| . 1 . 2 . >> |
| Author |
Message |
Gibbs1122
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Oct 2014 20:43
Reply
We are in the process of having a camping cabin built for our land in PA. We don't need a building permit because of size and recreational use. Apparently we do, however, need a septic permit. We have been told we have to put in a complete septic system even though we are going to use a composting toilet and do NOT plan on having water run to the cabin (we'll bring what we need for weekend use) Has anyone else run into this problem? What did you do? It's not so much about the sewage as it is the gray water disposal (I guess). HELP!
|
|
turkeyhunter
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Oct 2014 21:41
Reply
build a homemade grey water system under the radar. 55 gallon drum and a small drain field. NO WAY would I pay for a full septic system and use a composting toilet. I think these type laws are unreal!!!!
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Oct 2014 21:46 - Edited by: bldginsp
Reply
Perhaps you can convince the local health dept. that if you have a composting toilet that all you need is a grey water system for disposing of the non-toilet waste water. But I wouldn't get my hopes up. Good waste water disposal is usually priority number one for the local authorities. They're already letting you build with no permit using the Pennsylvania recreational use cabin provision, but as I recall using that provision depends on having a septic.
Have you researched the cost of a septic? In some areas they aren't that expensive, depending. Might equal the cost of a composting toilet and a grey water system. Once you have a septic, your waste water worries are over for many, many years.
But yeah they can be pricey. As my neighbor famously said, "My hole in the ground to s*** into cost $5,000".
|
|
groingo
Member
|
# Posted: 19 Oct 2014 21:51
Reply
Maybe you should change from a recreational use permit to a storage building, what you do with it after that would be up to you.
|
|
Julie2Oregon
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 01:32
Reply
Envirolet has a greywater treatment system that has been approved as a septic system in Canada and some European countries. The small unit costs about $900 and treats 80 gallons of gray water per day. That's probably about all you'd need.
I'm dealing with something similar in Oregon, except I am going to be living in my cabin year-round. My issue is that I'm big into environmental issues and one of the reasons I'm doing this is to live a simple, sustainable life. I don't want a septic tank buried on my land and I don't want a leech field taking up my beautiful land, either.
The state of Oregon does allow for alternative septic systems like the Envirolet system if your land requires an expensive septic system because of the soil. So I don't understand why folks can't simply CHOOSE to install an alternative system in tiny houses and small cabins! Why does one person living in a 320 sq. ft. cabin need a regular, potentially polluting septic system?! Obviously, a significant increase in size of the home or change of use would necessitate permits and planning approval and a full septic system. But not for this.
I'm in the process of assembling the documentation for the greywater treatment system and the passive solar/wind toilet and tank system I plan to use so I can start a dialogue with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. I don't want my land tore up for test pits and perk tests but I would be happy to pay the county its septic site evaluation fee anyway for reading the documentation and looking at my plan. Just no backhoes. 
I'm getting the Enviro Loo R-15, which costs about $2,400
http://www.swsloo.com/eloo-home
And I hope to have the Envirolet greywater system approved, too.
http://www.envirolet.com/greywaterlight.html
|
|
PA_Bound
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 06:16
Reply
What county are you in? Did any discussion of a "vault privy" come up in your conversation with the sewage enforcement officer?
|
|
Don_P
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 08:22
Reply
Why does one person living in a 320 sq. ft. cabin need a regular, potentially polluting septic system?!
because we have had so many with definitely polluting straight pipes. A septic system is a proven baseline for public health and is "prescriptive". Generally if you can show that an alternative will perform at the same level of safety through reports or third party testing they will consider it.
As an aside, a few years ago I got a wicked bacterial infection that is fairly contagious and potentially life threatening. My grey water was unsafe. Before I knew what was going on I had visited several forest service vault privies. It was fly season and the height of tourist time. People were having picnics in the same campgrounds I had potentially contaminated. In the course of life a person living in a house is probably going to get very sick at some time. Just as with structure you don't just build for a sunny day, you build for the storm. It helped me appreciate the public health concerns surrounding waste disposal.
|
|
Gibbs1122
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 08:29
Reply
PA Bound, the property is in Venango county. Vault privy has come up but I don't understand why we would do that if we're using a composting toilet.
Julie, thanks for that info. I'm going to check it out.
