Agenda - 06-05-2012 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 5/2/12 22 Kevin Lindley: The Efland area is primarily residential. Lisa Stuckey: The reason the sewer was extended to the Efland area was because of the failing septic fields and the public health was almost a crisis that was taking place. How many of these people really have backup fields that are conventional and how would we determine looking ahead on when the second field failing. Are you just prolonging a public health problem by not getting these folks on the sewer? This has real health implications. How many would have that option and how viable is that option in terms of public health? Kevin Lindley: I am not an expert in the environmental health field. My understanding is that when they added the requirement for the repair area recently. Maybe 20 years. At the time, they had moved to the point they were testing soils instead of digging pits and putting water it in. I would think a repair area that is designated would be viable but there are quite a few of the smaller areas in Efland that do not have repair areas. Pete Hallenbeck: I think Efland is all over the map. There are a lot of areas that are one quarter acre lot and the soil is not happy and has to go on the sewer. There are other people that have one half and one acre lots. The repair area has to meet the current rules. Mark Marcoplos: Septic systems are really quite eloquent system. If they are done right, they work pretty well. I think it has to be a case by case basis. Tony Blake: How do you write an ordinance around that? Kevin Lindley: At this point, I am asking that we continue it to May. I wanted to see what discussion was generated here and send this draft in the packet out to the public for comment. My understand it they have to send comments in writing for it to be accepted in the public hearing debate and to be heard if they choose to come and speak. Larry Wright: What I would like to do in response to that is to go around to each one of the members and ask them if they want to make a statement for you to go on the record. Mark Marcoplos: I would be okay with requiring people to hook up to the system if they had a failure to their system and did not have an adequate repair area. If they had a failure with an adequate area, it is still logical and fair for them to be able to use their own system. Andrea Rohrbacher: My first comment is on disclosure. If the property has a failed system and another system is put in the failed area and the property is sold, is that disclosed to the purchaser of the property that the failed area is in use and there is no option other than to connect at that point. That is something I would want clarification on. I think for public health reasons, if the septic system fails and if the property has the ability to connect to the sewer that it should be required to connect for public health reasons. Lisa Stuckey: I agree with the second part of what Andrea says but I could be persuaded if someone from Public Health came in and said it is okay to use the backup. I would fall out toward the public health solution. Pete Hallenbeck: If you are on a lot that when you built it required you to have a repair area and you have a failure of your septic system and that repair area is viable and meets the current regulations, you should have the option of using the repair area or the sewer. If it is new construction in an area that has access to sewer I am on board with requiring you have to use the sewer. Tony Blake: I agree with both sides and the only concern I have is that most of the time, in my experience, the septic system fails because they were not maintained correctly and it was a maintenance issue in most cases. I am afraid that if someone that didn't maintain the first one; they will not maintain the second either. I would like to reserve my opinion and acquaint myself with the area and drive through and see how big the lots are and how many new homes there are and get a feel for the lay of the land there. I can see both sides of the issue. Rachel Hawkins: I am all for public health safety. If they are new consumer they should have to connect to what is existing but I am with Pete that they should have a choice if their lot has a repair lot. I think they should have a choice. Buddy Hartley: I am with Pete. Alan Campbell: I would say the same as Pete and I would suggest that we could address it with some type of grandfather clause.