09-21-82 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY COUNCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 21, 1982 8, ENGINEER'S REPORT; B. Dean Johnston - Continued -- Mottaz - this would require a.fifth variance. These are not ( small variances - one is 50%, one 60%, another is 50%. -- Morgan - in response to the lot 'size variance - this lot appears to be one of the larger lots in the subdivision being .57 acres - there is only one "larger lot. -- Eder - one distinguishing feature, this lot has the pennisula on it - this adds to the area, but what value does it have to a composite lot - big projection. -- Novak - variances are a big problem - the amount and percentage. Have to consider Pauisrud's letter, -- Darrel Paulsrud, 8195 Hill Trail - was told by the original owner (Mona Cohn Bloom) that there was a septic tank and drainfield that ran under Bonestroo's driveway and in the direction of the old stable (no longer there), that being in the southeast portion of the lot in question. No written documentation as to when the system was installed or to what is there. Only have the verbal acknowledgement of this. Purchased the house from Mrs, Cohn Bloom. -- Bohrer - reconfirmed this converstation with Mrs. Bloom. She stated that she has no knowledge of any septic system on that lot and doesn't believe there ever was one. Confused by the conflicting positions. One of the important things is that if you,amin-fact, dochave a septic system that crosses two other lots what rights do you have or do not have by having that system,located on property that is not your own, -- Paulsrud - other than the fact that it was the original system - the original system out there, does this not hold anything. -- Novak--,- are we talking about rights or would this prevent anything from happening as far as another septic system. -- Bohrer - when this question was brought up last time, did not quite understand the question that there was an existing funcitioning system on the lot. Understood it to mean that there may have been a previous system on the lot. Commented that the only interference that would cause is if that is encountered while excavating for a new system - would have to either remove it(old system, as in the case of a septic tank or some structure) or if a drainfield trench is encountered this would have to be plugged off so the water from the new trench will not short circuit and run someplace else that you don't want it to. -- Paulsrud - looking to be assured that, if his drainfield is on the Johnston property, it won'L be shut off. Has a working system. Has replaced one system and running out of room to replace another one. -- Bohrer - just about impossible to determine if all of that system is functioning or not. Cound not see how the system could continue to function in the winter if it ran under Bonestroo's driveway. No way to verify unless it was --dug for, -- Morgan - there have been variances granted in this area before. Lot is larger than most in the area. If Mr. Johnston uses his land with the variances and the technologies available, will this in any way damage the environment of this subdivision. �, -- Bohrer - in my opinion, no. In the fact that it can meet all of the codes that are presently applicable, those codes have safety features already built-in. As -:an example, when say the septic system is just 50 ft. from the Bonestroo well, that 50 ft. already has a safet' factor built in and, in my opinion, it is not necessary to add on additional safety factors.