The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2010-09-13 Minutes\\0~~~"' R ~ W S " ~~~~i~~ ` OQ ~YfE ~Eq°A9 2 yo'@ lc = O u ~ r ~~ - //~j~ ~~NC''o x:~,can ~p r ~~~~~~'~~~i i~ i~ r i r n r r i i i~ i~ n i u ~ a~~~ \\~ Town Of Brewster 3 ~~ 2198 Main Street °~ ~ ~ Brewster Massachusetts 02631-1898 ~~ ~ (508) 896-3701 ext. 133 ~ ~~ FAX (508) 896-8089 Date Approved: 11/8/10, Taylor/Hughes, J, 6-0-1, Bennett abstain TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE Work Session Meeting Monday, September 13, 2010 at 4:30 P.M. Brewster Town Office Building - _ -- _=: Pat Hughes convened the Comprehensive Water Planning Committee meeting at 4:40 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with members, Joanne Hughes, Amy Usowski, Lem Skidmore, and Elizabeth Taylor, John Lipman and Jane Johnson. Absent: Dave Bennett Also Present: Sue Leven, Nancy Ice, Jim Gallagher and Chris Miller AGENDA Hughes, P: noted that she was pleased with the attendance at the community meeting. Leven: unfortunately they were not able to video tape the meeting. Taylor: commented that next time they should be sure to place a sign out front of the library. Hughes, J.: was disappointed that the longer term goal of allowing people to view the meeting had been lost due to the fact that they were not able to video Hughes, P: purpose of this meeting is to review the first 5 sections of the report for CDM. She would like to get the correct language on the recommendation for the BOH data and linking the information to the GIS database. Leven: they have their title 5 data keyed in but it isn't linked to the GIS -the 2 databases are in separate locations Ice: not all the septic systems data is on file....it starts at a date and moves forward (1990ish) She will find out the exact date. Hughes, J.: are the setbacks included? Ice: no - it is just a listing Johnson: they manually linked some of the info. Ed Eichner has the info on the 6 ponds. Eichner provided a map and he may have some of this electronic and we shouldn't reinvent/redo this portion. Comprehensive Water Planning Committee CWPC 09-13-10 Page 1 of 5 ,,~4 Skidmore: what we are talking about is integrating town wide data that includes OH and water data. Once we do that then it can be linked to a GIS Leven: thinks we can start with the info. we have and then add on Skidmore: agree but initially we have to establish a point to start with Hughes, J: has Rob talked with our IT person? Leven: yes; Kathy knows what is needed - we don't have to understand the way it gets done but that it gets done. Ice: we don't have a list of failed systems -systems that have failed and then get repaired. The log doesn't say what the issue was or why or when. We do enter the pump out data. We also know when a septic system has been pumped - if a system is flagged more than 3 times in 18 months then BOH follows up. 1990 - 1994 BOH identified all the septic systems in the town including all cesspools. They don't have a mandatory pumping 3 years. The report was only done for this time period (1990-1994). The way they track it now is through Real estate transactions or if there is extra pumpings then they follow-up. Hughes, P: the bottom line is that we should provide more info. to CDM so that the wording is written up correctly in the final report. Taylor: before we leave the cesspools -what was the difference between cesspools and Title 5? Ice: up until 1995 a leaching pit was allowed (6 feet in depth)- in 1995 the code was revised to allowing a leaching area of no more than 3 feet depth -this provides a broader area and it is not as close to the groundwater (longer peculation time). Hughes, P; how many have you all had a chance to review the comments -does anyone have any additional comments. Lets start with section 1 and see if there are any comments/questions. Taylor: are we going to correlate all the comments/sections with the contract? Leven: it is being done. Section 1: Leven: she felt the 1St paragraph was too intense and other people commented that it wasn't strong enough. Hughes, J: thinks it is a valid statement and isn't too strong. Leven: you could add a sentence that part of what makes Brewster -Brewster is the fact that there is so much pond and recreational based water resources. Hughes, P: Brewster is a giver and we have a lot of water and we have a jurisdiction that contributes to other towns (Harwich, Orleans, Dennis). The value of our water resource is ours and we contribute to other towns. Start with avalue/positive statement. Skidmore: the value of the water is tied to the value of your property. Hughes, P: noted some of the specific comments: for example: the acreage of cranberry bogs and farm land has been included someplace in the summary. A definitions and an acronyms section should be added (estuaries) Hughes, P: is there something that you disagree with or want added - it is not her intent to go through each comment CWPC 09-13-10 Page 2 of 5 =' Taylor: adding a paragraph on the salt marsh is good idea Skidmore: it is difficult to review when all the comments are separated throughout this document. Johnson: SECTION 1, page 8 -under the watershed -sounds like scientific talk -and needs to be addressed for the common folk. Hughes, P: agreed that it should be modified or put the quote as a footnote. Miller: