Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> ■ <br /> This development proposes- oaoo square feet ofcommercial space, 37 sinarle family- homes-and <br /> garden apartrnent, drivin 2 ranges, tennis Courts and 1 - acres of road /pavem entipa-rk in 9. <br /> Storm water from that impervious surface will be direct to 3 locations: indicated on the first <br /> sheet of handout. There is a great likelihood it will directly- injected into the w ll _ <br /> op <br /> urrently, the ter District has- supply o f 3. mill ion Liailon of water per.day. These wells <br /> ftmff <br /> produce 2 million ofthat 3.9 million wil n . Half of the to%vns water corn from these rwo <br /> wells. <br /> There.is alo.a demand issue. Peak demand currently is 4.05 million ;allons per day. On a peak <br /> dav, we don7t have enou h grater. This development will add 200,000 gallons per day that we <br /> on"t have. <br /> Mr. Henehy said there are too large areas ofeon em: <br /> - extent of development m close proximity to half of the towns water supple. This would be the <br /> 1n ide greatest level of development near a to,vn's water supply on all of the Cape. <br /> - New Seabury Is seekinu, water that,the water District does not have to dive. <br /> The Mashpee water District is very concerned about this development. <br /> The on1v meaningful ability+ to effect what happens here is throut h the Cape Cod Commission. <br /> New Seabury has completed the IEPA review. The Neater District is very disappointed in the <br /> manner .1AEPA handled this_ LMEPA officials would not ineet with the eater District durinr the <br /> comment period. After the com men period c to ed. they accepted in formanon from the appl i ca,nt <br /> and their attomev. The Water District was locked out of that process. <br /> The issue at the Commission is if this project was developed in accordance with a special permit <br /> issued before Jan. l then the�� would be a e- mpt from review. <br /> See, 5 is a very substantial chanile to the 1964 special permit. fir. He by oCltlined some of <br /> those changes. The Water District- ontends the development must now comply with the 1 PP. <br /> He is a ktnr the Planning Board to support the eater f istri ts`s position that this development <br /> e subject to the P P. <br /> everly said the meeting with the Commission has been hartred from Jan_ `�' to January 1 " t <br /> 3:00 at the orr missi'on's office_ <br /> Dennis asked what New Seal ury i saying., that it wont effect the wells`? <br /> Mr. Henehv discussed what he understands their position to he. New Seabury believes this <br /> development will not adversely: effect the wells, the Storm, water will not Lyo in vet the ' have no <br /> rnodelint to Prove it. The wastewater from the residential units will he piped to a new,treatment <br /> plant, but are n -assurances piping %%rill not leak_ <br /> dater uppiv is the sharpest disagreement. New Seat ur F saes it is the Water istri rs job to o <br /> MW <br /> et the water. The water District does pursue additional supply very aegressiveiv. There is a - <br /> 7 vear time period to get a new well permitted. Water supply is simply not available. <br /> New Seabur r developers did send a letter to theWater District a few weeks aeo see ' to <br /> discuss terms to tie into eater_ <br /> ►ir_ Hen by said this density of development-Es unprecedented in pro iminr to public wells. <br />