Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> ILA <br /> The Town Planner clarified, approval of the Special Permit <br /> Decision and a proposed Site Plan are required by this Public , <br /> Hearing process. <br /> Mr. Roberts suggested withdrawing the request for change } <br /> from six-plex to three-plea, focusing on building changes for <br /> which there are Plans. <br /> References were being made to Plans provided by Mr. Roberts <br /> at this point <br /> Public Comment � <br /> The Chairman recognized Tony Aniletto, who inquired as to <br /> when Applicant would lose Special Permit status and require a new <br /> Permit. <br /> The Chairman explained the purpose of this Hearing is to <br /> modify an existing Special Permit originally issued in 1987 and. � <br /> previously modified in 1997. <br /> i <br /> Mary Scanlan, Unit #9, Windchime Point, requested Plans be ,w <br /> provided f or review as the residents are concerned about the <br /> changes being proposed around theperiphery g g p p of the project. <br /> Mr. Roberts provided structurals and individual layouts. <br /> The public was invited forward to review the plans. ' <br /> The Chairman explained Applicant is requesting a change in <br /> the existing building design. ;; <br /> 0 <br /> James Dorgan requested Applicant provide a set of revised <br /> architectural plans for Board review/approval; the Chairman and <br /> Dennis Bal zarini agreed.. <br /> Water Quality Monitoring Program-Document Change �. <br /> , y <br /> The Town Planner explained ' <br /> P ed Applicant has requested the <br /> monitoringschedule be changed from <br /> g quarterly to annually, He <br /> also stated for the Record, the testing has not been done for the . <br /> last three/f our years. <br /> The Town Planner stated the monitoring is targeted at the <br /> impacts of the treatment plant; and that he feels this is not the <br /> time to cut back on monitoring, as the plant is not yet on lineIie . "'' <br /> stressed, the importance of Town examination of the monitoring <br /> results for the first few years of existence of the plant and <br /> after full build out of the project has been completed. The <br /> Board concurred on this point. - _ 4.4 <br /> Applicant stated two engineering companies have recommended ,r <br /> Yearly monitoring tests would, be more than sufficient due to the <br /> e <br /> �i <br /> sting conditions of the project. <br /> x <br /> -4- <br /> F <br /> 1 <br />