Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Septic Systems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board tables Title 5 variances for septic system at 185 High Rock Road
Summary
The Fitchburg Board of Health tabled multiple Title 5 Local Upgrade Approval and variance requests for 185 High Rock Road until the applicant submits a revised plan showing a relocated well and notifies abutters. The proposal would have reduced required setbacks and used an Advantex nitrogen-reduction system.
Dr. John Bogdasarian, chair of the Fitchburg Board of Health, opened a hearing on Local Upgrade Approvals and Title 5 variances for 185 High Rock Road and heard a presentation from Larry Greene of McCarty Companies about a proposed septic system.
Stephen Curry, Fitchburg's health director, summarized the property's prior tax-title status and demolition of the former structure, and explained that sewer access is unavailable. The application sought multiple variances under 310 CMR 15.405 and 15.211, including reduced setbacks to the property line (allowing 6 feet and 2.8 feet where 10 feet is required), reduced separation to a private well (38 feet where 100 feet is required; 22 feet where 50 feet is required), and a reduced separation to high groundwater (2 feet where 4 feet is required). Greene presented an Advantex system intended to lower nitrogen loading and fit the constrained lot.
Board members and Director Curry raised concerns about site constructability, protection of abutting property, long-term durability and monitoring of the proposed system, and legal requirements for notifying abutters when variances are requested. The board emphasized relocation of the proposed well and the need for annual well water testing to be recorded with the Health Department.
Dr. Bogdasarian moved to table the Local Upgrade Approval and variance requests until the applicant submits a revised plan showing the relocated well and demonstrates that abutting property owners have been properly notified; Diane Tousignant seconded and the motion carried. No formal vote tally by member name was recorded in the transcript. The board indicated general support for the project subject to those conditions and the submission of revised plans.
