Laserfiche WebLink
Jeffrey Ryther represented the applicant for this project. He stated that the existing house is tight <br /> on the lot, and the proposed house has a similar footprint and will remain three bedrooms. The <br /> upgraded system would go in the front. It would be a narrow, gravity-fed system that would be <br /> located 81'from the saltmarsh,tight to the lot line and near the road. The applicant hired Peter <br /> McEntee to do the test hole, and groundwater was monitored over a period of a week. The <br /> system would be at least 5'from high groundwater. <br /> Ms. Warden asked that a floorplan be provided. In response to Ms. Warden's concerns about <br /> adding bedrooms in the basement, Mr. Ryther stated that there was not room for a walkout <br /> basement. Chair Baumgaertel asked, since the leach field is partially under driveway, had any <br /> venting been provided, and Mr. Ryther responded that it would be vented as noted on the last <br /> page of the plan. Chair Baumgaertel asked that it be added to the drawing, but added that it was <br /> otherwise a technically good plan. <br /> Mr. Harrington stated that the Board doesn't typically like to see less than 10'to a crawlspace or <br /> a cellar wall. He noted that the proposed plan provides only 6' and advised that, if a slab were <br /> poured,it would lessen all the variances. In discussing the crawlspace,Mr. Harrington noted that <br /> if the concrete slab is poured at elevation 9.4, it would cut the setback requirements in half. In <br /> Mr. Harrington's opinion,that is better for the occupants and also makes it a more appealing to <br /> the Board to approve. He noted that the slab only needs to be provided in areas that are within <br /> 10' of the SAS: Mr. Ryther indicated that there is going to be a concrete dustcover put on that <br /> crawlspace. <br /> Mr. Ryther explained where the breakout barrier runs, and Mr. Harrington stated that the liner <br /> needs to be a condition of the variance. It was noted that there was no locus or benchmark on <br /> the plan, and Chair Baumgaertel asked that those be added. Ms. Warden asked that the word <br /> "divergences" be amended to say "variances". Because a revised plan is needed and would <br /> change the variances being requested, Ms.Warden recommended that the matter be continued. <br /> There being no further comments or discussion,Veronica Warden moved to continue the matter <br /> of the Title 5 variances at 16 Spoondrift Circle until the October 22,2020 meeting,pending receipt <br /> of the revisions as requested. Motion seconded by Ernest Virgilio. Roll call vote: Ernest Virgilio <br /> (yes);Veronica Warden (yes); Brian Baumgaertel (yes). VOTE: Unanimous(3-0). <br /> 5. Review and approval of 2021 BOH Fee Schedule. Mr. Harrington commented that there were <br /> two proposed changes to the fee schedule. The $25 septic abandonment permit fee was taken <br /> off by mistake at some point in the recent past. He stated that,as more systems are tied to sewer, <br /> it is important to memorialize that the existing system was pumped and abandoned according to <br /> Title 5. The second change was the addition of the short-term rental fees, which consist of a <br /> registration fee of$25 and an inspection fee of$75. <br /> Chair Baumgaertel inquired about the possibility of"memorializing"the one-time temporary food <br /> permit fee for multiple events, but Mr. Harrington explained this it would be difficult to do a <br /> blanket change on that. Mr. Virgilio stated that, in his opinion, the fees were not high enough. <br /> Chair Baumgaertel agreed, stating that it might be a good idea to do a full analysis of the staff <br /> time spent and the real cost associated with some of the inspections. Ms. Warden asked if the <br /> Health Agent had any fee schedules from other towns for comparison. Mr. Harrington answered <br /> that the last time a comparison was done,our fees proved to be relatively high, but he agreed to <br /> look back on the historical data. <br /> 4 <br />