Turkeyhunter, that was our original plan but we were contacted by the agency so we think someone may have called about our property. Why else would the township/sewer officer call us to find out what we're doing?
|
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 09:05
Reply
Quoting: Julie2Oregon Why does one person living in a 320 sq. ft. cabin need a regular, potentially polluting septic system?!
You need some kind of septic system be it composting toilet or full standard septic, or whatever. The question is, will your system pollute? Statistically and historically, full underground septic systems, properly installed and maintained, are the safest solution because they keep all the dangerous bacteria well underground and out of possible contact.
That is, until the system fails, which it will eventually. But the drain fields they require now are so well designed that they will last for many decades. I didn't like what I had to do to install my septic, but now I have zero worries about it, and never will for the rest of my life.
|
|
Malamute
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 13:49 - Edited by: Malamute
Reply
The counties have standards, which they use for default in any discussion, but you need to ask about getting a variance with solid performance evaluations to back the system you propose using, and a list of places its been allowed. I was allowed a variance in the location of a septic tank in its distance from a building, the county guy just came out and looked at it and my reason, and said "I don't see any problem with what you're proposing". Done deal.
I'm also a believer in the simplicity and utility of a good septic system. They may fail, though in the relatively dry ground I have, I've not heard of any, and very few that truly needed to be pumped unless people abused them. Avoiding anti-bacterial soaps and bleach, using some baking yeast several times a year down the drain in warm water, and not ever putting things down it that don't degrade in the system go a long ways towards trouble free use. I've never ever had a tank pumped, or heard of many people that have truly had to. Many do it because "youre supposed to".
I'm curious how grey water was dangerous? I've lived in a couple cabins that the grey water just went out on the ground, it never was a problem, and the grass grew like crazy there. I've thought about isolating mine to water a garden or trees.
I don't like torn up ground around my place, but if done with care, the damage can be mitigated to a degree. Things like keeping decent top soil separate and putting it back on top, a discussion with the dirt contractor about doing minimal surface disruption and plant damage with equipment, replanting native grasses and ground cover plants and keeping it weeded while it recovers, in a couple years it can be pretty well back to natural looking. A mini-excavator can do the job with less damage than a backhoe.
Even if you don't have true running water, having a septic makes it easy to deal with toilet and grey water issues. It looks like some of the alternative systems will cost about half of what a septic would (not counting dealing with grey water), but not give quite the flexibility in the future. I'm good with alternative stuff, but will definitely be comparing costs and overall utility while making decisions. Sometimes the price/value/utility balance doesn't really pencil out.
In short, I don't see anything inherently evil about septic systems, but rather see them as profoundly simple and utilitarian. There are situations they may not be the best answer, but I wouldn't dismiss them just because they are "normal" or aren't "alternative". An open minded comparison should be done. Some factors may be out of your control, like the State or County, but they may be able to be dealt with if a variation makes sense.
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 14:42
Reply
Quoting Malamute-
I've never ever had a tank pumped, or heard of many people that have truly had to. Many do it because "youre supposed to".
My understanding is that all septic tanks do eventually need pumping, because their basic task is to settle out the solids. They biodegrade the solids to a certain extent, in the tank, but not all the solids get eaten up by bacteria in the tank. Then, if the tank is not pumped and it gets too full of solids, the new solids flushed down go through the tank and into the drainfield, which ruins the drainfield.
But a tank only needs to be pumped when it gets I think about 60% full or so. You can test how much solids there is in it by opening it up and putting a stick in there. But the trend these days is toward mandatory scheduled pumping of tanks, like every two years. This is unnecessary in many cases, and particularly in limited use cabins, of course.
2 cents
|
|
Malamute
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 16:21
Reply
I didn't know that toilet solids wouldn't break down, I thought it was junk that shouldn't be put in them, like stuff run through garbage disposals and feminine hygiene products that wouldn't break down.
|
|
klb67
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 16:54
Reply
Your issue is dealing with grey water. You can't just dump it on the ground. If it is occasional use, you may be able to just carry your grey water out when you leave. Since you are already on the sewage enforcement officer's radar, I'd ask them what your options are and what minimum type of system they would require. I don't think the recreational cabin affidavit will help you (that just means you don't have to build to the UCC), but you may want to ask about that.
|
|
Julie2Oregon
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 21:47
Reply
Oh, guys, I wasn't questioning the need for something to adequately handle wastewater. The last thing I would want to do is contaminate the land/groundwater!
