Laserfiche WebLink
<br />4:35 PM Show-Cause Hearing Review of Compliance of Septic Upgrade – 100 Great Neck Road <br />North, Juan Marichal. <br /> <br />th <br />Mr. Seabury explained that on August 30 the office received a call of a cesspool overflow at the <br />address. One of the cesspools had flowed into the parking lot. Christine Willander, Assistant <br />Health Agent, and Joseph Callahan, Code Compliance Inspector, immediately visited the site, <br />where they noted large puddles of standing water and a pervasive sewage odor. Prior to the <br />Agent’s arrival a call had been placed for an emergency cesspool pump by the property manager. <br />th <br />The system had been previously required to be upgraded and approved by the BOH on May 19, <br />2022 under the condition of continued pumping of the cesspools. Mr. Seabury stated that this <br />overflow showed a lack of good faith under the agreement. Mr. Seabury indicated that the <br />purpose of the hearing was to get an update on the upgrade of the septic system. The <br />respondent began by explaining the overflow related to the cesspool servicing the laundromat <br />and office. The respondent also stated that the cesspools are checked every day as required by <br />the agreement with the BOH – being pumped by Ready Rooter if reaching 75% capacity. The <br />overflow was due to toilet paper being stuck in the toilet – running all day and causing the <br />overflow. The respondent offered to show the pumping records to the BOH to show compliance <br />with the BOH agreement. The respondent noted the property has been owned by Mr. Marichal <br />for only 3 ½ years with many needed upgrades and improvements being made to the property. <br />The respondent noted that it had received a groundwater discharge permit from the DEP in 2021 <br />which was appealed by the BOH – the property is very close to Mashpee River and a standalone <br />Title V was inadequate. The respondent noted that it had reached an agreement with DEP and <br />the BOH for an I/A system to address the nitrogen. Financing had been obtained for the <br />engineering costs of the second system. The second system cost about $600,000 more than the <br />initial system costing about $900,000. The respondent noted that Barnstable County will not give <br />a loan for the I/A system due to perceived obsolescence in a few years (the loan term is 25 years). <br />th <br />The respondent also noted that Barnstable County had regulations coming into effect July 7 to <br />upgrade septic systems (claiming the current I/A proposal would be required to be replaced in a <br />few years). Ideally, the respondent wants to connect to a sewer. In the meantime, the <br />respondent suggests putting in two additional leeching facilities. Mr. Seabury noted the <br />Barnstable County financing is for residential properties and asked if other financing was sought. <br />The respondent noted the increase in rates and difficulty obtaining financing. Regarding the <br />potential obsolescence and need to upgrade after paying for the new system, Mr. Seabury noted <br />that was incorrect and went to state it is the “best available technology” at the time – there <br />would be no requirement to replace a best available system due to regulatory changes. The <br />requirement would only be triggered if the system failed. Regarding sewer, Mr. Seabury stated <br />no sewer will be going there. Mr. Seabury then noted he has been in the position as Health Agent <br />for a year and has heard a lot about the property. Mr. Seabury noted he spoke to the owner back <br />in January about the upgrade and had heard nothing since. While it is true a clogged pipe can <br />happen, Mr. Seabury noted under Title V the owner has 2 years to upgrade (including the time <br />th <br />with the pumping) – May 19, 2024. The respondent claimed that the DEP had informed him <br />that there would be sewer in two years resulting in the pause. (“Does the DEP know something <br />that the Town doesn’t know?”) Mr. Seabury reiterated there is no sewer coming to that property. <br />Mr. Seabury noted that if the respondent acted the respondent would have the lower rate and <br />could have been helping the Town with the Mashpee River’s Nitrogen problem. The respondent <br />then returned to the “regulation change” as the cause of the stop – not wanting to waste <br /> <br />