Laserfiche WebLink
<br />and could be a contingency of the approval. He expressed concern about private septic systems, <br />particularly where there is not an anticipated connection to the MUSA any time in the near <br />future. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer asked if it would be possible to go ahead with rezoning this to the PUD, as <br />no one seems to be opposed to the concept of the plan for this site. He indicated it does need to <br />be determined where the septic system will be located. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated they will not be able to determine tonight whether the septic system <br />can be located on this site. The developer has done soil borings to maximize the location of the <br />drainfield,and they don't appear to have been close enough to where the actual drainfield will be <br />sited. Due to this the soil expert has indicated he does not know what borings will apply to the <br />drainfield. <br /> <br />Mr. Walz stated the soil tester bored the areas where the drainfield will likely be located. The <br />results of those two borings indicated it was the best location out of the eight pits that were <br />completed. There is no way without digging the pit to determine 100% viability, and that is <br />where the problem lies. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski explained the area was suspect because it was known that there was <br />filling in the area. This test confirmed there have been areas filled, but they found a couple of <br />boring areas where there was no fill. His interpretation of the report is that more testing is <br />needed to ensure that the whole area has not been filled. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked what is needed at this level to recommend whether to proceed with a <br />recommendation on the preliminary plat and site plan. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski advised the Planning Commission could pass the preliminary plat and <br />site plan with a contingency regarding the septic system. Once the preliminary plat has been <br />approved there are substantial rights that would be applied to the applicant. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy asked what type of contingencies would be recommended. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski advised there could be a contingency on adequate soils being available <br />for an on-site system and a replacement system. <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes suggested the four items listed in Staff s case as reasons for tabling <br />preliminary plat and site plan could be included as contingencies for approval. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy inquired about the testing being disruptive to the septic system. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt indicated under code it is required to have a main site and an alternate site for <br />the septic system. If a traditional perking system cannot be utilized there are other options that <br />would increase the cost. The development will not be given the go ahead until the City is <br />convinced the on-site system that will serve this area will be acceptable for the proposed use with <br />an alternate. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/October 5, 2006 <br />Page 13 of 20 <br />