Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1995 <br />( #9 - #2048 James & Joann Jundt - Continued) <br />Mabusth said the septic is non - conforming, and it is being questioned what affect the <br />apartment would have on the septic. Mabusth said it is a good idea to ask for septic <br />inspections. Peterson agreed that the goal is not to allow the septic to fail. Crawford <br />noted that this property was considered a hot spot for sewering at one time, and the <br />applicant has been dealing with this issue throughout all the applications. <br />Schroeder added that the City cannot allow more people to reside on the property than the <br />septic can handle. He is in favor of inspections; and if the system fails, Schroder said that <br />would affect the conditional use permit. <br />The property has two separate septic units, one for the main residence and one for the <br />accessory structures. The septic units do not meet the separation requirements. <br />Peterson commented that normal inspections occur every two years. This property, <br />according to Peterson, should be inspected more often. <br />Schroder moved, Lindquist seconded, for approval of a studio within the oversized <br />accessory structure, subject to conditions of the CUP with inspections of existing relevant <br />• system every two months to show its capability in handling the increased usage. A charge <br />will be incurred by the applicant for extra inspection time. <br />Gafl'ron remarked that the earliest date for sewering of the property would be the end of <br />1996. It is Staffs sense that the septic is not running out onto the ground, but noted the 3' <br />separation is not met. It is possible that the system may not be able to handle the usable <br />wastes during this period of time. If this is found to be true, the septic would need to be <br />pumped out on a regular basis. <br />There were no public comments. <br />Ayes 6, Nays 0. <br />Mabusth commented on an issue with tree removal in the 0 -75' zone for waterproofing of <br />a tunnel that was not approved by Staff. All of the earth around the tunnel was moved <br />during the waterproofing process. Staff will ask for replanting of these trees. Crawford <br />commented that the elms were deteriorated, and tree roots were extending into the tunnel. <br />Part of the tunnel encroaches the 0 -75' setback. An amended application will be coming <br />before the Planning Commission on this issue and is not part of this application. <br />( #10) #2049 FRED GUTTORMSON AND CHIC DWIGHT, 1220 TONKAWA <br />10 ROAD - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:25 -9:48 P.M. <br />The Certificate of Mailing and Affidavit of Publication were noted. <br />12 <br />