Laserfiche WebLink
B. Alternatives Considered <br />1. Identification of Alternatives - A number of alternatives to the continued <br />use of standard on-site sewage treatment systems were considered, <br />including installation of municipal sewers. The alternatives included: <br />a. Demolition. Removal of homes that have neither acceptable on-site <br />systems nor available alternate drainfield sites. <br />b. "Alternative Systems" and "Experimental Systems" which might <br />include: <br />o Conforming design/substandard capacity systems on lots with <br />minimal space, using holding tanks as an overflow mode. <br />O Surface discharge systems (home plants). <br />O Aerobic tank systems with reduced capacity conforming <br />dra infields. <br />c. Holding tanks. <br />d. STEP systems (Sewage Tank/Effluent Pump) - each home has a <br />septic t^ with effluent pump discharging to a shallow small <br />diameter force-main leading to City sewer system. <br />e. Neighborhood collector system with community drainfield, <br />f. Enforced flow reductions (reno-fit with low water use fixmres). <br />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.