Groves council discusses wastewater options, temporary treatment for Lady Luck phase 2

Groves city officials and representatives for the Lady Luck development discussed wastewater options on Feb. 5 after staff concluded the existing sewer main lacks capacity to accept flow from the proposed phase 2 of the Lady Luck project at 6579 Gulf Way.

The matter drew detailed technical and timing questions rather than a formal vote; staff described the session as informational and requested direction to prepare an agreement to return to council for approval.

The issue: connection capacity and routes

City staff member Laird Castle said the city’s ordinance requires properties within 250 feet of the sewer main to connect, and that phase 1 of Lady Luck is already connected to both water and sewer. “The issue is the existing sewer main cannot accommodate the additional… the additional flow from the phase two,” Castle said. That lack of capacity prompted discussion of three alternatives: (1) allow an on‑site, state‑conforming on‑site sewage (aeration) facility for phase 2 with a required future tie‑in; (2) construct a force main and lift station to bring flow into the Groves system; or (3) pursue a connection to the City of Port Arthur sewer system if Port Arthur will accept Lady Luck as an outside‑city customer.

Engineer’s assessment and permitting constraints

“I’m Gary Graham, with South Texas Engineer Surveyors. I’m a registered professional engineer in South Texas,” said Gary Graham, who reviewed routing and permitting constraints with staff. He noted the permanent option of running a force main into the Groves system would require multiple permits, including crossing state highways and coordination with the Texas Department of Transportation and with Port Arthur where lines cross that city’s limits. Graham said that completing the permanent Groves connection could take “oh, 3 years or more” because of permitting and construction.

Owner preference, maintenance and economics

A representative for Lady Luck, identified in the meeting as Mister Cruz, said the developer prefers a faster on‑site aerobic treatment system (sometimes called an aeration or treatment plant) so the project can proceed immediately. “If we do it on‑site with our treatment plant there, we would maintain it… We can get started on that immediately,” Cruz said, adding, “we've already invested millions into the city.”

Staff and the developer also discussed the economics: constructing a new force main and lift station primarily to serve 47 additional RV spaces would create a long piece of pipe the city would eventually own and maintain, while connecting to Port Arthur could be cheaper for the developer but would mean Groves would not gain the sewer customer and the city would avoid the long‑term maintenance burden.

On‑site systems: regulatory and operational details

Staff explained that state environmental rules require the owner of an on‑site system to maintain permits and arrange annual inspections by licensed operators. Meeting participants distinguished a modern aerobic treatment system from an older “septic” tank: an aeration system treats wastewater to a higher standard and typically disposes effluent by drip irrigation or subsurface disposal. Staff said the proposed design would use a drip system, require roughly 25,000–35,000 square feet for the disposal field, include a backup generator, and need regular pumping and licensed maintenance; exact pumping frequency depends on tank sizing and usage and was described as “not specified” in the meeting.

Council direction and next steps

Mayor Brenton Camitas summarized the practical outcome: “I would like to see this agreement for them to run the pipe, to use the aeration system, and the agreement to tie in, once the bottleneck project is complete. I'd like to see that paperwork completed and presented to council for approval.” Staff and the developer agreed to prepare written terms for council consideration, including: the developer will install piping from the on‑site system to Groves’ existing sewer main and cap it so the city can open the connection when system upgrades are finished; the developer will operate and maintain the on‑site system while it remains in use; and the staff will propose a specific tie‑in timeline for council approval (participants discussed a 30‑day window after completion of the city upgrade as an illustrative target).

The staff said the paperwork could be prepared quickly and placed on an upcoming council agenda, possibly the next regular meeting or the following one. No formal motion or vote was taken at the Feb. 5 work session; staff will return with a written agreement and the council will consider any formal approvals thereafter.

Why it matters

Council members said allowing a temporary, regulated on‑site system would let the developer proceed and keep economic activity in Groves while the city plans a longer‑term capacity upgrade that could take years and require substantial construction. Staff also noted that the city is exploring targeted improvements to a nearby bottleneck in the sewer trunk that, if completed, would free capacity for future connections.