Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
0400 KIDD'S HILL ROAD - HAZMAT (2)
Independence Park < Hyannis Ci l THt. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSEYTS BOARD OF HEALTH Town.. ....................OF........B a r Rs t-ab 1 e Appliratioit for Biivoaal Wurlw (fun ur#ion Vantit Application is hereby made for a Permit to Construct (R ) or Repair ( j an Individual Sewage Disposal System at: Bunker's Hill Road,._-Independence._Park, Hyannis - Parcel 1 -._ . ._,_•••- ..... .. Location-Address or Lot No, ...............Independence..l?azk..Asaa i.aGas.._&aa.LLY ...GLQ___l}la_._Kay_..Cowuan�.ps.....U.5...Ea:at...�:lfMI.•St- 1 Ow er Trust Address So. Boston, MA 02127 [+.►. ....id. . ..........................._............... ._..__....---••----...__._._........_......_.........._._...__._......_..._......_................ Installer Address Type of Building Size Lot....2ZQ4.1.73........Sq. feet 7 DwellingNo. of Bedrooms____________________________________________F_z Expansion Attic— p ( ) Garbage Grinder (^ l Other—Type of Building _T DAU51 X-iiil.... No. of lnsSU-,Od0 s f Showers� �r _ .._._. _ ( } — Cafeteria ( } Otherfixtures .................................... _........................................................._._...... l Design Flow____7.5_...................................gallon pertgwkk per day. Total daily flow.....3750..............................gallons. Septic rank—Liquid capacity_b040-gallons Length_]-7._:____-__.. Width.... Diameter...--__-._.__-. Depth... -'-A.".. Disz)us�l Trench--No........4........... Width...3.-''.J-'.'--...... Total Length__'i.00.......... Total leaching,rea-�-�QQ.........sq. ft. i Sc(tpage Pit No..................... Diameter.................... Depth below inlet....-............._... Total leaching area_._........_......sq, ft, Other Distribution box (x ) Dosing tank ( ) Percolation Test :Results Performed by....]....... ���:z..._. .I u.G_la._I)E,5_ 1 �...INODate.._..11 12rs•(85,--- Test Pit No. I....4..........minutes per inch Depth of Test Pit.._.1.2`_....._____. Depth to ground water.ljp:gp. _L j nc1 Test Pit No. 2....Z.........minutesper inch Depth of Test Pit_..12............ Depth to ground water-ni ne found d - ...........'...................................................................................................................I............................. Description of ;-oil_._-];_i.ne__. -d�.ttiD.__ ad.....C_X a.c._.S �t-. no--_gundwater- encounterEd A ap sa ro .__.............................. j ................fs?x-__hf._SZ__.Pi_Cs.._3...-__5..eve...p-lA1:'_s__."Pro•posed--Facil-i ! r. Fibronics International,lac. --...........1-ncl,epe�dei?.�e--Fark_.jyarta s.,.. Massachusetts" .¢ M gns Inc z r�dt I /) '/3ii i p Ail . j Nature of Repairs or Alterations—Answer when applicable � z--- ,fat �..•r�7a u AM ......... 3 , cg 3 __....Ji71411F- \.SJ+; -_.... Agr.::.rt'lent: The undersigned agrees to install the aforedescribed Ind tdt a y I r„ No 3131 � f t C 4 the ilror isions of �: ..t� 5 0. the _Mate Sanitary Code— The lie ur "'w` 51� ``yc` e tur 1'ceV���y_ tt ' 1 operation until a Certificate of Compliance has -1 i t Cd by th �a Signed..... .... ---- w . ....... =........... f - ate Application Approved By---- ,. . ............ .......... .. Date Application Disapproved for the following realgns_.......................................................................____.____--------_...................... _ •-•-•----------------•--......... ........ ................................................................................................ ..............._.................................. .............. r� Date Permit No.__•---.� ~q / Issued Issued......... ...�G�• `/ .......................... ---------------.........._••-•_.... Date . r "{ I% -` .>t� / -• t� 1 r M t F>�$........®`................. THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF HEALTH ........ Town ..................OF_.....B.arnstable Appliration for Dhipmial Works Tomitrurtion ermft Application is hereby made for a Permit to Construct (X ) or Repair ( ) an Individual Sewage Disposal System at: Bunker's Hill Road, Independence Park? Hyannis - Parcel 1 Location-Address or Lot No. ...............I;ndepcndeace...Park... s.aacda.tes_..Re-al-Ly ....c/o.._Th.e__iay...CQ.Mp.an.i.es...._$.1.5..-E st--Fifth St.. . ........ Owner Trust Address So. Boston, MA 02127 _- -•-•--•----.-------•----•---•---•--•-•---•---. --dreessss-------•-•---•-•-•- Ad d Type of Building Size Lot----270,.1.73........Sq..feet- Dwelling—No. of Bedrooms-........................ -------- .....Expansion Attic ( ) Garbage Grinder ( ) ;, Other—Type of Building ad _s_i r. al.... No. of 4&s50,000..s_f....... Showers ( ) — Cafeteria ( ) Other fixtures -------------------------------- :... ------....-- Q ----- •••---..... gallons per 1!gvgm er day.�- Total dais flow..... -------•-------•-- t tt --------- Design Flow....1.5.. ._.. p Septic Tank—Liquid capacity.60QQ.gallons p Lengtth�1.7._.._...... Width:---1.0_y___.. Diameter................ De th-_7�ll,ns. Disposal Trench—No. -------4........... Width---V.0........... Total Length.._4-00.......... Total-leaching area_3.5Q4---------sq. ft. Seepage Pit No..................... Diameter...................- Depth below inlet.................... Total leaching area.....__..._.._....sq. ft. Other Distribution box (x ) Dosing tank Percolation Test Results Performed V -I,-_p)j$IC�I$,-•-INCDate...._1_I f.26-(85..•--- Test Pit No. 1....4----------minutes per inch Depth of Test Pit---1.2............. Depth to ground water none found a Test Pit No. 2....2..........minutes per inch Depth of Test Pit...12.'-_-........ Depth to ground water.none found ------------------------------•--•-----...----•------•---------••------•----•-...........••......................................................... Description of Soil....l;-i.ne...aeSliuto...satld....>sr e__.$ t---no---groundwater... ncountered It J ...............1Qr._Le.st...p.1Es...3........5._S.c.e._.pl-ans,...j ro-posed_.Facil_i r Fibronics International,Inc. ,y --------------Independen•�e--Park. Hyannis-, Massachusetts" a- vgrl gns Inc wed 1/22/86 j Nature of Repairs or Alterations—Answer when applicable._...... � } ° .. ....................... --------------------------------------------------•-------------------------•--- G � �.. -_.... .••. ------- �z.... . Agreement 1�f10ZEtEWSK1 F. The undersigned agrees to install the aforedescribed fridi. idla, K' 1�i{ 0 1 o ehlowu' n,noe,with �+,m , c, 4, No 3131. !i the provisions of .y.IE 5 of the State Sanitary Code — The e. > ,\ e o 1 ce1ys; operation until a Certificate of Compliance har4 een PS tied by t r� Signed_._.r'y ........C"'ti •----- --.-. __-.---- ••-- f p'... to Application Approved By--------- = " .......✓ `:=`---------------•-•-•-.. ..... -•-•----- ---- .......-------- Date Application Disapproved for the following reasons------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- ---------------------------------•-•------------ ..............................-----•------------.........----------------------=-.......----------------------•------...------..........---..:_......_.. Date 6 PermitNo........................................................... Issued_.................----.................................. Date THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BOARD OF HEALTH ...... "..�`..................OF...... � ......�....1 ................ %Entif iratr of Trumpliaure CE .TIFY That the Individual Sewage Disposal System constructed (IO or Repaired ( ) by... l ..................................... {-•! •..............••----•-......- ------------- •------------------ ....... ns Iler n at....{............. �:c_�...... ._.....--. v n�( S I(J has been installed in accordance with the provisions of 'I E f-�he State,Sanitary'Cod e 1 described in the application for Disposal Works Construction Permit No.... ..................................... dated.._ .:-.............- THE ISSUANCE OF THIS CERTIFICATE SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE THAT THE SYSTEM WILL F NCTIO SATISFACTORY. DATE.........-� • . 2 . ....................................... Inspector--•' `.....1------------........----------=--------------------•-••-•---- 1 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS BOARD QF HEALTH ti .........................................OF_....................................................... . ✓✓�— No......................... FEE........................ r,e,e. Permissionis hereby granted..... � ...........................----•-._..------......--•--------..........P......------------........................._............... to Construct ( /)Yor Repair ) a9, Indi1prlual Sey�/t e(Di$pe'sal System 1 vn (> tCC !� at No................. r = - as shown on the application for Disposal Works Construc-tton Permit _.. Dated................ ...................... n ✓G {p •.Board of Health: DATE............................ ---...... ... ... FORM 125S HOBBS & V r, INC.. PU7 -'HERS v �S �I y�P�oFTeepo��� TOWN OF BARNSTABLE OFFICE OF BABHSTABLE, o 90 MABS. ei BOARD OF HEALTH s639• AjF0MpYlk. 367 MAIN STREET HYANNIS, MASS. 02601 May 4, 1989 Earl McBride Olde King' s Highway Barnstable MA 02630 Dear Mr. McBride: I am in receipt of your letter dated April 26, 1989 regarding the concept of placing a Medical Waste Facility in Independence Park, Hyannis. Such a facility may result in a nuisance to inhabitants of the Town of Barnstable and may be attended by noisome and injurious odors. Therefore, the facility cannot be constructed in the , Town of Barnstable except in such a location as may be assigned } by the Board of Health thereof after a public hearing has been held thereon, subject to the provisions of chapter forty A. You are reminded that the Board of Health may prohibit the exercise thereof within the limits of the town. Sincerely your , Thomas A. McKean Director of Public Health TM:cst cc: Martin Flynn Chairman Board of Selectmen 1 ' p �� C"`EC"' al Estate Se ices Olde King's Highway } Barnstable, MA 02630 Tel: (508) 362-3991 26th.. April, 1989 Dear Mr. McKean: Pursuant to our meeting on April 5th. at the Barnstable Town Hall, in reference to the placement of a Medical Waste Facility in Independence Park, enclosed herein you will find a Proposal of said Facility. I would appreciate your comments after you review this material. Thank you in advance for your co-operation. Sincerely Earl Mc Bride Thomas McKean Director, Board of Health Town of Barnstable 367 Main Street Barnstable, Mass. 02601 EM/dc enclosures II I I I I ��-,.. �-S l�rr�- � � , r C eN S E R V A I 0"" �rw N , u }♦D r t f' � g F 1' O aU D A � sT�x I O N L y,fi PI INP Opal , yg� L ed7 L t r • e 3P x �° a e+ w 46 p �OA 011 z { 4011.01 1988v ANNUAL REOwl PORT C�O�N,,.�S E RSV• ���: T I 'rf A�� L A W { a . •D D T A B =E-E` O""F ,C �O NT -T�: E N T' S Report offthe Chairman of the Board--. . .� . . . . . . 2 Report of the Director,: . �. . . . . . . . . 11' 3 ' - s #f� s _ ''Resource Conservation . . . . . . 4 * •Solid-Waste Project. . . . . Environmental Health t� . . . . �. . . . '.r.' 12 Land Policy 22 Marine.ies ces-. 7.- . , ! ... :' ' _ . . 32 Ua f - r Legal`Services . . ,40 *r �. Directors;Staff and Voluntee rs 41'k j -. 42 a � Financial Statement t skR� ! , ' ,. . . . . . . . . . �. . . .- 43✓ Foundations �� �fE. y� -- r44 41 Ak a pry, ' ! =M• ay 0 4 q - .tea All photos ©Boston Globe except where r - T-" -'` �i+*•'� �• � ��. tr•_`'1.� j 5 t.�� �.-��`7'_ w'.� 'ram'' -- y'^� l r':,y �r ,� eq rff 3 � \a _•y/ � G NO i A ZO ry r, t ��J r _ sue, , "' Q' �, '�` }`� �.�' �t•r t� • � � �� [[[ Nv Ak ff1988:'ANNUAL REPORT Rye p•ortof�th ��Chla ,i �� � nt.oft he Board , � Z; v , , What are the hallmarks of a successful year at the Conservation Law Foundation? The number of cases won? The caliber and commitment of the staff? Publica- tion of credible research to flag environmental hazards? The number of new tti members attracted to CLF's fold? Solvency: Did the amount of money raised cover,budget et shortfalls? Our pimage:,ublic a The frequency with which the media �,. .. -•.;.,,, � c and>public.o£ficals;seek-and quote our opinions on environmental problems? ,, • The answe of.course; is that a successful year is"a blend of all these disparate 41 and more.,,Winning a-big case.or changing public orindustry percep- �, tions of a'major environmental issue doesn't translate to'a banner year if mem- ! lrership ags-or.if'we'fail too pursue the balance,of our agenda, much of which ma shave a low public profile -.- a l •� ` Happily, 19888 more than-met all these qualifications. The impact of Power'to- + t g, ' Spare, a•CLF�effort�to force utilities to invest in conservation of energy instead of tI ,rp wer*plant construction, exceeded all expectations.`During-the year we brought 'Successful in inI'fi n� x New-England. g cases fiveiof,the.six `states and are now been asked to a _por0t1ie3CLFimodel to statesioutside our region and to foreign countries as well. �. I � { _ .y . ��� i, � -apt•.Y° . `��he�yeearr"vas also marked bylsteady progress in-ouhother major areas of con- s eem, which are described onkthepages�tlat follow. Iris important .to note the r �openmg of theiGLF,office in Montpelier, Vermont, a state in which we have long ►'W `` •needed a° resence. - $- A - +F k �•n it J v +� POO This,'f cord coultf not leave bee� ' ed n fashion —if A"three C L F life support systems were not'in Place t`and`functioinng smoothly:a resourceful and de di atedistaff;�a oy "concerned�;anrd generous body of,membe`r's an&donors like,yourand an.active, involved Boards These are,the ingredients that enabled`us fo:cdnfront`challenges ` `... � ;���-•�+r � � `.#t)� �a ,,tea .� �. _ percei}edy and{sereA I►ndipitou"s ='throughout the year. i i , 1 hi.. _ - - And they are the reasons we,face 1989°with anticipation and co_ifidence On'•; behalf oE,the Board:I thank°you for your unstinting support. W,ithbut.it, our # future would belindoubt. -* ' o © Y ��INA r l It Jf �, + 'r 4:1 1 ,t .�' •� :. x1t' s.ii Y "' ,y t% �►li' r 'a. Fran�is :, Hatch , `x xil t Y .l' f1 Chairman�ofthe�Board ` ,�1 `� t�r : �j���,�1f t ���'`,,w � \`1,� ?",�", G� '�•, ti. � i s..J •� A�of Z ��• {{{r.+++� �� �1 1,1� t' ��`�,.�`," � � Y`l �`. a� `� o "`.k 4 ��, ,f ��.�+ti f of_ c�� �� -"�,� � „� •� t�� 1 s j . . 2 Re ortlof,d4e--Difech6e � V � per.r�"qF.""'. '�� ._ �+�..cYA��� YR o,.+,mwP`^;'r"w`^ Ey •; ♦ Y` _...�..�_,�.� .ti � � ,.e ,;.,.rs.a _� '�` �f�v�I^f`��x—all...^rt...-,.r �.w..,rn✓+ -m^" w rtR'.�, The uestion most frequently asked b people new to CLF — after the learn the � ,, ,�• a, 9 Y y P P Y ` L range`of issues pursued by the office — is how we choose our cases. It is a A r w� tough question to answer. We can describe the formal process: case selection g- q � - _ .,� rmemoare"prepared by staff members, reviewed by the,staff management coni- "` r. mittee °then reviewed and approved-bye the Executive Committee of CLF's rBoard. `'' .. ,•, But desc bing he proces alone gives s a"'incomplete picture. The instincts and years-of expenenceal e°staff and-Board'bnng,to,ihose decisions,must be consid- P- +� •�i i►.. „�-3 r `.ate r � ` � �.�,. .�p+z, k ; y( . ,,;�,, t , ered, in addmon'zo the,taacncaljudgmenrof our-alawyerskand scientists —[heir sense ofwhen we;'can win�the arguments>and.when it-is best.to await a better : moment. And ofecourse,i.there.is-'our center field principle" =� f it getsrby use�"` J z Will tt•be a home tun? ° a =.icy° f., �ti Q n s :^ ... o� .::W k_ , •,�Theretis assuredly more�to:case selectiontthan-the,sum of itstp�rts. There is ,. also less MFor often,itfiis, as not the selected ce that wins the day. It is.the staying . power,and'tenaci`ry to stick with 4an.issue�through the best,and-the worst of r r ' ti to search for answers When-none seems:available; to'seize solutions when mes; . T ww„t o „most doubt ey canbedgaiAOWned;,to cunt`through the lietoric that often plagues en vironmental.debate,and3find hard-headed, practical,solunons. There is also no -r.{ +a�4�"° Pall-measure�ofluck and riming. _ .v gmgfth ug this report you will find'the results of the case selection;process bj r at CLF: that we�win�95% of ca ourxses; th'`at m any projects — such6as.solid waste -.cut across�seweral environmentalr issues,(water,air, energy);'thatmcreasingly- + ounwork includes;'human ihealth-related problems'(air pollution, lead poisoning,: v i ' urbAn cone si on a well as"the-more fraditio al nv ronm`ental eoncerns ofAr } e r© ` "source damage; aria 'that,almost``universally, enviro men6l'protection makes'eco- no"mic ood �I +. .�. g sensePerhapsnowhere are these highlights captured more clearly, �F. 1� �tm is� fk+w .:.-s-n ',ter' ' 4 �; ® than m the, 1�988,performance of�CLFs-Energy Project. At thetlieart of modern society'lam iesran==economyadriven by energy use Unfor , ' tunately, the same enerWthat brings us comfort, convenience and prap city.also, _ Jl 4 cN "''F k �".0\ . ems. —r,��y ►' f1 ;. brings us pollution impovenshment and glo[J lbwanming. The CLF•Energy,Prol-�.; ect'as'proof positive that this equanon;is not unalterable Begun mO1980�GLF.' , �i � .- ' �, : 4)`f�F1 �ylt(F��v."''��'�'' �'al�.yt�\� i'`I� -•'[' f.2 '_ } �i='S#� t' Energy,}Project evolved+�°,f.rom a successfiillbattle a�a inst'Seahrook42 (notbecause�it t,{ �� � .: . i �'s .`� LY" *-*;t"�'fir._ .,{°._- „x�w 'fit -.p . was rnuclear,`but�,becausesit was.a,,waste ofmoney) to,aeomprehensive program' driving.energy efficiency into virtually every e1bctric utility system in New England. MAL By im rovin ;the efficiencwithwhich weuseener forcing`'more work'-, out oheach kilowatt.hour — we &mall enjoy the samKold�drinks, warm houses andgnight)baseballl,,ibut�atkiower,economic andkenvironmental cost' CLF exists to�idennf` the roblerns,find innovative solutions,,and,to maintain (� r '` the will and'�thle iVti tenacity to force their adoption.Phis 1988 Annual Report rev . '°'. t1k� lW �?ril4� .. - ¢ , counts.an extraordinary year,ofrsuchsuccesses. w6are°proud,to,share t withw\��1 r - t'� / r ? Eeve Director 0 3 l RESOURCE CONSERVATION nergy and water conservation projects promote rational supply planning by New England's utility companies in an effort to move the region away from building large new generation facilities toward investment in less costly and environmentally benign conservation programs. i Energy Nineteen eighty-eight will long be remembered by CLF as the year the Energy Project changed the utility industry's priorities from building. power plants to "mining" efficiency resources. During the year, CLF signed agree- ments with the companies that supply a full two-thirds of New England's elec- tricity. These agreements will result in collaboration between CLF and the utilities in the design, implementation, and regulation of multi-million dollar conservation programs. CLF has convinced utilities across New England to buy the "conserva- tion power plant;' thereby preventing construction of new plants. Water In Providence, Rhode Island, CLF has challenged the costly and environmentally destructive plan to build the Big River Reservoir. Using the same technical and economic arguments we apply to energy projects, CLF is arguing that the reservoir is unnecessary because ample water can be provided at a lower cost by implementation of large-scale, utility-run conservation programs. CLF believes that the Providence work will result, as in energy, in a water conserva- tion model that can be applied across the region and nation. . a s } RMf � " i 0"" 8 0 1 a $ 8 2 1-1 7 7 =3 3 , -7 7 , 3 va Quit M W 4 l e -70 14 Ener -�� Pro ectl�X_88� r C plo breaks Q�ound n�New En�7l d kfor the, Conservat on-�Power�Plant, i.,.,,w+•�`:.1k. t„�ti �0..�]r „g:.�",-,. n 1988 CLF's Energy Project; et New Englandfmust mount amanonally " the energy ag nda for�sNewEng= unpredeted le elof p ogam and lan�Through-,a �rgeted setRof - mancial�commiimer� to'r�energy effi '' / "1 . e k mterventions�beforeunhty commis ciency`programs, equipment and f .