). It was also discussed that the access road must not be blocked at any time during the construction phase. The road must stay clear enough for emergency vehicles to pass through and for compact cars to easily navigate daily. The road and the ditch area must be free of any debris and be restored to original shape when the project is completed. All flagging for utility line markings and route markings should also be removed by the Contractor when work is finished on our property.

Where the trees will be removed, it was agreed to a 50ft width of clearing and that the contractor should stay within those parameters. The removed trees and vegetation should be disposed of by the contractor. We did not talk about how the condition of this area was to be left. The area needs to be leveled and free of debris, tree roots, etc. and planted with native grasses. It was discussed as to making sure compaction of the excavated areas meets standards and there was concerns of the compaction sinking within a year. If there is any compaction issues within a year, a contract would need to state that the contractor must come back and fix it when requested to do so or as soon as possible during that year.

The last thing not talked about is monetary compensation for the few feet through the trees on the back side of the property for easement purposes. It was clear when it was commented on that my dad did not understand the question when asked. We are not looking for massive dollars, but would agree to $1.00 per foot for easement compensation.

These are the terms that I would like to present to the successful bidder for construction activities on our property. I would request that the successful bidder contact me directly to develop a written contract that we both agree to.

Sincerely, Donald Schumacher