Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF A REGULAR CRONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD JULY 12, 1993 <br />RASMUSSEN REQUEST - CCNT. <br />Moorse explained tne ouyer of the property recuestsd septic <br />certification, whicn was done anc tne inspector found the system <br />did not meet the 3’ seoaration. which was reported on the <br />certification. <br />Rasmussen stated the most recent inspection was done in July 1991 <br />and tne system was found to be adeauate at that time. The later <br />change in tne orrinance created the prcolem. He said they are not <br />a ski fig the Council tc say <br />the 1 992 standards, but <br />the existing system is conforming with <br />merely reauestinq a variance to tnose <br />standards as the system is a functional system. <br />Moorse said the City nas always had the 3’ separation requirement, <br />but did not enforce in prior years if the system was functioning. <br />Rasmussen stated when the system was originally Installed there was <br />a larger than 3’ separation. out due to the mottled soil <br />requirement, the system is new corsidered non-conforming. <br />Jaboour clarified the system was installed in 1978, and in 1379 the <br />standards were adopted but not forced upon existing systems. In <br />1992 with the adoption of Shoreland Management regulations, the <br />City decided it would become tougher on enforcement of the <br />standards and al I systems in the City wiI I be required to meet the <br />stricter standards. <br />of a new system <br />IegaI when built <br />Neaton said as a practical matter this issue will surface again <br />when the new owners wish to improve the property, but he felt the <br />current owners shoulu not have to bear the cost <br />because the current svstem is functioning and was <br />and should therefore be grandfathered. <br />Mayor Callanan opposed the term grandfathered. <br />jabbour said he has \ problem in the past with the terms legal non- <br />conforming versus illegal non-conforming. When a building is <br />standing up and a new ordinance is adopted that makes the building <br />non-conforming, should the building be removed? He said he has <br />justified in his mind that somehow non-contorming means it becomes <br />a detriment to the f'ublic health and welfare. He said just because <br />his septic system has been found to be dumping some residue into <br />the lake does not mean that he has the right to forever after <br />continue to do so. He said there may be some justification in <br />allowing the home to be sold with the current system anticipating <br />improvements to the property when the new owners take ownership.