~�� , #�.9 � ion GhF4fo�jpo� ompnie� t ibuildinEpract ces. , n f"our�New Englandlstates)to�invest ,. ' r,,�„ min energyefficiency as�theynever ha`cl COririeCtlCUt I.1gITt Power r `� b`for"�e CLF-s'`succe, w aided`b �n iic� a t 1 fo ' `pubhcanon — on behalf of a regional CLF sfirst'-Powerfo Sparee. Con-r pubhe mterest4coalinon — of.t ie.first v s necticut hE ht 6z Pouuer Com an _.. i regionwi'd'et.analysis of xhe potent al 7 w<CL&P), t e re-gton's�largest retail" ` s a for electncahe er conservation: ,utiht., had,-re :uested,from� Pow � �' � �' �' qrt thel,Con r to SPare $ ite`cticut Depart'men[of Utili"Control e I CLF is now engaged,m settlement (DUCIfboth a sizeable rate-inerease • Nam . e, 4 ne otiationK to irn leni me Jar e scale and rmission d o subs�n iall�d�e� g. . p� g - p yP +. erierr effi iefic investments.with all y p" ' g, W, l gy y ,; k crease:,its efficienc ` New E g nd'stmajor'utrhties�- -CLF respon ed"byorg�nizing a r .. together accounnngrfo I thirds�iof' anel of expertw,itesses,)�culled�fr Kh, regions power1.4 41 supply. n ad'di- the nation s�leadmg.etntergy{con�s♦erva- it `° �noCLsconnn> ngitiganon tok.' �nonexperts�`This panel proded•ithe . They conservgf►on programs;CLF - bnng the remainder<of-the, region's Connecticut DU ithfacts-abouty C is cr�eatrng wzith the utiht►es will,be ' unlines�mto similar cooperanve�con- energy conserva ion opportun�ines ''� i servation ro am desi nd`costsn addmon�the anely e 44 models for`the nation and theme , p , p . world ,desperately.needed ez veloped a`;lis of cc6n'e—rn-v onapnon�"` Powerto .41 52 S are amples;beca a the`wasteful�usep ., ties for CL6zPTCLF"alsop sed an�� V of-energy ►sxthe primaryccouse of ter six years of energy relatedaliuga,. unconv_niional'pro,cess to ensure that . lobal ivbirhin andyacid rain lion CL`F concluded that rovidin the com an''icamed°out thes riori- Armond Cohen, Staff Attorne ac�tualprogram des�gnswasjthe�key ties fully a dfaithfully. have the'$ y - � " i to'accompl-is�hinulity-nestedxener- ' companylpay�CLFs�expert�panel to gy efficiency To ddahis CLFlassem>SA design_efficiency progfams7 a fi a~national team¢of ever experts In-Febnia�. .� �`gy p ry 1�88, the Connecticut a �--, _ and utilimana ers! With these DUC ado11 of.CLEF s ar" ments;'- � -' . ±, psi ; f• 8'-a �' . per-ts CLF*wrote=and released a re requiring Ch' to snearly d'oubleats port entitled Power to Spare: A�Plan conservation expendi[es7arid•'to� ' for,Increasing NewrEngland's Competi- • work withCLF and its expert panel veness�w rough rnerV Efficiency, t d(sigriRe programs. With CLF, < ® whfi'Clhlappeared in July 1987:' Ch&,P degeloped,andZObmitted in =O Cosponsored by t �y�-s c n- May the most advanced energy con= Sumer groups, environmental organs- servation,program in the nation. The z�ations and state agencies, th'e repo C n ecncat DUC was impressed ~' Al -' was provided,to key engy,decision--",. CLF and expertrpMa�el�will con;. makers in the region. power to Spare tinue�tWwork with#CLAP to refine tea. a 4r# "I i t- .- * V. demonstraaedthat hugeytechnical po-- enact, and evaluate.the programs; a '. tell, al-exists for energyefficiencyn a New-England = noto'co t`~effec MaSSC�IUSettS and NCW nvely�displa ec'"alldemandgrowtEnglandEtectnc�system ;sri�* ,� � � � � mt •the�ne�c�,e�n�tryTh�e`report als�bAlso i�n�.May, CL�s�pon�s �anot�h�� • � � . argued that�t�o�realize�the�se-�savinYg� �impanel of experts mho`testi-fiec�bef 5 4 b ra f µ ¢ w' the Massachuse"ttsiEDepartment;of mce'Mir pty-p rce---_ the mpanys iunableyto ag;eeR,on a-prjoXgram design ; Pubiie UnI" ` (DPU) in Con- load is accountedlfor by7 retail sub= «:process. Consequently°CLF as in �: necticutwC`LF�requestEd''he�DPU to sad apes in Rhodetti`sland�and,New. Vermont filed a fL115'adverserial case r ✓'! c�1 " . 8 .• . - > ` %o, require:seven Massacliu'setts utilities Iampshire. �.F A decision,-is expected next�-pnng � wl ieh tog- -r accoL.nt;]o& early „ CFI, .® ', �.<-t``5:;. .. _ hall�of`the"regionslelectncidemandw)?► Cl'ri1011t :Unite111u lnatln to engage rn,a�colohiabcrative program, In October 1987;�CLFkmade an e to result of CLF s,litrgated;ard developrnent process wieh CLF. ,� tenstv�e p g=,enta ion on Power to,Spare negotiated vtctoness in otherrjunsdtc C. s to ons tedlPto° s rulingmt t �atg Compan} ipatter4all.se:&rhh. as tes� tilr � ntttee-leadrng�the�es Public Ser ��c�f nnecticut came�eo C-LF?"i I}T� ties came forwzro ar�d voluntarily seC ice Board,(PSB) t open,an invesu and volunteered toalQm ;llabora- up suchxa ec�llabora ve effort �1s a tion�into e ergy efficiency This live efficiency prog am ciesi _pro result CLF concluded two copse .a- summer L�LF again pre.knted 'its pan cesss Preli ninary d scussions;eon . 't ►.r y� � ! € " sF S "Al tic` program%design age'eeirients i i e1 of experts who ecommen Ied that _ �ludedfin December, and dE.siJri work ie < . 1., on enerie' a eerriene thlf AheyPSB order a Connecticut- aid � snow underwa t e e l�at . g �► _ y six fthe utihtiestard one se a�rate } : 1\�Iassae,usetts,t e .collaborative pro the lomt ams agreement withNewEn aiad Electric, ceps.As a result, the tes largesLj t filed w they Connecticut Pti System w:hicli�cove s i1�ts retail sub utilityagentral:.e opt P'{uD is S rvice spnng 1989� :c Xr - .�s� x-„! sidianesan Massacl usetts New �Co an, reed tp collabora e W1i ,: � f ampsri e�and- a ode"I'siand� CLF n efficiencv program. s esigns. Pilblle EC1uCc�t1011 ` tThe ens agr`,e lls or the `ea w arl CLF has presse" its `< tI' cldiiion tots ynerg,, ccnse. � � e � ;V. a sixcompdar-iesao ovide85fi0�0 _ ase�ashe"o her malorur�keies on relare �agation JCL za �pre _ �` for F°s�.eK to d th atA,v� i at s at"t , : µ d wor cori er uon�VPo t �? r� r i �riase..oE`'an CJNKNn y�piog"amp. m r - ,"° tet�n an rogr-am-design in�dozens r* cludin of it .atemaKkng aycid financia4 VIAlrie forums mcludrngg l;i�annual treatme i`rriechanums, second Central mine Powe (CMP the rate s n " ii�e'etmgs,o the National Ps=ociauon' more detailed 'desi,�ri phase will ful Ufgpst,utility began*1 ist=u sions on f�t afoxv U'ti�ity,.Comniss ons w Th agre� err t ew,En g collaborative conservation ro�a and the, .ed l eiWB�r of land Elecmc Svste_n calls for a.mo•e d ggs withCLE in Septern , 9 laboxative energy ber.1.8E . Bo=ton CLFc y C1r�. y Y w. , , r I-�,.. t. Nle expedited prosess�with separate - .fit-tl e,same ti 41,C inter<vened4be conservation voi with tl e lyew finding,`to result t i hillscale Fro- fore ai e ub•1icU�ltility Cum ,n lari -utt1i es-`has bee�tured (fir�. �, ,r 9 *� ,,� 'grams to ,e Altincli�'ed rate Jarauar� mis ;�ch as, xamimng C1vIPxa prornmentl -in such newspapers and< . 1989 ThE CLF%Irw England�Electi prop<osedpurchaseoE�•Canaian•.gen - lourrials as Th� oston''G1�obe'�'Thj�era-... collaborative process wil hLve im eratmg capae�it� AAft, eY erisive ch Yorh limes and Amizus Journal. 4 " . _ � *�" pacts beyond�Ma�sachtsetts ical„ex hanges CLF-an. 9 ION 411 mj , < ,� i " s year`F LF�t'ook onn bothjapproaele t mportant new`ca�s&��Pater CLF,witnesses also detai L the ; Ilisu oa �s�his�o f a�uressmrade With�its`dnnking� vatesupplies �Y cluately maintatntngwater=quality 5 e raapproa�ching ma i.iumld, $� pla, nn-ng forergeciesNpainng 4 Rhode Isla-nd-move�lrwardrt�isyear amd�maantam. g,thewaterworks, oriel plans &egeafe Ithiee�er ° re an onag term strat c Blans e'pe" it-The ne. �reservotr wi1T co ax @ saga n5op. ng hey ig-Rt thestate?$3®0 tblton tAl housands of er Reservoir 's t. fore Provtdence to, ces ofh'gh uahty wetlands °tw,enry � desigrt,and ply er't 12rge�cale.va ...- ff ' �il s of natural trout streams1�25 � ter copse at onrprograS �lar ' acres of fresh a rlp) �l ="'" ter onds>extensive Four energy{co servation worl��M se _ dwelhnglKigh y,aand cerxtete y reU,, expert wimessesrCoodemonstrate a' Iaions and furthe egradan25n of t e, e proora s 'vabk^-apex en- thel. er stemo t e Patvtuxet Rivers wand �nvn onm�n ll ent �As : P x P l '' `' F, n CLF opp s thereservotr: an:Ln roden success uI`in-our ever- work ' ngs e ores Rhod I 'w e,to P.,k� cr`altaberahvel wit Public U"ttl arnxt�issio CLF.a the'R oxide ce yvater )upply B ard.; t" ty gud he Providence�y ater pup- to_ estgnadni or�aconsG&vation { °Boa d iadted,con� ' progr n tkt � rizs onI lag scale " k -w c�a fix,' > r � s�.. r r e R it 5eatio which presen'te aJess anted car e export toy o heareaso ;- des ructt Pand ch�e'aper alte�nauue ilre sta e and - , !i i r ,ater up tot e c am L'F ro bs `d'tha[�f ie ly or- i', a-growin s Boa'�d-be orce b etvater .upy, ne wh ch"3tx e�ataucipare wi be-as .. o Via*' ` � � In most c©ses, wafer.can be ale" a del c3tpeiasive tmpo rr nt tq 'ew Er�glar our aved at.a'frgact►on of the cost fn ther!re hat augrt n ao r ne Pro ect c r, crJ; financial and env►ronrnental — of coin e on,o;r,ac m•inatt9 o ibu►lding ne ater spiefs~°I�t is i!FF conom cally irrat►onalAandisoc►al y irrespons ble not tado so.' k afi !eter, Shelleyj$eriior Attor f �' ,;. _... s x �* r 9w a ry ; r 1 7 J SOLID WASTE PROJECT LF's Solid Waste Project has one goal: to-develop an environmentally and econom_cally sound and regionally coordinated program for the disposal of New England's waste. In 1988, CLF studied the various dimensions of.solid waste management and worked to ensure that solid waste facilities are sited and regulated to protect human and environmental health, to promote source reduction and recycling, and to help states and cities to develop integrated solid waste management plans. f � o - m J `. a � y l >•'r f� - 0 Co 0 . ,y •� 6 q OR �y a 8 i C Solid Waste g here is one environmental' first draft of the plan did not reflect s — and economic — issue on this priority. After a series of meet- the minds of most state and ings, and the submission of several local officials throughout New Eng- sets of comments, the Agency adopt- land: garbage. Solid waste manage- ed all of CLF's major recommenda- ment has become increasingly costly, tions — completely rewriting the difficult, and environmentally risky. plan. The final version, with a goal of Old landfills must be closed,+but new forty percent recycling, is one of the ones are difficult to site because of best state plans in the nation. legitimate health and environmental Another requirement of the 1987 concerns. Incinerators, which produce Act was the setting of standards for toxic ash and air emissions, are siting future landfills and incinerators. equally controversial and risky. While An early version of the siting rules everyone pays lip service to recycling, and the first draft of the siting sec- few large-scale efforts are underway. tion of the plan were too general to i, CLF stepped into this morass in effectively protect public health and 1988 and quickly rose to prominence the environment from the conse- as an expert and rational voice on quences of improperly sited solid solid waste policy for New England waste facilities. Once again, extensive and the nation. Efforts focused on CLF input led to substantial im- promoting the emerging concensus provements. { that an integrated approach must be The leading solid waste story in used to dispose of solid wastes, and Vermont in 1988 was the trials and "If New England cannot find bet- that recycling must play a greater tribulations of the Vicon incinerator ter things to do with its garbage role. CLF is concentrating its efforts in Rutland. In 1982, the Rutland Sol- than bury it or burn it, New Eng- in three areas: id Waste District contracted for the landers will forever live with the (1) Ensuring the solid waste facili- plant, which was designed to bum legacy of contaminated ground- ties are sited and regulated so as to 240 tons of trash per day. Construc- t water, polluted air, and scarred protect health and the environment; tion was due to cost $9 million and landscapes." (2) Promoting source reduction and take three years; disposal fees would Stephanie Pollack, Staff Attorney recycling; and be $16.50 per ton. However, by the (3) Helping states and cities de- time the plant opened in December velop integrated solid waste manage- 1987, its costs ran over $36 million l ment plans. while projected disposal fees rose to over $30.00 per ton. As 1988 opened, the Vicon's operator was in shaky Vermont the condition and had not The opening of CLF's new Vermont secured a site for long-term disposal office made it possible for CLF to be- of the plant's toxic ash. come heavily involved in the state's CLF stepped in to review the efforts to implement its 1987 Solid plant's air and operating permits at l Waste Act and in the problem- the request of Board member Jona- plagued Vicon incinerator in Rutland. than Brownell, who had been ap- Although the Act required the Agency pointed a special counsel on Vicon for Natural Resources to prepare a by Governor Madeline Kunin. CLF statewide solid waste plan that placed concluded that ash disposal planning the highest priority on recycling, the was inadequate and that the air per- 9 —_ 1 a t 1 It y t r �M. yam, a Y ,i 4 '�}..yJq++•' � � 3'ky � y� � tiZU p i emit needed adduional:„provisions for , l ,. I $ t both monitoring and„controlling air remissions. By June, CLF and others.,,;:: _ , lain that the began to comp start-up x 1 1 � � s 1 � air testing results had not been sub- 4 _ mitted to the state as required by'rthe ;, permit. In July,Vicon proposed a 1 plan to recycle its ash, which CLF - t � ' ' , t ,and others denounced as a threat' ,,. t.v public health. The plan waaquickl "withdrawn. Together, these challenge s mg •proved too much for Vicon and in �Yate August, ifdeelared bankruptcy i e �r S at and4hut:down. Because the-air and I �' o e atin `permits are`not au omati- l -t�` ,F� P g P L cally transferable to whomever buys the plant, CLF iseizing the opportu- j r t Ziry to propose much-needed changes_ tE. in the petmits;to ensure thatutie newt �# 'F � � owner will operate the:pllan in an environmentally,soundmanner. Massachusetts 1 1 Asin,Vermont, CLF is,,wor-king-to� r imple*ment.a 1987,rSo1ld.WasteAct..T• ;� r � �' = Governor,'s Commis-- " --_ - CLF�stts onsthe 1 t Y i ` c Sion-Solid Waste Management a :' a 4 &ro p created by.,the act to explore waysltoaVromote recyeling;and-�reduc- <, ttotn of solid waste volurfty' e biggest` obstacl forrecycling•n Massachusetts'` e a may. 'pmove to b'e excess incineration . .. • i - ---{ capac�tty Plants m operanon-or underof j construction have the to burn over-half of theNstate's solid waste-dn response to pressure- from �GLF-arid bther groups, the Depart- d t. mentof Environmental Quality)En- ntgtneering declared a moratorium on the is nuance of incinerator operating .� �� penniv during the yeaZfC.will take tej ti f 10 prepare the'statewi&solid wasted t;, Tlierevis also)a critical role for fed- prepare t ;' - C tic 'man- Ile,0 ,plan required'hy they,1987 Act: CLF eral involvement in solid waste will be tking an�acti e role�in chap- �agement. In 1988, the federal Envi„, ing th plan p` �onmental ProtectionAgency, aftea Dunng�1988, CLFcbegan working decade of silence,-announced its in- , ', with Boston officials to create a solid tension to become involved ins solid w stefarid_recycling program f6r=th''6, waste policy once again. CLF'has en- i . .®city.'The state's denial of a�permi for r couraged this interest and provided ' a planned incinerator in South Bos- guidance on the appropriate,role of t,:ton createda need lfor immediate;�ihe federal government through,:parr G. solutions hard an opportunity to y't c Vpation in a national c reference � - t, .. 'kip . r, i demonstrate the efficacy4of aggressive. held in Hot Springs, Virginia, and +' rec cliri to avoid ro ected $100'per �throu h verbal and written comments a Y- g.c. P�J p g ton landfill disposal costs. An ordi- "onEPAs prop sed;solid waste ° e � nance drafted by CLF was introduced strategy.�0 t , *4 tbefore the City Council in December CLF feels the federal overnment . � and will be considered early in,1989. should play an important role in . regulating inein1_ tO rs sand landfills. Aggressive federal regulatioriiis need-Al' 3 Regional and Rderal-Efforts ed to provide unifor pro`tecnon to Solid waste-management is a regional health and the,e'nvironment. At the y. issue: Garbage is frequently shipped same time, ensuring that disposal t , among states, and markets for recy- costs reflect environmental costs will iT , cled materials ar`e"regional in scope. make recycling economically competi- �. In addition to working within indi- live jwitli landfilling and incineration: `, 4 avidual statesi CLF can play an impor- CLF accordingly submitted extensive v ry ' # ^' �t.� ` rant role in`'solid waste planning for. comm�t 9^n EPA's proposed Jules 1 <. ' New England because of itstniqu , foso tl'd waste landfills, which`didct t J .regional perrsspective on these issues. hot adequately protect healtli,or the���. This process was initiated'in 1988. environment. During -also _ Q 0, J) f' ,rT ''', 1 t with CLFs� arfici ation on two?Zee. submitted comrnen on s nng and p� p + •� m s panels atthe New EiiglandResource operating standards for solid waste Recovery Conference hA in Portl n9d,',.} facilities,in Maine, Massachusetts, c Ivlaine 1 and Vermont: NO --- 11 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LF's Environmental Health Project seeks to reduce or eliminate envi- ronmental threats to public health. During 1988, CLF worked to remove or regulate the poisonous by-products of civilized life in New England, including ozone in the-air, pesticides in food, and lead in our children's homes. In addition, CLF has worked to reduce future problems by advocating the regu- lation of private sewage treatment facilities, trash-burning incinerators and, most recently, traffic. . w °1 !1 s w w� a $ '`a" '8 °far T � �}_ t` � .4r.k �,;,gin {� 12 Transportation Planning a -- ( , a- LEs-Fan_Pier casse, groWth tion inefficiency n Boston"fdndio 'rs ` management*ntuativees, and' solutions. The reportFto be issued in clean-air-work ha e lcd to a� January 1989, hasl e d aygenerated conclusionfithat_7excessive use of auto- consrtlerable-attentionxm-Boston, and g mobilesa..is.one of•the gre est so ces will�be used a..a blueprintJor-crea-t " of environmental degradation nNew tive cmechanisms to promote wiser gland. land=u e decisio s such as making J L Focu ng first_on_eastem-Massa-n developers1shoulder a greater bare or f _ chusetts, CLF is working actively t infrastructure cos"'�ts, and promoting „ with7 ity, skate,-regional, a1d4ederal the regiods flagging transit systems agencies to lim it.reliance.on motor, ,�, Traffic congestion is an tncreasmg: "1 vehicles insisting that anew c . eri onmental hazard andta serious,'f f- mitmentsb-kmade to fund mass tran_,4;�. dram on national, roductivit . Wh�e U P Y ,Y o sit projects 4adYlgrowthto areas it is outside CLF's traditio 1'progrram that can be most easily served by areas, transportation.planning iss well- "Air pollution from automobiles is transit. .„ within,our"exp" e rt se.AWe will coonn ..,-,..-w quietly'destroying,New England's In December, CLF completed the tinue;our work in Boston-arid'Eastem .forests d dgmagin"g our health. comprehensive study Gridlock: Facing Massachusetts over the coming year, �- For.,better-or worse; we have n Boston-sxIransportation-Dilem N- Hi h •bringing our-environme�kills to choice but.to reduce our reliance-f'"`�discusses the problem of transporta- the urban arena. on tli ae utomobile." t� Andrew Hamilton, Staff Scientist a o Ozone Poll - a t Lj mog was on New Englanders' acts to block life-threatening ultravio- minds - and in their lungs - let rays and is essential to human during the summer of 1988. well-being), ozone at ground level is a The hot weather created one of the respiratory irritant that poses a seri- worst summers for pollution on rec- ous health threat. Ozone is also one ord, with repeated warnings for the of the "greenhouse gases" which pro- very young, the very old, and sick mote global warning. individuals to stay indoors, and for This summer's ozone episodes-were healthy individuals to refrain from ironic given-themClea Air;Aet's-re-_ exercising in the smoggy air. quremeiit that all states`achieve the 1 The culprit was ozonetthe--prima health-based federal standard for compo�nent.off og;-which is formed ozone by December 31, 1987. Dozens in the atmosphere when emissions of areas failed to meet the deadline, from automobiles and a wide variety including all of Connecticut, Massa- of stationary sources combine in the chusetts, and Rhode Island and parts presence of sunlight. Unlike ozone of Maine and New Hampshire high up in the stratosphere (which In 1987, CLF filed a lawsuit against 13 I y "M am. e � i 1 p , ry4CD C the Environmental Protection A e " g ncy Implicitly acknowledging the menu J, # and he Commonwealth of Mas a- of many of,CLF's-,arguments;IMassa` a M 'chusettsa'harging�both;,-w �ailing to "z, chusetts!significantly stepped up the fulfill heir dutiesto-control ozone pace.of ozone control efforts-in,1988. pollution—Arguments-,.were held in Mas sachusetts, along=h�seven other federaLcourt in-Boston iinn January Nd�i.theast states�'dec ded-to-regulate dow n'by the endof the°decision had eearhanded redu e�aemtss ongaoflinsol nein r e my YI + � 'n der toZ "� y y ga vapors, Nev�rt�ess important progozone�CLFhsupported this effoffiportant rt oL was made on,-several fronts during 19 8/CLFjs`l`awsuit char ed"EPA with oral festimon and written comments fa 1'ing-to find that,Mass a huset su m_iiied to states trough u the,, ,s p g x .