HomeMy Public PortalAboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2010-12-13 Minutes 01�ckE uWrrs�iiii,,�
, T ,� Comprehensive Water Planning
°� ER `9' ��_ Town Of Brewster Committee
. FM
r Rigid__ . ,D 2198 Main Street
3 iI1•v Ih* :ti m-
ti o i; i��`i3 Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898
` - = (508) 896-3701
N i;i O`7,S
, . FAX (508) 896-8089
Date Approved: 2/14/11, 5-0-0, Lipman abstain
TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF
COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
Monday, December 13, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Brewster Town Office Building
Pat Hughes convened the Comprehensive Water Planning Committee meeting at 4:33 pm in the
Brewster Town Office Building with members, Lem Skidmore, Russell Schell, John Lipman, Dave
Bennett, Joanne Hughes, Elizabeth Taylor, Amy Usowski,
Absent: Jane Johnson
Also Present: Sue Leven, Jim Gallagher, Chris Miller, Ed Eichner
Recording or Taping Notification
"As required by the Open Meeting Law we are informing you that the Town will be audio taping this public meeting. In
addition, if anyone else intends to either video or audio tape this meeting they are required to inform the chair."
Discussion with Ed Eichner re: next steps for ponds
Pat opened the meeting by giving a summary of where the group is with the bridge projects.
Ed Eichner distributed a summary handout of the Brewster Ponds to the Board. See next page.
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 1
Brewster Ponds
�=
76 ponds
• 28 Great Ponds
• 6 on 2010 MassDEP Integrated List: 5 requiring TML).Ls, I No Uses
assessed
• 29 with extensive W(:) monitoring, (2001-2010)
• (i with watershed assessments, phosphorus and water budgets
o 2009 Brewster Ponds Report
• 1 with in--lake rernediation
• None have a rnana.gement. plan
Assessment: Needs
• Nrrtr•ient Budgets
cr Sediment. sampling(only completed firr Long)
C., Watershed delineations (7 completed)
• Water Budgets
c Flow monitoring (especially needed for Mill Ponds complex)
c_> 13at:.hyrnctr y (completed for 17 ponds)
•
(Alter concerns
• R.00t:e d Plants
c-, Conflicting wratcrshcet uses
o Water withdrawals/discharges
c.) Permitting concerns (Natural Heritage and Endangered Species
Program)
Management Needs
• Management.Alternatives
• Evaluate Cost&. Benefits
• Establish Goals and Lortg".Cerny (:'onlnziiment
o Water Quality
c) Watcrshect.
o Shared Resources - Ponds .84, l:istuaries
NM?,with gown of tare wste>r Comprehensive Water Planning Committee
December 13,2010 Kya w''t
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 2
dIf
<r <1 ',.
rir
by iri
S3
1
li
(`2".}
'
:�
Ed Eichner is from UMass Dartmouth, School for Marine and Science Technology.
Eichner: You have a lot of ponds and more water quality data than other towns on the Cape. You have some
informational needs before management decisions. I have talked to Sue and Chris. I have looked at the CDM
report. They did not cover how these ponds interact with each other. See Map. Mill Pond Collection, Stony Brook
Long Pond, Nickerson. Each group of ponds has it own set of issues and influencers. You have an opportunity to
prioritize where you want to go, current funding commitments, interaction with other projects, and figure out your
timeline and prioritize your funding available. Handout: Water quality monitoring, assessments, TMDL's provisions.
I have had many discussions with these folks. They are very focused on estuaries. Right now there are six ponds
on the list for having TMDL's. It is the same for estuaries.
Hughes, J: Asked for list of 5 ponds
Eichner: Blueberry, Long, Lower, Upper Mill, Walkers, Sheep. DEP's list is based on what they have done in the
past.
Leven: We sent a letter asking to remove Sheep Pond.
Eichner: Here are the regulations, control your own destiny. Use the regulations to your advantage. DEP
will set the agenda unless you do. You have a lot of water quality assessment been done. The report has
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 3
assessments to help you understand what to do with the ponds. Consider this process for the rest of the ponds.
Blueberry, Canoe, Upper Mill. Long Pond has had remediation. No ponds have management plans. It is about water
quality and how you want to use that resource. Pond Report Assessment Needs: Nutrient and Water budgets. What
is going on with the sediments? Do sediment cores. (Low vs. high oxygen) Watershed delineations—Go hand in
hand with getting a good handle on water flow.
Hughes, P: 7. The delineations by estuary program/water sheds, should not be regarded?
Eichner: Seven have been done. You have watersheds delineated. Good starting basis for an assessment.
Hughes, P: Some of our pond water sheds need to be delineated or refined?
Eichner: Yes, confirmed. Water and Nutrient budgets. Establishing sources of the nutrients. Are sediments the
primary source? is it really about the land use around the pond?Is it coming from an upgraded pond? Do you see a
transition from an algal dominated system to a root dominated system? Endangered species, natural heritage issues
as well.
Assessment needs: You have some funding. I would say at this point you are in assessment needs world, before
you move into a management area Establish costs.
Integration of ponds with other water resources - Herring runs, shorelines, where you have boat ramps, storm
water run off is occurring and how you integrate with the state? How you interact with an adjacent community (Cliff
Pond) Pleasant Bay? Deal between the two ponds.
