Conventional Septic System Design and Install Series

I documented my ultimately unsuccessful attempt to get a variance for a bucket to barrel composting system and designing and installing a conventional system for our cabin in a 3 part video/article series. Parts 1 and 2 delve into Texas administrative code for on-site sewage facilities but are probably mostly applicable to other parts of the country. Part 3 covers the design briefly and is probably the most interesting to watch if you're not fanatical enough about septic systems to watch parts 1 and 2. It also includes costs both monetary and time.  

The articles on my website (linked in the titles below) provide more details. Part 1 includes the full e-mail transcript of the month long negotiation we had with a county administrator as we whittled away our variance requests. Some parts are kind of funny in a sad kind of way. Part 2 includes the final design package I submitted to the county administrator to get an approval to construct.

Part 1: In Pursuit of a Variance


Part 2: Designing a Septic System


Part 3: Installing a Septic System

Agree with all the madness ... used to live in Travis County a decade or two back, owned land, fought the OSSF battles, and ultimately came up with the only possible solution:

1. put in an ossf
2. do your own thing afterward

Not everyone agrees with this approach, but battles such as this, codes, zoning, and bureacracies ... all have shaped my philosophy and current approach.

The only thing I would add is ... choose your land wisely, first having investigated all the madness that might be involved with that land, and having decided what approach you'll take with said madness.

Sigh ...

Jt Lamb wrote:Agree with all the madness ... used to live in Travis County a decade or two back, owned land, fought the OSSF battles, and ultimately came up with the only possible solution:

1. put in an ossf
2. do your own thing afterward

Not everyone agrees with this approach, but battles such as this, codes, zoning, and bureacracies ... all have shaped my philosophy and current approach.

The only thing I would add is ... choose your land wisely, first having investigated all the madness that might be involved with that land, and having decided what approach you'll take with said madness.

Sigh ...

Yes, I think the intransigence towards reducing the tank size bothered me the most. The drain field was sized to accommodate 100 gallons of water per day which means the minimum tank size should have 300 gallons but the administrator wouldn't budge from the 750 gallon state minimum.

We're outside Travis county so we're somewhat fortunate in that the only permit we needed apart from a rubber stamp building permit was the septic permit.

You may find that when the rules were written, the smallest tank was 750 Gal.
Or they may be allowing for solids build up so the system does not block itself in a relatively short time.

John C Daley wrote:You may find that when the rules were written, the smallest tank was 750 Gal.
Or they may be allowing for solids build up so the system does not block itself in a relatively short time.

I didn't find anything in my research about issues with solids build up. There's definitely a case for two chamber septic tank to keep any floating debris from entering your the field. This is probably sliding into cider press territory but I would have found county administrator's decision more palatable if he'd a better argument then:

1) We could have hypothetical guests that could overwhelm the tank. These hypothetical guests would overwhelm the drain field as well but the county administrator wasn't concerned about.
2) 750 gallon septic tanks probably don't cost much more than smaller tanks.
3) If we ever wanted to sell the house, a 750 gallon tank would probably help with the sale

 

All part of the bureaucracy ... this is the only answer we know (and can therefore allow), so don't confuse us with other facts. If you present us with an "engineered" (stamped) plan, we'll consider it, but we'll make your life miserable with processes, procedures, fees (regardless of accepted/denied status), and so on ...

Here's an idea ... All codes should have a safety valve in the form of a diy homeowner clause. If homeowner can get it done, by whatever method, and it's been engineered once in its lifetime (somewhere in the world), then just allow it, as a one-time variance from the same old stupid stuff; even fee us for it, as the only thing you really understand is fees. For the next homeowner, revert back to only allowable systems on the books, or go through the same one-time variance process & fee (which is always guaranteed to pass, because of the engineered design behind it).

You have mortgages or other pressures *requiring* the usual drivel, then don't even bother with the one-time variance, because the same mortgage/insurance folks are really bureaucracies in disguise (all we understand is what we think will protect our investment, so don't go there). You want to sell to someone who needs a mortgage, then also don't bother with one-time variance.

But, if you really want to do your own thing, the safety valve allows you to do it ...

As far as I know, no code has this, because it would go against the money-making stream that is codes, AHJ's, trades, mortgages, insurance, and so on ...

My state, and possibly others, have something a little close to it, in the form of "homeowners are allowed to do their own electrical, plumbing ... it just has to pass inspection at the state level". Nothing like the safety valve I'm proposing, but somewhat in the same vein ...

OSSF's are "county health board driven", or similar AHJ's ... all they understand is an OSSF of a basic form; a system that fully processes waste, with only pure water coming out the other end wouldn't pass muster. With a million such AHJ's across the country, there are a million different requirements, but they are amazingly all strict/rigid on the only kind of OSSF they will allow. As you know, we can't have a human dumping in the woods (next to the hundreds of animals that dump in the woods).

When you read a board of health requirement that they only be installed by licensed installers, we're right back to where we were with electrical/plumbing, and it will take state effort to work in a clause that homeowners *can* install it themselves (as I did).

Hmm ...

I have heard that one reason for having some rules is to protect any potential buyer of your property.
At least some 'standards, are being met.
In the extreme, imagine the problems if any sort of electrical wiring, colours, fittings, cable sizes could be used by 'homesteaders'.
It would be chaos !
And the same would apply to other aspects of building.
Sure, there may be room for chaos building, but where would the lines be drawn?
- a ban on sale
- demolition of buildings prior to sale
- buyer acknowledges no building standards apply to their purchase.

I guess banks want to know they are lending against a home and not a 'chook shed'.

Because our state of Colorado allows DIY's to install electrical and plumbing, we can cut out the expensive trades *and* do lots of shopping effort to reduce materials pricing ... however, we still have to get the work inspected by the state electrical/plumbing boards. So, there is no "doing shoddy work"

(shoddy = chook shed? chook = chicken? had to get out my "outback dictionary"

On the "safety valve" idea, because you would *have* to show an "engineered design" to qualify, there should also be no shoddy work. Somewhere in the world, at least once, the idea has been worked up by an engineer.

Out in california, there is an engineering company that specializes in alternative construction, so you can get an engineered/stamped drawing of your alternative thing. This is great ... the problem is that your local AHJ is up against an inflexible code (w/ no safety valve) and doesn't trust the engineered drawing from another state, and/or has a number of other hoops for you to jump through. The engineer in that other state isn't licensed for your state, and so on ...

Madness ...