Laserfiche WebLink
16 Great Neck RoadNorth <br />-Mashpee, -Massachusetts 02649 <br />wants to make sure he has clarity as to what the note needs to incorporate, an adequate <br />capture of vote, and revision dates are enumerated in the draft. <br />Mr. Hansen stated the Board has put a lot of effort into this but he is not totally in agreement <br />with it. By accepting this, he may not vote in favor of it. Mashpee is in a water quality crisis. <br />Affordable housing and water are two top hitters. This addresses water quality mitigation that <br />will complement excessive bedrooms. Mitigation to remedy a couple cranberry bogs and <br />restore to near natural and provide three building lots for affordable and cash as well. He <br />thinks MA and Cape Cod EPA and DEP have tightened water quality issues with additional <br />requirements. 30 years ago we created a Sewer Commission because we realized our water <br />conditions were dwindling and water quality is diminishing more rapidly. We are at a crucial <br />point and Mashpee has spoken. They approved Phase one of 5 phases for a nitrogen <br />management plan. Mashpee is spending their money on a sewar treatment plant and are <br />serious about it. There is a violation of a standing special permit about bedroom count. You <br />break the law you should pay. Cranberry bog mitigations being proposed are insufficient. <br />Fixing these bogs will not significantly reduce nitrogen going down Quaker Run, Southworth <br />has many larger bogs out there. Regulations are going to be more stringent. He proposes this <br />Board and Southworth should see this as an opportunity to take a leadership role and take all <br />bogs out of production and restore them to near natural condition. <br />Ms. Waygan noted this is what we have in front of us. She is fine with the changes that are <br />proposed. There are some redlines, and she is fine with them all being accepted so as to vote. <br />She thinks the number of bedrooms are excessive, they are not in compliance, it's a density <br />limit that was accepted and exceeds what flow neutral allows. Our bylaw says it has to be <br />consistent with its regulations. She cannot make a finding about adverse effect on public <br />health when it is not in compliance with the Flow Neutral Bylaw. We are required to know, we <br />can't approve something that clearly doesn't fit into a regulation, it applies town wide and this is <br />not consistent. <br />Ms. Faulkner stated she never got an answer from anyone in authority. Willowbend is unique, <br />if they built 12 units there would be less nitrogen coming down and going into water than would <br />be with 3 large houses with 12 bedrooms on IA system. <br />Ms. Waygan did some calculations. It is flow neutral not nitrogen loading. It applies whether <br />you are connected to private or public, it's not about how much nitrogen. We have to be <br />consistent and only approve a SP or modification if consistent with local bylaws. <br />Ms. Waygan commented a lot of people are seeing Flow Neutral Bylaw as a way to ensure we <br />clean up our waters. If we don't stop increasing flow we will never clean up, and we are <br />sewering for improvements to make sure preservation standards and pro -environment and <br />clean water, its more than just 0% financing. She is good with taking a vote tonight. <br />MOTION: <br />