Laserfiche WebLink
➢ Board of Health: New septic construction must meet full compliance with BOH I/A <br /> septic systems regulation. Any disposal system variances shall be heard before the <br /> approving authority, the BOH <br /> ➢ Building/ZBA: Project requires a finding from ZBA, scheduled March 26tn <br /> Documents provided: Self;Request for Determination of Applicability; 10/17/24 Plan"Site Plan—Proposed <br /> House Renovations"; (Plans by: Falmouth Engineering,Inc.) <br /> RDA <br /> 22 Nehoiden Road, Robert L. & Jeanne M. Manzi <br /> ➢ Representative: Engineering Works, Inc. <br /> Failing Septic System Upgrade Proposal <br /> • Proposed new compliance system in approximately the same footprint but larger to meet <br /> current standards <br /> • Existing system: septic tank under wheelchair ramp with reflow diffusers approximately <br /> 2-2.5 ft from groundwater <br /> • New system includes: two-compartment septic tank with sledgehammer, S86 to pump <br /> chamber <br /> • Leaching field will be higher than existing grade but level with end of driveway <br /> • Three trees potentially affected: 12-inch oak, 18-inch oak, and one at driveway end <br /> • Board of Health approved a 1 ft reduction to estimated high groundwater <br /> Tree Preservation Discussion <br /> • Clarification on groundwater levels: estimated high groundwater at 2.6, bottom of <br /> leaching system at 6.7 <br /> • Discussion about preserving two oak trees if possible <br /> • The 18-inch oak has good chance of preservation; 12-inch oak may need removal <br /> • Southeast corridor of lot identified as potential area for replacement trees <br /> • Area between shed and proposed leaching area also suitable for the planting <br /> Final Considerations & Motion <br /> • Recommendation for staff to monitor trees during installation <br /> • If trees cannot survive,replanting would be instituted <br /> • Preference to keep existing large trees rather than replacing them with smaller caliber <br /> trees <br /> • Application deemed appropriate for upgrade in a highly developed low area <br /> • Ms. Godfrey made the motion for a negative determination with the condition that staff <br /> monitor trees to ensure survival, which Ms. Thornbrugh seconded <br /> • Vote: Ms. Thornbrugh (Yes), Ms. Godfrey (Yes), Ms. Clapprood (Yes), Mr. Sahl (Yes), <br /> Mr. Colombo (Yes) <br /> o Motion passed unanimously <br /> Agent(Resource Area: LSCSF (landlocked. No other wetlands within 150 ft of project locus) <br /> 7 <br />