Short version of a long story: property is 22 acres, cut in 1/2 by a creek, wetlands surround the creek except for 1 spot where there is an old culvert I will be replacing (already have the DEP permit). Future driveway will go over the culvert. We want the house on the far side of the creek so that it can be 100 feet from a 2 acre pond with great views. We will also be building a horse barn and pasture near the house. The entire area on that side of the creek doesn't have the soils to support a drain field (septic contractor and Board of Health inspector said so). Test pits were dug but perc tests weren't even attempted. The other side of the creek, which has a gentle slope down to the creek, wouldn't pass a soil or perc test until it was about 700-850 feet uphill from the creek. Even then it was only for a sand mound system. The septic contractor is going to try to find a spot that would support a traditional underground leach field. I'll spend the money on a longer-range lift system to avoid the cost and appearance of the mound system. So, no matter what septic system I have the leach field can only be on one side of the creek. And, of course, we really want to have the house on the other side.I'm getting more curious the system you are building.
Will you have a buried field system or is a mound system possible?
If a mound system can it be closer?
Septic question - pumping to drain field
- Thread starter RobA
- Start date
- Views: 11695
deputyrpa
Gold Member
First of all, RobA, you are not "working backwards", you are laying out your development properly by locating your waste disposal areas first. My staff & I review and I approve residential developments when there are protected wetland and stream impacts, and I encourage that method of planning. I also review and approve systems with over 10,000 gal/day capacity. It just makes sense to have a competent system, regardless of the laws, rules and regulations one must comply with.
I have dense clay soils throughout the majority of my farmland (except in the wooded areas, which are rocky with shallow loam), where the top two feet had been tilled for over 150 years. That soil horizon was available to incorporate into a raised bed system, resulting in less fill needed. Unlike you where it didn't matter where I put a leach field, as is was clay or more clay, I was faced with the necessity for an engineered system. My concern was that I would be eating up my tillable land and pasture if I spread my development out to employ a gravity system. So I went with a pump system - one 1000gal septic tank and a 1000gal pump tank.
I was able to site the field on a sloped area that almost looks natural, but from one angle does not...yet. It's 1650 sq ft, and up to 6' above the surface on one side. It's been in a few years, and doesn't stick out of the landscape as one would imagine. In fact, most people don't even recognize it until point it out, and its's only 50' from the house.
In your case, it appears to boil down to cost, but over time, it may be that a raised bed gravity system with less "infrastructure" on the house side of your creek may allow for more flexibility in the use of your property on teh other side of the creek and along the line area.
Has your land been tilled where it may provide a top layer of usable soil? Even one foot of soil over a leach field surface area saves a bit of cost. Can you design the system to suit or blend in with existing landforms so it looks less obtrusive?
On the other side, ss the DEP going to allow a cut-and-fill line placement across the creek, or will the require directional boring? What are their line requirements and conditions for placement in the stream? Do the costs of their requirements bring you within range of the costs of a raised bed system?
I hope this helps a bit. If you need any help with explaining or deciphering any DEP requirements, let me know.
I have dense clay soils throughout the majority of my farmland (except in the wooded areas, which are rocky with shallow loam), where the top two feet had been tilled for over 150 years. That soil horizon was available to incorporate into a raised bed system, resulting in less fill needed. Unlike you where it didn't matter where I put a leach field, as is was clay or more clay, I was faced with the necessity for an engineered system. My concern was that I would be eating up my tillable land and pasture if I spread my development out to employ a gravity system. So I went with a pump system - one 1000gal septic tank and a 1000gal pump tank.
I was able to site the field on a sloped area that almost looks natural, but from one angle does not...yet. It's 1650 sq ft, and up to 6' above the surface on one side. It's been in a few years, and doesn't stick out of the landscape as one would imagine. In fact, most people don't even recognize it until point it out, and its's only 50' from the house.
In your case, it appears to boil down to cost, but over time, it may be that a raised bed gravity system with less "infrastructure" on the house side of your creek may allow for more flexibility in the use of your property on teh other side of the creek and along the line area.
Has your land been tilled where it may provide a top layer of usable soil? Even one foot of soil over a leach field surface area saves a bit of cost. Can you design the system to suit or blend in with existing landforms so it looks less obtrusive?
On the other side, ss the DEP going to allow a cut-and-fill line placement across the creek, or will the require directional boring? What are their line requirements and conditions for placement in the stream? Do the costs of their requirements bring you within range of the costs of a raised bed system?
I hope this helps a bit. If you need any help with explaining or deciphering any DEP requirements, let me know.
Egon
Epic Contributor
Many thanks for taking time for the explanation Rob.
Sounds like a nice place a coming up!
Sounds like a nice place a coming up!
builder2
Bronze Member
We have a raised bed septic system about 900' from our house. We have a standard septic tank (no filter was required when installed, but one is now required at the outlet into the pump chamber) and a 1000 gallon pump tank. The pump tank has a Myers S-4 effluent pump with float switches set for high and low which doses the bed at a rate of about 100 gallons per on cycle. Total head is about 19'. Theoretically, you could pump a mile to the bed as long as the pump lift capacity can handle the head (differance in elevation from the pump to the header in the bed.
Paul
LBrown59
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2004
- Messages
- 16,831
- Tractor
- 2003 Kubota BX1500/2004 Kubota Bx23/2005 Kubota BX1500
1*It's over zealous politicians and bureaucrats causing that.
2*I don't believe that for a minute.
3*All that can be done has already been done.
