Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
, Manage 3. Manage 3 would be your best result, because it only requires a 16.5-foot buffer, and <br /> you already have that in place behind the rock walL If it turned out to be Manage 1 or Manage 2, <br /> the buffer required would be 35' or 25' respectively from the edge of wetland. Mark tells me he <br /> is fairly confident it would be reclassified to a lower category than Preserve, but until the <br /> assessment was done we would not know exactly which category. <br /> I understand that Melanie has offered to assist you in choosing the right plantings to establish a <br /> buffer if you decide to go ahead with the buffer establishment based on the current Preserve <br /> classification. However, if you want to spend the money to have a MnRAM assessment done in <br /> the hopes that a lesser or no additional buffer will be required, that is up to you. <br /> As I see it, your options for dealing with the buffer issue are as follows: <br /> Option l. Have your wetland person do a MNRAM Assessment. <br /> If the MNRAM Assessment indicates that the classification should be <br /> Manage 1, 2 or 3 instead of"Preserve", then have him submit it to the MCWD for <br /> approval. Once they approve it, you would then proceed with submitting to us a <br /> buffer plan to have the appropriate buffer established in the case of Manage 1 or <br /> Manage 2; or if it's a Manage 3 no added buffer is necessary and we could issue the <br /> pool permit once you re-apply. <br /> If the MnRAM Assessment concludes that it's still a Preserve category, in order to <br /> move forward you would have to do the required 50-foot buffer as noted previously. <br /> Option 2. If you choose to skip the MnRAM and just go ahead with the Preserve <br /> buffer of 50', you should proceed with the steps outlined previously by Melanie and <br /> Chris. <br /> Option 3. You could apply for a variancefrom the buffer requirements, which has a <br /> $700 application fee and would take about two months to process. You would have <br /> to convince the Council that you have a practical difficulty that prevents you from <br /> establishing the buffer. From staff's perspective, we don't see that you have a <br /> practical difficulty, and staff would not support the variance. But, that is an option if <br /> you wish to pursue it, with no guarantee it would be approved. <br /> I did research your question about why the septic system had to be replaced. The City inspector <br /> did a soil boring on the property on October 8, 1999 and his boring logs (attached) indicate the <br /> seasonal water table of the existing system was only 14 inches below the trenches, not meeting <br /> the 30" minimum separation requirement. It had a deadline of December 31, 2009 to be <br /> replaced, but replacement is also triggered by new construction on the site or by a sale of the <br /> home. It is important that you complete the installation of the septic system regardless whether <br /> you proceed with the pool. <br /> Please call me if you have additional questions. <br /> Mike <br /> Michael P. Gaffron <br /> Assistant City Administrator/Long Term Strategy <br /> City of Orono <br /> (Street Address) 2750 Kelley Parkway <br /> (Mailing Address) P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bav , MN 55323 <br /> Phone: (952) 249-4600 <br /> 3 <br />