Laserfiche WebLink
MIM TES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CIT\' COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON MAY 13, 1996 <br />(#8 - U2\26 City ofOrono - Continued) <br />Kelley questioned the vacation asking whether the City should retain the easement for a <br />bike path through the area Callahan remarked that there was alot of traffic in the area <br />Hurr thought it was a good idea <br />Kelley noted that there is more and more pressure for a bike circuit He noted that the <br />old road connected Navarre with VVayzata at one time Kelley said it could be used in the <br />future and could always be vacated at a later date <br />Hurr asked if the vacation went to Lafayette Ridge, and if easements were taken back. <br />Mabusth said they were assessed for street lights and easements were taken overall the <br />vacation <br />Hurr moved. Kelley seconded, to deny the vacation of portions of Navarre Lane adjacent <br />to church pioperty and Lafayette Ridge but to complete the vacation of 33’ of right-of- <br />way adjacent to the O'Sullivan/Smith property Vote Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br />(#9) ON-SITE SYSTEMS CODE - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - ORDINANCE <br />NO. 147, 2ND SERIES <br />Steve Weekman said the proposed revision to the septic code was due to new State <br />standards. The ordinance would comply with the changes as well as clean up wording <br />and omissions presently in place <br />Goetten commented that she appreciated the 5 year extension for completion of repairs <br />to the non-shoreland systems found to be non-conforming due only to the lack of 3-foot <br />separation. VVeckman responded that there are alot of systems in need of replacement, <br />and it would take time to upgrade the systems. <br />Jabbour suggested eliminating the shoreland regulation and respond when the need is <br />shown VVeckman said it was a matter of compliance and need for inspections. He <br />suggested the Council set a different length of time period for eompletion of the repairs if <br />the separation issue vvas not of vital importance and no failure of the system is shown. <br />Jabbour suggested 20 years <br />Kelley voiced his concern with the need for both primary and alternate sites for properties <br />of 2 acre non-shoreland He gave an example of a developed lot not having the required <br />3' separation but having a working system He asked how that property owner could be <br />asked to abandon a working system to go to an alternate system, which would be the <br />property owner's "insurance policy", when the state does not require a time period for <br />conformance on the 3' separation Kelley said if a mound system was installed, and it <br />tailed, the property owner would not have any alternate solution.