My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-15-1991 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1991
>
07-15-1991 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/14/2022 1:03:54 PM
Creation date
12/14/2022 12:45:34 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
272
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Zoning File #1647 <br />June Hr 1991 <br />Page 4 <br />The existing septic system apparently consists of one or two <br />tanks and a very small drainfield probably within 10~15' of the <br />creek. We are carrying this system as a failing system, aTthough <br />there is no visible evidence of a surface discharge fro.-n the <br />drainfield. There is absolutely no way to replace this system <br />meet minimum code standards, and the separation from the water <br />table would suggest that any existing drainfield on the property <br />is not providing proper sewage treatment. There likely has been <br />no visible hydraulic failure because the sandy soils likely allow <br />direct underground flow of effluent to the creek. <br />The point is that the only feasible replacement system is a <br />holding tank should the City decide to take a stricter stand on <br />enforcement in the Stubbs Bay sewer area. Placement of a garage <br />in the proposed location has no bearing on the feasibility of <br />holding tank installation, other than the financial <br />ramifications. One can argue that by allowing a new garage on <br />the property, the improvements to the property tend to prolong <br />its continuance as a substandard lot with structures that have <br />substandard setbacks. On the other hand, unless the City is <br />prepared to condemn and redevelop this neighborhood, it may be <br />unreasonable to disallow replacement of a letached garage. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />If Planning Commission determines that there is sufficient <br />hardship and justification to grant variances to allow the <br />proposed detached garage, staff would recommend placement per <br />Option B, resulting in an 11' front setback variance, a 13' side <br />street setback variance, a 3.9% hardcover variance in the 75-250' <br />zone, subject to removal of plastic from all decorative rock beds <br />on the property, and approval of a conditional use permit for <br />work in the flood fringe area, subject to minimum garage slab <br />elevation of 935.0', subject to any further conditions that may <br />be imposed by the Watershed District, and subject to positive <br />removal of any potential septic system discharge conduits. <br />Isv
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.