� the year lan, or educin ozone pollution is re t n.Andj at the end'o inadequate and to order Massachu-�...,Massachusetts announced4hat it 2 ' ' a t ii �• ' setts to`prepa e=a-newtpiam"EPAwoul`d propose=to requiregasoline�d »-z•- o made that fining June Unfortu- - stations to equip their pi mp -w t' -� nately, the Age ney, failed to put Mas- vapor recovery devices to reduce gases,.; = sachusetts on a meaningful schedul`e�oline.vapors during refueling.;This ;:o for designing and implementing the so-called,Stage II vapor recovery pro- a -new„p1anC-L==Fsmay hav to o li[gate�gramsone-of.theimeasuresIsought •_ _ this issue during 1989. by the CLF 1 wsuitr , q ©- Vicon,Burns=Out r� 3 n their sea h"for solid waste ified volume of garbage disposal alternatives (see related. The controversy over trashburners Ll i story on page 9); states all over came to a head in Vermont this year_-�L the country are turning to trashburn- with the Vicon incinerator in Rut- ing incinerators. While trashburners land. From its completion in Septem- effectively rid communities of garbage, her 1987 to the owner's bankruptcy they also emit dangerous chemicals filing in August 1988, the incinerator into the air, including dioxin and was a continual source of trouble_for heavy metals. The ash left from the Vicon Corporation and_theRsurrdund- incinerated trash can be equally da g_towns:-- gerous, often quali£ying-as -ou t...--^�'�Th o gh the year, the plant's own- waste becaus�cs'hey,metal•con- ers struggled with a number of legal, ten Fur h'rm�inccinerators can financial, and environmental prob- discourage recycling,,particularly if Gems.,These included (among others);; communities sign contracts that pe- construction costs several times great- nalize them for not,producing a.spec er than predicted, the company's in 14 p ,. µY � ' abiilitv400 offer competitive diisposa mptcy, tli-fplant,was shut.down sand rates torts_,customers, and ithe refusal..,,,,,, sixty Vermont communities were left G. '..."®'r�.-�..r-.� _ � ,t+` t yry _ by the state environmental agency to scrambling to find landfills to take j grant necessary.ernvironmentaltper- their trash. If the plant reopens under P' mits`As each tssue aroseCLF sub anew owner it will-be onlykafter the mated comments to*the state�eny.._7____� health and safetyrproblems that *' `ronmental agency and.worked.withr- plagued h facility in the past are ' the gove or'pew cial counsel on dealt with effectively-CLF, from our,, — cc) f nding�A lu'rions and alternatives. A new�Vermo office,will keep aiclose IA— At all;times,,we stressed the impor- watch-on-this-case.-We,-will also-con- tancedof recycling�and source ed`uc.- time-to help the state,-as it coin-- - 21 tion-to;reduce the need for risky `ple�sits, statewide waste nfanageme t solid waste disposal alternatives such plan,-tosdetermine how best to com- a ` i as incineiators �, ,�, � -bmeincineration with oth olid When Vicon-finally declared bank- waste disposal options. --- Lead Poisoning Prevention g o Q o -� '•- :h"il`e_1'9$8.begL+'an with fought throughout the year t censure---- the signing of Massa- that lead programs would be ade- �= —chusetts' pathbreaking . quately funded. We also worked ''lead poisoning prevention n statute, closely-With the Department of.,....-� many of the year's efforts-were fo- Health and Department of Labor and cused on Washington, D.C., and cities Industries to develop regulations and states across the country as providing for the training and licens- CLFs.Lead.-Poisoning-Project gained a ing of lead inspectors and abatement national reputation. contractors. That reputation was based on the This was also the year CLF's lead expertise gained during the three poisoning prevention efforts moved years of hard work needed to secure beyond Massachusetts. As the only passage of the nation's most aggres- environmental group in the country sive state program for removing lead working to reduce-exposure""o lead - in paint, soil, and drinking water ..from all so�uur es,,-CLF's*pertise°was'' - from children's environme -b ,.--- so�ugh%.by government officials and fore they becomee poisoned.>CE 's-ef* "" citizens' groups from Virginia to forts'in Massachuse�id not end Hawaii. We worked, for example, once the statute was put on the with an environmental coalition in books, however. CLF and a coalition Philadelphia to draft a city lead r of environmental, health, housing, poisoning prevention ordinance mod- and children's advocacy groups elled on the Massachusetts law, and P 15 1 * � a � ec;with tenants' coalition-in Chicago_* nation_Nineteeneighty-eigh= was the to publicize,the.problem and seeklA,year the,federahgovernment;,teritative- much needed,funding fo prev non�-�, ly began,explonng.its_rolle in reduc- efforts. As part.of•the e efforis,�CLF ing,exposure to lead. Congress.re- testifie�d4be-fore-zthe:=C-ity'C,ou-cils of cei edraa,long-overdue.rep on the , both,,Ph-iladelFhia and Cliicago. © nature and extent cf.ch ldh�ood.l-ad 4 ck home in New Englan& F poison Agin chelUMited States, which' q �wokrked„§withfofficials m-Connecticut°' -"esti ated that seventeen percent)^ i p _ to d`eveloop regulations.to-implement., all preschool,child.ren in urbanfand—' yam... that sttate's new lead law The year suburban-areas'have dange-ously ele- Boston Hospital and co-s on- re on concluded thatomi filch ore _ ended with a conference lield.at vated"lead levels;Not-su risen 1 -elie ' st / k �►. was� �` ems-v � /,elm , . sored'by-,CLF, atpwhich over 1p25 act] had to be done top event lead expo vists',atiended,to begin the ,process of-'- sure. Federal initiatives during the,,/, implementing+the new--Massac'huseits'year focused-on lead paint in`public law. Much of the conference focused housing and lead in drinking wate t r on an issue thatwill�serve as the ' focus of CLF s lead poisoning prev,.n"�- ,,,a tion efforts in 1989: identifying fund- `, b ingxsourcesffto�help=preiperry owners - Lead Paint-in Public pay to remove lead paint and con- Housing ® ® o . taminated soil. In part because of he-renewed.a ar' CLF is also working to make Mas- tion to lead poisoning at,,thhe city an'1 c a sachusetts' efforts a model for the state level, Congress addressed the - T -- A r , s A f -dolor i i i k e7 U�F �b odtr°oversial issue of�rem�ovii�i-j lead7'`"`� m meaningfully regulate,lead contamina- � � �pain[.in-public housing. Three differ anon of d nking-water in 1988 ` `?a L� >7 ent-laws were passed, keeping CLF '" A.,year tha .saw the di=in-drink- s of dan- 1 f_ busy withlettters-and Iphone,call to gerously high level��-- CapitolHifla.TlaeAupshotof}thfl rry g1water,fountains in schools in I` of legislative activity,is that'�'the ° Boston and throw h_out-New England:-g ., �.. A.g "I Department of Housing and Urban '',Drinking'.water accounts for4 pprcx De elopmentii Conducting an'eigh '-ately twenty percent of lead`.expo tee n=month study.to-identify•the-most sure nationwide and a much highre'r� ' cost-effective-remedies for the lead proportton'in infants who drink paint problem. In the meantime HUD form la mixed wilh`lead=contamnat d _- will equire lead.paint removal a ,, tap`�water. Despite months ofibehind- y part=of'ong ing comprehensive modthes Brie pressure from CLF and qernization projects. Guidelines are = -other'nvironmental advocates, the now being developed:by`the'National Agency proposed-regulations that� Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) would continue to allow tens of mil- w to ensure that-paint-is,removed lions of Americans to be exposed to.,,,,.A -*thoroughly and safely- CLF is a "'dangerously high levels of lead** n _. member of the NIBS Project Commit- their drinking.water. CLF opposed tee:developing=these guidelines. these rile`srin'Congressional`hearings, -" Agency hearing0and written-com- ments and has signalledfits__1intenti a to continue the battle if EPA decides Lead in Drinking Water to finalize this shorts gh[ed strategy, CLF continued to fight the Environ- in 1989. mental Protection Agency's refusal to j ti PriSewagevate Treatment facilifies Sewage has historically been be developed. treated in large, publicly That situation is changing, however, owned treatment facilities. with the advent of small, private 1. Until recently, a residential subdivi- treatment facilities-(PTFs)_-PTFs-arm e�� sion developer in a town that lacked already-in use-for co min erc�al and k. a publicly owned sewagetreatmen industrial establishments and have re- plant had no-choice-but.to-install- cently become cost-effective for individual septic-systems for each residential subdivisions as small as dwelling. If the site or soil was un- 136 bedrooms. suitable for subsurface disposal of Problems with PTFs - including household wastes, the land could not the fact that they make development 17 Or s ,zu� P1.1 ossibl'eon:previously undevelop ble- nviro�ntal-study. land =have led to legislative restric This agency acnon, wl-i�h in effect , 9 -- f, eons in-Maine and Vermont. Iir Mas creates a temporary mo.ratonum on sachusetts ja�morator►um has been pro f s Ong of subdivision proposals proposed in response to-the twenty that include PTFs-tis a`recEssary step a t�ot,tnirry subdivision developers who 1 ; in,,the regulatorytpr ocess acid one have filed for,permits. "that hLFWh--ilhad ea moratc�n meen gororele ban-` nmental r� ces n the past two years. ozpns of is probably not the apFropriate-1 g - �-* other PTFs€are planned for residential term-resolution=for-P✓Ia-ssac,zusetts corid min um developments and' _com_mercial or industrial sites. PTFstpose°,many regulatory cha- £ waters may agifersvor surface ' B len es. Cer �+ y be threat by cumu- � -� k `lative effects of,dis barges from a ---large-n iffil5e—r of plants. After the+de- deloper disappears, the plant will have_toefunde&by_the homeown- ers in the subdivision, who will want to minimize long-term maintenance costs and will resist paying high re- pair or replacement costs. Already hard-pressed regulators will find it �. difficult to monitor and regulate dozens of small PTFs. Finally, state j ® ,_ _.-a-nd�locdt.officials-must-also ddress the implications of lifting the de facto ts-o dev lopment._ mow . ' CLF-addressed these issues in com- ments on the potential,impacts of a PTF in Sudbury,-Massachusetts. In '* April,the Department of Environ- " 9 mental-Quality�Engineering denied the permit, finding arrangements for % long-term operation of the plant to be inadequate. DEQE also expressed _ concern about the cumulative envi- ronmental impacts of issuing singles permits before a planned statewide environmental study is completed. Shortly thereafter, the,.E-xecu`tive.Of- � �" fice of Env ironmental-'Affai sr began ' notifying subdivision developers that their environmental reports would ther have to address all of the issues raised by the permit denial or await the completion of the comprehensive i do`rr the,rest of,New England regular f for completion in 1990. CLF is tions imust be.established to'm_inn representedtn hey cit zen's-Tadvigory� imiz he dverse,impacts of PTFs.---- " committee working-on'the report and .,� :. CLF will contin�o lkit e- will-participate in ddeev loping-new t sure that allissues=areFaddressed�in regulations Rbased-on�thetrepon's Massachusetts' analysis of` Hs due findi=ngs Q �a -fl t ` --..." ' . ------veryyttme you see a warningjsociated with the use of pest�ictdes-- sign on a treated lawn in Pesticides-are used everywhere and, _ Massachusetts or-Rhode— - — asialleachate--into groundwater `� Island, think of CLE Those signs are ly contaminate water supplies_In the I part of our continuing effort to de- last year, CLF has focused its Pe:sti- mand that the public be informed cide Project on public education ana about the presence and rsks as- the adoption of law tthat mill-allow 1 a x y fe x ti i s r e j '. r _ —_-- 19 a p eh 4�7 .K New-Englande-rs'gre�rsin the-f agricultural spraying. The new pro'v'i- 6gcfieralTuse,of.pesticides. .1 sion would also hold pesticide man, Tli,-forth(comin -Pesticide 14an-d ufacture s.more accountable for g� book wilt"discuss,the n"tss of;ndi-/7' groundwater contamination. . .� vidualtowns toregulate pestide use Inlanother-effort.o force.adaptation , within_theirborders, anrdiscuss' of-alt rriative control.mea"assuurees, CLF �wfi//citizens should be concerned �stoppedran insecticide application,in .„ about pesticid ssih the-first place." "a state;foresti nsisting that t e state' Wi�CLF'played_an.important-role in---- first exploreibiological control K xs3x_ advancing the controversial Massa- methods. �� C'r ' ch�usf�ts Pesticide Reform bill in,the Finally CLF'joined-severalregio nal -'I __8 legislative session. And, as ``, and national environmental,groups,m re aratio'ns for the�1989 legislative o osin a ro osed'major` olic P g PP, g P P J, P Y session begani�n December, CLF :.Chang e=by EPA that would- bolis'hba' ' drafted provisions-that would" or the - thirty-year-old law prohibiting the,"-'.2 - i b first time, provide incentives for farm- use of cancer-causing pesticides"that w A ers to adopt alternative control remain in food: y E methods that would greatly reduce -� t MilitaryPollution uring.198_8, CLF's Military lawsuit. That report will also consider Pollution prt had its the impacts of activities at Otis, in--- Dojec first successes in the on- cluding the decision to upgrade the going effort to ensure that the Penta- fighter aircraft used at the base. The gon complies with the same envi- new planes have begun flying follow- ronmental-laws-that-govern us all. ing special protocols, approved by CLF, designed to minimize noise. No Otis Air Force Base/ noise complaints were received dur- Camp Edwards ing 1988. CLF's efforts have begun to make Ongoing negotiations should soon operations at the combined Otis Air produce a settlement of the lawsuit Force Base/Camp Edwards facilities that will_substantially`Yimp ove�envi------I on Cape Cod more sensitive to en ronmental"praca at'the base. CLF's vironmental concerns:-Almost ll:of a al would require closure of the massive-spa o plan fo p base landfill, upgrading the sewage t_ Edwards wasp on hold during treatment facility, coordination of base 1988 while the Defense Department expansion activities with hazardous began preparing the environmental waste clean-up actions, and creation impact statement demanded in CLF's of a new, single authority at the base 20 Irresponsible for investigating citizen ues using criteria that are more,sen- complamts of noise and environmen�sitive to environmental and.land-use ' tal conta im natio_n. Afinal-agreement •r.. ncerns:fl¢ - x _ to settle this Iandmark_la su t is�ex- _ pected in,�1989=.,:,...;., `�.1� Westover Air Foree�Base _ Giant r military.°trans o is fle y ' p . ... d � GWENrTowers � ')',�Hof Westover�Ai�Force Base in� In 1988 the AifForce-finally conced�'" central'*" entral Massachuseltts during1988 ' ca ed that`it must,take-environmental��� prompting hundreds of noise'com- " concerns seriously in determining plaints'ping to force the Aid r v C` locat ns for a number of proposed Force`to`correctly-evaluate the im-----�- - -Ground~Wave Emergency Network~* acts of the planned base(expansio ( GWEN")`towers planned for New pis not yet over. CLF's coin eiits on ----r England. The GWEN project is anet-.,' the environmentalr mpactjstatement f'` 5 1 work of radio frequency�transmittmg had been�-particularly critical�d plans' and relay towers'de g ed to ensure to expand civilian operations at ilie- continued military-communication in base to include night flights; these ---,` ""the event of a nuclear attack. The-Air�aplans are on hold. CLF is also,pro-'— Force, in settling a lawsuit brought by viding legal-assistance to Valley Citi- -- "`��0 CLF;.agreed�to.re=evaluareTMtwo=of!the'--~~�zens-for-a:5afe�En ronment—�a local pposed sites using stricter environ- group challenging the Air Foice's` 0 mental standards and to begin a new noise and air polluton,evaluations process for selecting two additional in federal court. 9 g i W . - A z l Al771 WPM I 1 s# �# 3 '1,1101i 21 I LAND POLICY LF's Land Policy Project promotes the wise management and protection of New England's agricultural, coastal, public, and critical private lands. During 1988, CLF worked throughout New England on growth management, wetlands protection, land-use management, and the preservation of the shore, which has come: under tremendous,development pressure in the past few years. _ m VWN u p11P n €M1 22 1 6' t R � ManagingGrowth , CLF and New England tackle the challenges of explosive expansion t he next few years may be by timber and paper companies have the most critical in deter- begun appearing on the auction mining the long-term fate of block, provoking fears of a subdivi- New England's environment. Explo- sion bonanza. Over ten million acres sive growth, backed by a strong of prime forest land are-exp;tied to. economy, is forcing the region to change hands,by the turfi-of,fhe ce' nee ___--__7§t-ake hard, quick decisions about tury. The advan-cem�t age'*', - �, ,,Who or �at��ill shape the New treatment technology.�has also created' ' -.�En land�landsca e. Left to economic anew fh�rea't to-o en s ace. Econo'm- " �;g:.�, r :,{�.P ,,��`= aft° c�j�� �„ p �p r forces and often nadequate local ical,+small,scile,`privaiejtreatment fa- planning, ourbeau iful valleys nd cilites (vPT ) have openepvast o"<< el nese and pic sque fowiis new te'mtoryPto Tres dential d;coin- r t may be transformed,into a vast su13 b--• mercial=development areas which y '' '-`w *`fir .ir^�`4rF urban megalopolis, overspilling, 'ifh- ere pre iousIy unavailable due to traffic, sewage, and-garbage:,.Indeed� the,unsuitability,of their soils for •' ,many,of our precious natural resources septic systems. . thave`�allready been s�acnficecl- �"'i��a Re po d ng o the vocalic erns . a + I o "'�Un er gulate•;d gro`rw�th"Pin�,the form of ® of experts and,,citizen"s{`alike, thes;ate�A- h r�. x»r4+ ' ePstn15 development along highways, te legislatures of Vermont; Maine, an encroachment of condominiums onto New Hampsliire,�ha'�e-passed egisla- o `�''` * - w ' � ° ` . fartn's aand'forests; and the con�v, e�rysion tion.ininatmg-a new phase o growth,- 4of fishing ports torOfficesaand-to¢wi inanagementiri NewEnglaridVer , , 1.,. e iu houses has been met withsome mont's1ct 200;�passed in May times valiant efforts to rfiingaAthe , 1988,�ppoyides state 'support for local it "Our romancee th'the coast has im a is of that ro th' Miti�aiin im and regional planning Which must �P g ig g peg p g — ,been called Amerieaas mad,dosh pacts while certainly necessary, are�"' conform- ,to new0planning g alsrin the ,.to the sea.' In addressing its corn no1longer�sufficient to maintain envi�t"�` statute — all.tib be funded byr anew sequences,�� as acted to re- roni ental quality in Net E�ngla nd. transfer tax# real)es e�transactions. � .. `serve the'coastal'env.ironment, What�is needed is comprehensive _.1 In April, the-Maine legislature ,frad►tional maritime uses, and land�use planning to channel level;' rpassed a,�similarimeasure,;which`(( r public access- I �,� opment to areas•th"at needit=and.that mandates.local=planning and creates r F h`Richard Emmet, Senior Attorney can absorb impacts ,'�� Jwfinanciial ihceenti�ve�including legal °� Most,towns in New England have ``defense`fimds an_d?the right,to im- neither the information nor'the,.re- ,'pose development impact fees, to en- t ; sources t°carry o t"'effecnve�plaann-' �, courage submittal of the local plans ning,'�or to"defend plarining'ordi-f for-state certificationAn New Hamp- a a Ju r (riances in court! The ti e has come shire, the legislature recentlyextended" tr, for higher levels of government to be- &planni g,auh orit `to the Coos`Coun- - come in olved in planning Fortunate-©,, ty Conrimission"'covering the unincor- " .