maybe executive summaries should be added at the top of each section. Gallagher: the number of quotes is incorrect. Hughes, P. could move the simple statement up and clean it up to make it easier to understand Taylor: Page 1.2 the fourth paragraph -the open space noted is incorrect - it is more likely about 1/3 (now 31.72% -with the 2 new additional lots purchased it will be closer to 35%). Hughes, J: Clarify the note about the town owned golf courses -Captains -consists of 2 18 hole golf course; Ocean Edge and he National are not controlled by the town. Page 1.7 the number of acres under each watershed should be noted. Taylor: what data are they working off Leven: they are probably working off 2000 data because nothing is up to date. Taylor: she can get pretty updated information from Dave Tately - if we are working off 2000 data then they are working off some old data Johnson: define the difference between open space and conservation trust land -there is a difference. Hughes, P. There would be updated information that we could find during the buildout analysis. Johnson: for open space they took out land -that was owned by the town but not conservation - ie beach landings Taylor: how about underdeveloped land? How was that treated? Leven: on the base level you could do this with a GIS review. Hughes,P: they may have done that analysis but it isn't clear in the reports presented Leven: they (CDM) counted any building with more than 200 SF Taylor: affordable secondary house? You could add an additional home in certain areas and this could have a impact on the future recommendations. We can't ignore it and needs to be taken into consideration. Leven: it also doesn't count fora 40B. In Harwich they looked at 8 units per acre and the impact on that in the town. Gallagher -reviewed the chart shown in the presentation -notes Captains as 2 courses; cranberry bogs are listed. Where did CDM get the number of working cranberry bogs? CWPC 09-13-10 Page 3 of 5 Hughes, P: if they participate in a Cranberry bog association -they might have to register and CDM may have used that number. Gallagher: actually the report notes that they teamed the number of bogs from the Mass DEP data - it could be working data and it may not include new bogs or nonworking bogs. Hughes, P: you have to start with what is documented and unfortunately that document may have been written in 2005. Taylor: the agricultural commission should have the data. Leven: the typos will be done -some of it is going to be discussed in the next phase Hughes, P: CDM is working on the comments they have received to data. Any other comments on section 1?And now that you know that CDM already has these comments is there anything else? Skidmore: will Sue get the comments from this meeting to CDM? Yes, Sue will do that. Taylor: concerned about the Herring River watershed and the note that it is in the eastern side of town and not the western side??? Miller, noted just label the well fields. Taylor: reference the working bogs -there are other non-working bogs. Gallagher: they worked off a map that MEP had with red squiggley lines Hughes, J; clearly there is more work required that defines our cranberry bogs -the minimum is we need more up-to-date information SECTION 2 -Existing data Hughes, P: who gets the sampling data for the golf courses? Miller: he does it for the town properties and not sure on OE and the National - It was noted that the Commission probably has the data. Hughes, P: Does Nickerson State Park have a groundwater discharge permit? Ice: They just got a groundwater discharge permit. Unsure if it has started. Taylor: how come Nickerson State Park can have a composting toilets and not a title 5. Ice: the code requires it but was unsure because they went through DEP. Hughes, P: thinks CDM is focusing on the town solutions and what is realistic. Leven: a regional focus is not where we are at now. Page 9 there are a number of comments. Leven: answered some of the comments/questions noted. Skidmore: the Comprehensive Plan is from 1997 - if there is no action then that should be noted. Leven: the plan was drafted in 1997 and has never been approved by the Town. Lipman: is there going to be a revised report with the comments incorporated? Hughes, P: yes and at the next meeting we will be looking at section 6 & 7. Leven: given the way the discussion has been going -look through these comments and make your notes. If you have 2 or 3 specific things that need to be added/changed then please let me know. CWPC 09-13-10 Page 4 of 5 Hughes, P: CDM has these comments and if you want to add anything then please get it to Sue by the end of the week. Johnson: would like to continue to the next meeting. Hughes, P: please read 6&7 and provide written comments and we can add that at the next meeting. Skidmore: made some comments today on Section 6 and put them on the Broom Leven: please send them to me as well because then I would have to take them off the Eroom Taylor: thinks the committee should be further along amongst themselves before they meet with CDM. Hughes, P: Monday the 20th for a worksession is fine Leven: the afternoon is fine Friday at 2pm; it was agreed to meet both Friday and Monday. Taylor: Motioned to adjourn at 6 pm. Seconded by Johnson. Vote: All Aye. CWPC 09-13-]0 Page 5 of 5