Southampton Town Residents Upset Over Proposed Law To Exempt Septic Retaining Walls From Regulation

After a set of 6- to 7-foot-tall retaining walls were approved along property lines in their neighborhood, residents on Cold Spring Point Road in Southampton are furious over a proposed town law that would make walls around septic systems exempt from regulations that pertain to walls and fences.

“This has been approved, right on our property line,” Anthony Aufiero, who lives on Cold Spring Point Road, told Town Board members at a public hearing on Tuesday, February 12.

Mr. Aufiero explained that the approved wall would strip away his ability to plant a buffer, while creating an eyesore and a hazard.

The walls are constructed around septic systems, like the new nitrogen-reducing systems that were approved by the Suffolk County Health Services Department and are subsidized by the county and the town for qualifying homeowners.

The reason for the retaining walls is that the septic systems must be at least two or three feet above the groundwater to prevent the water from leaching into the system. The walls are constructed around the septic system in the shape of a box to prevent water from getting in from the sides.

Michael Benincasa, Southampton Town’s chief building inspector, told Town Board members that groundwater separation between the bottom of the leaching field and the groundwater is required, but sometimes engineers will call for walls that are six or seven feet above the groundwater.

“Separation between groundwater is not a bad thing—it’s a good thing,” he said. “In our eyes, the height of these walls is not a good thing.”

Assistant Town Attorney Kathryn Garvin told board members that retaining walls around tennis courts or any other structures are typically scrutinized by the building department, but if walls are attached to a sanitation system, they are typically not looked at by the building department. She explained that once Suffolk County stamps the septic system as being compliant, the building department does not review it further.

“It really was intended to codify a longstanding building department policy that exempts retaining walls that are used as part of a sanitary waste disposal system from our regulation,” Ms. Garvin said of the legislation.

Mr. Benincasa acknowledged that the process may need to be looked at more thoroughly.

The size of a septic system for a residential property is typically based on the number of bedrooms in the home. But homeowners sometimes put in septic systems that are much bigger than necessary.

Mr. Benincasa said if a person has a six-bedroom house and gets approval from the health department for a 12-bedroom system, that system should probably be downsized, and a flag should be raised to look into it further.

But as for the retaining walls, he said, the health department does not regulate the height—it ensures the system complies with wastewater treatment regulations.

Mr. Aufiero said there are nine homes in his 68-house development with retaining walls around their septic systems. Of those nine homes, only one has a wall over 4 feet high—the rest are all under 4 feet in height.

He said while many advanced septic systems require walls around them in low-lying areas, he found one that can be installed without a wall around it.

The proposed wall on his property line has him concerned about other things as well: The water that comes into the neighborhood during a flood will be forced onto his property, which is the lowest point on the spit of land.

“Large walls do not allow water to recede,” J.J. Sacha, the development’s homeowner association president said. “We would oppose any amendment or change to the code that would make it easier to put in these walls.”

Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman said he understands the importance of separating septic from groundwater. However, he said, installing walls cuts off root systems for vegetation from neighboring properties, and retaining walls could also pose physical risks to anyone who may fall from the 6-foot ledge.

But, to date, the walls have not been required to meet dimensional regulations, the supervisor said.

Two recent Article 78 lawsuits—actions to appeal decisions by regulatory boards—have been filed against Southampton Town because of these walls. Both are from residents of Cold Spring Point Road.

“We had a neighbor that didn’t like the wall next to their property,” Mr. Benincasa told the Town Board. “When somebody doesn’t like something in Southampton Town, they call an attorney.”

Town Board members chose to adjourn a public hearing on the matter to allow more time for residents to chime in, whether through written comments or during a second public hearing date on Tuesday, March 12.