� ,,, J,� U . is ly, state legislatures in�the�hardest�hit� �porated'aea's (40tipercent) of the - f Ilk �� states are begmning,to;respond)to thee` county,swhich�jincludesinost.of the N � , �;., r r 41 t ,. to need'Becausse'of the recent emer state north of`the White Mountain gence of,two additional'f tors —,pn'- ►)National Forest: y? d , ' vate`treatment facilities (see.,page:17)-9 In Massachusetts, the legislature ad&the" selling of4vast amber tracts ,' adopt d a,$ 00}millionl peen,space£ these efforts,may be lint in'time. a bond, and legislation is pending that tt [ Huge forested tracts in Vermont,= �i would,create-a-Aregional planniVom- .a--"'- 'r4,• ;C 1� ,. 1 Y*.--1`. ... � a �s�J .».� r <l�y „P'„ r� -- , 4F - -, New Hampshire,,.and'Maihe owned mission for Cape Cod`and.'authorize .Ga 23 1 local imposition of a property trans- seeking to have the executive order j fer tax to fund the purchase of con- require agencies to develop legally servation lands. binding plans, with full public panic- CLF has become involved in growth ipation, on how,they will meet the management issues on several fronts. planning goals. CLF will,also-propose In±all three northern states, CLF is recommendations o ow the local- _ ,monitoring the implementation of the and regional plans cai4best.mee-the I er x '' new egtslation — which, if carefully law's requirments w!:" implemented, could literally alter the (;'The,,Vefmont,office also,,filed its, 'face,-of northern,New`Englannd (first court case, which mvolved the In Vermont Cj F s new offices growth impacts of a proposed high- � working on several growth;`manage- way.near-Burlington-CLF�successfully- .. T *: , ment issues. Undee Act 200, Ver- '" ari edlfor7dismissal of aFlawsui[filed " ` mont's GovernoMladaleine;Kunin'. by loCalitown�seeking,to block state must issuean executive,order requirR {eview ofa�its, equa[eresponse,to . r _ -�-mg state-agencies,thatfmake•decisions� development pressure`sjresulting from affecringtl`and use such as,.th�e high-a ttie new,highway.�The state subse- '�,*� .-way^'department-;to co ply with�th'e' quently�asked`CLF to prepare-recom- ' '' ew a * planning goals`of�the statuceCLFis� m ndatonsfor'protect nag farm a d . ► s✓ omen - growth.) a. �� fr ewe, is *' On Cape Cod,ThF Has le t,up ' i x port o the co cept=of a regiona ' NJ. planning mechanism. While that` `i' process slowly unfolds, CLF will be( looking for ways to ensure protection` <, b. of the Capes only drinking water source�ran;unclerlying aquifer that, is fede Jally�pr�tected,but is seriously r =.Jproved"iHe'gCeate9t threatened by�development.PrivatetreatmentffaciliC es have � � threat in assa ��, yspi e�'the Commonwealths chusetts de . j limited~`b n. L(LF s seeking to`have A� all new construction of PTFs banned ... i S until strict guidelines concerning their) ' h imp d ti • � �'� growl impacts acts are adopted. �° - ,_ tom• �_ `CLF is also continuing its recent eln as s'on intelligent urban plan . nmg, with'a major thrust coming this u �`" �`" '` fall in the form;of zoning proposals requinnglth'en"ity of.Boston to prove" _ - w that it has the�ii frastructure capacity tS to absorb,further;development before approving g in office t veers' Throuyhtthese,efforts,an- others, »mot r d g 7 4,A,fr@rr�" ' l CLF is workingtto ensure that exces- 00 ' sive growthdoes not consume New England's abundant natural ities. 24 p i Coastal Lands v a lands. CLF has joined in an appeal Moody Beach An impending decision of the Maine for administrative review of the issu- Supreme Court will end a lengthy le- ance of the proposed license to make gal struggle by a group of shorefront sure that the facilities are designed appropriately. owners to'end public recreational use of Moody Beach in the town of Wells. '` The.case has raised many important Off Road"Vehicles e,,,-<legal�issues, including public rights in On Cape-COdr .. ,% _ ' »� -it,elinter'tidal zone and acquisition,of ' Du g 1988 CLF p s dxfurther .' �. • . . �, �+ �a '• ~—r' • rr&r6iionaI nghts,through'us6 er. miles t'ones.`in"its decade=Long struggle a t 4� �i an extended period. In the pastyear," to,haveoff-road vehicles (ORVs) ''ICLF has submitted briefs.to4support banned from th`e beaches and dunes � C , S , ram, the appeal by ttheetown and state of a- at Cape..Cod-National-Seashore As a trial court decision favoring,the.pri _, result of 01984 decision;in CLF's „*� vale owners;. }^° c_ suit a mst the';Departrrient of the .- Qa } r ;,r '• �+�-.w-F,...f f.� ,.. �Interior,'S ORVs`rriay,;now�se.only a Gloucester Landin ` . g� fraction of the area they were previ- . j"..� C..:;,"'`•^+�. � �.,.5' , .era„• ;u During'the past year, CLF's•effo'rt to ,�� ouslyspermitted,However, the,current Y 3 secure a new dockage and ser c�2i amouni of su e,remains well above Y = facil ty for-Glou es`ter's,commmercial +the�level,au thorized by`'the Cape,Cb ! fishing,fleet moved'one step closer,to t�National.Seashore Act, which requires ., f union. Gloucester eUndmg Associ'4 rpreservation of it e Seashore in'its L ates�has agreed to build this new natural unspoiled condition. r, , , facility as a condition for receiving As this,report goes to press, CLF ) ", �,testate license tobuild a commercial_/{, awaits,a ruling on its appeal of,a s ' Yr�•; 'projecton-Gloucester's historic water-'y,, and decision by the district court, .-; (� + front. The'Yde eloper willbe requi ed rendered in June ,CLF also awaits tlie',. ` 'to fund a significant portionlof the , `� next move by Interior, which has !7 E, fishing'facility, supplementing previ!-r stated that it intends:.to piropose ously authorized state funds:'A�coali- _reinstituting,the+pre-1984 manage y �t Lion representing local business'and ment plan`Whatever-'the outcome of preservation interests has appealed• its appeal, CLF will'respond.with re- for administrative review of the issu- newed vigor to any attempt to roll ance of the,proposed license. CLF: v back the level of protection afforded will not join in this appeal. ; the Seashore. Steamship Cove 1` BlackToint Anothe effort by CLF to secure pri- On September 6, Rhode Island Gov, vate funding of new dockage for=coin- " error DiPrete committed his adminis- mercial fishing boats,is focused,on tration to acquiring, through eminent= x Steamship Cove iri`Fall'Rider. As M1in eft r' "' �'` p ;domain if necessary, the entire forty ti w Gloucester, the°developer of a large+ acre parcel at Black Point that has waterfront project has agreed to 4 �t#`been the subject of a 'two year battled* , finance and construct this dockage` ' involving;citizens, environmentalists, facili fy as a condition for receiving developers„and,government'officials. a state,license to,build a hotel con- Black Point is&h ,fl rgest-.remaining �dominiurin and marina in the tide stretch,ofrurideveloped�`hard,rock, 25 t warm water, open-ocean continental rights at the site, both in an historic coastline in the U.S. The controversy coastal path and in the beautiful surrounding it has attracted wide- rocky shoreline to which the path spread publicity and has become the provided access. symbolic focus of a major political is- Following a first round,in--theme--�- sue: how to preserve public access to courts, the lengthy,and a ontroversial- _'- �thevshore in the face of rapid coastal proceedings bre`fore the te'Coastal devel p ent. Resources Ma agement'Cou°n l4gen •�-„ & _ �ThetBlack,Point parcel was to�be o erated strong,public1sentim ent in,fa- developed intosome eightyc ndo=r N -keeping Black Point open to mmium units.'CLF and Rhode ds- the publieThis publictsupport, along land's Save=the Bay, later joined-by w thelefforts,of CLSave'KtheBay, the state's:Atromey'General, spear- ; and!the".^•Attomey Generals De ait e headed a major effort to requirerthe. ment'se- the, _gesfor tYl e governor's developer to recognize-+existrng�publiic, commendable action. rs' � "vim ✓"" �„ � '� ,„ `' �� � A# I s � a 41 — � x CS � ` M Wet rids a r O G7 `+ ,. ♦P'• gar �`rD r a M a ' ,` Y SRou e�.6 i }r^`> y `'� , the exi�st�n4 3gtr`oa ra lternatiVe}.ihe ' �,�'•'" DOT had-no fully explored CLFfalso- ��; CLF joined thle fray oven Connec"ti=, � ,� r 4 � , � h .� ycu's'Rouie 6 this year, sutitung voiced concern over the�cumat}ve. 4 ., - `' effects§of ro ects like the Route ,r 'Comments.to`the,Army Corps ofkn' «P J � f ` neersm o osmon to the road-ex =Pansion•and over2the DOT's propen- a w�� PP g �. c, ' et pansion'proposedrby the Connecticutsity to tmplernent,one enytronmen " ^ '�" �' tall destn ctiver�plan after another Department•of Transporta on (DOT). -,_y _. P, ta, 0" The controversy is 6,M Route 6 be,,,, ol , t 'etch' -Pyramid,Victory r o tween Boltonand Windham,Fa stretch J " � of road thexDOT con"stdersparticular= Some developers.takeenvironmental ly unsafe TheaDOT,is<proposing,to considerations seriously. The Beacon A` ' � relocate the,road -„in the:process� Companies' Rowes'Wharf project on , i'dest oying over,seventy-seven acres of Bostonf Waterfront is a case in point. prime wetlands.yIt would be,tlie -- °", Other develo ers demand that.the largest wetland destruction m;New ,r environment bend',to their wishes. England in a.dec de:S •' ^` U The Pyramid.Com n es' Attleboro c; g .. i t Y a P t ' Iri comments to the Army Corps+ q�M� all project mAitleboro,OMassachu- , r of Engineers (who must approve the setts, is a good example Wetlands in-w d project)'CLF argued that the pur +terests throughout'the�natio were '*,` t'r .. , i A :; �-- • a ported safety benefits of the.reloca- '4f'' 'advanced,stgnifi6ntly this'y ar when C r tion can be met by less exp.11 ensive a powerful"coalition of,environmental' . . , ; r� -J� ,._, IJ d a`.t-;ter %V � . .� ` : J'3 and-less destructive improvements,to groupsincluding}CLF`�handed'the , 26 -- g u - Pyramid Companies their third — advocates, and the strength and and we hope final — blow in court. teamwork of public interest lawyers Although Pyramid is attempting to working on the legal challenges, were get Supreme Court review of its case, a critical element in the victory. a number of observations can be The results cannot be overlooked. made. First, this case has been a vic With a positive,and- environmentally, _ ,-'`y tory for strong and proactive EPA en- sensitive and protectivpFanfroacl",,th I$. " forcement,of the wetlands laws. EPA Beacon CompaniesbuiltRowes Wharf, stook step's to block the unnecessary in five years,�on schedule'and budget. T fifty-acre wetland_loss-despite,the�� €F*yetyears after purchasing Sweeden's Army Corps of Engineers' approval of (Swafiip,,1he Pyramid ompanies are the protect: Second, the interventionstill:,in,court fighting environmental, ` . * J y— fighting} ,f r rof a national coaliiio �of wetlands Gprotectionrather than working'f��r it. 4 p 13 ♦�<a , !9 s- � „� e „�,,; -, mow. u,i'•.� �; ,`� �� �`'�� 's. Independence" Park the,Barnstable Board of ,suppomng In 1988, CLF filed a brie `w Health m its w a a eat to the Su reme.udicial:Cfi ou t a- p 1 ® oE.Massachusetts. The By'and of Healthw, '.� 'i 1" * 4,V- A attempted,to require'that<subdivisions ' `� • : man industrial park-hooklufp totthe municipa�l�s�ewei`The developer, I�n de�- pendence Park, hallenged this re- o .' efit and won i lower court. CLF nbehalf ofthe " Board of+Health ink-a4inal'appeal be-,,, ' cause it was likelythat'Al lower ' Q court decision would discourage oth- er.boards of health from'lbecomng a " 3 r3 '� 'V C J sa» involved in environmental protection Also?, the subdivisions-weree located `3 ` 0 �7 oven the environ e tally sensitive Cap6Cod,aquifer — the^sole d°rink= ing water'source for residents of Cape ,stable'Board ofKHealth and affirmed Cod..Boardsof-health-throughout the CLF's argument that local boards of- `', - rn � €"ir , - N� .1 �J r- "r k1 i�A state watched the case,to see how ,y C1 health ehave,broad po wers and-obliga- �' a o� .. .`' Massachusetts highest court Would rule. _ tions[to Fproteci: publicfhealth'gand the_ -'A %, [/ (�d The SJC ruled in favor.of�t_li�eBarn-�-.w environment 27 Q Greylock Glen come alarmed at the increase in the Greylock Glen is a proposed develop- planned size of Greylock Glen — in ment project to be located on 1,040 1 particular the threefold increase in acres of privately owned land at the the number of proposed condomin- " eastern edge of Mount Greylock State ium units. As a result-of environmen- Reservation. The proposed develop- tal pressures;)the,,plannedrnumber-of .;, ent.would include residential con- units has been s€al ba k but state 41��domin ums;a conference center, and officials have.proposed xo increase ,'; -- " '- public recreational facilities— includ--` thevubl c mvestment,in the project x : ing a large lake'formed by damming to an-estimated $21.5 million. This a�mountain brook. In 1985,jo"ien- increase,(and�thhe possi�bl seoof ourage economic development in the funds appropriated-for open space. northern Berkshifess the governor and' acqui�ion andinain enanc of exist- , � ' t� � .� � ,►... -,� r � r.at+�_ -��. * „* legislature authorized investment of ing state lands) raisedrma�°r legal and t$8.5 million,.in public,funds as'th6,� poky issues CLF has-communicated state's.share.�of'this4$25 million pub_,ti its-concems`tb state officials,and will licPrivate ro ect. take a ro nate- tion`if.these con- y, c m over the past,yy ar CLF;and�other cerns are►not_adequately�addressed. M1 environmental organizations have,be-�,, ';"ka �F.lk � •* �'�'� ��� � t * Mkt SM, A a �" 4 *, re I ,WhACMountainsl . R ' e� `�' t'�°� 1 ..�t�."��,,.yn�, l✓ C' � c� r CO11Way B ASS a, grade option with a;,"mini bypass,_ Y The Conway„New Hampshire area" through'Conway1village. Chas grown,virtually uncontrollably in y In the ear�lystudy stages, the west- recent history, and now miles.of,fac- fern alternatives through the Forest'' tory outlet=stores and other strip de-t ' appeared.to be clear local favorites. velopmeni°have`helped 'slo,.v�traffic to a�scenic road could be built with no 0 � � €a crawl on Route 16 leading into the � cost-to the,town in terms of losing',_ � eastern eaches of the White=Mound land,�ho ses, etc. Since a poor prece m t tam National Forests .. dent would,be-set if Forest land was ra In 1988, the state-,prepa pared a draft 'sacrificed'-to itowns who:have simply.; environmental impact statement (EIS),, failed to properly,plan their gr_owtO analyzing various options for bypass CLF wrote a-letter .the,state-signed N t- a ing Route'16 through the congested; � by four environmental groups request, ` ► w , to t /.cf f} F_ ,-4 n r. Conway area,,including one-bypass :,-ing thatt,tthetpresunlption agai st-tak-� I-rr N tip. 7 t �'` � ,:� highway�to the,6st, three options to ,ro bing national�forest-landbe-a,major r � the west= throiigh White.,Mountain' "focus of,th,e,EIS. .��� National Forest land_. and one up-,) When the Draft EISWwas'`released, r ; y. . t* 4¢ `�jtl� 28 i a k c� the western alternatives through the In the final analysis, it appeared Forest had in fact been discarded in that the eastern alternative would favor of the eastern route. Although simply divert traffic so that more we commended the state for this de- shoppers could "fill-in" on Route 16, y cision, CLF voiced a number of seri- encouraging more commercial+devel__, -'• ous objections to this preferred alter- opment, and more congestion`,The tive during the public comment upgrade would'.haveomuch,thessame [traffic] effect.on the•lftge gion as ,• R• ., he eastern alternative would-dee-� the,bypass'a ternat ves-but would'not . stroy 35.3 acres of wedand'?which—" b`ri g%s eh benefit-to-the Conway. can only be`allowed under federal law regionmretail base" DE'53IS'at"4-207. -4-no feasible altematives,di —CLF Thus theieastemsaltemative would noted that the upgrade-alternative was• primarily llh 1p,comniercialtdd velop-, feasible, and in,fact supeenor.to the 3ment, but-not the traffic`"4yF.illing thirty- • eastern route from.a,traffics oint of. five acres of wetlands for P.oute 16' # E er r"w•Y"``-`� +_,k�C, „p ""'r Li view;thro�ugH,the thirty year period strip evelofpmetntt,,cannot�belj�stified �•� analyzed iii the EIS The upgrade also' ,under the,stnc iguidelines•of t- `p has-far-fewer impa is on wedands, Clean Water Act. o ' - ♦ water quality, farmland, historic.-strut- tures'and`secondary,impact Ui v . .4 s- , F , i r R u 9 L a f 29 3 i - 7 In addition, CLF commented that a will quickly strangle any highway so- new highway would simply attract lution implemented by the state of new growth, particularly at the north-. New Hampshire. ' ern and southern termini of the by- f At the very end of the year, the pass. Unless this issue is addressed, special committee appointed"by the, , q relentless, uncontrolled growth in the governor rejected the eastem:alterna' �&istin commercial area and at the tive due tc, e-whe-Aitig local'nd riorrtliern and southern bypass termini environmental oblectfon:-The affected kz p t 7 r f * MOW 46. ♦y} � yr, �-��`.t.F � .c..w.��dn.S� d *� Y3 .s� -N 6 t� 1w # ypi � 1 f rn w ,.g� � •ems ..-� �'�� �� .',s r°,° '� ,�� ,� � ��"^ *°-�° �' � $' �,�,p-. 30 e {� c J towns are to report back to the gov- an EIS. ernor by July 1989 with their recom- CLF disagreed. In the public com- mendation for transportation im- ment period, CLF argued that the provements. CLF will continue its t! potential impacts were clearly signifi- involvement in the process, working cant, and thus triggered the necessity to protect the White Mountain Na- of an EIS. For instances eth owmak- �tional Forest and valuable wetlands ing would in olvee-'cons derab el ;with= -r �* '`from unnecessary development, and drawal of wat`e�from,Eth East•Branch Jencouraging the towns to replace un- of1he Pernigewasset'River Arid even- } `F... '"»'�'+* ,9„ tk.,.,., .L'S .^ ,as �i *:> " 9 - - =controlled growth with-afi ambitious tually,Loon Pond, raising critical ,� r, , . progrm of land use-planning and ' ques .,about water quality and °� "'•*<�- . zoning,contiol quantity randyboutthefu u e'"of 4 ?"" "" theX S?�,Fish,�and Wildlife Service's Loon Mounta1Ski Area - salmon restoratiompr-ogram in the Expansion, river, The Forest Servrce.had not con- ` CLF one ih s" c e"sssf Illy defendedQ sidered,any the major`cumulativI.., . r� � �,�.�i'' Policrn ortant National Environmental and"indirect4m acts of: e project Act (NEPA)�when}the Fore r such as con- sted`traffic;stressed Service,agreed toy prepare an environ- ' community services, and increased * mental impact iateme n t (EIS) under:' growth�g�rally.,T effects oof�'al,I that-statute.for,a�proposed"expansion ing prime wiidlife habitat had,,not� ' ofj he Loon•Mountam ski-areaion, :beers thorougl lr�exami iedV. r *, Whi`eeNountain National Forest nd. An EIS examines-reasonable*lalte* , 'Loon Mountain,n�,Lincoln4N;w fives to"environmentally significant Hampshire, req eu sted�a special use project 7, analyzes cumulative andcin- «• permu{from the Forest Service in or-, direct effects, and examines overall ^+, der:to'dramatically expand its ski` costs,andibenefits: It-is-,the` only ways area.,On 930�acres of natial-forest that a�prroposaslucchas L�oo s�c a land, Loon proposed to build seven be,weighed in an informed and , 'new,lifts,,29 ne*w"trails? ew lodge +'sighted,Rnan er The,Fo t Serrvices' ; y ; 4 , and`a•major new�snowmakugrsysiemz* .decision m,early 1988 to.require anW: � � � �, P F more than 'doubting its,cuire�nt MEIS was a victory_for-the White Moun=; _ v s.t° � capacity"lto 13,400 skiers-per day. o 3 twin National'Fo�'rest and a victory forti, ' Despitekthe,tremendous impact ,NEPA, thercomerstone of environmen'l'�; oIVArs such,a project would;havejonCwatei;_ tal law. CLF,attended a number of 01 traffic, habitat, and-all community „ advisory,commission meetings to .3 .` r7l V r" n j r,y.,' G y services, the Forest.Service's inclma- �inonitor the progress of this impor o 9 ,., n ., ., �' ® "' tion_was to immediately approve tant environmental document, and .� C G��,� � i Y-3�, Cl ,�° the p -jectron tht grounds,that the : will prepare extensive comments "r a °when the draftaEIS is'released n pot en tial'impacts•were.too minor p� , t ' ;• to warrant the in-depth analysis'of early 1989. E WJ + s *Y F �ylap Cn « rj c7 y 31 j j i 1 a 1 i j MARINE RESOURCES he Marine Resources Project reflects CLF's long-standing commitment to the protection of coastal and offshore environments and the rich fisheries they support. During 1988, CLF took important steps toward protection of New England's har- bors. In addition to ongoing protection of Georges Bank and litigation and advo- cacy in Boston, Fall River, and New Bedford, Massachusetts, CLF startled Maine officials with the release of a report revealing the degradation of Casco Bay, Maine. v 3� AIV F 4z` h I i tr r, r 'r 32 L b 4 , S Geor es. Banks . 