11/13/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes (2)

Home Browse Search

Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission 16 Great Neck Road North Mashpee, MA 02649 Septic Concerns Commissioners immediately raised concerns about the septic system's location. Plans show the existing septic tank directly beneath, or adjacent to, the area where structural pilings are proposed for the rear addition. Mr. Colombo questioned whether construction could proceed if the pilings conflict structurally with the septic tank. Mr. Bright stated that the exact location cannot be confirmed until the ground is opened, but excavation cannot occur prior to approval. If the tank occupies the space needed for pilings, alternate structural solutions such as steel beams or cantilevered supports may be required. Structural feasibility cannot be confirmed without exposing the existing system. En6ineerint! Uncertainties Mr. Sahl asked about the reliability of the proposed piling layout. Mr. Bright responded that he must manually dig test holes before any final engineering decisions can be made. He explained that a steel beam may be able to cantilever roughly three feet, allowing flexibility, but if the septic extends significantly under the deck, the design could require major adjustment. He reiterated that no certainty exists until the septic tank is physically located. RDA vs. NOI Ms. Godfrey expressed concern that the rear additions should not be approved under an RDA due to septic uncertainty, floodplain implications, and the likelihood of additional work if the septic fails Title V. She stated that a Notice of Intent would give the Commission the necessary review authority for structural changes near or over the septic system. Mr. McManus noted that the flood zone mapping on the applicant's plan was unclear. GIS indicates the parcel spans AE-12 and Zone X. Commission Discussion • A Title V inspection is required by the Board of Health, and depending on the results, a septic upgrade may be necessary. • No natural vegetation removal is proposed. • Rear additions within resource areas generally require an NOI. • Chair Cook observed that the plan appeared to show the existing deck directly over the septic tank, emphasizing the uncertainty of proceeding under an RDA. Mr. Bright agreed with the Commission's recommendation. • He requested that the front entry bump-out be approved under the RDA so construction on that safety-related element can proceed. • He agreed to remove the rear additions from the RDA and will file an NOI once the septic tank is uncovered and its exact location confinned. MOTION: For a negative determination on the front part of the work, the entry bumps out exit off the existing deck and living room and the rear part of the work to be subject to a NOI once the location of the septic tank is determined. 3