My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-08-2000 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2000
>
05-08-2000 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2023 8:53:31 AM
Creation date
3/15/2023 8:46:39 AM
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.
/
336
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
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MINUTES FOR APRIL 17,2000 <br />f <br />variance to the septic code and permit a drainfield site to be located less than 75* from the neighbor's <br />well but not less-than the Stale requirement of 50*. Weinberger stated the affected property owner <br />will need to be contacted regarding this option prior to a variance being issued. <br />Weinberger stated option two appears to be the best option for the parties since it has the least <br />impact on the adjacent residences. City Staff is recommending approval of the application with a <br />variance being granted to the septic code. <br />Piepho stated she has spoken with both neighbors who have indicated they would prefer to have a <br />variance to the septic code. Piepho stated she understands they will need to be contacted <br />personally in regards to this proposal. <br />Mike Molvani, Contractor, stated in his view option two is the best choice. <br />Hawn commented she is hesitant in granting a variance to the City’s septic code, noting that Orono’s <br />septic code is more stringent than the Slate's. Hawn stated the Planning Commission should take <br />Into consideration any possible health concerns that may result by granting the variance. Hawn <br />stated in her view a variance should not be granted if it compromises someone's health. Hawn <br />commented she is not aware of the reasons for the City's 75' requirement versus the Stale ’s 50’. <br />Weinberger stated Septic Inspector Pence has indicated that part of the reason for the 75’ setback <br />is that residences were being located 75’ from the septic site, and when additions were added to <br />the homes, they would generally involve the need for a variance to the septic site. Weinberger <br />indicated the State of Minnesota has determined that a 50’ setback from a well is appropriate. <br />Weinberger staled City Staff will be looking at reducing the 75’ setback requirement to 50' to <br />conform to the Stale standard. <br />Gaffron indicated the reasons City Staff will be reviewing this issue in the near future is because <br />it has been determined that there are no health issues that 'vould be impacted by having a 50’ <br />setback versus a 75’ setback: two. the Stale currently has the right to issue well permits; three, <br />well contractors typically go out and only meet the 50’ setback, with the City not being notified until <br />after the well is in that the 75’ setback has not been met. Gaffron staled it is difficult to enforce a <br />Pajjc 5
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.