08-09-1993 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Item D addresses the upgrading nonconforming sewage treatment systems via local government implementation of shoreland zoning controls. The overall issue of nonconforming sewage treatment systems was identified as a high priority issue by local officials and DNR-Division of Waters staff during a statewide shoreland program advisory committee process conducted in 1983. The results of that process, as documented in Sup. 3, Issue 1, clearly point to the need for aggressively addressing nonconforming sewage treatment systems through the Shoreland Management Program. The negative environmental impacts of the existence of non- conforming sewage treatment systems are well documented. For example, a November, 1980, Environmental Protection Agency publication entitled "Groundwater Protection" clearly describes the processes and threats of groundwater pollution from malfunctioning on-site sewage treatment systems. In shoreland areas, groundwater resources are often directly linked to the surface waters of the lake or stream. More recently, two published reports entitled, "Protecting Minnesota's Waters ... The Land Use Connection" (MNPCA, 1986) and "A Citizen's Guide to Lake Protection" (MNPCA and Freshwater Society/Foundation, 1985) clearly discuss the negative impacts that failing systems and improperly treated sewage have on our shoreland resources. Briefly, these impacts are often seen as algae blooms, fish and wildlife population declines, unsightly or smelly water, and eventual erosion of soils if discharge from failing systems breaks out onto the ground surface. The provisions in this item were developed and agreed upon by the Shoreland Management Committee after modifying the earlier proposals drafted by DNR Shoreland staff. The requirements found in the introductory language of Item D are needed because local governments in some cases cannot reasonably develop and implement programs to correct non- conforming sewage treatment systems unless appropriate funding is available. However, in many cases, the level of funding required to implement parts of item D may already be available at local units of government, since zoning administrators and support staff (building inspectors, sanitarians, clerks) could feasibly satisfy on a routine basis the requirement that systems be updated when permits are issued and variances are granted, and the costs of implementing this section may not be substantial. Further, it-»va8 found reasonable by the Shoreland Management Committee that such programs must require system# reconstruction whenever permits or variances are required! and/or granted, as recommended in SUP 3, Issue 1, point 5.