My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/23/2003 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
>
1/23/2003 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 5:03:49 PM
Creation date
3/26/2018 1:50:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF HEALTH
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/23/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
i <br /> Mr. Ball responded that they were suffering that they were on the side <br /> that it was okay for me to do this but no one else. He suggested that they <br /> pull their file and see hover many variances they requested. <br /> i <br /> Ills, Warden agreed with Mr. Ball and stated that you probably could pull <br /> their file and would find quite a few variances. <br /> Mr, Grotzke continued by stating that he actually had a system like this <br /> one that had the board's approval that was in the ground now, But,, they <br /> are choosing not to use this one: He and Mr. Harrington had kicked around <br /> the concept of going with the existing new system as which could b <br /> equivalent to adjacent system. He felt it would be superior seeing that <br /> they have no definitive time line to install a system which would comply <br /> with Title V as closely as possible, which would increase the distance to <br /> ground water and give there the maximum leaching area. Again the <br /> variance they were looking for was a septic tank. Well they could move <br /> the septic tank over. He felt that it would impact doing the clean and the <br /> nitrates from the leaching area interfer with it. <br /> Mr. Ball asked what he meant by a five-foot variance from the property <br /> line. <br /> Mr. Santos added that he had remembered what Mr, Grotzke had told <br /> them at the last meeting. He told them that they were right down to the <br /> o' coastal. The board members wanted to see a denitrification system <br /> with the UV treatment. <br /> (A discussion ensued clarifying that this was 11 ocean Bluff that was <br /> under review not 3 ocean Bluff, which had been withdrawn by Mr. Grotzke <br /> for the time being.) <br /> Mr. Ball stated that the board members don't require the denitrification <br /> and UV treatment because of the ocean flow. It would serve no purpose. <br /> But, if that was ghat Mr. Santos and Ills. Grady voted. It was the past <br /> practice that on the coast it would serge no purpose because of the <br /> coastal flow into the sound. If the was a pond he could understand the <br /> use of these types of systems. <br /> Mr,. Santos added that the renovation of this whole subdivision was driven <br /> by the fact that it would be hooked up to the Deur seabury sewerage <br /> treatment facility. <br /> Mr. Ball suggested that they force New seabury into doing something by <br /> not granting any further variances. <br /> 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.