If it ain't broke, don't fix it—unless it's a Baltimore County-sponsored sanitary sewer extension project.
Baltimore County officials held a public hearing Monday to discuss why a dozen homes along Lilac and Dunrovin lanes in Perry Hall would be forced to abandon septic systems to connect with the public sewer system. The new connection could, in some cases, double the homeowners' property taxes.
Affected residents were issued several pages of cost estimates and public notices as they entered the Perry Hall Library meeting room.
Debbie Delahanty of the county public works department repeatedly emphasized that the sewer extension was an urgent health project. "We pretty much have to go forward," Delahanty said.
County inspectors have found that two septic systems along Lilac and Dunrovin lanes fail on a regular basis, pushing contaminated water to the surface. Five additional systems may also be damaged, said Kevin Koepenick, an environmental protection and sustainability expert with the department of public works.
Based on these reports, county officials have proposed that all 12 properties in the rural area be forced to connect to the public sewer. Total construction costs for the project are estimated at $1.1 million, according to county documents.
Because septic problems are a health concern, the county is responsible for covering about half of those costs. Delahanty said she expects the County Council to vote in favor of funding the project in August. Construction could begin as early as November.
The remaining construction costs would be divided among homeowners and adjusted for each property's total square footage. Payments, ranging from about $1,000 to $3,000 annually, would extend over a 40-year period at about 5 percent interest and be added to homeowners' property taxes, according to county documents.
John Slone, who lives on Dunrovin Lane, had a new septic system installed on his property 15 years ago. Slone said he has never had problems with back-up and pays about $150 per year to have his system pumped. The estimated cost of connecting to the public sewer could amount to more than $2,000 per year, Slone said.
"A lot of homeowners have perfectly working septic systems. Why should we have to pay the added cost for someone else's failing system?" he said.
Koepenick responded that connecting to the public sewer will eliminate future, unanticipated problems and increase resale value.
Eric Koch and his father, 78-year-old Henry Koch, live in a Lilac Lane farmhouse built in the 1800s. Their eight-acre property also has not had any reported septic problems.
"This will double our annual taxes," Eric Koch said. "A couple of grand a year is a lot for someone on a fixed income."
Koch admitted that access to the public sewer would increase the property's resale value and make it easier to subdivide.
"But what if we don't want to sell? ... I may have to sell part of it just to afford [the property taxes]," Koch said.
Diane Peters, who also lives on Lilac Lane, said she understood the cost concerns of neighbors, but was alarmed when she realized the severity of local septic problems.
"Our backyard often has the smell of Back River," Peters said, adding that she supports the county project. "Money's important, but our health is important too."
Those with concerns about the planned project are encouraged to contact the department of public works at 410-887-3300, or County Councilman David Marks' office at 410-887-3384.
http://www.biomicrobics.com/images/media/Coast%20Press.pdf
I BELIEVE RESIDENTS NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR SYSTEMS , HOWEVER GOVERNMENT HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO ENFORCE THE LAW. A GREATER CONCERN IF THIS WAS A KNOW HEALTH ISSUE , AN ISSUE I (WE) HAVE BEEN DEALING WITH FOR THE PAST 15 YRS LIVING HERE. I FIND MYSELF WITH MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS AS A RESIDENT , WE WERE FORCED TO GO ON PUBLIC WATER UNDER HEALTH ISSUES , OUR SPRING IS NOT CONTAMINATED, WE WERE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO SO, NOT KNOWING WHAT THE FUTURE OF DEVELOPMENT BRINGS IN THE MEANS OF CONTAMINATION . NOW AFTER YEARS OF ASKING THE COUNTY TO ACT, ENFORCE LAWS .. THE SOLUTION IS A 1,100,000 SEWER SYSTEM FOR 12 FAMILIES, BECAUSE OF 3 OR 4 FAILING SYSTEMS AND WILL BE DONE UNDER THE GUIDELINES OF HEALTH. OK , SO THIS IS SUCH A HEATH THREAT/ CONCERN IT'S TAKEN OVER 10YRS TO ACT ( I GUESS A CHILD PLAYING IN THE MUCK WOULD BE DEAD BY NOW ) WHY HAVEN'T ANY MEASURES BEEN TAKEN TO CORRECT FAILING SYSTEMS OR HOLD THOSE ACCOUNTABLE WITHIN THE LAW FIRST ? WHEN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS WERE BEING BUILT , WHERE WAS THE PLANNING FOR WHAT WOULD BE FUTURE NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE - WHY WAIT FOR THE TYPICAL PATCH WORK SOLUTION ? IF ONLY 3 OR 4 SYSTEMS ARE FAILING WHY MUST THE REMAINING 8 0R 9 RESIDENTS BE BURDENED WITH A SYSTEM THAT IS NOT NEEDED ?