0 t ineteen eighty-ght was a ,s'^ waters less than 40C�meters deep orb banner year for,propon_ents. -in,the productive deep water canyons: of an oil-an drilling a' �I.als7 p protects areas,off th coasts of " zban on�Georg0 `bank:,In April, Cai Florida and northern California. adian EnergyMinister Marcel Masse, CLF has been involved with the' , - {{__ a ,� 0 sk �'K4t `•,, ► j announce&his.govemment's decision a Georges Bank controversy since 1978, to p ` .attemptsri � n k trys side,of.Georges Bank until at a4 by the Departme t of.the Interior•[o r least the year 2000:,`xGeorges Bank sell leases,to the oil industry on mas-, has onesofcthe richest; most econom- hive tracts„of the bank\which is the `{ ` ically important-fist eries in the world;' world's most productive`fishery per °4 10 said`Mr. Masse echoing arguments' acre For over 300 years,'the bank 3 ro „ th`at6have been made for years by lhas been theNainstay of New Eng- , l fro R an I v s�. CLF.and fishermen in Nova Scotia. laiid's fishing,.mdustry,providing 18.6 Following Canada's lead, the U.S. :percent,of the-value of all U.S. fish We have-been insult ng our har- Congress approved.,a bill for fiscal landings ,40,Q00 jobs, and sustaining-- hors with..indust Ial,and domestic �year� 989 protectrng_the�most.sensi- a fishing industry worth.up to�$2 bil- �wastes assurr►ng.the garbagel, tiveareasyon Georges=Bank from all on annually. With the continued ,would disappear Now we are .lk�Idi111ing;activities. The bill prohibit,s� supporC Qf the Canadian and U.S. reaping,a grnm�harvest of,closedy the Department ofahe l'nte`nor frob governments; and CLF's"intervention beaches and dcm flats,:contomi- t spendin!g,any fundsds`ton leasing�activ-' when necessary,;t will remain that s ......�'S` { `�{i"C,.� �F^^ `a t� Z "� .,r''-#' -�."" K" ' I I Il'nated lobsters and diseased mes'for.any area on the�bank'in;, way.for�the 'next300 years. � ., flounder. Eleanor Dorsey, Staff"Scientist> ' r 4 r+ 4. INX�Casco B4y t f IF and Maine's lsland'Insti ©overflow pipes. More'°than 6�7 tons of; r tute'released a major report toxic metals and 1,5�00 tons of petro-� in Octoberdwarning that' leum hydrocarbons pouriinto the bay �r prompt action must betaken to stem each,year Shellfishi'ng has.already the,pollution.threatening:,Casco Bay. been-prohibited or restricted ,in al- Qroubled Waters dkumen is numerous M most-,15 percent of the bay, due to zsigns of increasing contamination,_in ` bacterial pollution�and�')expanding �* a - <cl tiding ysignificant concentrations of reas of the bay fail'to meet even bacteria,gtieavy�metals,�Hydrocarbons,r', --minimal water quality standards for and PCBs in' the bay. T �--swimming. ._ , According e to-the re port, 30 million While the report emphasizes that t, p Pk p gallons,of,treated sewage and 123 mil- fish and shellfish from the bay are lion gallons of industrial wastewater edible today, iticalls for immediate pour into'iCasco�Bay daily, along with action from state`.-and federal officials untreated sewage land runoff from 60 to stop the pollution that could render 33 __ I ILN 3� y • ' 3 ` the,seafood unsafe for consumption. !•`tiestuar'. nd federal`mussel watch to J �. 3 Gy ti# .S Im iiedlate action_is,recommended programs; and initiation of compre ,g against combined sewertoverflows,to $pensive fishtesting at both the re= ; i►. � F 9tfie'Pordan&are�a, includini g reduction{ gional and4national'levels # iri'the level of fecal"colifoin bacteria . CLF and the Island Institute hope R ` in Portland's treated sewage; estabm�` that,the reportlwill.provide`incentive lishment of a Casco Bay Environmena to government officials'to address this m ' tal'Tnasi Find f nanced though envi"�} growing pollution\'problem=If`not,t 90 d', . 4 x � ronmental.enforcement,penalties; a CLF will consider initiating legal,ac- joint state/EPAplan,for water quality tion to prevent repetition of the m i s-* in the Portland/South Portland'area; takes made in Bostonkand New Bed- inclusion of-thebay in the national fordxHarbors. v !�'JY' V � to 3.0),amon Is`� V 9 *V ka t t d ,: •�+� ✓tom�.. � �� �.� ' k` s a result�of omrnerits file,d' ift-wDecernben 1987,,,' Y C _ .and several"Mame-environ=r ,mental1-groups, EPA dechnedsto-issue x 4 o a,I ermit,for'a proposed private waste- t xwat ream e"pt Iant.on Great D a=�_ �mond,Islan�d, Ma tie CLF a g i'that a r~ .EPA sh'ould.;not allow an dts- �� charge into Cascc,LBay until all exist- t ° ding°dis�c,hargers are put under 'strict °c e nup�sche61e Insteadlof den in y��g the permit, as „- - CL'F'-demanded,,EPA offered€,the'de- LJ / veloper the option lofeither relocating - '�,��, the outfall.pipe-to-a,b&tt6r site or re- � d_estig ring t#h e,,systemz to�produce a zero dischar. e of fecal d ff W t� g�., � le :.thy e'�,'� z�,�' r ..-., hen t`he,developere c ed, e de option,`CCLF andulie Maine group w ar `ed�successfull��for a new ubhc -.=. fm Y � P n _ h rin and',comment period. The ea .gig' s hearingiis,s`chedul"ed for January 1989. c1 , =' 34 Boston ,HAA rCA � ` r t'y j ive years ago CLF filed; o� The cleanup agenda resulting from '- 5 lawsuit against the Common this lawsuit.contin;.ies"to be complex t T 'wealth c Ivfassachusetts�and,. . 4t• r ` ee anda'oaded with hurdles The treat- ¢ Y3 ►, `*� _ a EPA,•for the'outrageous.pollutionof ment plantwill be one of the largest Boston Harbor. This year,our work m the world'—' and one of the most . a K # ae5 ; '• ". o bore fruit with the first groundbreak- costly._While 2the Massachusetts Water` " ' ing event ifo =the new treatment worl3o ` Resources lAutlioritty ih charge of,tlie-ate :! on DeehslanBd Vheii it becomes', $ cleanup is vi orous�+and com etent ,�g P f operative in 1999 the new plant, in apt CLF will continue o monitor-their 5" combination witch.:elimination of sew= , progress over the entire course ,of f tthe� g rfl oveow pipe de will reversexthe cleanup. gradation of EBoston Harbor 01 8�a ,. 1QP a December*19877CC'Lt`F�filed`a program;-underwhich Fall River reg= ?� .� a4 w.f � � �1 �� lawsuit against the Ci ofaFall. ulates:indusmes that must remove River,Massachuset the city''s toxiCchemicals'from their wastewater �failurk'to control the�hron} discharge before dump git into;Asewers. CLF is " q of.untreated�sewage into Mount Hope now waiting four a paling a ,B The-suit see 'both financial A, { ;, p aloe and aC urt o dered�time- d �•_"° ftaaVIe equ ring the city to:tak'e�reme- dial ste ss to update antiquated f o Tsewage'system. Much of Mount-Hope Bay is closed shellfish ig a e # ifishermen frofi m Massachusetts and • :,,. *RRode Island continue to lose mil- "�lions of,dollarsinpotential'lharvests ( �Ak year eaffo CLF'so lawsuit seeks a court order to force the ci{iy o�take"immediate steps ° erase�wa 11�nry-weather discharge of *�. to;�eliminate d g the bay' and�pu Fit 9 ° on a�tight:s ekle.for completing and implementing the rec'o�mmenda- tions of gas#dy on wetweather over- ' flows ln`a'-dition, CLF,`aske'd the „ 4 courtt't63order,the ct to correct defi- ' P ciencies in ats-ndustrial pretreatment 35 l �11 r I 1 a New Bedfords lost Harvest k , Y Sf{ i LF released a report in Jan- distribution sectors and expanding uary 1987 on shellfish bed the economic analysis beyond the closures in New Bedford, New Bedford area, the loss increases Massachusetts, concluding that sewage to $24 million annually. pollution = not PCBs — costs the CLF's involvement in the New Bed- area millions of dollars every year in ford sewage problem began in 1986, ' lost income and economic activity. when CLF announced it would sue t Lost Harvest: Sewage, Shel fish, and the city for continued violations of Economic Losses in the New Bedford the Clean Water Act. There followed Area, prepared by CLF Staff Scientist more than a year of negotiations be- Paul Hauge, estimates that the shell- tween CLF, the city, EPA, and state fish beds in New Bedford Harbor officials that culminated in October and Clarks Cove currently closed due 1987 with a court-enforceable sched- to sewage pollution could yield an ule for addressing all of the city's K annual harvest worth nearly $5 mil- sewage problems. "Lost Harvest" was i lion. By circulating through the area's intended to bolster the city's efforts economy, those dollars could generate by helping it to build and maintain a total-of nearly $6 million in annual public support for a cleanup project income: Adding the,processing,and that will take at least seven years. k; a a Aw n .r yf 4 t i RR t �Z f. In 1988, progress on the remedial NewlBedford and the considerable phase of CLF's New Bedford lawsuit downscaling of the federal money i was slow, highlighting both the delays available, CLF is considering methods � built into the state funding of the of redesigning the way federal and r sewage facilities construction process state subsidies are allocated to muni- and the city's financial problems. The cipal programs. CLF's concern is that construction grant program, originally scarce resources provide financial re- established under federal and state lief to municipalities on the basis of law, has become a vast bureaucracy need, and that the unavailability of that seems at least as capable of de- these funds is not used as a justifica- 1 laying pollution control projects as Lion for the delay of needed treat- 1 it is of building them. ment facilities. As a result of CLF's experience in Narraganstett 123,affv Ei 1 2. 5 ; n spring 1987, CLF and Rhode One of the violators, Rolo Manufac- Island's Save the Bay threatened turing Company, agreed to discuss a to sue two Rhode Island elec- possible settlement with CLF and troplating companies for violating the Save the Bay. Those negotiations end- Clean Water Act. Although the com- ed in February 1988, with all three s panies responded in different ways, parties filing a consent decree in the outcomes of the two cases should Rhode Island federal court under i { send a uniform message to other which Rolo agreed to pay a maxi- companies facing legal actions by mum penalty of $50,000 — half of citizen groups. which would be paid only if Rolo Both companies had long been in lapsed into significant violation i violation of the law by failing to treat within two years. g their wastewater before discharging it The other company, RIBCO Indus- 4 to the sewer system of the Narragan- tries, took a harder line, arguing that ' 1 sett Bay Commission serving the it had already come into compliance € Providence area. The metals and oth- with federal and Commission dis- er pollutants in the discharges posed charge limits and that CLF and Save . . : a potential threat to the water quality the Bay no longer had legal standing of Narragansett Bay because they to sue. Although the company's mon- r" could pass through the Commission's itoring reports still showed intermit- treatment plant and enter the bay, tent violations, CLF and Save the Bay and because they could harm the sought the help of EPA and the state f bacteria on which the treatment plant Department of Environmental Man- relies to perform essential treatment agement (DEM). Because these agen- + functions. cies are not restricted in the same 37 i _ � J F • �i. � _� � '� t'fv cti � E i "� s: W'�' Y ':"e*f'Y -� C � o •� d4:"� 61 6 �� .,� v1..1 � Hs �� � '�'.may , � x 4N _ , way,as cmzen groups they can seek IZolo paid,— as, ong as the company, �t** - abs' es of P o iolat onAf1e sariddsllars of RIBCO'sFtetnalh�will g F. y several mor_ths of neg 6,i.bons the g. I&the od�e�Island Clean Water �. company and twoAll �agenc3es fled a Act Environmental TritSt Fund;the ' consent decree in'August 19881'�`under rest-will o to t e.-U.S.-Treasu - which Ptotal`apenalty of,$J25,000: `� g - # will be 'paida five Rmes the.amoun't za: W � O I in A k ' aG N f +•+[�{ `""°' _ w 'N d 4r _ i r VV 4j a q , O u � �t � f Y V y -. 38 ... �, m � k Thbutylnn I�Z, s� • ith the suppon of CLF ,tifoulant its extraordinary toxicity, t and various.state a.gen-. — alsoi?ma.kes it a threat to other or rWcies, -Iassalhusett and ganissin,4iat�are noc'the•i-itended tar-", 'Rhode Islandejoined the,grovwing + gets,of its deadly actior. tiutnber of coastal statesktYtat hav Ai the urging of CLF anc ,the Office'`-{ g' 3 taken indepenc.'ent'action to egul tee' of'Coasal Zon&Management;�the f / n boat paintsicorsaming tributyltii d Massachusetts*Pesticide Bureau . n (TBT). Oceanograpl er Edward Gold,3 � promulgate!j`a temporary,emergency berg once called.the various :orms of regulation that bans.the use O TBT, TBT "probably,ffie -nost toxic coin- paints on boats less than eighty-two t y pounds ever deliberately introduced feet long'JIn Rhode Island, the De-I { by,soctetiesgmto natural wate-s' ti '-r-�partment,of Environ nent<il Manage- t TBT is.added oV�oat_botto-ri paint ment adop d" regul tior s�;to:ban TBT. to kill fo"ulfng�"organis (fcr exam-' . use on boats less than�iixtyjive feet` t ple barnacleswand other orgar_tsns long, These b{a�ns on small vyeyssels vir- that attach to and grow on the ves- ,tually eliminate TBT fromannas r' sel-s hulll). But the7prrope ?BT wher levels of the chemi l m the that ma uc�h' an.effecavb ar•- water'can,be,especially -i,>}li. ltE r 3 E. + ,4 , 1 i a 39 LEGAL SERVICES he Legal Services Program provides practical advice to Massachusetts' municipal boards and citizens regarding the implementation of envi- ronmental laws. 40 Legal Services Pr6gram LF's Legal Services Program merous callers. Many questions could' has been providing free ad- be answered by referrals to CLF's vice to CLF members and Legal Services publications, includ-' other Massachusetts citizens, particu- ing the Legal Handbook for Boards larly municipal board members and of Health. In all cases, callers were staff,for over twenty-one years.In 1988, helped to understand state and local Legal Services continued to field re- environmental regulations and review quests for advice or assistance on an mechanisms and how to apply them x increasingly wide variety of environ- to,future problems. mental problems in Massachusetts. The Legal Services Program also A large percentage of reported prob- contributed to CLF's analyses of pro- lems this year concerned land acqui- posed state regulations, on issues sition, groundwater protection, waste` ranging from protecting wildlife to disposal, and wetlands protection. siting=waste.facilities.-Legislative and U Many municipal officials called with judicial decisions affecting the author- questions about the wording of by- ity of municipal boards in Massachu- "I continue to receive calls from laws and regulations — particularly setts were studied, and members Massachusetts town boards and wetlands bylaws - and conflict-of- were provided with detailed reviews residents trying to protect their interest or interboard jurisdictional is- 'of proposed municipal bylaws. communities. In the face of in- sues. Finally, with development fever Through its Legal Services Program, creasing development and environ- still sweeping the state, Legal Services CLF also frequently submitted its own mental degradation, it is encour- received'a number of queries con- comments on project reviews carried aging to know so many people ceming effective use of the state's out under the Massachusetts MEPA , are concerned enough`to ask ,1 j environmental;review process ,process. As time permitted, in-depth { questions and to act."' Often workinghand-in-hand with analyses and comments on environ- ! Sally Newbury,I egal Services the'Massachusetts Association of mental impact reports were sent to 1 Attorney ' . " '� Conservation Commissions, Legal MEPA, with)the focus on issues relat }A.. SeF7ices tnedito provide answers, ed to water resources. JA� docluments andlreferrals to the nu- { "Oft 41 i BOARD OF DIRECTORS' = (as of December 31, .1988) d Hon. Francis W Hatch Dr. Robert L. French g A Chairman of the Board Sarah M.B. Henry, Esq. Dr.John M. Teal Horace A. Hildreth,Jr., Esq. Vice Chairman of the Board Samuel Hoar, Esq. David E Cavers,Jr., Esq. Mr. Michael B. Moskow Secretary and Treasurer Mr. Albert E. Mullin,Jr. Mrs. Sarah M. Richards Nancy Clayton Anderson, Esq. Mr.Jonathan M. Sachs Robert Backus, Esq. Hon. Francis W.,Sargent Professor William Bossert Mrs. Henry D. Sharpe,'Jr Alexandra T Breed, Esq. George T Shaw,Esq'. n. x Russell L. Brenneman, Esq.- Dr Ralph Z4Sorenson Jonathan Brownell, Esq. James W. Storey, Esq. Charles C. Cabot,Jr, Esq. Dr. Bailus Walker,Jr. Dr. Donald G. Comb . Harold R. Ward, Esq. Mr. Philip W Conkling ` Alan Wilson, Esq. Donald L. Connors, Esq.' Mr. Thomas Winship Mr. William L. Dunfey + F: Mr. Frederic A.-Eustis,'II� Douglas I. Foy, Esq. Professor,James A. Fay Executive Director • Dr. Richard A. Flavell STAFF;. 4 } f F . ir (as`ofDecember 31, 1988) r , Douglas I. Foy, Executive Director Constance Miller,"Staff Secretary Emily M. Bateson, Senior Scientist Sally Newbury Legal Services Attorney Joyanna Bishop, Staff Secretary Jean Pendleton, Editor Stephen Burrington, Staff Attorney Priscilla Phinney, Development Assistant Armond Cohen, Staff Attorney Stephanie Pollack, Staff Attorney Eleanor M. Dorsey, Staff Scientist Andrea Quigley, Bookkeeper Richard S. Emmet, Senior Attorney Renee J. Robins, Staff Scientist Andrew Hamilton, Staff Scientist' Peter Shelley, Senior Attorney k Elaine Lawrence, Membership Coordinator Margaret>M. Sterling, Administrator Alice I. Ledogar, Development Director Margaret Wildman, Senior Secretary t Janet McGowan, Staff Attorney Marie A. Wright, Receptionist ,,, Ee is,Milford„Staff Attorney — Vermont Susan Zak;'Development Secretary v ERE; V L T � jj, Y c' Tottl e pease people`�who donated time assistance-to;, ex ertise, and CLF in =1988, l . many � P � � 7 accept our gratitude; among them: • � � �. � . 9 Arrowstreet, Inc ` Mr. Steve Kaiser lei 1 r'"Q f a f r'F �. s4 f� DrjRayy on chaefer '.�:, Mr. Robert`Belkrfap"_= ,.-.„,Ms Susan Kiernan 'Andrea Simpson, Esgq Nii ' f E sr,,. it, Carla Bregman, Esq. lvlrs Jan Manes is J -Mr. Bradley Steele ' Cy Mr.Joseph Chaisson Dr. Ian Menzies ;Iv1r:jPhil Steele Mr. Robert Erwin Ms. Caitlin Morris J0 kgSStevens, Esq. Mr. Thomas J. Foley Mr. Ian Nisbet Jeffrey Thaler, Esq. < R' Mrs. Barbara Harris Mrs.Joyce Pendleton " Mr. Gerald Tolman Mr. Richard Howard Ms. Susan B.Peterson Alexis A. Van Adzin, Esq. Mrs. Carol Iliff Harrison Richardson, Esq. Mr. Andrew Weiger k r Mrs. Susan Johnston Dr. Arthur H.:Rosenfeld Dr. W Gary Williams 42 i FINANCIAL STATEMENT Income (August 1, 1987 - July 31, 1988) Total Income: $1,106,897 Reimbursements Interest Fee Recoveries 1% 5% Publications j 10% 1% Individuals 23% Foundations 60% Expenses (August 1, 1987 - July 31, 1988) Total Expenses: $1,207,388 Public Education Fund Balance 12% August 1, 1987 Development e, $147,087 10% I Projects Fund Balance (see chart at right) July31 1988, ¢ Administration ° �`� ,.1 14% 64/o t `�,. �/• t `� • .mot 1 � ' The Conservation Law Foundation Marine of New England, Inc., (CLF) is a Resources nonprofit, tax-exempt, publicly 16% Solid supported organization under Waste Section 507 (c) (3) of the Internal Environmental 12/° ,v Le"gal o Revenue Code and is a publicly Projects Health 22% ',Services I supported organization as defined (Expenses) 6% ' Land Policy Resource in Sections 170(b) (1) (A) (vi) and 16% Conservation 509 (a). CLF's IRS determination number is 04-6749986. All contri- butions to CLF are tax deductible. 43 FOUNDATIONS In addition to membership fees, gifts from individuals, and corporate matching gifts, CLF received financial support in fiscal year 1988 from the following charitable foundations, associations and corporate sponsors: The Boston Globe Foundation Mary Flagler Cary Charitable Trust Caughey Foundation + Jessie B. Cox Charitable Trust Digital Equipment Corporation William H. Donner Foundation, Inc. Doran Trust The Educational Foundation of America Foster Charitable Trust ' i The Gillette Company Gloucester Fishermen's Wives Association Island Foundation W. Alton Jones Foundation, Inc. The John Merck Fund j New England Biolabs Foundation Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation_ Alida Rockefeller Trust Rockefeller Family Fund Rowland Foundation Lawrence Saunders Fund The Scherman Foundation, Inc., i 44 1 g u R h n .• x Aw— x v _ 4� 1 ,g^ 7 •b ♦..y,.W"y�. k �.� _,aw. «.-� '� r� .3 ° T .s 'r.'.'�J ! � 'y."