Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> Public Hearing Reopened *7: 0 PM <br /> Applicant: Harbor Homes/Mark Dedecko <br /> LoIcation: Between Quasknet Road and Coombs Lane,Assessors Map 44, <br /> Bloch 30 <br /> Request: Approval of 10-lot(changed to 9-lot) Derrnitive Plan. Continued <br /> From April 1 , 000 <br /> This meeting was reopened at the request of the applicant upon arrival of fix. Rowley. <br /> The applicant was represented by Attorney Kevin Kirrane, Mark Ded cko,and Richie <br /> Feuer. Mr. Rowley asked about two leeching pits,driveway runoff, and extra runoff <br /> from cul-de-sac. Additiormlly,fir.l o vley would like drainage calculations. fir. <br /> Rowley did not have his comments with him. It was deeded to approve subject to <br /> discussions between Mr. Rowley and Mr. Ferrarer regarding runoff`, cu-de-sac,and <br /> denitrifying each house. Mr. Fuda.la questioned the water quality report(page with <br /> regard to the calculations in the table being done using 7 houses instead of 9. Mr. Nick <br /> aney inforrn d the board that 7 was a typo, and the calculations were done using <br /> houses. The nitrogen-loading rate is based on the Mashpee zoning bylaws. Mr. Kirra.ne <br /> stated it conforms to local bylaws. Mr. e r responded that each house has <br /> denitrifying unit <br /> Motion to Approve subject to fir. Rowley and Mr. Ferrarer discussing cul-de-sac <br /> drainage runoff and septic systems are denitrifying for each house. <br /> Notion: Hatt Malone Seconded: Dennis BaL arini <br /> Vote: 4-0 Unanimous <br /> Discussion <br /> Applicant: Jack Landers-Gainey(Grill En e r <br /> Location: Assessors Lot 29,30, Industrial Drive and Great Hay Drive <br /> Request: Discuss what the board will rewire prior to subrn tsion <br /> Mr. Landers-Gainey began by stating when they fist started this project,they thought <br /> this plan would be an bIR.because they were preparing just two lots and conveying <br /> third lot to the town of I1► a hpe . The plan is now for 2 lots, with a cul-de-sac on Lot 29, <br /> which is just for tech cal compliance. Mr. Landers-Gainey wanted to discuss with the <br /> board the possibility of waiving the submission requirements for topographic work and <br /> for the creation of the actual road surface. Mr. Fuda.la indicated the applicant might not <br /> even have to talk about waiving the cul-de-sac turnaround requirement-with regard to the <br /> right-of-way. This lot is going to the Mashy Economic Development Council(EDC) <br /> for their use. Since this lot # is going to the town,Nr. Fudala feels it would be a <br /> logical choice to waive some of these standards. Mr. Kuchinski wondered about the <br /> possibility of waiving frontage and getting a variance. Mr. Fud la responded that that <br /> wasn't done because a variance is only good for two years. with a cul-de-sac, the <br />