Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Septic Systems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Health imposes temporary moratorium on variances tied to IA septic systems, schedules scientific review
Summary
The Board of Health enacted a 90-day moratorium on considering variances for new construction that would use innovative/alternative (IA) septic systems to gain additional bedroom credits, citing the need for updated scientific review and community-level impact analysis.
The Board of Health imposed a temporary moratorium — adopted at a prior meeting and discussed on June 25 — on considering variance applications for new construction that propose using an innovative/alternative (IA) septic system to support additional bedrooms. The moratorium is 90 days and is intended to give the board time to review scientific evidence and hear expert testimony before approving future bedroom-credit variances.
Board chair Malcolm McNabb read the moratorium motion into the record: "To adopt a temporary moratorium of 90 days on considering variance applications for new construction if they propose using an IA system to accommodate more bedrooms so the board can study the issue and make better informed decisions on such applications." The moratorium explicitly exempts applications to replace or upgrade failed systems without increased flow and applications that do not require variances.
The board said the pause responds to a recent uptick in variances requesting bedroom credits tied to IA system installation and to testimony suggesting that adding bedrooms may have broader environmental implications — particularly where multiple properties in a small area receive bedroom increases. "When you see an agenda that all your Board of Health is doing is giving variances so people can build more bedrooms, it's time to take a deep breath," McNabb said.
Health staff explained the IA systems have been considered an improved treatment technology and that the board historically granted nitrogen-loading variances on that basis, but some recent testimony suggested the cumulative effect of increased bedrooms may outweigh the benefits in certain sensitive areas. The board arranged expert presentations for its July meeting and said it expects to review scientific evidence and policy options before the moratorium ends at the September Board of Health meeting.
Board members and several commenters expressed concern about fairness to property owners who planned projects based on longstanding practice and about schedule and cost impacts. Town officials noted some applicants have agreed to short scheduling extensions so the board can consider the moratorium timeframe; staff also noted state and local deadlines for acting on applications (the board mentioned the 45‑day action requirement for pending applications).
Public comment urged the board to rely on scientific evidence and to weigh benefits and costs carefully; several residents and stakeholders said IA systems are generally beneficial but asked the board to consider cumulative and localized effects before expanding bedroom allocations.