}y. f T i(! �' ♦� _ .k ,.qy '� <..fi" ., s M ... Cot. r i G - L_ '�q�. _ +"�U.".7� PPostalge o 4AZD =fa"er-filt # M k IV kTo rw 7 ab �Conser'ation La�� � � ' ... w oundation ff Of Niiv`England' In +' 01e 3'-J0 'StfiEet Sos ors `Wssac • q f08'149T a' a 'Ined ; e ycf apee, Barnstable Conservation Corrtm. .Town. Hall. 367 Main ;street Hyannis, MA 02601 � I ' �pF 114E o Town of Barnstable, Massachusetts &UL►,,SrABLE. ; Department of Planning and Development 1639. �� 230 South Street, Hyannis, Massachusetts 02601 (508) 775-1120 ext. 141 .olEO MA't A December 21 , 1989 John DeVillars , Secretary Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street . Boston, MA 02202 Re: Independence Park Supplemental Draft Environmental Report (SDEIR) EOEA #7193 Dear Secretary DeVillars : The Town of Barnstable, Department of Planning and Development considers that, carefully planned, the development of Independence Park is crucial to the economic well being of the Town of Barnstable as well as to the Cape as a whole. However, in reviewing the SDEIR we find that it has not provided the information or addressed the issues required in the Certificate issued on May 22 , 1989. Although the Town supports servicing Independence Park with effective municipal sewage treatment , there remains a lack of meaningful , long-term resolution of the outstanding issues , specifically: * Protection of all existing wetland and pond recharge areas critical to groundwater resources , public supply wells , and environmental and ecological preservation of vegetations and wildlife habitat . * No meaningful design alternatives or development assurances to mitigate traffic impacts upon surrounding roads was proposed in the SDEIR. The provision of a "functional -design type study" is inadequate given that development along, and east of Mary Dunn Road, and adjacent to Route 6, may preclude or limit options for implementing traffic improvements , particularly additional access to Route 6. Page 2 of 2 : December 21 , 1989 John DeVillars, Secretary Executive Office of Environmental Affairs " Extension of the sewer , eastwards of Mary Dunn Road to the pump station at Lamsons Pond, is premature in light of the lack of resolution of the issues listed above. The Department of Planning and Development emphasizes its support for development of Independence Park as a "high tech" industries park, to provide new employment opportunities for Barnstable. It is critical for all concerned that issues be resolved by June of 1990 to assure that sewering will commence on schedule and without additional delays . The Department is committed to cooperation with the applicant to meeting the June deadline. The attached review elaborates on the Department's concerns for the SDEIR. Should you have any questions or need clarification, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Respectfully, Jacqueline Etsten Principal Planner cc :Paul Lorusso t 9 r-4 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: INDEPENDENCE PARK SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT (SDEIR) EOEA #7193 The Department of Planning and Developments concerns are as follows: LOTTING SYSTEM (LOT DELINEATION) The Executive Office of Environmental Affairs certificate issued on May 22 , 1989 directed the applicant to develop an alternative lotting system which "considers the fragile nature of the wetlands and their rare plant and animal species" . In reviewing the alternative lot proposal submitted in the SDEIR, the Department of Planning and Development finds that minimal changes are proposed which are very limited in nature. The proposed re- lotting addresses only certain ponds and wetlands. The road alignment remains unchanged. The relotting scheme proposed in the SDEIR is confined to the provision of a 150 wide buffer strip surrounding Israel Pond and wetland complex, and Mary Dunn Pond. In these locations the buffer strip has been excluded from the surrounding lots . The buffer strip around Lamsons Pond and the Camp Grounds Pond remains part of lots 29-32 : the boundaries of these lots extends to the pond edge. The only protection that has been proposed for the buffer areas around Lamsons and Camp Ground Pond is through the Independence Park Regulations , controlled by the Independence Park Development Corporation or its successor, from which Variances can be granted. To a large extent , this easement will allow the land area contained in the buffer strip to be used towards calculating the buildable area on that portion of the parcel outside of the 150 foot easement. A buffer strip easement therefore does not substantially restrict the density of development and may result in a higher density and level of development adjacent to the buffer that may negate the benefits anticipated from the buffer strip. A wetland which was discovered and delineated after the subdivision plan was acted upon by the town is not protected by any buffer strip. This wetland is connected to the west side of Camp Ground Pond and is located upon lot 25 of Conceptual Lotting Plan I1 / A. The wetland is shown on the "Modification Plan of Land in Barnstable, Massachusetts for Independence Park, Inc. " , approved by the Barnstable Planning Board October 19, 1987. ROAD ALIGNMENT With regard to the re- lotting directive from MEPA, the Department of Planning and Development would propose that a more optimum alternative exists to the alignment of Independence Drive eastward to reduce the length of road, its repetitive double loop system and location in close . proximity to ponds and wetlands . Eliminating the double loops roadways would result in less road run-off, reduced development costs and provide additional protection of groundwater quality and the sensitive wetland and pond environs. Re-configuration of Independence Park Drive could also provide for a direct link to Route 6 via a new interchange or linkage to a parallel access road with Route 6. i TRAFFIC IMPACT Neither the DEIR nor the supplemental DEIR provides any measures to reduce or limit the impact of traffic upon the surrounding network of roads . Those which were proposed have not been fully developed or appraised in terms of available right of way, community acceptance and potential for government approval . In the DEIR, the traffic consultant for the park recommended that a new interchange be provided at Mary Dunn Road, however no realistic appraisal was made in the DEIR or the SDEIR of the practicality of this proposal . Factors that have not been addressed include community acceptance, Federal Standards for interchange location and design, the availability of land for the interchange and for the widening of Mary Dunn Road, particularly at the intersection with Independence Park, - given the on-going development of the Park in this location. Another alternative not explored in either the DEIR or the SDEIR is the construction of a parallel access road to Route 6 linked to either exit six or seven, or both and a realignment of the Independence Drive to connect with this road. The Department of Planning and Development wishes to emphasize the need for direct access to Route 6 and the need to incorporate the necessary right-of-way in the plan of Independence Park, before land conveyances and development precludes access alternatives. DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY No additional limitation on the maximum development capacity has been proposed in the SDEIR, nor is inherent in the Park's regulations . A 25% building coverage limitation is only minimal protection since parking can be extensive with this percentage of. building coverage. SEWER The applicants have applied for a waiver to allow the severing of existing facilities within the Park west of Mary Dunn Road and the proposed facilities for Software 2000 east of Mary Dunn Road. The Department endorses the need to sewer the existing facilities in the older section of the Park but has several concerns about the extension east of Mary Dunn Road which are not adequately addressed in the DEIR or the SDEIR. Software 2000 is the type of "high tech business that the Town of Barnstable hoped to attract to the park, to provide diversified, skilled employment opportunities . However the proponents intend to extend sewers a considerable distance beyond Software 2000 along Independence Drive and Prescott Drive to a pump station west of Lamsons Pond. The Department suggests that the applicant explore an alternative to limit the severing request to the Software 2000 site with the installation of an ejection pump at this site. CONCLUSION The Town of Barnstable Department of Planning and Development recognizes the need to provide Independence Park with Municipal sewerage treatment facilities . The Department is concerned however at the lack of progress toward providing any meaningful , long term resolution of the outstanding issues . The Supplemental DEIR provides very little additional information except for some minimal re- lotting around two of the four wetland complexes . Lamsons Pond and Camp Ground Pond have not been afforded the same degree of protection as Israel Pond and Mary Dunn Pond Complex. No measures are proposed to mitigate the impact of traffic upon the surrounding network of roads except to fund a "functional -design type study" with a long-term time frame, presumably beyond the time frame of the MEPA review process. The Department would sincerely like to see some further progress toward substantial mitigating measures through the MEPA process before time expires on the sewer grant. Cr��u�nn�t�iiel#I� of BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COURT No, 45462 6 INDEPENDENCE PARK, INC. VS . j . BOARD OF HEALTH OF THE TOWN OF BARNSTABLE JUDGMENT This action came before the Court, Wagner, J. , presiding, upon an agreed statement of facts , and was argued by counsel , and findings having been duly rendered, it is DECLARED: that the regulation of the Board of Health of the town of Barnstable issued February 211 1985 , shall apply to any land shown on a plan submitted after that date notwithstanding the fact that the same land may have been shown on plans submitted prior to that .date . Dated at Barnstable , Massachusetts , this thirty-first day of October, 1986 . OR OF JUDGMENT APPROVED: RW1 677010 ���y Q tA In Justice . the Superio Cour A true copy, Attest- [Novi I Cif 1111tc•ol6rallIj of BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COURT No. 45462 INDEPENDENCE PARK, INC: - VS . BOARD OF HEALTH OF THE TOWN OF BARNSTABLE FINDINGS., RULINGS, AND ORDER This matter came on to be heard and upon the evidence , briefs and arguments of counsel, the following findings , rulings and order are made . The Agreed Statement of Facts (stipulated facts) executed and submitted by the parties hereto is hereby incorporated by reference and given full evidentiary weight . In August of 19853, the plaintiff, Independence Park, Inc . , filed the instant action pursuant to -Massachusetts General Laws , Chapter 231A, Sectionsl and 2, whereby the plaintiff seeks a declaration of its rights with respect to a regulation promulgated by the defendant , Board. of Health. The plaintiff alleges that the regulation of the defendant , Board of Health , cannot be applied to its property for a period iof three years from the date of endorsement of subdivision of plans !by the Barnstable Planning Board. i I i-: arm;;�i, The basic issue presented, is whether the i plaintiff is entitled -to the protections set forth in G. L. , Chapter 111 , Section 127P. fNO ] RE�� f ' No. 45462 -2- G. L. , Chapter 111 , Section 127P, provides , in part , that "CwJhenever a person has submitted a subdivision plan . . . . the land shown on such plan shall be governed by . . . the provisions of local board of health regulations . . . which, 4te in effect at the time of first submission of said plan. " Although no cases interpret the language of G. L. , . Chapter 111 , Section 127P. the plain meaning of the statute may be used to resolve the dispute at hand. The statute makes it clear that a developer need comply only with the board of health regulations that are in effect at the time the subdivision plan is first submitted. Thus , the pans submitted. by plaintiff before the board of health regulation issued February 21 , 1985 , need notcomplywith that regulation. T.he �I issue , however, is whether plaintiff may make changes in t;:e subdivision plan that will result in plans that are materially ' different from, but utilize the same land as , the original plans submitted before the new board of health regulation took effect . The plain language of the statute indicates that any :'ew subdivision plan submitted by plaintiffs after February 21. 1985 , must comply with the board of health regulation. Plaintiff' can avoid the new regulation only if it proceeds to implement :he plans it submitted before the regulation change. Simply using t"e same land is insufficient .to avoid the application of the board of health' s. regulation. Support for this position can be found. in other zoning law areas. G. L. c. 111 , §127P, like G. - L. c. 40A, 56 , was enac'ed to protect the developer from substantial changes in zoning laws or to. 45462 -3 health regulatio.ns . See e.g. Nyquist v. Board of Appeals of Acton, 359 Mass . 462 , 465 (1971) . However, when the developer makes material changes to the plan, then any new zoning or health board regulations must be considered and complied with. In addition, to allow a multitude of subdivision plan changes , so long as the same land is involved, would be to undermine any state or local control of property development . The legislature did not intend to allow developers to make material changes to such plans without complying with new board of health regulations . Because plaintiff intends to materially alter the plan approved before the board of health regulation took effect , then it should not be allowed to avoid the application of the regulation. I Wherefore , it is hereby ORDERED, that the plaintiff' s motion for summary judgment be denied , and plaintiff' s prayer for a declaration of rights be allowed with the following proviso: The regulation of the Barnstable Board of Health at issue herein shall apply to any land shown on the plan submitted after February 21 , 1985 , notwithstanding the fact that the same land may have been shown on plans submitted prior to that date. Augu to . Wagner, J . Justice the Superio Court Entered : October 31 , 1986 true copy, Attesh, _ \�I"lszcQ- Clerk GaI11zi 1111fura1#Xl .of Pas-mr1l'aults BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COURT No- 46381 INDEPENDENCE PARK, INC . VS . PLANNING BOARD, TOWN OF BARNSTABLE, et al JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL This action came before the Court , Keating, J. , presiding, upon motion of the defendantsto dismiss pursuant to Mass . R. Civ. P. 12 (b) ( 6 ) , and was argued by counsel ; and the Court having granted said motion, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: that the complaint is dismiss as to both defendants without costs . Dated at Barnstable , Massachusetts , this twenty-fourth day of December 1986 . FORM OF JUDGMENT APPROVED: Justice of the Superior C rt Clerk A true copy, Attest : Clerk r , Q10111111011fujoultil O BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COURT No. 46402 INDEPENDENCE PARK, INC. VS . PLANNING BOARD, TOWN OF BARNSTABLE, et al 1 JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL This action came before the Court , Keating, J. , presiding, upon motion of the defendants to dismiss pursuant to Mass . R. Civ. P. 12 (b) ( 6) , and was argued by counsel ; and the Court having granted said motion, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: that the complaint is dismissed as to both defendants without costs . Dated at Barnstable , Massachusetts , this twenty-fourth day of December 1986 . FORM OF JUDGMENT APPROVED : (—Justice of the Superior C etrt Clerk , A true copy, Attest : .r� Clerk Q1n11t11tr11 till r41ItI o �zss�t���tzs s BARNSTABLE, ss. SUPERIOR COURT No. 46216 INDEPENDENCE PARK, INC . VS . PLANNING BOARD, TOWN OF BARNSTABLE , et al i JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL. This action came before the Court , Keating, J. , presiding, upon motion of the defendants to dismiss pursuant to Mass . R. Civ. P. 12 (b) ( 6 ) , and was argued by counsel ; and the Court having granted said motion , it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED : that the complaint is dismissed as to both defendants without costs . Dated at Barnstable , Massachusetts , this twenty-fourth day of December 1986 . FORM OF JUDGMENT APPROVED : Justice of the Superi4 Court Clerk A true copy, Attest : Clerk ....� OF jHE tp� � o Town of Barnstable BAILNAS .K & Water Quality Advisory Committee � hLAS 0 Op 019. ATED MP � O NeeIM De Town a<Ba�ptElp D 11gym February 27 , 1987 Board of Health MAR 1 6 1987 Town of Barnstable - - 367 Main Street : Hyannis, Massachusetts 02601 Dear Board Members : At a meeting of the Water Quality Advisory Committee, held on February 19, 1987, a proposed new headquarters for Nauset Workshop, Inc. , was reviewed. The location of the new headquarters , at the intersection of Independence Drive and Mary Dunn Road, places it within zone of contribution #1 and subject to the Board of Health regulation lim.iting sewage discharge to 330 gallons per acre per day. E The proposed building, of 22, 000 square feet, is projected to have a daily sewage flow of 1 ,995 gallons, serving 90 persons currently and a projected 133 people at full capacity. The size of the parcel is 3 . 0 acres with a proposed set aside parcel of 3 . 04 acres. The project was reviewed at length by the committee and was considered to meet the requirements of a variance from the 330 rule based on the following criteria: 1 . That the occupancy of the building is not to exceed 133 people on a regular basis while it is. being serviced by an on-site sewage disposal system; 2. That the 3 . 04 set aside parcel , owned by Independence Park, Inc be set aside in perpetuity or until such time as the public sewer collection system is made available to the site and a connection is made thereto; 3. That all efforts will be made to reduce water consumption and hence sewage effluent discharge; 4. That all efforts will be made to dispose of stormwater run-off into vegetated swales and as few leaching pits as possible will be used for such a purpose; Page 2 5. That the septic system will be designed to disperse the sewage effluent over as broad an area on the lot as is practicable; 6. That the septic system will be constructed in a location that will exceed a distance of 1 ,000 feet from the nearest public supply well . (Barnstable Water Company, MD4) Should your board have any further questions on this matter, the committee would be happy to respond. Respectfully, mas lien, Chairman Water Qua ty Advisory Committee CC: Nauset Workshop Independence Park WQAC Members Oxe 4mmonmeaN C�xecccti�e ���cce a�C�n�ixa�amen����r�� MICHAEL S. DUKAKIS GOVERNOR JAMES S. HOYTE SECRETARY March 20 , 1987 Mr . Paul Lorusso Independence Park Box 1776 Hvannis , Mass . 02601 SUBJECT MEPA STATUS OF THE INDEPENDENCE PARK PROJECT Dear Mr . Lorusso: in December 1986 , this office received a petition from 10 citizens , reauesting that an EIvF be required for the independence Park project in Hyannis , pursuant to the "Fail-Safe" provisions of MEPA regulations, 301 CMR 11 . 