Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8A - Individual Septic Treatment Systems - Ordinance 99-13 MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT OCTOBER 4, 1999 8A JANE KANSIER, PLANNING COORDINATOR DONALD RYE, PLANNING DIRECTOR /:3 CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 99-N!f AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 705.1200 PERTAINING TO INDIVIDUAL SEPTIC TREATMENT SYSTEMS IN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE History: The City of Prior Lake has traditionally adopted by reference Scott County Ordinance No.4, entitled "Individual Sewage Disposal System Ordinance". By adopting this ordinance, the City was then required to issue permits and inspect all private sewage systems in the City. Recent changes to Minnesota Statutes and Pollution Control Agency rules now require counties to conduct an inspection and maintenance program for private sewage systems. Since the City has its own ordinance, we are not subject to the Scott County requirements. Therefore, State Statute requires that the City also conduct a maintenance and inspection program. The City has neither the staff nor the resources to conduct such a program. Given the frequency of such permits within the City and the fact that the County has an established program, it makes little sense for the City to establish such a program. We have discussed the possibility of some sort of joint agreement with Scott County to conduct this program within the City limits while allowing City staff to issue permits for new systems. The County, however, did not seem willing to enter into such an agreement. The County was more amenable to taking over the entire program, including issuing permits for private septic systems in the City. In order to initiate this process, the City Council need only delete the reference to the Scott County Ordinance in the City Code. By statute, the County is then required to enforce its ordinance within the City limits. The City Council reviewed this amendment on September 7, 1999. The Council tabled action on this ifem to allow for a County representative to be present to address the issue of guidelines and 1:\99files\99ordamd\citycode\99-068\99068cc2.doc Page 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: RECOMMENDED MOTION: REVIEWED BY: enforcement standards. Al Frechette of the Scott County Environmental Health Department will be present to provide an overview of the County program and to answer the Council's questions. Current Circumstances: There are about 180 private septic systems within the City limits. Upon adoption of the proposed amendment, Scott County would place these systems on their list of existing systems and provide notification of inspection and maintenance requirements. In addition, Scott County will issue permits for any new systems. Since the City rarely issues more than 1 or 2 permits per year for new systems, very few property owners will be affected by the proposed ordinance. The City will continue to issue all building permits, and ensure that any new construction is connected to sewer where it is available. In cases where sewer is not available, applicants will be referred to Scott County for a septic system permit. Conclusion: Adoption ofthe proposed ordinance will place the responsibility for the inspection of septic systems on Scott County, which has the staff to handle this program. The Issues: The maintenance of septic systems is important to prevent pollution of ground water and surface water. Scott County has the staff and the resources to conduct such a program, while the City does not. Adoption of the proposed ordinance will not have a major impact on the citizens of the City. Budfet Impact: This proposed amendment has no immediate budget impact. If adopted, the City will not be required to prepare a maintenance and inspection program for septic systems. This will eliminate the potential need for staff and other expenses involved in such a program. The City Council has three alternatives: 1. Adopt Ordinance 99- XX approving the proposed amendment. 2. Deny Ordinance 99-XX. 3. Defer this item and provide staff with specific direction. A motion and second to adopt Ordinance 99- XX approving the proposed amendment. I :\99files\99ordamd\citycode\99-068\99068cc2.doc Page 2 CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ORDINANCE NO. 99-XX AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 705.1200 OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Prior Lake does hereby ordain: -=- Section 705.1200 of the Prior Lake City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the language as shown below: 705.1200 Private Sewer Disposal: Where a public sanitary sewer is not available, the building sewer shall be connected to a private sewage disposal system complying with the provisions of this subsection. No private sewage disposal svstem shall be installed without a permit issued bv Scott County. At such time as public sewer becomes available to the property served by the private sewage disposal system, and within a one year period, a direct connection shall be made to the public sewage in compliance with this Section, and any septic tanks, cesspools and similar private sewage disposal facilities shall be abandoned, pumped and filled with suitable material. The Minnesota Plumbing Code is hereby adopted by reference. Seott Comity Orditumee No. 4 eBtitled "IBdiyidual Sev/age Disposal System OrdiBaaee" is hereby adopted by rerercmee. This ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Prior Lake this 4th day of October, 1999. ATTEST: City Manager Mayor Published in the Prior Lake American on the 9th day of October, 1999. Drafted By; City of Prior Lake Planning Department 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue Prior Lake, MN 55372 .J:\99fi1~\99Qrdilmd\citY~odc:i99-06B\ord99H.doc ~ge 1 16200 Eagle creeK Ave. ~.t.., Prior LaKe, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61L:) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Council Meeting Minutes Seotember 7. 