My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/9/2003 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
>
1/9/2003 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 5:08:11 PM
Creation date
3/26/2018 1:49:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF HEALTH
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/09/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
■ <br /> Mr. Harrington responded that he was superbly overjoyed by it just by the <br /> fact that there are variances to the coastal bank. There are local <br /> variances. Regardless of any board members previous stances, they have <br /> regulation that}states that if they are less than 1001 they put in <br /> denitrification system and if you are less than 751 you need to add a UV <br /> treatment. The board is definitely within their right to ask for those things. <br /> The DEP will be involved on the coastal bark approval. The board <br /> definitely has the right to deny this entire proposal because of the <br /> variances to the reserve area and to the bank, accept that the board has <br /> approved the reserve area prior to this for another Bluff lot cottage <br /> property. He didn't believe that the coastal bark or especially this <br /> distance to the coastal has been approved before. They were talking a <br /> pretty short distance. it was approximately 12 or 151 to the coastal bank,. <br /> That is a Title V setback. eonservaition also has issues with that. But, <br /> again, he thought it was a tough property to deal with. These were beach <br /> cottages before and now they were talking a six-bedroom home. It was <br /> three now. <br /> Mr. Grotzke stated that the building was not as large as it may seem <br /> because they have the existing lines that have to be taken into account of <br /> the cottage that was demolished. He now demonstrates whet he is <br /> talking about by pointing to the actual plans,) if it hadn't been for these <br /> dwellings this thing never would have gotten approved. They had the <br /> equivalent footprints so they did make an effort thing relatively comp pct. <br /> The whole overall structure is no bigger than it was in the beginning. <br /> Granted it was going to be two and one half stories instead of a single <br /> floor, The chap who has bought this has paid close to three million dollars <br /> just for the land with the expectation that he will build a house as all the <br /> other cottages have re-built their cottages. <br /> Ir. Harrington stated that he did not believe that the other cottages <br /> required or were located in this situation with the coastal bank wrapping <br /> around their properties. <br /> Mr. Grotzke responded that this was clearly the toughest property. <br /> Mr. Harrington asked when he could see when that line or when possibly <br /> the sewer extension was going to be done. He would make a <br /> recommendation that they hold off because a lot of these variances would <br /> go away with the septic system and the board of health would step out of <br /> a lot of this when the sewer line was put in. <br /> IIIb. Santos agreed with Nor, Harrington and added that he was leaning <br /> towards making a motion to deny the plan as submitted because he would <br /> grant to see a denitrification system with the UV treatment. They were <br /> 7'1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.