Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Septic Systems Title 5 topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves Title 5 local upgrade for 9 Stone Street to replace failed septic system

5954042 · September 23, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board granted a local upgrade approval under Title 5 for 9 Stone Street, allowing a 3-foot separation from high groundwater instead of 4 feet so a replacement system can be installed.

The Goddard Boyle Board of Health approved a Title 5 local upgrade approval for 9 Stone Street on Sept. 22, 2025, permitting the bottom of the absorption field to be 3 feet above the high groundwater elevation rather than the standard 4-foot separation in order to replace a failed septic system.

Health staff reported the existing system was classified as failed following an inspection tied to an impending sale. The proposed replacement is a conventional system with the same design flow as the current system (reported at 220 gallons per day). Staff said the only local deviation requested was the 4-foot-to-3-foot separation; no reductions to lateral setbacks were proposed. A licensed soil evaluator determined the high groundwater elevation and percolation testing recorded a rate of 10 minutes per inch, which staff said meets criteria for a local upgrade approval.

Board members discussed the difference between a local upgrade approval and a variance, noting a local upgrade approval applies only to failing or nonconforming existing systems and is intended to restore the system to maximum feasible functionality. A variance, by contrast, is a broader departure from Title 5 that would be required for new systems or other substantial departures from the code.

The board recorded the local upgrade approval as approved in the meeting; the transcript does not show a formal roll-call vote or list a mover and seconder. The board’s approval was contingent on staff review of the replacement plan; staff said they had reviewed the plan and would bring anything requiring further action back to the board.