Committee divided on reserve-area size for decentralized systems amid affordability concerns
Members debated whether to require reserve areas equal to 50% or 100% of the primary dispersal area; supporters of 100% cited failure resilience while others warned it could raise land needs and housing costs.
The full story
Committee members debated the draft requirement that a reserve area equal at least 50% of the primary dispersal area. One member said he would "feel so much better if we had a 100%" backup area, arguing 50% would not handle a full-field failure; other members cautioned that expanding reserve areas to 100% could increase lot sizes and drive up housing costs, noting a local starter home price example.
Sign up to keep reading.
Your free newsletter brings you what your city council, county, and school board discussed and decided.
or