Laserfiche WebLink
Indian Creek - Addn Septic Review <br />January 8, 1990 <br />Page 2 of 2 ,n6. In Lot 1, Block |2r applicants have advised that the <br />existing road ditch system will be used to direct flow from <br />the private road to the southeasterly ponding area. As long <br />as this is followed through, the drainfield sites on this <br />lot will not be affected by grading, but again should be <br />protected from any traffic or soil disturbance. <br />7. Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block i, all have suitable <br />drainfield sites located away from road construction and <br />appear to be relatively good building sites. <br /><{8. In Lot 6, Block t, the west end of the drainfield site <br />is fairly near road construction and should be ,strictly <br />protected. The drainfield sites in Lot 7, Block ?“are in an <br />open area near the end of the existing field road, and <br />should be protected from inadvertent traffic. <br />In general, all of my previous septic concerns have been <br />addressed and resolved. While some lots will benefit more than <br />others from prudent site planning, each lot appears to meet the <br />code requirements for primary and alternate drainfield sites. <br />We are in receipt of a revised "drainfield covenant" drafted <br />by the applicant, which is to be filed in the chain of title as a <br />separate document, for each lot within this subdivision. I would <br />recommend the following sentence be added between sentences 1 and <br />2 of that covenant; "In most cases, these are the only two <br />feasible sites on each lot, and must not be disturbed. The <br />existing natural topsoil must remain in place and must not be <br />subject to any traffic which will cause even the slightest <br />compaction." Then start applicant's next sentence; "To protect <br />those important sites . . . " as a new paragraph. <br />Note that the covenant requires a fence 20’ outward frcsn the <br />boundaries of drainfield sites which are accessible to earth <br />moving equipment, and further requires fencing along the lot <br />lines during construction so that construction traffic does not <br />drive on adjacent lots. <br />Based on the above comments, I would recommend approval of <br />the current preliminary plat revision. From our discussions, a <br />propos&i road outlot and potential future road connection to the <br />west through the northerly half of Lot 5, should not have any <br />effect on drainfield sites. <br />■ <br />I <br />.1 <br />I J <br />4 ^