Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Planning board hears engineers weigh monitored treatment plant against large subsurface septic fields for proposed development
Summary
Engineers and consultants debated three wastewater options — a packaged treatment plant with a constructed vegetated corridor, a geotech‑style subsurface septic field, and a conventional plant — focusing on treatment levels, footprint, monitoring and ecological risk to a nearby stream. The board requested DEC/DOH correspondence and monitoring specifications before deciding.
Warren Longacre, an engineer with MJ Engineering, outlined a subsurface disposal option that would replace a centralized wastewater treatment plant with two 10,500‑gallon septic tanks, a dosing tank and a large absorption field sized according to soil percolation rates. Longacre said design uncertainty near the equestrian center led the team to use a conservative 11–15 minute perc rate rather than 1–5 minutes, which increases the field footprint; he estimated a design maximum day flow of about 18,600 gallons and calculated an absorption area need of roughly 23,500 square feet using a 0.8 gallons/day/square‑foot application rate.
Rodney Morrison, civil engineer for the applicant, described an alternative that pairs a packaged wastewater treatment plant with a constructed, vegetated corridor roughly 190–200 feet above the stream to slow, diffuse and increase infiltration of treated effluent before it reaches the watercourse. Morrison said the corridor is intended to improve outflow characteristics and is not being proposed to replace regulatory discharge requirements; he…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat

