My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-09-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
04-09-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/18/2024 2:20:56 PM
Creation date
10/18/2024 2:18:58 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
457
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
#1506 Carol Senn, 3220 Watertown Pd - Septic System Testing ]?eview <br />March 7, 1990 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />5. Because runoff from the Carlson subdivision currently <br />flows generally between the primary and alternate sites on <br />Lot 2 towards the northwest, a swale would need to be <br />provided between those two sites to keep them from being <br />affected by spring run-off. A much better solution would be <br />to direct all run-off from the Carlson subdivision to the <br />ditch along Watertown Road, and within the Senn subdivision, <br />continue that ditch along Watertown Road westward to the <br />creek. This would better protect these drainfield sites, <br />with a greatly decreased potential for saturation due to <br />transient surface water flows. <br />6. The tested sites on Lot 2 are more than 75' from the <br />creek, and would not be expected to affect or be affected by <br />the creek. <br />7. Having walked the site, even if there were six dry <br />buildable acres, it is unlikely that additional drainfield <br />sites could be located to support a third lot within this <br />property. <br />8. Within Lot 1, the low ponding area located north of the <br />proposed house contains no cattails, and there appeared to <br />be a fairly large mature live tree in the middle of that low <br />spot. This did not appear to be significant as a wetland, <br />and does not show up separately on our designated wetlands <br />maps. There would not appear to be any compelling reason to <br />require a drainage easement over this low area. <br />9. The proposed driveway location within Outlot A appears <br />to be on high ground and I would not expect it to be <br />affected by the creek. <br />In summary, I would recommend approval of the subdivision, <br />finding that both Lots 1 and 2 have acceptable tested sites for <br />primary and alternate sewage treatment mound drainfield systems. <br />Regarding the proposed driveway, is Outlot A intended to <br />serve as a private road, or just a private driveway? What will <br />be the required principal structure setback from the west line of <br />Lot 2? (If a 50' west lot line setback was required, that might <br />somewhat limit the size and configuration of the rather long, <br />narrow house depicted on the survey.)
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.