My issue is that they insist on everyone going through the SAME, TRADITIONAL process rather than considering the structure, use, and new technology. A traditional septic system emptying into a leechfield can fail and contaminate, too, so why do they insist on an evaluation and testing for only THAT and only allow you to install approved, alternative systems if those tests fail?
I've read the Oregon DEQ regs for septic and greywater systems and am fully prepared to comply using the new technology, as I linked to above. I just don't get why I have to spend over a thousand dollars to have perk tests and test pits dug on my property for traditional septic system evaluations when my proposed systems produce NO blackwater and my greywater system is mega-filtered and approved as a septic system by countries with more stringent standards than ours.
Plus, Oregon DEQ requires a separate application and permit for a greywater system and discharge water testing at least annually. I'm happy to comply with that, too.
In other words, my proposal is cleaner. So why force me to go through the time and expense of traditional septic tank/leechfield evaluation and tearing up my land? Just give me a yes or no on my systems first. And if they won't approve my systems then, OK, I'll go the traditional route. Wouldn't that make more sense?
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 23:23 - Edited by: bldginsp
Reply
I think you are right that they are defaulting to what they consider to be 'tried and true' rather than give credence to a newer idea. Not to argue in their favor, but just to try to look objectively at their perspective, consider this- they may see you as the rare person who studies the situation and understands how to operate an alternative system, or they may see you as a pain in the neck who makes more work for them, or a combination of both. At the same time, they see you installing a system that needs to be maintained to be safe- which you will probably do, at least at first. But then, what happens if you sell the place to people who don't understand how to operate the system or don't care- then what happens? The thing about a standard below ground septic and drainfield is that its pretty hard to screw it up, and it operates safely by default and in a passive manner- you just flush it down and everyone knows how to do that.
Again, I'm not arguing in favor of their viewpoint, just laying out the logic that public health authorities work with. From your side of things, why should you have to install a expensive, invasive system that you don't want just because of what other people may or may not do with it in the future?
I think you may have to be the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. It will be interesting to see how they respond to your supporting information. I suggest you provide all the documentation you can, and in particular provide proof that systems have been approved for use by other jurisdictions. Also any UL approved and listed systems or products will mean something, or listed equipment from other listing agencies like Warnock Hershey and others. Newspaper and magazine articles are next to worthless, but trade journal articles stressing the need for 'further consideration' can sway opinions.
These new ideas for grey water systems are gradually gaining ground, and the recent plumbing code includes some first shots at regulating them, which shows that there is a need being addressed. So the folks at the health dept have heard of this kind of thing, and may or may not be sympathetic, but in the final analysis they don't want to be the people who approved a 'cutting edge' system that failed and got people sick, so they will be very skeptical.
Keep us posted.
|
|
Malamute
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 23:29
Reply
$1000 to do a perc test? Serious? Wow!!
I dont think my excavation guy ever charged me for perc tests, it was just part of the job, and didn't add to the basic cost (and yes, I'm sure it wasn't more than the basic job cost).
If your alternate system produces less and cleaner output, and you can document it, they should give you a variance on the permit.
Get all your ducks in a row, with solid, reputable documentation and present it to the director of the county department responsible for septic permits and see if they'll review it and give an opinion on the chances of a variance. If its presented in a straightforward manner without seeming like its a crusade or trying to change the world, you may get a good shot at getting it passed. That last sentence isn't a reflection on you, more that people in official capacities sometimes don't like to be put on the spot over the normal business they do and make big decisions. If it doesn't seem far out, it may go well.
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 23:35 - Edited by: bldginsp
Reply
My perc test was $400, it was two holes in the ground monitored for 8 hours for water absorption. But sometimes they want a 'mantle test' which is when you get a backhoe out to dig a 6 foot deep trench so they can climb down there and assess the characteristics of the soil at depth. Costs a lot more cause you have to get the backhoe out there.
Just a technical point- you are not looking for a variance. A variance is something that is given regarding non-life-health-safety issues such as planning regulations, when special circumstances show that the rule doesn't or shouldn't apply. But they won't give a variance to a basic life-health-safety rule, that sounds like they are letting you not meet the safety regs for some reason, and everyone has to meet the safety regs. So what you are doing is applying to use alternative methods and materials, which you assert have been approved for the use elsewhere, in order to fully meet the safety rule. If you say you want a variance you are asking them to waive the rule which they can't do.
