Sandy council directs staff to rewrite ordinance allowing alternate wastewater systems with safeguards

Sandy City Council on Aug. 18 directed staff to return with a rewritten ordinance that would allow alternative wastewater systems — including porta-potties, graywater systems and certain septic-type systems — for commercial and industrial properties only when the city cannot provide sufficient ERUs (equivalent residential units) at the time an application is filed. The council’s direction was a policy decision rather than a final vote; staff said they will prepare revised code language and hold a new public hearing before any adoption.

The change matters because Sandy is working through a long-running wastewater compliance and infrastructure program that has limited available ERUs; council members and several residents said permitting alternative systems could allow some development to proceed while sewer capacity remains constrained. At the same time, residents and some councilors pressed for safeguards to avoid long-term private septic fields or temporary solutions becoming permanent without appropriate oversight and payment of system development charges (SDCs).

City staff presented three draft options for code language. Option 1 would have been narrow — limited to industrial parcels and only short-term solutions such as porta-potties and graywater. Option 2 was the draft ordinance previously circulated. Option 3, which the council asked staff to refine, is the broadest: it would allow alternative wastewater systems on commercial and industrial lands but require discretionary, case-by-case council review and a set of conditions and protections.

Resident Nikki Skinner raised affordability and stewardship concerns during public comment: “Why would we want to go to another city and county, which is one of the highest tax counties in Oregon, and put ourselves in that boat?” She also asked whether residents would bear future repair costs if Sandy connects to an outside system. Former councilor and resident Carl Gexner warned about the cumulative cost burden on residents: “I’m really concerned about how this is going to be affecting the people that are here in Sandy.” Both speakers urged transparency and fuller financial analysis before final decisions.

Staff clarified several implementation points during the discussion. Kelly (city planning staff) described the city’s existing three-category approach in the draft: porta-potties (intended as temporary and removed when a connection is available), graywater systems (installed for useful life), and a catchall category for newer or untested technologies. Kelly said the ordinance can be written so all alternative systems follow a single discretionary path if the council prefers that approach.

City staff and councilors emphasized that county and state approvals remain required. As Planning staff explained, applicants for on-site septic or other systems must still satisfy Clackamas County permitting requirements (soil feasibility, drain-field setbacks, replacement drain field) and any relevant state regulatory approvals; the city can only remove municipal code barriers. Councilors repeatedly underscored they expect projects to meet “all federal, state and local laws” as a condition of any city approval.

Discussion also covered how to prevent unintended avoidance of SDCs and how to ensure alternative systems do not become long-term liabilities for the city. Several councilors said they want the ordinance to include: 1) a requirement that the alternative route be available only when the city lacks sufficient ERUs at the time of a completed application, 2) case-by-case discretionary review by council for every alternative system application (so even commercial projects open to the public would be heard), and 3) explicit criteria and enforcement authority to require removal and connection when sewer capacity becomes available.

Council direction and next steps - The council gave staff direction to return with a revised ordinance based on Option 3 (commercial and industrial) with the modifications discussed: apply the same discretionary approval path to all alternative systems, build in a definition of “insufficient ERUs” (insufficient city-allocated ERUs at the time the application is submitted), and add clearer enforcement/maintenance obligations and conditions related to SDCs. This was council direction, not a final action. - Staff said the revised draft will reopen the public hearing process (a second reading and new public hearing are expected) so the public can comment on the updated language.

What was not decided - There was no vote to adopt code changes. Councilors and staff repeatedly said the revised ordinance will return for formal decisions after public notice and a hearing. - Specifics about SDC timing and whether certain investments (for example, new septic drain fields) would be required to be removed at the city’s direction will be included in the revised ordinance for council consideration.

Background and context - The council has been addressing sewer capacity limits and a consent decree-driven capital program for several years. Staff noted ERUs are finite; councilors and residents said the lack of available ERUs is already driving discussion of alternate approaches to allow certain commercial or industrial projects to move forward. - Clackamas County retains permitting authority for on-site septic systems and conducts soil feasibility testing and setback enforcement; state regulators (DEQ and others) also have permitting roles. The city may set local code conditions but cannot override county or state regulatory requirements.

Ending Staff said they will return with clear draft language that implements the council’s direction, including objective definitions for ERU availability and the discretionary criteria for council review. A formal second reading and a new public hearing will be scheduled before any ordinance adoption.