Laserfiche WebLink
<br />submitted, and revisions are required to accommodate the required number of trees. Staff is <br />requiring the planting of 25 additional trees. Staff is not requiring landscaping on the south <br />parcel, except in those areas near the pump house. However, re-establishing disturbed areas is <br />required; seed is acceptable. Ms. DaInes explained the plan has been revised to indicate a <br />separate loading area for deliveries and commercial vehicles. No changes were made to the width <br />of the drive aisle in this area. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes indicated a soils report has been submitted that calls for additional <br />study of soils in the exact drain field area. After analyzing the report it is still unclear whether <br />the site is viable for a septic system. The City Engineer will provide further information <br />regarding the soils report. Staff recommends tabling action until it can be verified that the <br />subsurface conditions are viable for a septic system, what the size of the system will be, and <br />where it would be located. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Mr. Mike Walz, General Contractor representing Northfork Office Condos, stated he is frustrated <br />about how this situation is going. He just found out 15 minutes ago about the recommendation <br />to table this and require additional testing. According to his conversation with Ms. DaInes, the <br />bottom line is that they need to excavate the entire site to determine the viability of the septic <br />system, which he finds completely ridiculous. In doing excavation it will invalidate those <br />locations anyways. His hope is that they will be able to recommend moving forward with this <br />pending final approval of the septic design. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski explained the soils report indicates that four pits were completed; <br />buried debris was found in two of the pits where fill had been placed. Two of the pits did not <br />have any material. Mr. Jankowski advised the report suggests that it is possible that the two <br />areas where there was no fill found may be an acceptable area for the septic. The indication is <br />that there needs to be additional testing to determine the extent of the fill and to make sure these <br />areas are acceptable to accommodate the septic system. This report states the boring done is only <br />a partial fulfillment of the subsurface assessment requested by the City. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt requested clarification that this septic system will be for a commercial <br />development and would meet commercial sizing. The size of the drain field for the conventional <br />system would be based on the type of use and the native soils the drain field would be established <br />in. The test is inconclusive as to the soils; therefore they are not able to properly size the drain <br />field. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski explained at this point it is not known how big the drain field needs to <br />be because the infiltration rates are not known. There is cautionary note in the soils report about <br />infiltration rates; the report states: If the very top soil layer observed and testedfor extends below <br />the drain field the rate of infiltration could be much lower than the rate estimated. Mr. <br />Jankowski advised there is some uncertainty expressed in the report, and an infiltration test is <br />recommended. They can then size how much area is needed, and then do borings to determine if <br />there is sufficient area. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/October 5, 2006 <br />Page 11 of 20 <br />