Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maitland council amends cross-connection rules; clarifies who must test backflow devices
Summary
The City of Maitland adopted amendments to its cross-connection (backflow) ordinance to clarify ownership and annual testing responsibilities, require replacement or refurbishment of dual check devices every 10 years under DEE rules, and remove certain replacement charges.
The City of Maitland City Council on April 28 adopted amendments to its cross-connection control ordinance to clarify responsibilities for backflow-prevention devices and testing.
City Manager Mark (last name not specified) told the council the amendments clarify that owners — not the city — own most backflow devices and that the city will perform testing on residential service connections smaller than 2 inches; owners of nonresidential service connections greater than 2 inches must arrange testing and provide annual test results to the city. The ordinance also requires dual-jet backflow devices to be refurbished or replaced every 10 years "according to DEE rules," and it removes certain city charges for replacement repairs.
Mark said the changes are mostly cleanup to make program responsibilities and procedures explicit after staff and residents encountered confusion following prior language. "It clarifies who owns the backflow vendors, which is the homeowner or business owner," he said, and added the amendments respond to a resident-driven question about acceptable tests.
During public comment, a business owner identified as Mitchell asked why the city specifies a low-cost inline device (DCD 100) for some applications while irrigation connections use dual-check or double-check valves that can cost substantially more; he described a roughly $35 inline part versus a roughly $400 irrigation unit. Mark said he would ask public works to follow up on that technical question.
Council members discussed whether adopting the amendments would lock the city into a specific approach. Mark replied that the ordinance does not prevent later changes: "No change in reference. So if anything comes up, you know, it changes." The council voted to adopt the ordinance on second reading.
The adopted ordinance amends article 2, section 20-25 of the city's code; the city clerk will publish the ordinance and any administrative procedures required to implement the clarified testing schedule.