What the new rules will do is keep the politicians inspectors bureaucrats and contractors employed and in business at no benefit to the party footing the bill.
bearhawk
Platinum Member
Yet another example of LBrowns thoughts on Septic Systems.
We already know we don't want to live downstream of LBrown.
RadarTech
Elite Member
While I am not taking sides here let me put a few thoughts out..
Where I live in NC, I know an area where there is a creek that has been there forever..
At the head end of the creek there is a sewage treatment plant.
The plant is currently undergoing a mega-upgrade that is running on 2 years of work! Something about not enough treatment of the sewage before it entered the creek..
Now with that fixed, the trout pond about a mile or so downstream still will not be a good eating area..
On the creek there are houses and cabins that sit across the creek from the road. All of them have bridges of some kind. At places the creek banks are 5 to 10 feet high.
It is widely known that most if not all of the houses on the creek direct pipe the septic into the creek.. It has been this way for over 30 years..
All the homes have grandfathered permits. A new house being built in the remains of a burned home seems to have been grandfathered in as well....
The only mitigating factor for these homes is that they are all vacation homes / cabins and occupied intermitantly...
As a side note, mode of the homes have wells way up the bank behind them or across the road...
One of the houses actually has perpetual water rights, on a driveway across the road coming out of the bank over 60 feet higher than the road, nearly 75 feet higher than the creek bed. I believe this to be the case for several, but I have personal knowledge of this one...
This is currently on the radar for EPA since the sewage plant was dinged..
It will be only time before the value of the cabins and home is either negated to nothing or they get some real expensive sewage treatment systems.
Before someone says they should just be connected to the plant...
Not possible or if it is not easily.. plant is a city plant, houses are in the county.
Road is gravel with solid Granite base showing in several areas and the elevation change from the plant to the houses goes from 10 feet to 40 feet lower than the plant... the road is single lane width for the most part....
The back of the homes go up a bank that varies from 40 to 60 feet to a railroad track that is all but abandoned.
It is not just Puget Sound that has problems.. but all over..
And I see both sides of the fence...
Having travelled quite a bit and served in the Marines there are problems with sewage and management the world over....
Later,
J
Where I live in NC, I know an area where there is a creek that has been there forever..
At the head end of the creek there is a sewage treatment plant.
The plant is currently undergoing a mega-upgrade that is running on 2 years of work! Something about not enough treatment of the sewage before it entered the creek..
Now with that fixed, the trout pond about a mile or so downstream still will not be a good eating area..
On the creek there are houses and cabins that sit across the creek from the road. All of them have bridges of some kind. At places the creek banks are 5 to 10 feet high.
It is widely known that most if not all of the houses on the creek direct pipe the septic into the creek.. It has been this way for over 30 years..
All the homes have grandfathered permits. A new house being built in the remains of a burned home seems to have been grandfathered in as well....
The only mitigating factor for these homes is that they are all vacation homes / cabins and occupied intermitantly...
As a side note, mode of the homes have wells way up the bank behind them or across the road...
One of the houses actually has perpetual water rights, on a driveway across the road coming out of the bank over 60 feet higher than the road, nearly 75 feet higher than the creek bed. I believe this to be the case for several, but I have personal knowledge of this one...
This is currently on the radar for EPA since the sewage plant was dinged..
It will be only time before the value of the cabins and home is either negated to nothing or they get some real expensive sewage treatment systems.
Before someone says they should just be connected to the plant...
Not possible or if it is not easily.. plant is a city plant, houses are in the county.
Road is gravel with solid Granite base showing in several areas and the elevation change from the plant to the houses goes from 10 feet to 40 feet lower than the plant... the road is single lane width for the most part....
The back of the homes go up a bank that varies from 40 to 60 feet to a railroad track that is all but abandoned.
It is not just Puget Sound that has problems.. but all over..
And I see both sides of the fence...
Having travelled quite a bit and served in the Marines there are problems with sewage and management the world over....
Later,
J
Kays Supply
Veteran Member
Short comment. I am a liscenced sewage system installer in Illinois. We have the clay soil issue. We have went to an aeration system. I have one in my home. It is very compact. Requires no leach field. The discharge is chlorinated and is basically clear water. Do you have an option like this?
schmism
Super Member
The retreat camp i worked at one summer in the north cascades uses a large septic system for the entire (old mining) camp.
due to sitting in a narrow valley they are very restricted on septic layout. As such all sewage gravity drains to the low end of camp to two large septic tanks. the effluent is then pumped about 1.5 miles up valley and about 30' in elevation gain to the only other spot in the valley large enough to hold the drain feild.
they use large 5hp 3ph submerged pumps. Not to say they dont have problems with them, its a very maintenance intensive system with dual back up pumps which are often in use.
the point, with enough pump and adequate pipe size there is no effective limit for how far it can go.
due to sitting in a narrow valley they are very restricted on septic layout. As such all sewage gravity drains to the low end of camp to two large septic tanks. the effluent is then pumped about 1.5 miles up valley and about 30' in elevation gain to the only other spot in the valley large enough to hold the drain feild.
they use large 5hp 3ph submerged pumps. Not to say they dont have problems with them, its a very maintenance intensive system with dual back up pumps which are often in use.
the point, with enough pump and adequate pipe size there is no effective limit for how far it can go.
Last edited:
schmism
Super Member
and has to be the most costly and maintenance heavy system currently used. between chlorine cost and 24/7 aeration pump running. Not to mention the surface water discharge which EPA requires to be tested every year. ie testing fees, paperwork to fill out and the gov't being all up in your business able to walk on to your property at any moment without any prior notice to "test your system"
it would be THE last resort option to use IMO.
