0:28The meeting’s primary focus was the variance request for a property located on Moris Island Road. The property, a pre-existing home, faced a failed septic inspection during a real estate transfer, primarily due to its system’s proximity to groundwater and its location beneath a garage. The board examined a request to reduce setbacks from property lines and wetlands, alongside a request to decrease the groundwater separation requirement from the mandated five feet to four feet. The property, approximately 38,294 square feet, had been previously approved by the board as a four-bedroom home in 1996, with the living room functioning as the fourth bedroom.

Board members scrutinized the property’s architectural configuration, including the open staircase leading to this bedroom, and emphasized the need for an architectural plan, though it was noted that the building department file contained more detailed information. The existing leaching area was deemed to offer improved compliance with local regulations, addressing the previous system’s failure due to insufficient distance from groundwater. An increase in the septic tank size from 1,250 gallons to 1,500 gallons was proposed to allow for greater retention time.

After no public comments opposed the variance, the board approved the request through a voice vote, with conditions on the number of bedrooms and requirements for documentation and certification of the septic installation.

The second significant agenda item involved another variance hearing for a property on Fox Hill Road. The existing septic system for the three-bedroom home, consisting of a single leaching trench near a coastal bank and salt marsh, was up for improvement. The proposal included using the existing tank while installing a new Title 5 system, which promised enhanced capacity through two 500-gallon chambers surrounded by crushed stone. The property’s limited space necessitated several local upgrade approvals and variances, including a 4.8-foot waiver of the 20-foot setback from the house foundation and a substantial 59.6-foot waiver from the 100-foot minimum setback required from the coastal bank.

An engineering representative explained that erosion control measures would be implemented during construction, and efforts were made to preserve a 20-inch tree between the garage and the proposed leaching system. However, the removal of the tree was acknowledged as a possibility, depending on the liner placement necessary for the installation. Board members inquired about compliance with groundwater separation requirements and the overall impact on resource areas during construction, highlighting the challenge of balancing adequate septic system installation with adherence to environmental regulations.

20:09A related discussion arose regarding a three-bedroom dwelling with a failing septic system, where the homeowner proactively sought replacement to prevent further deterioration. A precautionary liner was proposed to prevent sewage from reaching the full basement, with specifications on its dimensions. The board debated the classification of a room labeled as a study, considering its layout and elements like built-in bookshelves and a fireplace. A member remarked, “If you saw it, you wouldn’t count it as a bedroom,” emphasizing its lack of privacy and usability for sleeping purposes. Despite being greater than 70 square feet, the study did not meet the criteria for a bedroom under current guidelines due to its layout and privacy limitations.

The board also examined the septic system’s placement relative to the Coastal Bank, considering factors like trees, land grade, and property line regulations. It was noted that the leaching system was set 10.2 feet from the property line, and members agreed that moving it further up would be impractical given the constraints.

Following these discussions, a motion was made to approve the variance for the septic system replacement with specific conditions, including maintaining the property as a maximum of three bedrooms and recording this restriction on the deed. The engineering plans required written certification confirming adherence to approved specifications, and any alterations to the dwelling’s floor plan would necessitate further board review. The variance was approved unanimously after a voice vote.