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Oct 2014 23:52
Reply
Julie- before you do that $1000 test I suggest you march in there with all your documentation. They can waive the requirement for the perc test if your alternate method fully complies, in their opinion.
|
|
Julie2Oregon
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Oct 2014 00:01
Reply
No, it's over $500 just for the county to do the site evaluation PLUS the cost of the perk test and digging 3 6-foot-long and 4-foot deep test pits. I'm estimating it to cost a total of $1,000 for all of that. It could be more.
Bldginsp, Actually, the state DEQ already has that resale thing for alternative systems covered in its regs. You MUST disconnect a greywater system and render it inoperable before selling the property. For exactly the reasons you state. The new owners would have to apply for their own approvals and permit if they wanted to use a greywater system.
So the responsibility is all on me and the approval is ONLY for the structure and use being permitted and the property owner who currently owns the home. Any sale or change of use would require new permits and approvals. That's why I don't get it.
But, yeah, I do have the documentation, certifications and white papers for these things and am about to start working on it with the DEQ. We'll see what happens! The solar/wind incinerating toilet is fine with them but I'm going to present it anyway with the greywater filtration system as a whole house solution.
It may help that the US Forestry and Wildlife services are using these things and guess what land my property abuts? ;)
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Oct 2014 08:18
Reply
So did you mean that they will only allow you to use these alternative systems if the perc/soil test fails, such that a leachfield cannot be installed? Otherwise, if it passes, they will not allow the alternative systems and only allow a standard septic?
|
|
klb67
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Oct 2014 12:05
Reply
We have a few discussions going on here. To the OP Gibbs, I'd take whatever info you have on alternative systems, including the stuff that Julie posted, and try to get the SEO to discuss the options - with using a composting toilet, there has to be another acceptable option for grey water other than a traditional septic tank. They certainly are defaulting to what they know, but they should be able to work something out.
|
|
Julie2Oregon
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Oct 2014 18:05
Reply
bldginsp
Yes, that's exactly it. It's kind of a catch-22 -- a habitable structure must be at leasr 225 square feet but that means any home that size and above has to go through the septic site eval., testing, and septic system installation if you don't have municipal services. The state has approved the use of alternative systems but only if your land fails the tests.
It's ridiculous to lump a 300-square-foot cabin in with 2, 000-square-foot homes, as far as the process and regs. One of the county on-site folks told me the size of the required system is partly determined by the number of bedrooms -- not square footage so much. It encouages folks in small rural homes to take their chances and fly under the radar, which defeats the purpose. And in talking with people, everyone knows that's common and they are a bit surprised when folks like me say they are going through the process.
But I do think I have found a bit of wiggle room in the DEQ regs. And if I can work with the DEQ and present a letter of approval to the county, I hope they will waive the testing. I will pay the $500 county permit fee for them to come out to the site and read the plan. No problem. I just don't see the point of tearing up my land.
The state permits greywater to be used for drip irrigation, landscaping, etc. I also want to store a bunch in case of wildfires and forest fires since there are no fire departments or hydrants near me. And that's forest fire country!
I'm sharing this in hopes it will help the original poster and give him some ideas. I have been speaking with county officials and reading regs for Oregon and comparing them with other states, plus looking for helpful new products.
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 21 Oct 2014 18:20
Reply
Good luck Julie
|
|
Malamute
Member
|
# Posted: 22 Oct 2014 22:56
Reply
Quoting: bldginsp Just a technical point- you are not looking for a variance.
Thanks for clarifying that and expanding on it, good info.
Hope it comes together for you Julie. It does sound crazy to go through all that for a small place and for those sorts of expenses.
I had to do a septic for a 3 BR house even though my place is tiny, the smallest level they had, though its not very expensive for permits or perc. $35 for paperwork maybe? Perc was part of the installation.
|
|
Littlecooner
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Nov 2014 07:12
Reply
Ok, I got lost from the OP with all the discussion going on in various states. First, I agree with some of you above - do your homework, assemble information and sketches of your alternate system that you propose and have a discussion with your local health department official.