03 . The 10 signatories attached various memos and prints regarding the project as evidence of their environmental concerns . An environmental meeting was held on February 19 , 1987 in order to gather information and hear both sides in the controversy. The issues raised were endangered species , threat to water supplies , sewer systems & capacity, project change from research to industrial uses , and traffic. Lengthy issues of history and process are also involved, and I have summarized the historical events in the attached chronology. In anv determination that an EIvF be filed according to the "fail-safe" provisions of the MEPA regulations , I , as Secretary of Environmental Affairs , am required to make a finding that the filing of an EIvF does not constitute a severe hardship to the proponent . The specific hardship facing the owners of Independence hark is the loss of new tenants during the period during which the environmental issues are in dispute . One potential tenant has already declined, because of the leaal issues associated with the fail-safe petition. The one issue on which all _parties aaree is that traffic will be a serious pro.olem. in the "r_vannis area. The severe congestion along Route 132 from the Airport to Sandwich Road is a major problem today, even with only about 10% of Independence Park constructed. Other development is continuing apace, with very little evidence of planning or mitigation. Mr . Paul Lorusso March 20 , 1987 Page 2 Independence Park has been projected ultimately to provide 8 , 000 to 10 ,000 jobs , which translates translates into about 30 , 000 daily vehicle trips . Afternoon peak hour traffic could be in the range of 2 , 500 to 3 , OOO vehicles/hour , which exceeds the range of existing vehicle flows in both directions on Route 132 during the 1966 summer peak. Given the difficult congestion conditions already occurring, there is no way that 2 , 500 to 3 , 000 beak hour vehicles can .be absorbed into the existing road system without drastic alterations . The original 1964 proposal for independence Park showed two interchanges with Route 6 as part of the plan. Currently, there are no plans for new interchanges or ramps , nor are there commitments or funds to extend Independence Park Drive through the Campgrounds area and into Falmouth to connect with Willow Street . Past traffic studies have been either brief or unresponsive to the seriousness of the situation. In 1986 , the consulting firm of H. W. Moore produced a traffic report for Independence Park, with the conclusion that certain intersections would be severely overloaded as a result of future traffic. One intersection had a projected V/C ratio of 6 . 25 , which implies that traffic demand would be over 6 times the roadway capacity. Therefore, based on my own review of the traffic reports and plans for the area, I have decided on my own initiative, pursuant to the MEPA Regulations , 301 CMR 11 . 03 ( 6) , that the filing of an Environmental Notification Form is justified for this project , for the primary purpose of identifying impacts and mitigation associated with traffic problems . The requirement of the MEPA regulations to avoid severe hardship to the proponent can be achieved through the waiver. process ( 301 CMR 11 . 18) , whereby all completed parts of the park plus one-year ' s worth of .market absorbtion area would be exempt from the ENF and EIR filings . In recognition of the concerns over the sensitivity of lands east of Mary Dunn Road, any MEPA waiver would involve only lands . to the west of Mary Dunn Road. I Mr . Paul Lorusso March 20 , 1987 ?age 3 I urge that an Environmental Notification Form be filed forthwith, so that the issues of problematic impacts can be resolved to the degree practicable , as soon as possible. ?lease feel free to contact the MEPA unit at 727-5530 for anv rurther information you may require. Sincerelv, .:ame�S �o_ t4A Secretary jSH/SK/sk Attachment Chronology r CHRONOLOGY OF 1NDEPENDENCE PARK i958 Paul Lorusso identified the independence Park area as a potential development site . Lorusso owned the tvannis Sand and Gravel Company gravel pit to the west . He informally communicated his interest in the site to the Selectmen. 1961 Barns -table Selectmen voted to create the Barnstable Development Committee, with Lorusso as Chairman. 1962 Development Committee reported to Town meeting, proposing to create a research park and a new committee to carry forward piannina and development . The new committee was proposed to be a 121A corporation, with members restricted to those willing to invest their own capital in the project . 1964 Studv produced on Barnstable Research Park, with proposed office bark, inn & conference center , golf course , including two interchanges with Route 6 and a major access drive from. Route 132 to Willow Street in Falmouth. 1966 Project submitted and approved by Dept. of Commerce and Development as a 121E development . The Barnstable Housing Authority was the local government entity having eminent domain powers . 1967 Incornoration of Park-land Properties , Inca as private developer of the site, with Paul Lorusso as President . Lorusso retained his position as chairman of the Development Committee . ParK-land agreed to handle all aspects of land development , including paving for land accuisition, at no cost to the town. 1970 Stock offering of $500 , 000 by Park-lands . About $340 ,000 sold. Land Disposition agreement signed. 1973 Most of Park area acquired for about $300,000 ' 1000 acres) . Some land was taken in error, and the taking was reversed. DCA Commissioner Miles Mahonev disapproved land disposition agreement , claiming it was , "if not illegal , a most unwise perversion of sound renewal policy. " Barnstable officials protested, Governor Saraent .expressed his support for the project , and Mahoney left office shortie thereafter . New DCA Commissioner Lewis Crampton determined that Independence Park project was arandfathered and therefore not subject to DCA review of project changes or new land dispositions. I � Chronology_ of Independence sari: Paae 2 1975 First section of Independence Park Drive constructed; Promotional brochure produced. 1975-1985 About 70 acres developed, with 15 new giants . 1984 Balance of land ( 300T acres) conveyed from Housing Authoritv to Independence Park. 18 month moratorium on development in the park, as planning and negotiations proceeded. Town purchased 70 acres , but negotiations failed to agree on the price for another 120 acres . EOEA offered $1 . 2 million in acauisition funds , Pius $200,000 from the Nature Conservancy. Park officials wanted $20 million for the land. 1984-86 Continued development . 3 traffic studies done for parts of the area. Moratorium failed to resolve issues relative to Independence Park. x 6��pG VIE f tJilt W,,J/ � 3AR79TLDI 7 tlAdl °o 1639. �aCF.Yk •�1'�a�+s.al� a�1'RJ6aciis�s��d 02601 COMMISSIONERS: (617) 115-1120 Ed. 123 / KEVIN O'NEIL, CHAIRMAN W�`�`,' JOHN J. ROSARIO, vt C[ CHAIRMAN ROBERT L. O'BRIEN� !U►[RINT[HD[NT TNOMAQ J. MVLLEN PHILIP C. MCCARTIN F. SHELDON BUCKINGHAM October 17, 1986 To: John Kelly, Director of Public Health From: Robert O'Brien, Superintendent, DPW Subject: Independence Park; Sewering Proposal t' Attached hereto is a letter with enclosed sketch relating to subject proposal which was presented to the DPW Commission by representatives of Independence Park at its meeting of October 7, �:. 1986. Any comments which you or the Board of Health may have ' ,regarding this proposal would be most welcome. Copies of this proposal have also been sent to the Director, Planning and Development; Chairman, Water Quality Advisory Board; and, Whitman and Howard for comment. ROBERT L O'BR1EN Superintendent RLO/bw Encl t W` r l.. CPS/Planners ® Architects P.O.Box 333 Sharon.MA 02067 October 7, 1986 Mr. Kevin O'Neill , Chairman _ Department of Public Works Town of Barnstable ' 367 Main Street , Hyannis, MA 02601 Dear Mr. O'Neill : Independence Park is anxious to move in the most expeditious and cost effective manner to provide sewerage for the Park now that this is public policy. The quicker a shield around the well fields can be erected through sewer construction, the quicker the agitation about these aspects of Park existence will diminish. To accomplish the above goal the Park proposes to the Town that a force main be constructed b.y the Park from a low point in the Park to the two 12 inch force mains in Phinneys Lane. An accompanying map shows a feasible alignment for an easement across Hyannis Sand and Gravel property. Technically, this is simple and straight forward. Engineering considerations for this project as we perceive them are as follows: -- The run between the Freezer Lane pumpinq station in Barnstable Village and the Treatment Plant in Hyannis is approximately 3.5 miles. -- Taro 12 inch force !r:a i ns dr i vein by '-io i 50 horse p �o, r pup.-ps at a static head of 70 feet move effluent from Barnstable Village to the Treatment Plant. Only one force main is employed at any one time. -- Capacity of each of the force mains is approximately 2 million qallons a day, limited-'by pump size. Presently,, onl'y ',75,OCO gpd is pumped' through either main,1 ess�than 'one twenty-f i fth 'the r• I apacity of either main. -- The force main from Independence Park would be valved separately into each of the tr,,o force mains in phinneys Lane approximately one mile from the Treatment Plant. Study needs to be directed at the hydraulic factors involved in this juncture because of increased friction. But, at the very worst situation a larger Dump micht be required at the Freezer Lane plant which would be furnished by the Park. I Page 2 -- There is no sacrifice of future Barnstable Villaqe sewerage capacity, even should population of the Village reach 8,000 people on the sewerage system. This is hiohly ,unlikely, con- sidering land available for development, and would in fact consume half the 4 mqd capacity of the Hyannis Treatment Plant. There will be no loss of redundancy in the Phinneys Lane situation as only one line would be used at any one time, exactly as today. As can be seen from the above, there are no engineering problems with the proposed solution offered by the Park. There are no leaal and time- consuming actions involving -betterment solutions on non-Park land. No time will be lost pursuing grant Programs. The number of lift gr pumping stations is reduced from two (2) to one (1 ) . And most important, ,the project can be accomplished gVi.ckly. We hope that the Town and its engineers, alono with Park engineers, will examine this proposal carefully as it appears to solve many problems in a succinct and timely way. Sincerely, John Atwood President JA/ep i _ To Fame z !,z• , M1 r I �%/ .=.� ( C/ �•, _ -#U.CAPE �C:,V {� (' " �•l •� , �.� �' a Ul ) I ►I WAY I r -\'`�` j� 1 .l `'.\ 1�') �.�J ,7. y •(y'� �� .-'. --i---''��. ti•� �•L� ''I� � � �} t '` � ,l�� \�� ° •y �' r; •1, (f,-' � � I'y'.;�> ,_ � �.:• � r y' .,.-.c �.; o �, � � „'' yam\ [v� �• 1fiS1� b � �: �. It 1, -'- � it � � s / � i�'••'�1 � ` ` `•� • 1�, _ •3 ••/' — mot • t 9r`' •cy ` � r;� 9� �� _ '/ — l ` , ^°� .;; ;`:. INDEPENDENCE PA oc\ -Al :,. o = - r� 1984 e 211 JDISTANCE IN FEET e0 B 0 Goo 1000 2000 10 A( y?x,"tl AOVTE :=a - pF t H c o Town of Barnstable / . a ,��t�, • Department of Planning and Development 9�0 16 9 `0� 397 Main Street Hyannis, MA 02601 (617) 775.1120 ext. 141 f0 A �a M SATE• December 1 2_', 15,861 T�ID: DOES O`BRIEN FROM: WATER QUALITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE = I NT-FF_Nr ENC-- PARE:. PROPOSED Scl,iER RO t T c 0CTr1_E:EF; 7, :��;_;�_,, LETTER FROM. CPS/PLANNERS - 'RCH I T EC S At the November 20, 1986, meeting, the Water Quality Advisory Committee voted unanimously against the proposed sewer route based on the following findings. 1. Independence Park area is recognized as one of three "high" priority areas for future sewering in the Town. 2. Capacity to sewer system-wide is limited and the specific allocation for the area in question has been established at 450, 000 gpd. This allocation also includes existing uses and other adjoining properties within the industrial zones. 3. Protection of the public supply wells in this area is the s paramount objective for providing sewering. Existing on-line _. supply here represents 17% of the Town"s total. pumping capacity and 30 of the future supply capacity. - 4. Studies completed by SEA, Inc. , Whitman and Howard, Inc. , and the Barnstable Fire District suggest a two-tiered approach. to groundwater protection for the Town in recognition of the unique hydrogeology associated with the aquifer system: } a) Establishment of a general protection strategy for the entire area within zone of contribution. b ) A higher decree of protection to be afforded to the direct recharge areas ( flow paths) of the public supply wells. 5. Specific pump test results indicate that the direct recharge area to the pumping well (s) may e::tend upgradient for several thousand feet. Page 2 6. Evidence suggests that the direct flow paths to the public supply wells in zone of contribution #1 extend west-northwest toward Hathway Ponds. 7. The proposed force main system would require a pump station east of Mary Dunn Road apparently designed to service the entire Park.. S. The development capacity and potential sewage generation of this area greatly exceeds the stated allocation. In order to insure maxim!im groundwater protection, sewering of this area should proceed within the direct flow path areas first, then if additional capacity exists, extensions could be approved on a case-by-case basis. = . Orderly sewer ---tensions are necessary in order to carefully monitor increased flows and properly allocate remaining capacity. This would be difficult utilizing the force main proposal as designed. 10. The force main would serve Independence Park only and ignores the recommendations of the Wastewater Management Plan as far as the preliminary system design and areas most in need of sewering. It should also be noted that the WQAC recognized the importance of conducting the Town's sewering program with the ongoing land use planning efforts being conducted for this area by the Department of Planning and Development. Orderly sewer .extensions, scheduled with the planned development of this. site should be the priority of the Town's discussions with Park officials. The WQAC supports sewering in this area, but feels strongly that the development plans of the Park must be coordinated with the sewering needs and capabilities of the Town. It is further recommended, therefore, that the Park be encouraged to work within the context of the new Wastewater Management Plan, and, with input from the DPD, prepare .a phased development plan designed to achieve maximum protection for the public supply wells. Al, �`���� HE 3 B9HHSTdBL i y HASB pp i63 9 � anyeuc aostu6 D MAY � 02601 COMMISSIONERS: (617) 775-1120 Ext. 123 KEVIN O'NEIL. CHAIRMAN ROBERT L. O'BRIEN JOHN J. ROSARIO. VICE CHAIRMAN SUPERINTENDENT THOMAS J. MULLEN PHILIP C. MCCARTIN F. SHELDON BUCKINGHAM October 17, 1986 To: John Kelly, Director of Public Health From: Robert O'Brien, Superintendent, DPW Subject: Independence Park; Sewering Proposal Attached hereto is a letter with enclosed sketch relating to subject , proposal which was presented to the DPW Commission by representatives of Independence Park at its meeting of October 7, 1986. Any comments which you or the Board of Health may have regarding this proposal would be most welcome. Copies of this proposal have also been sent to the Director, Planning and Development; Chairman, Water Quality Advisory Board; and, Whitman and Howard for comment. PR—OBERT L O'BRIEN Superintendent RLO/bw Encl r a CPS/Planners 9 Architects . P.O.Box 333 Sharon.MA02067 October 7, 1986 Mr. Kevin O'Neill , Chairman Department of Public Works Town of Barnstable 367 Main Street Hyannis, MA, 02601 Dear Mr. O'Neill : Independence Park is anxious to move in the most expeditious and cost effective manner to provide sewerage for the Park now that this is public policy. The quicker a shield around the well fields can be erected through sewer construction, the quicker the agitation about these aspects of Park existence will diminish. To accomplish the above goal the Park proposes to the Town that a force main be constructed by the Park from a low point in the Park to the two 12 inch force mains in Phinneys Lane. An accompanying map shows a feasible alignment for an easement across Hyannis Sand and Gravel property. Technically, this is simple and straight forward. i Engineering considerations for this project as we perceive them are as follows: -- The run between the Freezer Lane pumping station in Barnstable Village and the Treatment Plant in Hyannis is approximately 3.5 miles. -- Two 12 inch force mains driven by two 150 horsepower pumps at a static head of 70 feet move effluent from Barnstable Village to the Treatment Plant. Only one force main is employed at any one time. -- Capacity of each of the force mains is approximately 2 million gallons a day, l imited"4y bump' size. 'Presently-;- onTy 35,,000 gpd is pumped through ei ther vai n-, A ess'than ' 'One Uenty.=fifth :the(- capacity of either main. -- The force main from Independence Park would be valved separately into each of the two force mains in Phinneys Lane approximately one mile from the Treatment Plant. Study needs to be directed at the hydraulic factors involved in this juncture because of increased friction. But, at the very worst situation a larger pump might be required at the Freezer Lane plant which would be furnished by the Park. r Page .n -- There is no sacrifice of future Barnstable Villaqe sewerage capacity, even should population of the Village reach 8,000 people on the sewerage system. This is highly unlikely, con- sidering land available for development, and would in fact consume half the 4 mgd capacity of the Hyannis Treatment Plant. There will be no loss of redundancy in the ,Phinneys Lane situation as only one line would be used at any one time, exactly as today. As can be seen from the above, there are no engineering problems with the proposed solution offered by the Park. There are no legal and time- consuming actions involving betterment solutions on non-Park land. No time will be lost pursuing grant Programs. The number of lift or pumping stations is reduced from two (2) to one (1 ) . And most important, the project can be accomplished quickly. We hope that the Town and its engineers, along with Park engineers, will examine this proposal carefully as it appears to solve many problems in a succinct and timely way. Sincerely, • John Atwood President JA/ep I s t red t.��Nro�Vt`W =a.'. Moo CAPE �r'1.' c .j ��':�':�l .,. � �� `� � ��' ��1 • ,' Q •'�. .}HjCiyWAY � \�..._. .i i 1, � •) '� � •.4 ;�. � '-_ -� .r; r. r � ) S�Q is ^1,. � _L� •( G r loll t��: � • �� .� 1 ' w :1r .� �f�:,� '� - .; •�•_ � '• ��jy' OE �. �'�,cf': '�l -• •`al�`)f t •..,,.. �.{` \IJ 1=_ , !F;•:, yr, . „ ' ` . )• C�'- •••�-Y 1 • '\ 'a5".- '••••.. �'•�'{.� .., \f..� �� •'� :,r^ � 't:fI "��"'�'/•' r l �J•� '/ J t t'- � jib •�;�>�!•, Q Of X �-:1 _may:�i• � - 1 .,� 2 , . .. �` •f` � a i C •�° l:-. � � Q' ....-j. .�.Q ,.. ,` � � .'�- �. '-. :_�1••ram- �� o%�� ' _ � /; 0 •F k � �..r-� 1 � i� , . is .•� ,1 „ ., - to �I/ , �� .� 'l` ,,.' '� I� 1 -• • ' . • I.'`• n. } � D.C_` L,j�.� � - .lam•. .� . � r.� "..I� INDEPENDENCE PARK M •�,o• ! � (, '�� 9ysy i }.f• r"^ .s %` '�`` 1984 90 Ok pT i DISTANCE IN FEET (p O SOO 1000 12 000 10 ACRE: �1:r d t S�FIt/,EiQQG� P/QO/�OSAL yYA"/y aouza 25 — / . t { . r as.-"!Vr } t ,. . + t S t ,.a:.. .a, '.''""al"•... s tt.•t s . .1 ti -, ' S t„`. 'z .,O t.. n -�`. 'I k.ft -s i n`'`i,• *r, r 5;;�. ' •F^ .y t o i +t ' ri 5 N+ a .,,Y $ , t�\. t �� E r-y� r " .'" yr dy! j<I avSar Y l 1. r * +�A f + t 'y k` 3' l �+ s n Y Y ,}f 3 rt F+'!:w• R�-� ql k y � +'w•. 7',.., " } x 4 r ;r M, 14 r+ ,r t3 ♦ + I+ F. :,^'..d va �"•t"°a'`r V a a f � M a C+ .' -t f�r + :, xf `'.v a' c :' - F" `� + i•'* ; r��"rrr`k s e "" '3 I �'l. +.,Ar t y>� 4;,.r.t. r�L':J S'{0, ,�. ''e, ,� e•vh'; ° • ' ,F, a.--- i n r J•x .y r-s, ✓c t+t ,-'•rf i 4f° - %tai n i - y N r ri t o 4 st , f> ^r,}# +C,,' !$ ,.i + 1. ,. tI. "S i� " t t t. 7`Ta .�t`Sw�4 r-,,. r .;r'. it t Nrr� .ri �,tt... Aa �- WI fr1. rX'•} Y'. G' t o o a +� h i A Ii r , 44. ` , : 1 �� w,Jr r-+ r *w•� r '' K{'T 4 ; .{ 'c' t trM.' ¢ nr' r"� ,4 t +5 ,R•' �, * r .;,£,,, Se gA'Y y„,,- $,y a t�'n .+aa ..< '7 4:3f fijt r z 5 11 " a a%i -1 i t tV."� t 3r„ "'3 r -°.-, ,• k ',s � `g ,+ 'r 7 i' ,. .C1 ', L .+ ? i h ^V{ t • t 1,A'.x• F" "'" pit ; .f 7', # i.'R t - ¢-4 ,+�C` I f-� L °'••y,� -�' ,fit• +�y �r i<. ^ f i�' �, { � f'�t a. ?a �. r _ �-�,I r S V, � .. L x - iil . +..�. 1.. x ♦ .I:t k + w4 "•t "y.:) {r§r " lx w J'i`{, v , ' eY.,^xe- d'} . t1 ,"4 , . ,.t 4%x Md 4 #, , l •.il t, w s. t1 .; ... n, r ,t r w J A. ,i 'L r +`t,C.e ! r.; +s'` a ° .f •�ty� `r. f "., i•. S##- F rk{F..t r +♦ ,,.'#, h �y, ,ay i r,a ,,�r•" r r� ,• i f { ¢ , s < Z b•:•r nyF t y t Y y el.rr t .. N� 0..n ' r f f.."t + f +: •tt,i r e7 r ,^,y,"�; xt � e pp... ? ? ,f Syr y +T f`�- s. ti', j7a 31 rItI .t 6 # y� w •' •fi4 +'. s > 5i-- ' r ;,, .,, < Ps`"tr x b:+,,, �v r"s- tali u it i7�'��t Y $� t.: j .i 3 i I , ' Tt . ri �t , y v '„'. ,�a ,n, ♦ •#D �' w 6 9 µ 3 ; f , 4 {� ." 7 sp ; ' ;7' v i , 3 .Y'r 4 .4 tV. y,b I,- . i a!; f r e . , p, t7 Y- < y- + ++ •F� " S Y;'r.r°-•i.) '' -, F�" _ �,S ..