My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/21/2003 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
>
8/21/2003 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 5:48:59 PM
Creation date
3/26/2018 1:59:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF HEALTH
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/21/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
FIs. Warden agreed that that was basically what the variance was for. It <br /> was because of the way the system floated around the pool it actually <br /> caused the water to turnover in the pool. The pool didn't have enough of a <br /> turnover rate because there was only one mein drain. <br /> Mr. Harrington thought that it just had skimmers. There was no main <br /> drain. <br /> Ms. Warden thought that they had one main drain. <br /> Mr, Farrington agreed that they had a main drain in the sidewall near the <br /> end rear the shed. But, nothing on the bottom. He felt that the unit that <br /> they were using was pretty good. <br /> Mr. Santos asked if the hoard was happy with the current system and <br /> variance request. Did they want to have therm keep corning back each <br /> year for a variance? <br /> Ms. Warden interjected that this was a state requirement that they come <br /> for a yearly variance. First it was a state regulation, they couldn't be less <br /> stringent. They would have to be more stringent. Secondlyq those are the <br /> regulations and the requirements. When the pool was built thirty years <br /> ago that turnover rate might have been adequate. They didn't have the <br /> regulations back thea that they do now, It was her opinion that the state <br /> would not have granted the variance with local concurrence unless that <br /> was adequate piece of equipment. <br /> Mr. Santos stated that they would just have to keep corning back every <br /> year for a variance. <br /> Mr. Harrington agreed that that was correct and they appeared to be <br /> happy with this arrangement. At one point they did request it for five <br /> years but the board denied them the request, <br /> The board acknowledged the letter. <br /> 3. Robert Bateman -- 96 Algonquin Avenue <br /> Mr. Harrington stated that at the last meeting the board granted Mr. <br /> Bateman a week to find a home for the dog. Mr, Bateman called hire and <br /> stated that they were unable to place the dog,. Mr. Harrington verbally <br /> Slave hire some more time to do it because the board was not meeting for <br /> month. Therefore, the board was not going to need an answer for an <br /> additional three weeks. He asked Mr. Bateman to call hires to advise hire <br /> when the dog was removed. He would then do an inspection of the <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.