Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 <br />ZONING FILE #1757 - CONT. <br />Gaffron reviewed why the new shoreland regulations have more <br />restrictive standards than previous codes. He explained that for <br />about 15 years there has been a standard for ail new systems that <br />If there is mottling present, which is an indicator in the soil <br />that there is a seasonal perched water table, a 3’ separation above <br />the mottling is required. The DNR and the PCA mandated that any <br />existing system that does not meet that separation is considered <br />a non-conforming system, and In shoreland areas, the DNR has said <br />those systems must be made conforming. <br />Gaffron explained that staff does not have all the facts regarding <br />the septic system for the guest house, and absent testing in the <br />immediate area of the system, staff has had to look at testing done <br />on the remainder of the property which indicates mound systems <br />would be required. He said the logical thing to do would be to hire <br />a site evaluator to do soil borings at the site of the existing <br />drainfleld to determine its relationship to the mottling elevation. <br />Hanser stated the rules keep changing and felt the City should not <br />continue to hold up the subdivision process because of this issue. <br />He said he would be happy to hire an evaluator. <br />Jabbour asked if the system Is now considered Illegal <br />conforming. <br />non- <br />Gaffron stated by definition, the system Is non-conforming and <br />cannot stay that way based on the new shoreland requ1rements. <br />Taylor indicated the definition of a conforming system is one built <br />to codes not withstanding its location. <br />Barrett opined that if the City decides to change its rules, they <br />mtist add an obligation to provide for non-conforming structures, <br />and if that Is not provided for, it might be considered a taking <br />of property. However, the regulatory values Imposed by the DNR, PCA <br />and the City with respect to shoreland property, may Involve o <br />public interest which is high enough to allow the City to regulate <br />even non-conforming uses and require them to be upgraded. <br />Jabbour asked if they have a way to aiiow the subdivision to <br />continue conditioned upon the applicant providing the information <br />required to prove the system is either conforming or non- <br />conformi ng. <br />6