CC 02-24-1960 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . 29 . . 1.'R. FRi:;."D,i. M:lHL, 1580 No. Griggs, Roseville: I'm for the sewer system because I'm for something that I think will protect our water supply - our ground water supply - and I feel that there is a possibility that these septic tanks might be endangering our ground water supply. Just today I was reading something here that I thought I might pass slong to you. Just a couple of words here. A committee in New York State - by the way they have a lot of problems with contaminated ground water in New York State so that got a committee together out there to study the problem. In 1957 this committee, in its report, said the follo'Ning: It is agreed by sanitary and public engineering profession that the only satisfactory way that the disposing of domestic sewage in the modern community is by means of public sewers. In the Health Department we receive plats for approval with septic tank installations and in 278 cases approved them although we know private sewage disposal systems, regardless of condition, is a temporary condition which only postpones the development of the ultimate solution which is public sewers. This committee is definitely opposed to septic tank installations in realty subdivisions built up or potentially built up areas regardless of soil and ground water conditions. Septic tanks should be reserved for use in predominantly rural areas. Another paper by the American Society of Civil Engineers states that as population density approaches one and a half persons per acre the need for public seNage is recognized. It is also stated in another public report that sewers are financially feasible when population density is ') persons per acre. My int.rest is, as I said, in protecting our ground water resources. I'm a sanitary engineer W~YOR ASHSACH: Are ;you employed by the Banister Engineering Co.? .