My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-06-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
05-06-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2023 3:40:19 PM
Creation date
7/31/2023 3:39:57 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
2. Analysis of Alternatives <br />a. Demolition <br />- High cost of acquisition is not affordable to City. <br />- Negative impact on existing neighborhood. <br />- With high percentage of homes in some areas not having <br />alternate sites, entire neighborhood would be subject to <br />demolition. <br />- Removal of "every other house", for instance, does not <br />likely yield suitable drainfield sites for those remaining. <br />- In older neighborhoods, reduces already-limited stock of <br />affordable housing. <br />- For the above reasons, demolition of selected homes in an <br />existing neighborhood is not considered as a viable alternative. <br />b. "Altemative/Experimental" Systems <br />i. Surface Discharge Systems <br />- Typically a packaged home-use individual treatment <br />plant. <br />- Surface discharge not approved in Minnesota. <br />- Disposal of effluent in winter is a severe problem, may <br />also be a problem in summer. <br />- High individual system cost. <br />- Ongoing individual plant maintenance required. <br />ii. Aerobic Tank Systems <br />- Claim to provide adequate treatment to allow drainfield <br />size reduction. <br />- To date, MPCA/UM have not fully approved drainfield <br />size reduction concept. <br />- Drainfield must still meet the 3-foot separation <br />requirement, which cannot be met on many properties <br />except by standard mound sytem technology. <br />- Ongoing maintenance required. <br />iii. Conforming design/substandard capacity/holding tank <br />- Concept is to use substandard capacity but conforming- <br />location drainfield to its maximum capacity, then <br />overflow into a holding tank (for re-entry to drainfield <br />in off-peak hours, or for hauling away). <br />- Concept assumes a small conforming trench drainfield <br />can be constructed, which is not the case on many sites; <br />not a viable system when drainfield is a mound. <br />- This has been used as a short-term retro-fit in Orono <br />(by adding holding tank to existing system) in <br />developed ares where no other options exist or until <br />sewer is available, but is not a long-term solution. <br />None of the above methods are considered as viable alternatives <br />to sewer for the reasons noted. <br />• -i
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.