12-09-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE STUBBS BAY SEWER HEARING - NOVEMBER 20»*f * Gaffron noted that on Page 5 of the handout. It exp la.ns categories of existing systems within the Stubbs Bay area. He noted that currently 1/5 of the systems are conforming, however with the proposed new DNR shoreland regulations, some of those may no longer be conforming. Gaffron stated that about 50% of the systems in the area are substandard, about 10% are near failure, about 8% are currently falling. 2% of the properties are on holding tanks; 4 cabins do not have plumbing; and 8% of the systems are too close to the lake and are less than 3' above the lake elevation. Gaffron noted that some alternatives Include: alter water use, repair or replace current systems. Innovative Joint rn—site systems, collection systems with off-s1te treatment. Individual holding tanks, selective condemnation or demolition, and sanitary sewer. Sanitary sewer Is the best, permanent solution. He explained that the DNR regulations will force adoption of the State Septic Code, which will require when a resident proposes Improvements or additions to his property, the septic system would have to be In compliance with current code. Gaffron reiterated Council's past position, that areas that S0woped will not be rezoned from a 2 acre standard to allow higher densities. Gene Oeterling. 240 Cygnet Place, asked If water quality studies had been done to determine where the real problem lies, such as how many fish are dying. Gaffron explained that In 1975 soil borings were done in the Stubbs Bay Northeast area, which told them that there was untreated sewage In the near-surface ground water. He stated that there are a number of systems near the lake In sandy soils that are undoubtedly contributing to effluent entering the lake. He pointed out that the areas near the lake and the streams are of biggest concern. Oeterling suggested that the City has concerns but they are not able to put an exact measurement on those concerns. Gaffron noted that much greater effort and expense would be Incurred In attempting to quantify the problem, and to date the City's determination of the extent of actual pollution has relied an Inferences based on relative compliance with code standards. Jane Behrman, 340 Leaf Street, stated that she felt the expense of additional testing would be worth It prior to spending home owners' money for sewer. Joe OeHeo, 400 Oxford Road, agreed with Behrman. Jabbour pointed out that If the City Is forced by the State to enforce such regulations, what can the City do about the Issue.