Laserfiche WebLink
� T <br /> MINUTES November 29 , 1990 4 BOARD OF HEALTH <br /> Mr. Greelish motioned to approve revised plans for the <br /> Popponesset Cottages as submitted with the stipulation re- <br /> vised plans meet with Health Agents approval , Mr. Doherty <br /> seconded, all agreed. <br /> Mr. Grotsle requested the Board- forward a letter to the <br /> Conservation Commission stating their- acceptance of revised <br /> plans as submitted, <br /> Board members agreed- to the request. <br /> Mr. Costa motioned to issue septic permits for lots <br /> 1365, 1367, 1368Ar 1368B, & 1375, Mr. Doherty seconded, all <br /> agreed <br /> MEWS IST - New Seabury <br /> Mr. Greelish relayed D.E.P. has reversed their stand on <br /> the commonality issue# The State had requested this Board <br /> withhold approval of the Popponesset treatment plant due to <br /> the question of commonality. This Board was of the opinion <br /> commonality was irrelevant to this project. <br /> Mr. Burden briefed the Board, on the history of discus- <br /> sions that took place with the State concerning the commonal- <br /> ity issue. We understood the commonality issue as it relates <br /> to two side by side lots that aggregate over 15,000 gallons, <br /> however we do not understand the issue as it relates to sew- <br /> age treatment. D.E.P. forwarded examples of their opinion of <br /> commonality as it relates to sewerage treatment. It was as <br /> e thought, and informed thea our situation -is not the sane <br /> as examples provided. In speaking with Richard Lehan he re- <br /> layed apermit would not be granted unless sewerage treatment <br /> is provided for all of New Beabury.. There is not way we can <br /> obligate the existing owners to fund and hook into a sewerage <br /> treatment plant. Mr . Lehan was adamant that this is the only <br /> way in which State approval would be met. Subsequently we <br /> met with Mr. Powers at D.E.P. who did not agree entirely wi <br />