My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2000-BOARD OF HEALTH
TownOfMashpee
>
Town Clerk
>
Minutes
>
BOARD OF HEALTH
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
2000-BOARD OF HEALTH
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/20/2019 2:41:58 PM
Creation date
11/17/2016 3:22:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF HEALTH
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/31/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
164
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES April 13, 2000 7 BOARD OF HEALTH <br /> would have the keys, open the doors and use it. There are a lot of problems associated <br /> with this choice and the continuing rise of cost to use dumpsters. <br /> Mr. Santos wanted to return to the issue of the judging of the waste. For example, if <br /> you were picking up commercial waste in the Town of Mashpee, there is a <br /> monthly/yearly report that comes back to the BOH regarding the tonnage. Why can't <br /> the same report be produced for the recyclable material? <br /> The trash hauler stated that he can pick up 40 to 60 cans and that is a load. The pick <br /> up of cardboard is sporadic. Everyone has a trashcan. But, very few people have a <br /> cardboard can. You would have to make a guesstimate versus an actual figure of how <br /> much is being recycled. Co-mingled recyclable trash is $45.00 per ton as the going <br /> rate at present. <br /> Mr. Ball concluded the meeting by stating that he appreciated everyone coming to the <br /> meeting to spend the time to discuss this issue. He also stated that the Recycling <br /> Committee would be in touch and keep them informed of any updates regarding this <br /> issue. <br /> APPOINTMENT: New Seabury re: Ocean Bluff Cottage and Other Permit Extension <br /> Requests <br /> Mr. Michael Grotzke of New Seabury was in attendance for this scheduled <br /> appointment. <br /> Mr. McQuaid stated that Mr. Grotzke presented the BOH with completely revised <br /> separate plans last week that conform with the new Title V as far as the type of <br /> leaching system to be used. It eliminates the leaching pits that had previously been <br /> installed and uses newer shallower 500-gallon dry wells. One of the only non- <br /> conforming items left is number of bedrooms limit. However, it does propose seven <br /> bedrooms versus the original ten which was based on the original inspection of the <br /> structures on the property. The other non-conforming item is that they are not <br /> proposing a denitrification system to help offset the number of bedrooms exceeding <br /> what would be allowed under the new Title V. This was reviewed by the two Board <br /> members present last week. The two Board members decided to postpone any decision <br /> until this week until a full Board was present. <br /> Mr. Ball asked Mr. McQuaid if he had been in contact with the DEP at all? <br /> Mr. McQuaid confirmed that he had been in touch with the DEP and had faxed up a <br /> copy of Mr. Grotzke's cover letter to them prior to last week's meeting. The DEP <br /> wanted to remind the Board that they had 45 days to review the plan. Since then Mr. <br /> McQuaid had been in touch with the DEP in order to inform them that the BOH was <br /> ready to make a decision tonight. The DEP's comment was that the local BOH would <br /> not approve the plans unless the New Seabury applicant were to propose a <br /> denitrification system with the septic system. This was due to the fact that New <br /> Seabury applicant is asking for a variance and not specifying that the variance is in <br /> relationship to the new Title V. The variance relates to the Town of Mashpee <br /> regulations that has a limit of 660 gallons per acre. Also, in granting this variance the <br /> DEP reminds the BOH that two issues have to be satisfied. The first being that the <br /> applicant has to prove to the BOH, that not granting the variance would be "manifest <br /> Ilk <br /> L <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.