05:39The most notable topic of the meeting was the public hearing on a septic system proposal for a property on Bruce Street. John Borman, representing the project, presented a plans to upgrade the existing system to accommodate an expansion from a three-bedroom to a five-bedroom house. The proposal included the installation of a Presby septic system and a retaining wall to manage grading and protect a nearby wetland buffer zone. Health Director Francis Dagle confirmed that the plan met Title 5 requirements, and board members discussed its implications. After addressing questions about the visual impact of the retaining wall and the choice of the Presby system for its smaller footprint and cost-effectiveness, the board unanimously approved the proposal, concluding that it did not require a variance.

15:22The conversation then transitioned to the complex issue of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and septic system regulations. The board explored how state regulations now emphasize the number of bedrooms rather than room counts when evaluating septic system capacity. This shift necessitates the use of deed restrictions to align bedroom numbers with a septic system’s design flow. The board examined a hypothetical scenario involving a house with an ADU, where the septic system was designed for fewer bedrooms than the total room count would suggest.

20:44Further deliberations revolved around the challenges of managing non-conforming septic systems, particularly those predating the 1995 Title 5 enactment. The board acknowledged that many properties might require a Title 5 inspection if an ADU is proposed. They determined that if an existing system passes inspection and remains within its designated bedroom count, an ADU could be permissible. However, an increase in bedroom count would necessitate an upgrade to the septic system.

12:57Concerns were expressed about potential misuse of regulations, especially if ADUs were constructed as standalone units but classified merely as ADUs for septic purposes. The board questioned whether size restrictions on ADUs could prevent such occurrences.

28:23In addition to the primary topics, the board received updates on infectious diseases within the community. The prevalence of the XCC COVID-19 variant was noted, with vaccination rates around 30%. Flu season had seen a decrease in cases to low levels, with a vaccination rate of approximately 50%. There was optimism about the community moving past the peak of the RSV season. The board reported no new local avian influenza cases and recommended that individuals vaccinated before 1968 consider a booster for the MMR vaccine, given measles cases in nearby states.

31:37Administrative matters were also addressed, with the board approving meeting minutes from February 12 and March 12. Kevin Baker proposed establishing regular meetings with the select board to improve communication. While there was some hesitation about the format and necessity of these meetings, the board expressed a willingness to accommodate requests for interaction, provided it remained collaborative.

41:23A administrative update involved ongoing efforts to establish a backup plan for the health department with the Nashoba Associated Boards of Health. The proposal from town administration regarding payment for services was to be presented at an upcoming Nashoba board meeting. The board emphasized the importance of clear communication and being informed about any plans affecting their operations.