Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands Septic 31 Meadowbrook topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues septic replacement hearing for 31 Meadowbrook Road until April 28 pending DEP file number
Summary
The Conservation Commission continued the notice of intent for a septic replacement at 31 Meadowbrook Road so the applicant can supply a DEP file number and complete required on-site testing; commissioners accepted re-testing during installation to avoid repeated disturbance.
The Sudbury Conservation Commission continued the hearing on a proposed septic-system replacement at 31 Meadowbrook Road on April 7, agreeing to reconvene the item at the commission’s April 28 meeting once the applicant supplies a DEP file number.
Matt Morrow of Morrow Environmental Consulting presented the notice of intent for a single-family septic replacement. He walked the commission through the plan area, erosion-control details and the proposed location of the tank and leach field. Morrow said the proposed work will place most system components outside of the commission’s most restrictive zones where possible and showed a proposed erosion-control line and straw-wattle detail for the 50-foot area.
Evan Carloni of Innovative Septic Design, the system designer, explained test results and the rationale for the selected site. He said the existing three-bedroom system sits roughly 30 feet from the wetland while the proposed system is about 60 feet from the wetland, and that testing encountered groundwater during earlier pits. To address the site constraints, Carloni said the design uses a patented sand-filter system (not a standard pipe-and-stone field) that achieves “almost 10 times cleaner” effluent than a conventional system. He described tradeoffs and costs involved with attempting to site the leach field farther forward in the front yard, including longer building sewer runs, utility relocations (gas and water) and the potential need for a pump chamber if a gravity-fed system would no longer be feasible.
Laurie (staff member) told the commission the proposed system conforms to the Wetlands Protection Act and the local bylaw, that the Board of Health had conditioned retesting of the proposed field during installation, and that the commission’s bylaw allows the commission to require greater setbacks if it chooses. The commission expressed preference for minimizing maintenance in the buffer and for a configuration that reduces future disturbance.
Commissioners agreed to continue the hearing to April 28 so the applicant can provide the DEP file number and so Laurie can prepare draft conditions; the commission accepted the Board of Health-conditioned testing to be done during installation to avoid multiple disturbances to the site. The motion to continue was approved by voice vote.
