HomeMy Public PortalAboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2009-08-24 MinutesBennett: Asked what the problems were that can't be enforced?
Staley: Needed some clarification about the existing bylaw: 1. apparently, the bylaw, as written, applies
across the whole Town. During the review process for this bylaw, he was under the impression the 5
parts per million (ppm) only applied to the DCPC areas.
Johnson: Agreed with J. Hughes. He felt that a full review of the bylaw was needed and it should be done
right. He didn't think 3 weeks was enough time to accomplish this task.
Taylor: The bylaw has incorporated all the Attorney General's comments and is effect. The Planning
Board and the Board of Health both need to be involved and 3 weeks is just not enough time.
Lewis: During his involvement with the development of the Water bylaw he was under the impression
that it only applied to the DCPC. He felt that somehow it got mixed up and should not apply to the whole
town.
Bennett: The existing bylaw does not apply to single family homes. If the committee just clarified the
5/ppm in the DCPC only then the modification should be able to get done in the timeframe.
P. Hughes: Wanted to know how the BOH and the Zoning Commissioner were currently dealing with the
5/ppm? And what were the challenges they were faced?
Ice: has not seen any issues from the BOH standpoint. They have not reviewed or applied the 5/ppm
requirement.
Staley: Under the Performance Standards, Mr. Staley interprets the 5/ppm as town wide. This could
have implications on the Bed & Breakfasts on 6A that have no impact on the drinking water.
P. Hughes: Referenced the current 179-60 Groundwater Protection bylaw. The performance standards
listed note a 5/ppm for the Ground Water Protection District. This was established in 1984.
Taylor: The section 179.60 was replaced with the Water Quality Protection bylaw
Bennett: Noted that there may be conflicting bylaws and conflicting Boards reviewing. This is something
that needs to be addressed. However, Mr. Bennett noted that he would like to see the measurement
addressed by 1 bedroom/acre or so many gallons of septic flow. This model offers more flexibility. As far
ad Zone II & III -the state has regulations that apply across the zones.
However, he would like to move this issue and readjust the focus of the committee to get the
modifications done for the fall town meeting. Changing the 5/ppm would not be viewed negatively and it
could be corrected now.
Douglass: Are you suggesting to focus on just the 5/ppm?
Bennett: Correct.
Johnson: Thinks it is a complex issue and needs to be worked through
Taylor: Informed the Committee that the Cape Commission is recommending that the goal across the
Cape and for all new development is 5/ppm.
The meeting then moved to a discussion on the RFP.
2. Status report on RFP.
Leven: A discussion regarding the status of the RFP occurred. Dates and deadlines were established
and Ms. Leven noted she would be sending out the RFP this week.
08-]0-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 2 of3
Bennett: Motion to accept the deadline of September 25, 2009 at 3pm. Seconded by J. Hughes. All
Aye.
Leven: Noted that she would draft the ad, post the RFP on the Web, email, and mail out to consultants.
P. Hughes: Noted that no other issues were raised.
The discussion then returned back to the Water bylaw modifications.
1. continued -Review of Draft Water Quality Protection By-law amendments
Leven: If the Committee wanted to proceed for a modification to 5/ppm in the DCPC area only then the
bylaw could easily be changed. In fact it probably would only need a few sentence changes. Single
Family homes are exempt. In addition there is no grandfathering in the DCPC.
Bennett: Motioned to have Ms. Leven revise the bylaw based on the discussion and have Ms. Leven
draft a narrative with the reasoning for the changes. The Committee would review at the next meeting
and then the committee could vote to recommend or not to the Planning Board. Seconded by Taylor. All
Aye.
3. Discussion of Natural Resource Protection Design by-law.
P. Hughes: Asked Ms. Leven what she was looking for from the Committee regarding the proposed
bylaw.
Leven: Would like the Committee to read through and make sure it all made sense. The Planning Board
would most likely move to have this bylaw referred to the Board of Selectmen. Ms. Leven noted that she
would be discussing with the Board of Selectmen on August 25.
Taylor: Wanted to know if any developers had reviewed.
Leven: She had provided copies to a couple of developers and was awaiting their input.
The Committee agreed to review and discuss at the next meeting.
J. Hughes: Motioned to adjourn. Seconded by Taylor. All Aye.
08-10-09 www.TOWN.BREWSTER.MA.US Page 3 of 3
yann Sci/Administrative Clerk