Laserfiche WebLink
• ^ <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD AUGUST 9, 1993 <br />(#8) TIMING OP PERMIT-TRIGGERED SEPTIC UPGRADES <br />Gaffron asked for direction from Council regarding whether the two <br />year time frame for repair of septic systems which are non- <br />conforming solely due to the lack of three foot separation, should <br />apply when there is an application for a building permit. Staff <br />feels such systems should generally be upgraded concurrently with <br />the building project. The DNR has also taken this position per <br />their letter of 0/4/93. <br />Hurr stated she agreed that the City should use building permits <br />which add bedrooms or living spaci: as a lever to ensure needed <br />repairs are completed. <br />Gaffron described various scenarios and types of permitted building <br />projects that might or might not affect existing septic systems or <br />future drainfield sites. Hurr noted it would be a disservice to <br />cur residents if they found out after their building project was <br />completed that they had destroyed their only possible site for <br />replacing the septic system. <br />Council discussed the ramifications and impacts of using or not <br />using leverage at the time of a building permit and possible <br />enforcement problems. <br />It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Jabbour, that any building permit <br />extending the exterior envelope would be the trigger for <br />concurrent replacement of a non-conforming system. <br />Discussion ensued as to whether additional issues would be <br />forthcoming. Gaffron indicated that is likely, and this may be <br />just one of many issues with septic code enforcement for which <br />Council will be asked to define policy. He also noted that efforts <br />at publicizing the new requirements have met with limited success <br />as it seems few residents have read the materials sent out so far. <br />Gaffron indicated a concern regarding holding up building projects <br />proposed late in the year for as much as 6 months in order that <br />site evaluation be completed prior to building permit issuance. <br />Jabbour indicated this would be a real problem, since construction <br />in Minnesota occurs year around. <br />Mayor Callahan stated that dealing with the City is becoming <br />burdensome for residents. Discussion continued regarding the <br />construction process and how it is perceived by residents. <br />Mayor Callahan called t.he question. Ayes 2, nays 2. Motion <br />failed. It was moved by Mayor Callahan, seconded by Jabbour, to <br />I