Agenda - Council - 04/22/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Case DRAINAGE CONCERN: 6508'- 171ST LANE NW By: Steve Jankowski, City Engineer Backgrounrk:,. At the Council meeting of Apri,1 ~8, 1'997; Lori Farber of 6508 171st Lane NW appeared at Citizen Input to discuss an ongoing problem she has been experiencing with 1°t drainage and her septic system. Attached are a location sketch showing Mrs. Farber's property and the record drawing of her septic system which was installed when her home was constructed in 1984. Although 171st Lane is not identified in the sketch, the twin septic absorption fields are located in close proximity to the south right-of-way line of 171st Lane. A notation on the permit application suggests the system sizing was doubled in area because of underlying clay soils. The septic system flows by gravity to the absorption:field which is located in a lower-lying area adjacent to the right-of-way. During heavy rain events and snow melts, 'the ditch and adjacent areas become ponded. In these instances, the ponded water drains through the septic system into Farber's basement. Mrs. Farber has claimed that the~C/ty is responsible for remedying this situation for the following reasons: I) The septic system was installed under the inspection of the City. 2) The City has not provided adequate drainage of storm water which would prevent ponding over her system. 3) The~ City_ granted a variance to the property to the west' (the Smith property) for the construction of a single-family home whose drainage caused the problem. Staff has repeatedly taken the position 'that'the City is not responsible for remedying the problem, citing the following responses to each of Farber's claims: 1) Farber's claim that the City inspected the installation'ofthe gystem and is therefore liable: .... The purpose of the City septic system codes, similar to building code is to protect public health and safety by ensur/ng minimum standards are met. The septic system codes specify a minimum size for the system's absorption field. These standards were met, and in this case exceeded. Other than separation distances from wells, the code does not specify siting criteria. This is the obligation of the designer and, ultimately, the property owner. The system was placed in a low elevation to minimize cost. Ponding water backflowing through the system is a consequence of siting the system in a low area. 2) Farber's claim that the City is not providing adequate storm drainage to the area: The purpose of the City's roadside ditch is to provide drainage for the City street. In this area the road is well drained. Temporary ponding of water in a road ditch is an acceptable condition as it relates to the City street. The City does have a responsibility for handling drainage from its street system, particularly where run-off from large areas are directed along a pathway defined by ditches and pipe, or are discharged from such pathways into ponding areas. In this case, there is less than 100 feet of roadway upgrade from the problem point.