Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-9-10 - 10 Barber Hill Road - Septic Failure Letter[QWN SfAf ..w 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 �N�SnB ��r• AREA CODE 203/644-2511 M E M O R A N D U M September 10, 1985 TO: Water Pollution Control Authority RE: FAILING SEPTIC SYSTEM AT 10 BARBER HILL ROAD On September 10, 1985, an eight foot deep observation pit was dug adjacent to the failing septic system at the above address. The purpose of this pit was to observe sub -soil conditions so that criteria for an effective replacement to the failed system could be determined. In conjunction with the observation pit, the Town Environmental Health Officer also composed a very rough "field sketch" of the usable front yard area. This was based on the location of the existing septic tank and information obtained from the Kuehnel's on September 9, 1985 as to approximate property lines and well locations. A percolation test was not conducted for several reasons; the upper soil layer in which the system would be placed was without question capable of absorbing septic tank effluent. Secondly, there does not appear to be enough usable area to install the minimum amount of leaching area required; therefore, the maximum amount of leaching area which would fit in the usable area would be installed. Based on the above stated observations, the following information is offered. Sub -soil types and maximum groundwater table are such that a septic system replacement could be installed in compliance with the State Public Health Code. Assuming the septic tank was moved so that it was seventy-five feet from the Kuehnel's well (it is the opinion of an installer that the tank should be replaced) and assuming the least amount of usable area, the Kuehnel's could install enough leaching area to closely approach the minimum amount required for a three bedroom home (375 square feet). This could be accomplished by two options; first would be the installation of a leaching bed, (approximately 300 square feet), secondly, would be the installation of leaching galleries (approximately 320 square feet). The second alternative although probably the more expensive would be the preferred one here since that installation would cause less ground disturbance and could be serviced in necessary. If the driveway area were disturbed. even more effective leaching area could be obtained. A:D TO P H FROM M O OF N E M E S M A A E � E M O PHONED11,_, AICO FORM NO 50-176 /,0 o l umir b ` P AREA CODE NUMBER : Z V-z).57 EXTENSION SIGNED ❑ SANTS EEYOUO ❑ WILL AGAIN ALL ❑I WAS IN ❑ URGENT ❑ 2w 39 'A'Aelfs-9 -' 3,,,-? g4 Memorandum To: Water Pollution Control Authority Re: Failing Septic System at 10 Barber Hill Road September 10, 1985 Page 2 The State Health Code allows for the local Director of Health to grant variances to the code for the repair of an existing septic system if those variances are unlikely to create a health hazard. The small reduction in the leaching area referred to in the above paragraph would not cause a health hazard. Assuming the existing septic tank was utilized, a variance would not be needed since it is existing. If the tank was replaced with a new one in the same location, a State Health Department variance would be required. The State Health Department has indicated the variance would be granted provided there is no septic system pollution problems with the well. The Town Health Department will have the well water tested if the property owners request it. If the same area was used for the septic tank, even more leaching area would be available. Local Health Department variances may be needed for separation distances from property lines or footing drains of the dwelling. Those would be granted since they would not create a health hazard. To accurately determine property lines, including the Town right-of-way for Barber Hill Road, the Kuehnel's must obtain a plot plan of their property showing boundary lines, their well location, house location and location of the two neighboring wells. An engineer's plan will not be required but the new leaching system must be located on the plot plan. A final determination of usable leaching area will be made once the plot plan is reviewed. Since the usable area is limited, the existing leaching area will have to be utilized. The existing leaching area must be removed and properly disposed of. In summation, it appears as though the septic system can be repaired using the front yard area. Another option would be to relocate the well to the front yard and place the septic system in the rear yard where there appears to be ample room. Robert Dep ula, R.S. Environmental Health Officer RD:bmr cc: C. F. Shaw, Supt. of Pollution Control