The huge factor here that is missing above that is being overlooked is WATER SUPPLY. If no water other that what your bring into the structure in containers or catch as rainwater is planed, this should change your status as disposal. Most septic tank and gray water systems are designed on a table of usage of fresh water in, gray or black water out. Septic tank field lines in my area are designed on number of bed rooms in the structure. Septic tank volumes are designed on having a two day storage capacity. In my area, the design factor is one hundred gallons of water per day per person usage! All this stuff on the OP about gray water and he has no supply of water?? Where is the gray water going to be generated if he has no water supply? Sounds a lot like getting the cart before the horse. These small recreational cabins are throwing a curve to the standard regulations, especially the ones with no water supply. When dealing with your local health department, remember ITS ALL ABOUT TREATING AND DISPOSING OF THE WATER YOU USE IN THE STRUCTURE! It could be as simple as recording the statement in the public records (where deeds and mortgages are recorded) that this property has a covenant that no source of water will be permitted for this structure. No wells or no public water.
|
|
Littlecooner
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Nov 2014 07:53
Reply
For my state - I just went on line to our state dept of Public Health and downloaded the Onsite Sewage Regulations. This is a 100 + page document. In the Appendix is a table of "Flow and Organic Loading" for the various types of establishments. There is a section for "Recreational Establishments" Under a category called "Camps, Resort day and night with limited plumbing" The design output of total waste water is 50 gallons per day, per site. Under the "Luxury Camp w/flush toilet" the total output is 100 gallons per day. FUI a minimum residential home would designed for 300 gallons per day of total output. Systems are designed (sized) to handle the output of water.
If I was ask to design a black water or gray water system for a small cabin with no flush toilet, I would only design a gray water system with the ability to handle 50 gallons a day.
No, you people are not building three bedroom houses for full time occupancy- so what you need to meet your heath department requirement will be scaled down to fit what you are constructing. OP guy just needs to do a little home work and call the health department guy and submit a plan to handle the gray water based on the PA regulations.
|
|
bldginsp
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Nov 2014 07:59
Reply
Littlecooner- What you say makes sense- if you don't have a steady supply of water why do you need a huge drainfield that is designed to get rid of large volumes of water. But I've never heard of a health dept. that would accept the idea that if you sign a recorded covenant stating that if you have no water supply, you can then use a certain type of waste disposal system. In other words, you are proposing legislation, you are ahead of the curve, and they are not there yet.
I think that the basic argument most health depts. would take is that regardless of your water source, your waste water is still just as dangerous and they want you to have a place to get rid of it that they think is safe. Also, you could get a water source later, such as rain water collection or access to a local stream, in which case you would then have access to high volumes of water with a system not designed for it.
Not saying they are right or wrong, just saying that's what they will say.
|
|
turkeyhunter
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Nov 2014 19:06
Reply
Quoting: Gibbs1122 Turkeyhunter, that was our original plan but we were contacted by the agency so we think someone may have called about our property. Why else would the township/sewer officer call us to find out what we're doing?
nosey neighbor called for sure!!!....people should mind they mind their on business...I always try to be good neighbor at camp.
|
|
Littlecooner
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Nov 2014 19:39 - Edited by: Littlecooner
Reply
bldginsp - My proposal is how I would handle this situation in my state. I have been dealing with the State Health Department on these issues for over 40 years, have been a practicing Professional Engineer for over 35 and have quite a bit of expertise in what I quoted. This is for my state, I do not know what your states rules are and do not know what your zoning regulations are for each application. Just trying to point out that these are not just simple "cookbook" approaches that cost the same for normal residential construction. I know how my little area works and what to do to make it simple. Just trying to get these people with problems to do a little homework and seek a little advice for THEIR APPLICATION. The original post said the health department called and wanted to know what they were doing. Where I live, the answer is simple and the construction cost would be no more that what they would normally do if they were planning on installing a sink in the cabin and needed a drain field. I would hope that most other state regulations would be similar. Here we have in the rules a procedure where a site does not fit the normal conventional rules, a PE engineers systems that are permitted and then a document is recorded into the public records that this site is "permitted" for that specific design and deviates from the normal rules.
|
|
Littlecooner
Member
|
# Posted: 20 Nov 2014 20:20
Reply
Gibbs1122- from your state of PA health regulations :
"Camps, hunting and summer residential (night and day) with limited plumbing including water-carried toilet wastes (per person) 50 gal per day" You should not have a problem!!!!!!
|
|
| . 1 . 2 . >> |
