02-16-1988 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

9Yof ORONOly, MinncMla 55323•Munid{»Rl Othcm irns 5 systea design for the Bsed various concerns ger Machneier of the ce. Dr* Machmeier is a md is likely the most egarding the design of Lew of the pertinent determinations s because the rock beds refore the assumptions Lid. Mr. Parker used a his design but it does ers generally accepted >rtion of the property eolation test had been inch* the basal width ifined as approximately equired in addition to maintain the necessary 1 have put the ultimate ty boundaries. led system would not be straining setbacks for ance that the property re and a primary and mound systems due to a :eria are as follows* lot are 75' from the rear lot line. PUBLIC WORKS - 473-73S9 fm Robert Posthumus« Lots 58 t 59» Itorse Island Park January 19» 1988 Page 2 of 3b) For the mound systems# the setbacks are 75* from the lake# 75* from the pond# 20* from any structure# 75* from any well.c) For the well# the required setbacks are 75' from the lake# 5* from the property line# 3* from any portion of the house or overhang# 75' from any portion of the drainfield syst«B# and 50* from the septic tanks (note that the State of Minnesota Standards allow the well to be 50* from the shoreline and 50* from any portion of the septic system or tanks). 4. Having drawn all of those constraints onto a copy of your proposed site plan# with your proposed house location and slse# in my opinion the required primary and alternative sites cannot be fitted within the property boundaries. 5. However# it is also my opinion that with a number of variances and careful site planning# perhaps in addition to a reduction in the else of the proposed house# this lot smy in fact be suitable as a building site. The revisions that I see being potentially feasible are as follows* a) Place the well at a location 5* from the southern side lot line and 50* from the lakeshore (this requires a conditional use permit and variance approval from the City Council). b) Move the house nearer to the southeasterly lot line to a point as near as 10* from that lot line (this also requires a variance approval fr<»n the City Council). c) Reduce the footprint area of the structure so that setbacks of 20* from the mound systems can be maintained. The designated primary and alternate drainfield sites then would be on the flat portion of the top of the hill# and near the base of the hill near the lot corner as shown on *:he attached conceptual diagram. Based on my discussion with Dr. Machmeier# the point from which mound system setbacks are measured would be defined by the required basal dimensions of the mound systems (l.e. for the primary site on top of the hill for a 21 minute per inch perc rate and slopes of less than 3%# the defined edge of the treatment area is 5' outside of the rock bed# and we would still, expect to see a 10* side lot line setback and 20' house setback frem that boundary). Also# for the alternate site downhill# which because of a steeper slope and faster perc rate has a defined treatment area underneath and downhill from the rock bed# we would again escpect that the 10' property line setback be maintained along with the 20' house setback. These are also shown on the attached diagram. This configuration would appear to meet the required setbacks from property lines and from the lakeshore and the pond. In this configuration we would allow addition of fill materials outside the designated treatment area up to the lot lines (but not outside them). El • ............ ......... ........... .....................................................ms 1 ^ V. ■mms :gW;. •! V .:i 'mmmam wm