Laserfiche WebLink
v <br /> I <br /> I <br /> potential issues to which Mr. Rubenstein responded that he does not anticipate issues but will <br /> know more when they run the sums of the nitrogen loads of the sub watersheds. In regard to <br /> nitrogen loading,Mr. Eichner stated that as part of the QAQC,by looking at a given sub <br /> watershed in terms of the flows that were assigned from existing and build out conditions,that <br /> the unified database now agreed under the scenario loads assigned by Stearns& Wheler and the <br /> other assigned by Lombardo Associates. With the agreement between the two portions, SMaST <br /> can determine that the existing build out conditions are o.k. and the attenuation factors and <br /> reductions from each scenario can be applied. Chairman Fudala questioned the possibility that <br /> loads have been reassigned from one watershed to another. Mr. Eichner responded that they <br /> used the same sort of assignment that was used with the MEP to put into the MEP model. The <br /> Chair asked if there was one big model to which Mr. Eichner responded that it was one database <br /> file attached with the GIS information containing all of the various water uses and all of the <br /> parcels under existing and build out conditions including Lombardo's and Steams & Wheler's <br /> scenarios. Mr. Eichner further stated that the consultants' information must feed into the MEP <br /> model watershed models for each bay. Mr. Hall questioned if there would be 3 different flows <br /> for each parcel or l flow that would be pulled into the unified database. Mr. Eichner responded <br /> that the intention was that there would be just 1 flow figure. Mr. Eichner clarified that one flow <br /> will be assigned and used throughout the scenarios but the attenuations will be applied to the <br /> treatment scenarios. <br /> j The Chair concluded that more time would be needed for the consultants before the Commission <br /> can sign off on the project. The Chair asked if it would be too late to change the loading on a <br /> particular parcel, specifically one that was allocated as 46 residential units, but is now only 4 <br /> residential units since the town purchased the Camp Vinhaven parcel. An additional property is <br /> the Shields property. Mr. Eichner responded that he would need to know map and parcel. The <br /> Chair will send an email to Mr. Eichner with the map and block numbers and the new number of <br /> residences. <br /> Brian Howes noted that once the information is received from the consultants,an email will be <br /> sent confirming that they are ready to run the unified database with results in 30-60 days. The <br /> follow up report will provide the detail and specifics about each scenario along with the results <br /> of each scenario. The Chair questioned the possibility of losing a year of time in an effort to <br /> consider other scenarios. Mr. Howes responded that the development of the unified database <br /> will allow the possibility of running additional scenarios with a 30 day turn around time. Mr. <br /> Howes recommended that future consideration of scenarios should include SMaST early in the <br /> process because they may be able to offer some shortcuts. Mr. Howes thanked the Cape Cod <br /> Commission for their efforts at no cost to the town. The Chair requested that Mr. Howes attend <br /> the meeting in September to present the results of the database. <br /> Status of Stearns& Wheler Tasks: <br /> Mr. Hall indicated that all other tasks are currently on hold until the unified database process is <br /> complete. The Chair suggested moving forward on Regina Villa to clarify the scope of work in <br /> anticipation of seeking public comment. <br /> 2 <br /> i <br />