Laserfiche WebLink
ak <br /> Judy made a motion to deny the subdivision plan based on the <br /> access question, the applicable zoning and other items which <br /> the Board will outline later on. Scott seconded the motion. <br /> Pat Coffey abstained. All other Board members were in favor. <br /> A list of reasons for denial will be put together later in <br /> the evening. <br /> Applicant: Daniel Hostetter <br /> Location; East side of Santuit Pond, with access from <br /> f <br /> Newtown Road in Town. of Barnstable. <br /> Request: Continuation of Public Hearing to review the <br /> Special permit Application for a 114-unit open <br /> Space Multi-Family Development known as "waters <br /> Edge". Letter of extension to be discussed. <br /> Mr. Kevin Kirrane was present representing the applicant. <br /> Judy asked the date of the original application? <br /> Mr. Kirrane stated that the Special Permit application was <br /> submitted September 2, 1987. <br /> Mr. Kirrane stated that as of the last meeting, they had <br /> addressed every item except the issue of phosphate loading. <br /> At the Board's suggestion, the applicant engaged in a <br /> significant engineering undertaking to establish the ' <br /> phosphate loading in the area of Lovell 's Pond. They hired <br /> GZA to study the issue but because of the expense involved <br /> in that, they decided to take a different direction-- to <br /> incorporate into the design of the sewage treatment plant a <br /> phosphate treatment element which was not in- the original <br /> design of the plant. <br /> Also present was Shurender, formerly of the Boston Survey <br /> Group, who was involved in the original design of the plant. <br /> He did the re--design of the plant for phosphate removal. Mr <br /> Gerry Cura, formally of GZA prepared a report addressing <br /> phosphate loading data in relation to soils - what happens <br /> to phosphates in effluent coming from the plant? <br /> Shurender presented a site plan for the waste Water ' <br /> Treatment plant. The re--design will add 2 units to <br /> precipitated out the phosphate. This design offers 90% <br /> phosphate removal (1-2 parts per million) . Regular septic <br /> systems have approximately 18 parts per million. <br /> Tom asked about the problem presented of disposal of sludge <br /> g <br /> since the volume of sludge will increase with this <br /> =, s treatment. <br /> Shur , <br /> =, ender stated that this is an issue which will have to be <br /> addressed by the developer. Usually the sludge is similar to ' <br /> any found is waste water Treatment plants, and there are <br /> facilities which will accept this sludge. He does not <br /> believe removal will be a problem. <br /> Tom stated that he wanted the Board to be aware that it does <br /> increase the amount of sludge and the developer will have to <br /> have a contract with someone who will accept the sludge. <br /> 6 - <br />