Laserfiche WebLink
LJ <br />To: Ur i an f-ul mer ar,d Joanne Mabuuth <br />From: Mich,-4-1 P. Gafiron, Assi ant Zoning Administrator <br />Date,: Septembur : o, 1904 <br />Subjert: Soil And Site Conditions For Dog House Fennel Proposal <br />Res Septic SystemT, <br />- Site west of garage slab is not nearly big enough for mound <br />or any system. <br />- Garage slab is over existing d_rain_fie_ld serving the house! My <br />official recommendation is that the garage slab be removed. <br />- because of 75' well setback, there is vary little alternate <br />drainfield potential at this site, and what little there is <br />should be preserved for alternate site to servo c::isting house. <br />- Site east of proposed kennel was bared by Schermers and found <br />to be fill material over peat/organic soils. Water table on <br />9/1 /84 was at _ +/- during the driest time this yEar. <br />Schermers noted that the soil was mottled to the surfa_e and <br />likely would be saturated to very near surface in the E�pring. He <br />indicated he would riot want to recommend even a mound without a <br />Getter 1nowledge of the high seasonal �jater table, probably by <br />monitoring a number of iospect.on weI17. for a year. <br />-- In a conversation with Dr. James L. Anderson of the U. of M. <br />Agrcul tore E>: tensi on Service, he suggested that the e:: i st i ng <br />kennel system be investigated +urther to determine how well it is <br />fur=tioning, and relate it's affluent gluality in the tank: to what <br />might be found with .1 hLiMan waste load. <br />- Our code requi res• e;: t e n s i v t, l y detai I ed �:-, i to and .oi 1 <br />,-?valuations" on fill Soils, and where peat soils are encountered, <br />would allow a rsystem ui,der only the most e:: treme conditions due <br />to e:: i st i ng lot conf_i gi_!rat on. The City is under nc obligation <br />to 'approve a systr-7 on these uoi 1 s. If a system was allowed, it <br />would be subject to metering cif inflows and periodic groundwater <br />quality testing. I do not believe the City should allow a new <br />system to be constructed for a new or e::panded e.eso unless the <br />minimum acceptable soil conditions e::ist, so that we aren't <br />creating a new prat1em where none appears to e::ist now. <br />- As for the existing kennel system, we have boon repeately told <br />that no animal fecal materials are introduced into the system, <br />and that the only discharge is from spraying out the kennel <br />stalls and from dog wash water, hence we would c,:;pect a 1LA <br />intensity effluent which might not form a sludge or a biomat. If <br />th;s 15 found to be tht, case, and no apparont problems with <br />groundwater :duality or liquid volume di•po5al are noted, I would <br />feel fairly comfortable in .allowing this type of a sy .tem to br, <br />installed for the kennel for the existing type of use, without <br />the human sewage? element, i.e. can't hook up zin ap,-krt(nent to i t . <br />1 <br />