Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL <br />MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 23, 1996 <br />( #12 - Request for Sewer - Continued) <br />Goetten asked who created the vacant lot. Gaffron reported that the City approved it in <br />• <br />1987. Goetten said she then had no question regarding this issue since the City deemed it <br />as a buildable lot, the applicant should not be asked to combine the two lots. With the <br />upcoming availability of sewer to the area and with the additional cost born by the <br />applicant to bring the sewer across the street to his property, Goetten recommended that <br />this option be considered. <br />Hurr said she disagreed noting the sewer line has to end somewhere. Hurr said the City <br />did not create the problem and the applicant had the option for an alternate site on the <br />vacant lot, the experimental mound system, or the rearrangement of the lot lines. <br />Maresh said the present system is failing, and the new codes have created a problem with <br />the high water table and ponding requirements in the ordinance. Maresh said the lot was <br />originally a tree farm and has an intense growth of trees. He noted that S -P Testing <br />found depths shallower than 12" outside the intense tree growth area. SMI Testing had <br />tested in the midst of the forest area where the septic would not be desirable. Maresh <br />said Steve Weckman also took several borings which were less than 12 ". He also asked <br />Weckman to take borings on the sites tested by S -P and very few met the requirement. <br />In the dense forest area, there was found to be only 6" separation. An alternate, less <br />dense site, also did not meet the requirement. <br />Maresh continued that he was informed that the experimental mound might not work and <br />would be more costly with the need to double the amount of sand. If that system failed <br />and have to be rebuilt, there would be even more expense involved. He noted that <br />sewering was more expensive but would be of a permanent nature, one that would not <br />have to be repeated. He also noted that he did not purchase the vacant lot at the same <br />time as the homestead lot and should not be required to combine the two lots to gain a <br />septic site. <br />In reviewing the vacant lot, Maresh said there was a dense forest area in the portion of <br />the lot off of CoRd 6 across from the Trinity Lutheran Church. He said the south side of <br />the lot was not adequate as it was used for drainage and wet in nature. A house site for <br />the vacant lot is to the south side and had only two septic sites available without invading <br />the tree forest. He added that the experimental mound system would come back to haunt <br />him if required. <br />Jabbour asked if the sewer unit could be considered as an extension of the MUSA line. <br />Gaffron said it would have to be an addition through a future amendment once the 50 <br />units were reached. Jabbour said he was sympathetic to the problem of the applicant but <br />recognized the other 600 non - conforming septics within the City. He was concerned <br />with the additional costs involved and opening the door to other residents asking for <br />sewer. Jabbour voiced concern with the affordability factor also. <br />• <br />