Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Septic System Local Upgrade topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fall River Board grants local upgrade relief for septic at 81 Greenleaf Street with conditions
Summary
The board approved local upgrade variances for a septic repair at 81 Greenleaf Street, subject to conditions including a recorded two‑bedroom deed restriction, neighbor well testing, a notification document, and a hold‑harmless agreement.
The Fall River City Board of Health on March 25 voted to grant local upgrade approval for a septic repair at 81 Greenleaf Street, subject to multiple conditions intended to protect nearby wells and to ensure ongoing maintenance.
Niles Aga of Zenith Consulting Engineers described the plan: decommission the existing leaching area, install a new 1,500‑gallon septic tank with a microFAST 0.5 secondary treatment unit and a 1,000‑gallon pump chamber, and pump treated effluent to a stone-and-pipe leaching field. Aga said the site is constrained by nearby private wells, and the design requested reductions in some required setback distances; he told the board that the design team will rotate and enlarge the leaching field and use retaining walls so the full (100%) leaching area can be provided rather than the 50% reduction sometimes allowed with secondary treatment.
Board reviewer Aguiar (staff) said he inspected the proposal, performed soil testing and groundwater determinations, and recommended conditions to address the constrained site. Aguiar recommended: recording a two‑bedroom deed restriction at the Bristol County Registry of Deeds; recording a notification document alerting future owners to secondary treatment maintenance requirements; conducting baseline well testing on the two adjacent properties that would receive setback relief and repeat testing for two years after installation; and executing a hold‑harmless agreement indemnifying the city.
Aga agreed to the conditions and to submit a revised plan showing the full‑size leaching facility and any retaining walls. The board made two motions: first to approve the requested local upgrade variances allowing the system layout and reduced setbacks necessary for the design, and second to approve the recommended conditions (deed restriction, notification, well testing, and hold‑harmless agreement) as pre‑compliance requirements before a certificate of compliance is issued. Roll call votes recorded Thomas Corey, Michael Coughlin and Steven Gagliardi voting yes on both motions.
Board staff advised the applicant that the conditions and recording requirements must be completed before the board will issue a certificate of compliance.