`{ }` "' z+ j . ,7ta h ++.. r' ,., Ys I,. , IR+ ;;"' ,j I-,i' �t�.>w ���� 4`k`k. i + _ {r • t.,'`' r ..+ .,,. A •+fs. `` f. t#n Y rM„C. .r'; i. 1 I `-I s'a, :,= -IA +„ ik e •' i #,' , rt<?, . Decemb**er'9, 1 85�`i F a ;� t (. `, ► , ya, �4r ht` ,{� '.� ;.'� t �I Y , . ';., �; .# Y. %F C ., .i '" i, t ^ r -.I. " Iv4,< i• "44,'4i i. t' °5 r :*�' t 'aw,: a tr Ss t r?�1 r ;•r t= 8 # s� " , a1. r. c�,i• .t<s tSF , .r.<: rr..R .t Ui yr•y .t'.' " .k' Y •t wk a C 1 '•5 e F'Y t T, •# t �� f t ? ,�.. ,i '.�. 4 7'f 1„+ , -' "�:v } ?1 i ''4 4 F '.S , .tJ t � '} °&a "< . m F ,c .t S§.P 1°'p �5ti" ,r'{ rrn f., ',ri -. �t r r �, i ai % , ,t j, 'T ' ,fir sY, �S a '}s ia, �}A.';'` "'"•. k t;, µ r .#,yx4 ,t I ;:i ,,,r,t +t a ��s, F` .£ fr '�'"- t, t E .-+r * •<# t,,y , $, ` s R r . a+ r,�,,4 , ti', '� t-•r1.>' 4 a i J t k.. a s b;. r 1 .j ''t3 �' tit ,,{ y , " 1, "ill. a".;..e i'r.•Lw t ,Rx r .•fi a i°-.r r+++In" s 1' sty r t j + . a f R.. ° # " e +.* y y y*."' �Cl"'s� rT ''w,A,,l r fl• s. y i d irY ,y s t Y Y oa es,A v_'\ +e� - .§i.. F..' •� «• r . x. i. .: s*'C.. ak' r ,.y 1 a,yr r t�,,..,, } Yt, "ix vs• .'t f ,r a <- 6 "r, - . ,�:, -k ,• r a * r,w s �' k .i f s f '"�'• . rt .,. ,+ ,a=tiy'+'{t+Y' ,r 4 `. r'; A s'•'� f;.'r y, 6l �w "`. *-.; ` r-, 'r�,; w -• + `]Y`" t r, lt`Rr [ tAZ°k ,. rrjtiAa -. •r,5..'ti {•,a rg �. . t ` I . .< 3 �f�y ,f` 'S 1, r,t ° r it . Aa..s, ;�..t?.7s "f:s 1 4" Id - .R�, YAt'a .r°,+ 1 , .r`t,w F F £ t # '" t i.. t i .l • ,rtt F,�j<^s} pp r•.If� .,of , `�%1"'�jY, , i Ir .. !� "� �, w -. tn•"Re^tr4 'rt c ,. i a_ ' . - } F. .msr ~ �. f ti f + A'w'r'P `r+ its ..i.;n'"..*r r.{.$ } a r; +''E �, t a S , . t , t tMi. David ..E ;Chased 3 " ? � # b .,° ► :, e' ,'rp 1.w I , f. :` °�^:Vice President Development �r #r ` �." _ , r t tr K, F� a 5 k." r ' •:tss 4 e .i• _ r * fi tJ, { f ,A.1' ` #, ,, 'S\�t. n w ,T r t Y, t a ' j r �, Incle�pndence Parkr _ + K. , Y �� s t,.14 �,�. .� , ,�, e ; I, , t- -', ` r • ' ;t- Sc p� ;` r� n r 5 -'+ { x +f' -ae':. e ^Z e '' . Y :,I '�° T`t ,r, r �c r<. at" .a r t-.x :"fP .O"�w,..B�x.l,/76 r 'a +.r astY'...i °a t.," 4 r.1 1 P�!° •;., v x'£a ry ? „ • t,•..y T+' ';7 a w•i,r T .- it. 4�.. t 1 >f rg A F i i" i hG + r 5 a }k IV, ,, 'an.< �4 1 - rr - 'w t 3'1 i "� 't'i � �h ? r a 't`..2 -J, A 4,4a"ieTfis 3. i `;, ' ,v-,,.Hyannis,IMA 02601�. "'!ll,., ,�� ,,i' _ r" •: t N, , ,� „ •�. r % �, ti.. t Z"Y.- f t. ",A. w, ir. a ,r:,+-,�ra:{t 3 `�°,-r..'4 t''R-,. " a.'a,�Z * �.� Nit `£¢ t't �'..xi, *N= C9P;,f ��, •t h 4 0 r ."�Y+`Ls �•.t^ y s .l' � t` ,' •i •i t t, .! .s " .,'e£ A 2. 34 r'_ q, - Y 0.'`'4''4• �}hpt ti "I,t I .lIN # i•!• ''"t r �' t" -•� t-j 4 "Ya:^' •d ,;P ,s t r Y r. .?;I. `Y. ,, ! y i'i!eit x P 4 r .A,# sit^, •, "`Dea ,Mr `Chaser ,t �t, ; + �• r . . tAf + t ,; y ,t 3 s h Yam. " #I. r" t. r ••t L c.5';; ';.rrr7.s ry. ,,.r f+Y` "' �^` ,"' ty a .P"x,�<IklR, ' n"' 7a,. try ,,','i .y ti`'£x y.,A `n . , ` ,t a, + ✓, t, .r 4 3 t'-°° ,tN x' *.. °"s '"Jf, 'k." +. i -•7'' ?�,.�1 `}^�`l' c t„ **iFts • a' P ,-�+r. 't ��•� -ti` 4� t .rt p.t ),.ti `,¢a Y9a+rr id t. i .{_°riff}M At— ��;:t� � � th P' s�.f.�ry,�f'v t t r°'.}r �.... .� .y. r ';� _' We.are in,receigt of,your letter requesAt`1ng aw�heafing. n regard to our '� "J ' ` r,," �..t r i .,,' * +: i � ,,r .1111 i .=I t`Y�5'... ... ".y,S' 1 � .4' s^+1.FA,:"' '>3 � • �. i. p; " , �,, ... lettei to-Mr.,L aul L,orusso dated Dec6mber-2, 198�5 r }w 01, ;*" t r ,� ,.,: :� ' Ifs •.}u +9+-J,. 'I D+ t_ 2 t.k _T��y a.. #, ;- ,, j {` ?"itr :$ ti �x_. u t,.f; ti #t i'.; 1F t, s'k+'�t,. € .k `.',i � i-11 �� ' ` ,`�'r The hearing`ha`sbeens`chedt�ledfor 5`QO,PM ;�on;Tuesday, . " "• .=2:� ` ".•n " ;' ` r .I �• .t, 38,_a• '-. F...t{ i se Y a -. - t s..r L Tt §Sy/,t , �,t 'January,t7 1986,;,im�the Ali ai" aiof'health office, 367`Main'`S.:, e—. Hyannis . }tw L r' ' r.. y .<, •^; ;st- A°4 .. ', .. �s. it i' .,: + +.. ;1"rya,'"Y. I #y, "r s a'. a#r' < L ".,.1 i• + n 4 tr' * ..e p�,.t �. - ^:_, w }"). •'` y +a f 0. ', } t t�* .F r r ' °s rr1 ,tt r i(1•,a s , : { # }� �` S -�. " �-+. ¢ c t r ,. 4 ; r r ty I t' �• ;.5, Please eorifirm;'.thei. time date',witti:kthis',6fficeI 5775-1120 ,extension <7 t ; r s x.. `s 4 `� ._ -ryr qi.-n.>``182 x i.«; Y..:e•�f �{ 4m,t ;. i n+ �'``y" "ck.''k l #+.�."�t ;�•�'Sr�`a .+"r„ .i-.,,• ,,• .,,,§4 . r' `. a 1 1!, 4 Y { sf f�, { 9e,3 ,r sf' F +'?. ,t• .?, d. l +i � j- r^11:1 { ,y't Ore t Y ,�* ,t 1 R,. x, x a'_q a r 8 ". �. ,-,,.. } ,-', .+r ,s Y I I k 6 �, '6•,,p i3; .r -,W '71 'dry 1" #-.S;e^ �Y t : + t .,j i5 't 'Y t M '.+„ Vt 5'§ :I" ry A' h r ...A? # 'i-, '� ?7- :"J � ", ,,,�+ ,,. � :y g .F` x � �F5' f. Y Y� #w # , / ' ;tom, ... y>_x" T` r•,' r r? '• _y'.•.�',;i, Clc �` ti 1 S,• ., r y i 1+�T.,x.. ,w;r.'.. j •�7 ,`t •" •.' j " ♦Pir �'vtrul ours , '-i' A v"�1.,4, < Ai I- •4• ' h at•,� r-.- .. .I h. }+e-•• '4 ". a ',�Y -I.s .Ti ., e• - 1�1 SQk, j,.r i'i" '%i 'F.. '' ',, r 1! t t,,.tl;w t y v`a „r•.+ •.s r ^� .v, 3`;'�IlV a ,n .f,'k r "Y ;t '- 'r .41 .w'IG'h r.ty' ,s •:£A ,F' ..' 1•r+ ".1,r,f, {'� a a' '�,F: Yet .«.fc�'r^f` -"n ' .x i• §. t°r< ,t- r,.1.�.q -x �19 �s 5'',�+ S" ,J y� y�, Z {`1t'A `t�� ,�...?t Y•. 1*, '.i r.. 's 1x'xr',. ,;t, 4 .� �'w• •t�.,t `!v y..k s,�y , 1: a a r" � S t '°ar',4 d t Y.1."! r° ' w 4 ,'J'i ti. w r ' C' Orr ..r., '7 x ,'�d• 1 ` iF'•�' }; '"' "'' ds; ` y%rt i.' r�a4.t.�. I,�•F C-IY'w'•. �t`}"{� i E r 1w n ,tr C,.s,'�+ 4 a ;,�';.a� r t• .",. 4 w.• 'SM 1r, "gF t n '} 3 ,,r. 9. + ,,, 'Y•: ', -:'" .fr+m..k..• 5, y rrk �$.-.,` ;trt; s t !#� ,r r rt �+` John�kM.;Kelly$ .QI, r.4 r! ,Ly,r °e S er. IxY .t p 1 I " t k r5x 5 . k if. ,+>� �: t " #{ ,x.1 et* t i r e. s 1. n !"" F?�'•rt �w P. I#, , - e a _fir 1 y�.,+ fr Director�of Public Health �� �¢ t qt ` � r°l <• r ',,' y t, ✓. "+. " t.� r '.` '4. 4 l e x-r 2itX d+.s� �'°,.t�..E^ .� ''"S Y`yt� dY £(*+ .$ f s I "y�r:5„ f 'q�� 9 + .E 7 -yw, ".t •* #{[,•'`"3'!•4 xr'. A. is pt�� y r : ri4., '» u'"` 3, { -�.` t 4 r,°,s -',P 1 t t C,a r A .. 0, ,t h+,�. + "c t N y' `. -r^ �` ti1!' , .t;0-- r ' t,. �;. yRy w :,Ef sr""S`,`ri , :'''�6rr - '+ x 3 t .Yi Px •- c- .�., x t� i 'i*i ',. }E,r t ii.. C AF i t :t v •.^ •s•'• p tx.,. ` ^ } ;�: t �pM a : 1'r s.�y,., ,�+ ;. •.,. d •, 1. + .s1 �, a... 1• s,-JMK/mm r - . , , R A Ott ~ lr<ti.. .. r 7++saws 7 r:At w t .1 A; d . ".N '"�..i `" '" t•' -4 ,f r "" �s°,i;e,t ti*at v i- }t 't r,� r ,n. ,. 'rt'` �`1rs t ?° i t 4 Kj{.-.*Ye. p•• " ; ," ,, ` S ¢ 't S;.r9e #: .••s,. ,.;i n }' i*: n w ti r.- }t r., r a { ti• :rY wt. Y + 'i Irj 4� V • ". I't r.N. . 4'F '�-) t i r i `+ Sf� :"n '+!a *S ; .,d� �•* �] G 12 A r t .. y ^t< r,;. ,i x-t W t• ... t ,xe r.: r.+�4 Mx7"'x r.':_nV J A ''t +•Y ,4'*.a'a* " : ,.t :'-. i ..,¢ - r ,F".,- '�, rt . ?:± k,:'°;'r t'#'�-.� t"'P"'`�, k ;` ' ,}'k:r.e• '°11'-'y�.u., g"4 4 rt ,n; �,+ " �f". ' k I'.1 v yi^r,.,•, ' •.7 '• r _ � i- r y'� ;d ..,}•.A _ �`•,',o as.._ +'.•ts" # '• K ,i`.r'"r !'�" A t' -t-i• c°j 3•�4 .�,,.r- *eF rw + t ,+:.. '' , rS.'' ¢ qr"• t >;a # , k J. „ i 4 r .'y-s." y t - } .z� Y. +r a'�+ r 5 a " 'i 4 Y 1 i,'4K .y,.' t�! ° t' �,. t�`6*'1 t'A . , ,r t.,r q"`., ^rr 2'.: z a t... :F . i e 'a '` .r, xr. rC*It x r ,x, l ( E '#ur r e ,, �- _k't. ` " A " i '"r' e'4 t>r p.-. S Y ,r �,,<"t ♦.. a'F a.. ,.Se'.- ; i.;r t ;q. .i#•t. a ivy:. ►.,{!<`n rr ttt"e'i 'rl''#� a° ;' s f,' < ` ° 9 a�r { , r 1r Y i' .r e r Y .'z X ; Ai +. § �,}, sT w E °' yY1. is 4:. ;' ry f..St Via. . ♦ Ft r ,n % v . +*r> # s 4 ^/•{', 4 4 sts^F .s" J. 7 P ,'. f er t .y I _ 1 • r x. 4 - M SI !, t�" .`r (t �Y x yr #�� .Y S r.,p.� 'f • .. r .. {F,r# tit".r,- b'* -.• + y .#t atAe r•$ '! r" i ,ir t t - a i. F q '�t ,�..Fy ` r `. A Y•ti *l :t. r` 4° M a ^'t " "I ., !' k ": nir`,'t s;'.'p r".aC r=A,La%,,,,';t ,,y "tr w. S` Y 1r v t' ,R3.t. w ,�. ., a,t ,r# . i'fF .� y .r : ,' "r ,C t ,�',. 3+^ , 2't gq 4` x s K + r � K t yy ' s,.y`a t '..e a" �# s t ...sj r- r r ,, .:�?+ it5.'.l , eu ,r ,y ".t t �'�"3"`t`` a y t...^ 'k".a= r;rar, Y ,;4 ,, t r r t SL.,t S{rr` :'w t><1 t.,:`' } '§ .,kt ;-It r n.t `'; t ;s. :."' d� a� r y ;r A�F,� ,...,,, t •-L- t. t ♦r✓ L w "J` r,. + 2 4 t•.,§' e" r .F -0.b , s-.r'' t P Z J. `irt "V+:< /.,r..r Br4s4 .,+�`," " '" R itj,f, 7't rr.+ #k A•+ Y f .: }�* t" . 'S".ry k yt k}„ ,-,t y 17 a r' "t " .S A 7a' -t"e t"5. «t't} �.':; tt- .•v c� A ' -,r+,1 r t 4^°. , � i "�« J r i" s?'.}.ti" " P F, {"-W V,. ,, „t 9.. YI ,0 r I �.� .V. .. q; ��� � a r � Y f4 t� � �rF { +x` 1. 4��ye�7fi P-:�i �` � 4i •� ��t a 4: e�# i , R - v `t .I & ?1 'I 'U t a * l t t S 1 i a�•.':.� ,yl r�. e, cr r.t,e.o�# 4z ir* e = s 'f '{" n•', +" ' .:°t• F Y!.7 '}},,4 'r,",.1 t +. h ' )0 ,,e s ri. a" r. G �. 4r u t t a y, ,IZ �. .r 1 4 '' " t nA }' t +4 a r . ,r ,^ }w •r..` a,..r 't's'S'" r>ti 1.II r �t� �i 'G Y ti' r , sr.?t #' :yr r ' r r c x g. i " .f .f r r r„ _ t 4. ` t; Y� -e a`, ir,, :t ra Ws, aS~ kY-lk It , t ag" .K �1 .g . �� t + f., F ,'� y e <�Y 4e- t •;t '�'r`-d 'F . ? r. ` tt.'4 t rs Yj r,} s t it'; a}*"srr..'� sY ti: u 0. y'', w f 4:'.Ax t- ..a' 1.{ '",..I j,.. " M h *°*^jry•' 1',' �7"Y4'�h�')f �'F M. ..e i t#+'x4a '�`±' JI. „ot:. 4 :,.. 5. f * +« S t e'xx t""mot ' tyn -»y,r YqS.Ae $ �n. .? #� " ♦ t _ 2 h,. k..M L -'Inc ;,"sni tc f t. tw,l•' ' "F.� [r. F, ,!<• i' Yt t *} '`" fir, C a �� „rr r.. tL' 't �'�! aj" " ; _ d�" j #rpt .",� A {1..", ��.dF {' gX-3- r�a t't' t • , 4�[ •r s r* " 4�i' >, ,' Yr..f .y :.. ,. , " r '?� ✓< e L P. rQ t gt r t t f y { i s '+. t v' s 'i.. x '- x 14 "5 " tf , is1 r v a+`�t ,° ., , ."'14, t t •€," ,i-,'`y "n I-1'r f •r- ,r,r+ • '� h t `:.r" r# r t: , •, F,S, t � I ° "t r +. ' .4Fr ..ta r' r0.-'' , r s -t k•'' # 4 a. - A t 4 + ' ?` rz...t11 � ,•�t `;Y. �...r A, .8. ,.t'Y r ° 't ,a. Y. ZC `t� I ���. §" r*§: n .t ;mods h rt i r; _.a .t .: x"' `l a( - a Y , �' r °, r' ,*T+r , i t '. x t r r-.r` +/ 'i +t V. r'.-..Y�a. s.. , *I. F . .t r } 1 y -'{ t, • " �3,t. + '. .d s ', 5 trio ,t 3 y '''• , 4 r 5 4' art li., •� #t, t i;. <I. "t ttr f. 9w " w ." ..T r� ' r:aj X 4 t� Ff F . 'I ) r '.k'` tr r`;'. ' r '. F,4 t A I 1 -�. s E.L; Fs t ' 'y.'.; ,+ ^t;qt n�§`. .r} '"c°' Yi! r kS Y ..t k`,} , + t i..i r "a•.' F.I} ° •1. ' _ r.,+ ., '�'=" .w\'t j 1 .r� y t ? �,,�4 '... {t ^ + r s x.„i�tr i :. �.14 '.`+ 3�. .r z } }.' sy . a.- ry - - e r r! t ,rr: X •'{t-+ „3�- .. w + f �',f. , i . � # .,"�' -ij" t !, d. ..l r .^a'�' �11 !. cy •% § } :; v,7 y �aS t �"°Tfy p ti. .. II1. ,a " :;"Y'f'r�'§"a r . '�!4+, _, r-- is .,,,o T ,, . r`J , " wr .. 7 ,�i, sue} +.# .t"•1 �r:v4 , 1.'. t„ .. 4r �4% lI'k # - h + r f # -t t .. { 'tY t i �V�. t (4 " `., #" t x.' t . y 3 �" s ` +alt i " 4 iS# i 3� �v r,j. - .,< rr'r° a j� A. (- f r,e':;"1 t .,1 r,rg ' +, i Y d'AS r �`;2• ��? "�. +r 8"a hr'l.`y �'.� _ "r S" r t.• a ^} v 'x' 7 ,r �u't ., .N't i : 3..3< t r iQ ,�, Kr e �•1. qrr}, '""• .i'. 3 a +t: - , o- •t. i3 t• 1 '� 5 i "` 1 rv+` 'p"F 1 i.. -V rf+ t �, + .1f t9, , ...4� s . Ft t+t".X•f�,`"*''t'k?.�.,, As'. �I D D ' Box 1776, Hyannis, Massachusetts 02601,(617)775-1776 December 6, 1985 Mr. John M. Kelly Board of Health Town of Barnstable 367 Main Street Hyannis, MA 02601 Dear Mr. Kelly: We respectfully request a hearing before the Board of Health on your Notice to Abate Violations of Town of Barnstable Nuisance Control Regulation No. 1 (Sources of Filth) , and 105 CMR 410. 00, State Sanitary Code, Chapter II. 'ncerely, David E. Chase Vice President Development DEC/ep ® SENDER: Complete items 1,2,3 and 4. cPut your address in the.�'RETURHI To"space on tho reverse side.Failw-re to do this will prevent this card from being returnee you.The return receipt fee will provide _ .+ you the name of the person delivered to and the date ofi deliver►. 7ur additional fees the following services are c available.Consult postmaster for fees and check box(es.. for service(s)requested. pip i XKXSnow to wnum,Gate ano aacress of deimery. W 2 ❑ Restricted Delivery V 3 Article Addressed to Mr. L. Paul Lorusso, President Independence Park P. O. Box 1776 HYANNIS MA 0260 1 4 Type of Service: Article Numbei ❑ Registered ❑ Insured latertified ❑ COD P 522 444 199 ❑ Express Mail Always obtain signature of addresseegr agent ano DATE DELIVERED. O 5. Signature—Addressee I x t�v 6. Si ture -Agent C1 x O+(► ���. m7. Date of Delivery Voe, Z s Addressee's Address(ONLY i reques a ,a ..e#pia: m n m v i UNITED STMES POSM SERVICE (OFFICIAL BUSINESS SENDER INSTRUCTIONS Print your name,address,and ZIP Code In the u®® space haloes►. e Complete Items 1,2,8,and 4 on the reverse. • Attach to front of ardde If space permits, PENALTY FOR PRIVATE Otherwise affix to bad(of article. , USE,SM • Endorse artide"Return Receipt Requested" adjacent to number. RETURN TO BOARD OF HEALTH - TOWN OF BARNSTABLE (Name of Sender) I P. O. Box 534 HYANI 9'ay jA rM,%pp,@5i-,P.O.Box or R.D.No.),j (City,State,and ZIP Code) P 522 444 199 RECEIPT,Ko,,R CERTIFIED,MAIL 4' NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) r Sent to_ Mr. L. Paul Lorusso a, Street and No. P.O.,State and ZIP Code O d co Postage $ V) * Certified Fee. Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing to whom and Date Delivered 04 Return receipt showing to whom, as Date,and Address of Delivery T o TOTAL Postage and Fees $ 1.67 U. Postmark or Date is mailed 12/2/85 E 0 U. to a i STICK POSTAGE STAMPS TO ARTICLE TO COVER FIRST CLASS POSTAGE, i CERTIFIED MAIL FEE,AND CHARGES FOR ANY SELECTED OPTIONAL SERVICES.(see front) i 1. It you want this receipt postmarked,stick the gummed stub on the left portion of the address side of the article leaving the receipt attached and present the article at a post office service window or hand it to your rural carrier. (no extra1 harge) i 2. It you 0 not want this receipt postmarked,stick the gummed stub on the left portion of the address side of the ' article,date,detach and retain the receipt,and mail the article. 3.Y Ufou want a return receipt,write the certified mail number and your name and address on a return receipt card, Form 3811,and attach it to the front of the article by means of the gummed ends it space permits.Otherwise,affix to back of article. Endorse front of artile RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED adjacent to the number. ) i 4. It you want delivery restricted to the addressee, or to an authorized agent of the addressee, endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the article. !!i 5. Enter tees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the front of this receipt.It return receipt is re- quested,check the applicable blocks in item 1 of Form 3811. i i 6.Save this receipt and present it if you make inquiry. �. yx.r. # -•_ r t ♦ ;. .. .. f ,."r x ..ice A it .' � 1 1 Y i i• ^, 2 t, +;- e Y,.� d :, y t 7'`^"� `T, Z w '� � r ..,�,r,�sr .,�'''sr � � , ji w,at .f ? •4. }� a ,..a�'4 w�'� �' �, '4 'S A �• �. .' i� w .F a w'`i' ti� t Y q f.jai r r �;(" �. h 7�i��t t :�=:.� c . ,.* x'y'-t•' +r'r 4..ff'�,f:'.S 4 .tar�• } r .:..a r t,.�!� � ! 4 ,d +ya n�� c,y °` a ty � ,, - 7�.r> if V.•' f ^ � kf a�F tit a 7 F x rN,. we M. at�.�. wr. k s" Y y+.� A * a tat a� 1 t wr♦d.. Sep y .r •r, 4 da j., '} +� ,'t r .. }f { • r jt'F N. > -•"e?'• -j1�, a ,I '° 4 sit ''�' r wf fi t��SS. `.'' .6i �' S w12 � x�. ,t 1 tK� , t.', ♦ r+t .r w y � ,ri;. x � k �. � �h } ¢;} � a �!', Iv 4 �%� c } r t.! t - � yt 'f t r✓ r �. �` � ifa s` ,,:Zip .'r` n." # t ✓h x •� r - S 4 � r. A•�_ � ti '� ; ! f�. .. �' tit �i "+'.y' t :. '• t, ti fi x ;- 4r t ,� ;3=�- r.• v xf tt{ e� r r f;�" f „s =x , e S 4 Y7 x '•�.. f et�.t'.k 't;v i-_ T}�r rr' { r i ti * .�.♦ y, { 70. S+ err`. 5! `' X a.'.+. °d i .�. f ix' r,i'" r}.f :.,d^ ��h y, ,. 9 r .7•'" {:.e+i { December" ,',1985 f � , • �a R .,r t ; �•. •,r rr - .•_ �v�t r-.�.4 � a Y `• F• x" ±+4 i! «r , r} ;. S'J i,w4 Y°n rat T}a k r i` t =+� . =,-ry f,af l -1" + S a, f.-,.: ter:i.• I t.. Pawl Lor`u- ; President ,!a I y �:• � c..' r w riw .� " tf G' d .fyr'a I,,i' 7' y e C`4 t'!• #r'`e xh"+ i 't-si' .ti �t ♦-i. -Andependence Pafk b .';a , r� is f +•c} r rr *�; ♦ 1 f ''A Jr S°d '+�y5, r _i •..: r I Y .y #. i A46 Aox 'tea ,s1 r; Hyannis,,+MA e02601. s a4 5 t ""r r,'�*� y li r13* i„ dr}j �t; ?',. ,rt`t•.�``; 4 r�r a f 4 {a f t + Y' •'} +. .k, `' x a `:4 �'! � x.. ,y..�> ?x � ' t af'' y '� tr �i�c 'F 'fie .� r rx �,. y�. a`� ... .3 4, ♦ r.,>r�-x ;. +. ♦ i..;. Ty"�+'{�^-t a;,•. ..e,r.� _� h •x'4` NOTICE' .TO-yABATE'VIOI ATIONS sOF4..TOWN (UF' BARNS.TABLE` NUISANCE CflNTROL.r� REGULATION.*NO .1"' SOURCES -OF,.FILTH),'�-'AND 105 .CDZR,410:00;: STATB: SANITARY.r k a" CODE' CHAPTER II'21 F rt �, � "s`�iF �:' ♦ t' x. +.! `"t" �� ,} ' t � a '�I f t. rTheR property, owned' by you;located,behind 'Barnstable-Business Bays, on.;BreedsHill§Roads; Independence' Park;,Hyannis; was inspected r:bq Thomas 'McKean;anii James Conlon,%Health 'g ` a s° Inspectors:for the :Health;of Barnstable, ,because:of 'a cornplaint` -The.'following violations- : A of 'rthe Town af,`Barnstahle Nuisance CantTol RR'e&1ation `No. ry1' (Souices3 of-• Filth),;,,and Regulation.410;602A, of 105r I"b�lk� '410 00.b�t'State Sainitary CodeChagter II,°'wereobserved - j -"�,4♦Fe •f�r�`a".•A.��i»��'rtth•r'�T- 'p,yx�51,�',tS�`�a,.y !«`.�, � *. .; s �,}'ry ?•`tlj.�"yt�.},w r ';w e3 viYr:�i s ,tip .V i �. ~ Large pile of,palates, brush and,-stumps located on ground in excavated T rr - -o `•s"." e♦ r#"y.:♦ far t+'L £'•."f ,!#.:�, i 6f .. �- ,, uY ! <.'f,.A �ti Severa1,,empty♦;white fiye gallon'tra smissicsn�fluid-pails on`grouad�adjacent to independence Drive i' t r - F t`:x.r � .•t' y t1ry>p '+ .. . ..Y# f, ,'� 1 f7`t�,•4 tr _�^ta,r,,,+• -- a -f, , y • .r.w fR 1, ;,; .. 1r 7•'�. 1.- ty / .. f^ � !, � I f_.� , ,' - .[ a ++.� t - nr P r'ti. _ a• 4 „�c r "1„' ,. - 'r �.A�, �fir.. , ♦.R ' t er. a wtR '• F 4 ♦s.«� + b `�.�� � One large wafer heaters on,the ground: ,} ; L t ! K , rq J:- 3• , ,�a K 4 J : ' �; ` t FS r' � ' f2j a'. :? t �. .� r rj(�I ait•}� A - �t�Z �,wyhi Y{ N�'ja�' '1y i ��.�. 4 ,.� � i l'f�f Y,� R ;�F, 1 r�. Y 1.�. .t},. ; ,, ;-!.'.•i� 'v i,4 '`.!+ry°, lw' t ` ) Ity�«`� #:'.3 f re , ^4. )�d�t S N b ♦ ,t A1.. y a .i tfV, 1 f , s Several,orangeburg�pipes on ground in,exca_vated,area + . { L �'r #+' } ' ♦y, ,3. tY R. i _Nti F • .. X is tt' ti Y..r�'.S'�v .1"• �''°c.td„ � r';as..•� x SCAB ,r q k�'� - y ,a it d1:! � You Ae directed to•correct'theselviolattons within=seven,(.7)ytdays�of,receipt of this notice i,a_= y>i:l♦'y, r -. +:;ha' i. i:'•✓ '' iF #'Tt �1 k t ty rrf.. .. x .!" , •'r" �t. 1:'` � Y +k...' i` Af s`-• .si �� t'. Yt l�t A r•' � a , r yr �• F i, yr tf .# #Y �S r �`9 1''....�- 3 qw }e, t �"R t •' ri' ti,; -,�: K ''Y '� rho a... �.k, R'+ri` r f>.. You..may request ta;hearing before theBoatd;of�Health=i virittenpetition requesting same is received`+within seven (7)`days afater,the'date the order:.is served Sr�4'7 y.y, .t * i.-ira �t 'r~t }. r 'H. 2 s,,,v is -• r ♦'°t- ♦r�-Mi � k'7T�'Ith '` T wr,y, •!i a¢.,.K r ft �'ti. �. .}. i r kk +. {r,xx t}` ..Zt1 r"r =Non-compliance :could result�in aR'fine of�up'64500 ="Each day'= failure•rCo comply.with angF orderg'sriall constitute''a separate`violation r;Failure to_'oinply',w th this ;order,could result4 y , ,in°a'ticket'cita'tion,'with an�automatic'.f1ne;of'$25.00 -Each;day's failure'tacoinplq`with.khi� 7 r order shallfconsEitute a sew a'rate`violation andticket citation. " $} r i R 'rn Y7,fi: p y1.:n e+.+"•z' - 'r M s y �'r} v '�":'t 4 > >' p.0 r { e A: q F y,�T '.x-fi -i �, ,r ,;,'� x .�"• p rr,�+ k � � ::' M,,i ,.,"�''r�r s '. �' 'b.+,,`. •. A t� tb y � In;addition,wayn an 'is', living in;t '4enta,Qn park property in violation of '105 ;�CIvLRiX '10 000; i Minimum•Standards of Fitness fo Human Habitation,y oP they State' Sanitary f Code,'and the r13Ek, `~:Town'= By-Laws The'lnan was notified to vacate.the property. s y{ PER ORDER OF°THE BOARD OF,HEALTH t, .y` r r ` � wr><',l • '.. +' _� r;Irt�sa f' �x�,,r 3 � `r '''.� { '� � ��` �� t •♦i .1 r i:. x 1 r 3 .. f= f., f4rf`7 ,t� ` e . r 4' ��. }fir t a '3 't� rs �>V �"' '�•p r 4 7,+`s e§ r 3 {. •a r. i. �, s.: ,, { 'p •. c ,3r r x-,r `' i is t, x ^E.i>`�'� wx% } C i 4'a Y � �: ✓,y, � z-. . ., r ♦.>d1v r } ;.John.M:Kelly } Director.of Public.Health '- i r? x a .,«,'a 44 K l,;,... kf °r- ": r r ♦i. ° i e{ q Yf"«b" fi 4 ,r ! r n r - ':r s -• r * - f 9r A`• f ♦ r 5;a +r...! x $c• ^'ter t .A v i¢ •F i .y r + T},. �'i •C•''S"t4`p j s f'' JMK/mm. r ' �, ,� .,'.:., -: � +�, r .`f;i. -'•r rs•.{ { w.:r t }:r f C� x { '♦r M1 �¢Y r,'e .�, f S. •yam s+' f { - _'• '' T,x } � 'k t ♦ 'y i�'Tr•1 .n r` '4�'`�') Fi] r ,.,i;.a 6, ,.h :.-i y t .r ,r .� r !, i} y` ♦ 7 . "... t`'�' 1 'r3{ x#�.,+� f`�t •�:r. ri Z ,*4�«a _s 4,.r x ; rw y x ! ;i t yar.*�,y. � _, C� a.-. J' ,r lri! x 'x� ti f f f4` t>/ t 7 fL '1 fart Ewa WRn � . A*.ajr�.• kt ': r�� � >, `r �. � a, 3 r •♦ �� r6 I_i:'S�f d -