1993 - Req. for rev. of septic sys. nonconformity

Home Browse Search

Memo - 2700 White Oak Circle July 7, 1993 Page 3 reviews those repairs proposed by the property owner and his agent for compliance with code requirements. If a site suitable for a standard trench drainfield exists on the site, trenches would be allowed. • Defining "unsatisfactory" operation According to State standards which the City adopted in February 1992, the Rasmussen's system is not functioning satisfactorily. This change in definition of what is "satisfactory" is having a significant impact state-wide, especially in shoreland areas where the DNR has made adoption of the standard mandatory. There is a move underway by various entities to make the Chapter 7080 standards mandatory state-wide, not just in the shoreland areas. • Establishing water table elevation Neaton's letter suggests that Weckman's observations of mottled soil are insufficient to establish the "actual" water table level. As we all know, water table level fluctuates from year- to-year, from season-to-season, and the perched water tables in the upper layers of soil fluctuate on a daily basis. The "nonconformance" of the system at 2700 White Oak Circle is not only related to the actual free water surface observed in a boring hole on a given day, but the indication by soil mottling and other indicators as to the highest seasonal water table that may exist from time-to-time. If the property owners wish to hire a certified site evaluator to review the site, they are welcome to do so. If the conclusion of their consultant is in disagreement with that of Weckman, then we would recommend that a soil scientist from the MPCA be brought in to make a final determination. Options for Council Action This septic system is nonconforming by definition and that status is not something that can be changed by Council action without changing the definition of nonconforming. The City added the MPCA's 3' separation requirement to its conformity definitions based on DNR and Met Council requirements. Council does have the option of extending the deadline for repairs or replacement. Staff has been in contact with DNR, MPCA and Met Council to discuss their positions on an extended time frame. DNR would not oppose a three to five year grace period for upgrade of shoreland systems which are nonconforming solely due to lack of required separation. Met Council indicates while they have no specific approval jurisdiction for such a revision, they like our,one- year limit and would suggest not extending past three years. MPCA indicates they have no time