1999 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: Consider Approval of Ordinance 99-XX Pertaining to Individual Septic Treatment Systems in the City of Prior Lake. KEDROWSKI: Asked that staff bring this item back to the Council at a later date to discuss the guidelines and how enforcement will be handled at the Council level in dealing with septic and well issues. Not currently comfortable with the County enforcement standards based upon his information from the Orderly Annexation planning board. BOYLES: The intent of the Ordinance amendment is to avoid having both the City and the County duplicating the same service. The intent is to have the County assume those responsibilities. . Suggested having a County representative respond to enforcement concerns. KEDROWSKI: Clarified that the County has enforcement authority by state statute, but the City's current ordinance supersedes that authority. WUELLNER: Asked if the City can have standards more stringent than state statutes. RYE: Answered that the City is well within its authority to adopt more stringent standards in this case. MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY SCHENCK, TO TABLE THIS ISSUE TO ALLOW FOR A COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE TO BE PRESENT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF GUIDELINES AND ENFORCEMENT STANDARDS. BOYLES: Asked staff if a delay to the Ordinance amendment affects any other timeline. KANSIER: Noted that the Ordinance amendment could be an issue that affects the timing for approval of our Comprehensive Plan since the City is required by state rules and PCA rules to have a compliance and inspection program in place. If the Ordinance remains in place, the City continues to be responsible for the program. KEDROWSKI: Advised that the intent is not to deny the amendment, but to get clarification on the enforcement standards from the County, because of the current standards applied in the surrounding townships. KEDROWSKI and SCHENCK amended the motion to direct the staff to request that the County representative be present at the September 20th regular meeting. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: Ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Wuellner and Schenck, the motion carried. Consider Approval of Resolution 99-84 Authorizing OSM & Associates to Provide Construction Observation Services for Developer Installed Improvements. MADER: Concerned that the decision to select OSM & Associ~tes to provide these services is not the lowest bidder. Asked staff for clarification. ILKKA: Noted the specific guidelines of the qualifications-based selection process used by staff in making the determination. Also advised that the bid ranges where $53.00 to $70.00 per hour, but 090799.DOC 2 - , INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE TREATMENT SYSTEMS (ISTS) COMPLIANCE FACT SHEET SCHEDULE TO UPGRADE FAILING SYSTEMS. This table only applies to an ISTS that has been found through a Com liance Ins ection to be failin . SYSTEMS THAT POSE AN IMMINENT HEALTH THREA T* SUSCEPTIBILITY TO GROUND WATER CONAMINA TION SYSTEMS WITH LESS THAN THREE FEET OF SEPARATION SYSTEMS THAT CONTAIN CESSPOOLS & lEACHING PITS AREAS THAT ARE MODERATELY SUSCEPTIBLE TO GROUND WATER . CONTAMINATION 10 MONTHS 5 YEARS 3 YEARS AREAS THAT HAVE LOW SUSCEPTIBILITY TO GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION 10 MONTHS WHEN SYSTEM BECOMES AN IMMINENT HEALTH THREAT 5 YEARS *A system that poses an imminent health threat is a system that discharges untreated sewage to the soil surface, surface waters, field tile, into the interior of a building. Scott County Ground Water Susceptibility Map T ex t R 0 a ds .........../.. Sectio ns trunk Highways CJo _4 "TWP Roads Lakes C 0 u nty R 0 oil ds Bedrock S us oeptabilitv c:::l Low Susoeptibility CJ Moderate Susceptibility _ High Susceptibility When a building permit is applied for and no information is on file regarding the existing septic system a compliance inspection is needed unless the applicant admits that the septic system is not in compliance (has a cesspool or is discharging). A non-complying system will need to be replaced in accordance with the Table and Map. Many non-complying systems will not need to be replaced because most of the land in the townships is in the low susceptibility area. If there are records regarding the existing septic system, it is most likely that a compliance inspection will not be necessary. This would apply to over half of the systems. .. . Costs for compliance inspections will range from $50 - $250. Since It will generally be systems older than 20 years that are required to have a compliance inspection, in most instances, it will be obvious to the inspector that the system does not comply and the cost should be less than $100. In many cases a compliance determination can be made by discussing the ISTS with the applicant at no cost. COMPLIANCE INSPECTIONS ARE REQUIRED. . When an inspection is done for any new or replacement Individual Sewage Treatment System. . If a penn it or variance is applied for to alter an existing individual sewage treatment system. If a septic tank must be replaced or a drainfield trench added, the entire system must be inspected and brought into compliance. . Any other time an individual sewage treatment system Is reviewed to detennlne if the system is in compliance. Though not required by the County, this will most often be the result of a property sale or refinancing required by a mortgage company. These will likely be the more expensive, full compliance inspections rather than an interpreted records checks. . When a penn it is applied for to build a horizontal addition onto a home, or to build an accessory structure. This includes garages, pole sheds, barns, decks, gazebos, grain bins, 3 or 4 season porches etc.. Even in the case where the ISTS is non-complying, the permit can be issued without delay if there is sufficient area on the lot for replacement of the system. This can often be determined with existing data and is seldom a problem for farms and large lots. However, small lots may need soil testing to verify this especially if the proposed structure will take up a considerable amount of the remaining open space on the lot. This provision will only affect an individual who has a non-complying ISTS and is requesting a permit to build something else on the only remaining place on their lot. . Any time the Scott County Zoning Ordinance No.3 requires an inspection of an IST8. Conditional Use Permits, Variances etc. . Before a building pennit or variance is issued for the addition of a bedroom on property served by an 18T8. If the bedroom permit is applied for between November 1 and April 30, the Department may temporarily waive the compliance inspection provided that the inspection is performed by June 1 or before an occupancy permit is granted for the bedroom addition, which ever comes first. Any work done on the system in order to issue a certificate of compliance must be done by the following September 30. (State Law) . Any time there is a change in use of a property (i.e. residential to commercial, commercial to industrial, etc. or the addition of a business to a home). If a residential home gets turned into a business or if a business that potentially increases water use is added to a home the sewage system must be inspected to determine if it is in compliance. . When any parcel of land is developed, subdivided, rezoned or split and there is an existing ISTS on any of the parcels. EXEMPTION: A compliance Inspection is not needed for those systems that we,. p,.viously pennitted by this Office which have acceptable Information available to determine the location of an alternate dralnfie/d site and the act/on proposed In the building pennlt application will not encroach upon the alternate site. !~