No matter where you live, the New 2011 EPA mandates say that even a slow drain in your leach field or elevated Nitrate levels could require replacement of your entire system for $20,000 to $40,000 or move out of your home or business. Septic System News - http://www.Twitter.com/MillerPlanteInc UN Agenda 21, Ch. 18 - http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_18.shtml US Clean Water Act - http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/cwa/03.htm EPA TMDL (Nitrate Limits for Water Supplies) - http://www.epa.gov/chesapeakebaytmdl/ EPA Mandated Inspections - http://www.marex.uga.edu/advisory/cssmip.html
But let's be clear... these are NOT new "taxes." It's a little disingenuous to say they are taxes. They are a fee being paid for a service, financed over 40 years. I have the same thing at my house for public water/sewer hookup. I am paying $1,100 a year over 35 years. It's a financed loan, NOT a tax. These people "should" (like I do) have the right to pay off the amount owed any time they want and save that interest costs. And the other poster is right... You'll pay plenty to put in a new septic system if/when that time comes. The unfortunate part is that the other residents are being forced to replace theirs.
THE POINT MEANT OF NEW DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, NEW DEVELOPMENTS ADDS STRESS IN FORMS OF MORE SUFACE WATER LESS AREA FOR IT TO BE ABSORBED , IN AN AREA THAT DOESN'T PERK THAT WELL TO BEGIN WITH ..IT ALL ADDS UP HAVING A NEGATIVE EFFECT. I HAVE NOTICED A DIFFERENCE - THE EFFECT OF RUN OFF IN FIELDS IN OUR AREA , JUST DUE TO THE ADDITIONAL STREETS, AND PARKING LOTS . THE SECOND PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT ISSUE IS THAT INFRASTRUCTURE KNOWN TO BE NEEDED 10-15 YEARS AGO , COULD HAVE BE PUT IN PLACE KNOWING THERE WAS A PLAN TO BUILD 53 HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET, ON WHAT WAS WOODED WET LANDS ..... JOHN K , YOU ARE CORRECT THIS IS NOT A TAX , AND I'VE NEVER STATED THAT IS WAS. HONESTLY I HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR PROPER INFRASTRUCTURE ALONG LILAC LANE FOR THE PAST 15YRS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF OUR NATURAL SPRING WHICH IS A FEED SOURCE FOR OUR POND . I ONLY MENTIONED THE COST WILL BE 1,100,000 GOING INTO IT FOR 12 RESIDENTS OF WHICH NOW I'M NOW TOLD ONLY( 2) ARE FAILING SYSTEMS AND HAD MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS , CONCERNING THAT LODGIC. MY MAJOR CONCERN WAS: WHY HADN'T ANYTHING BEEN DONE TO FORCE THOSE ( 2) PROPERTIES WITH REPEATED FAILING SYSTEMS TO CLEAN UP THEIR ACT FOR THE GREATER GOOD .. CONSIDERING IF THIS IS SUCH A HEALTH ISSUE ? I UNDERSTAND THAT THESE ARE ALL OLDER SYSTEMS AND MOST LIKELY JUST LIKE OTHER" WORKING SYSTEMS " IN THE AREA MAY NOT BE UP TO CURRENT EPA STANDARDS - IE. MY PUSH FOR PROPER INFRASTRUCTURE DURING THE BUILDING BOOM.
I'm not a big fan that my tax dollars are paying for these people's lack of maintenance and upkeep. Don't hear too many people squawking about that here, just about "big government." If this minority of the residents had some personal responsibility and took care of their systems, it might not be a problem that we and the other residents have to pay for...