09-07-82 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY COUNCIL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 7, 1982 -4- 5, DEAN JOHNSTON PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED; -7Johnston - Shares the concern for safety and health relative to the drainfield. Asked if the plan could be approved contingent upon a drainfield plan, designed and approved by an acknowledged expert and the City Engineer, This would eliminate the necessity of bringing it back before the Council. --Eder - wants to review the redesigned plan, would like to have the drainfield further away from the street, particularly in the upper 2-3 lines. Concerned that the blacktop in the cul-de-sac will be affected where the field in within 3 feet of the curb of the cuirae-sac. --Johnson - understands that a satisfactory mound system requires only 1/4 of the available 2250 sq. ft. required setback requirements. There is plenty of rrom for a satisfactory system plus an alternate this is a technical question. --Bohrer - a variance is necessary from the setback from the house not the septic system. Being 75 ft. away from the water, meets the septic system setback and elevation requirements. If the system were moved slightly away from the eul-de-sac area, it would be less than 75 ft. from the water. Configuration of the area would still require a redesigned system to be placed in this location with only the upper 1/2 of the system constructed. The number of lineal feet of drainfield would remain the same for this proposal or a two bedroom House design. In regard to having Roger Machmier design a system - the mound system is considered a non7convential system - Johnston"s system is a convential system with runs constructed at different elevations. Sees no need to have someone else design the system again. Has calculated the area available for the runs, can meet the standard of 4-41/2 ft of undisturbed soil between the runs. An existing drainfield would affect a new system. With the know- ledge that there might be another system would have to have an understandinq that if durinq excavation a septic tank pr_drainfield r'ux's- are enaauntered-- the tank t,,,ill have to be removed and the runs grounted shut, This :would be enforced ]5y'the Building:. Inspector. T;ie Engineer informed the Council that the City has adopted the revised Chapter 4, Individual Sewage Treatment System Ordinance. This is more restrictive than the PCA standards previously used. This ordinance differentiates between the use of a garbage disposal and not. This considers the use of a garbage disposal as the load equivalent to one additional bedroom; Mayor Eder closed the hearing at 8:50 p.m. --Mottaz - would like the Engineer to respond to the following; 1. Possibility of an existiing:drainfield on the site. 2. A determination as to whether or not two separate systems can be installed on the available area, taking into account that with a garbage disposal are talking about a 3 bedroom house, per the present Ordinance requirement. M/S/ Mottaz/Novak to table action on the Dean Johnston variance application until September 21, 1982, pending the Engineers report. I The Building Inspector will review the systems indicated as having \ problems and forward his findings to the Engineer; also, copies of the Larson septic testing reports to -be forwarded to the Enginb8r and the Council. Carried 4-1, Morgan opposed.