Hughes, P: We have been talking about the ponds. CDM has recommendations that are not dissimilar to the pond
study. We do have some funds. We can invest them now. How do we establish some priorities and be efficient
about the funds?We can't start detailed reviews of the other 22 ponds? However maybe we do Stony Brook, Long
Pond system? Stony Brook is a Herring Run and publically recognized.Two of three ponds are impaired (Upper Mill,
Lower Mill, Walkers)
Schell: Each of those three ponds is category 3 listed under Clean Water Act and that supersedes everything else.
Hughes, P: We are looking to you and Chris for advice. Look for other opportunities to do some more detailed work.
The challenge right now is investing what little money we have in a good way to position us to do more work.
Eichner: Dennis—They have made a commitment to implement recommendations.They have set aside some
funding every year. Figure out as they go along. It goes through Committees, Natural Resources, Town Meeting,
and see how it goes. Started sampling on Scargo Lake, bird monitoring and storm water identifications. This is what
they chose to do. The biggest part of that was that they are making a commitment to do it
Hughes, P: It makes sense to choose areas that need to be addressed.
Schell: What you described for Dennis sounds like a pond management plan?
Eichner: It is actually more of an assessment. The next phase will be to figure out why they have water quality
issues. A management plan is on the tail end of that phase. What should we do about storm water? Scargo Harbor
connections?
Schell: In your report you made detailed recommendations for 6 ponds. What would be your outline for RFP's for
next step?Three of those ponds are in the Stony Brook watershed. Share your ideas?
Eichner: It depends on the amount of money available. I have some ideas. You can get a good idea of hydrology
of those ponds, how much water is going out of lower mill, what is going on with the sediments, depending on
funding—Collect some water quality data. How it fits into the information that you already have. Might want to do a
water plant survey?We have an AUV that takes pictures of the plants. It can survey the plants.
Schell: Unit gives you something that can be converted into Chlorophyll readings?
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 4
Eichner: Yes. It can do a mussel survey as well. This unit would cost mid 10k. [Leven asked for general cost.]
There are also things you can do with town resources. Tagged all storm water outlets?Water quality samples.
Aquatic bird issue: It is in the report. Don't know how it applies to the Cape. We have some volunteers collecting
data on Scargo Lake, similar one set up for Cedar Pond in Orleans next. Is this a big issue or not?
Hughes, J: You said to correlate with the state fish stocking. Does it go along with what you want for quality of
swimming pond? Can they co-exist?
Eichner: Sure. There tendency is to stock colder and deeper ponds with trout. They do stock ponds that it is pretty
clear the trout won't make it through the summer. If you could get into a situation where you were restoring habitat
for the kind of fish they are interested in, state money possible? Possibilities—develop synergy.
Schell: Prepare a request for proposal for it? Smast offers?
Eichner: RFP route, you could directly contract through us. How you want to go about doing these things. We are
typically less. Research based vs. private industry.
Schell: Any problems with other towns going directly to you vs. RFP process?
Eichner: No. It is research based. We are trying to help the towns and do research.
(Some discussion occurred between Schell and Eichner regarding services available.)
Taylor: Do we have any control here? Regarding what the state does. Does it matter what we want?
Eichner: That is a very interesting question. I don't have a good answer for you.
(Some discussion about liming of ponds?Taylor and Eichner.)
Hughes, J: Is it possible that some of this stocking of fish is contributing to the sediment of the ponds?
Eichner: Probably not. It is a question of magnitude. Most of these ponds are the big ones.
Taylor: Are we going to have anything to do with the Nickerson Ponds? State land.
Leven: We have discussed this in our meetings.
Eichner: That is one of those questions. They are on state land but within town boundaries. Watersheds extend
outside of town land. I would probably put them third in priority. Eventually you will have to tackle them.
Leven: We talked about that there is some interest in the state to look at these ponds?
Eichner: If the state for example wanted to tackle these ponds next year then they would become a priority.
Hughes, P: We need to be aware and realize there has to be a state/town ponds discussion. If the state turns up
the heat then we would have to put it higher on the list. Chris -- Would you endorse this approach, suggest
changes?
Miller: It is all a matter of funding. I support what Ed is saying. We need to address these assessments like Stony
Brook and the work with Harwich. Then we can go to spring town meeting for additional assessments.
Leven: We have met with Frank Sampson. We can go over this at another time.
(Dave Bennett arrived and Pat Hughes gave him a brief update of the meeting so far.)
Bennett: Have we asked Ed about bridge projects, inventory of storm water drains? Cranberry bogs?
Hughes, J: Identification of storm water drains is a priority
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 5
Hughes & Hughes: Ed mentioned bird counts, Septic systems, septic counts. 50-60 k
,.j
Bennett: How important do you see the storm water outfall for the ponds?
Eichner: We have looked at some of the ponds on the Cape. How big are the roads? boat ramp?, it may or may not
be a big issue.
Lipman: What would that mean? Can you compare land use effect on the ponds to somewhere off Cape?
Eichner: Pretty much anywhere land use will be an issue. It really depends on storm drains structure. The biggest
issues tend to be when the state roads are going by. They tend to be bigger collection systems, pipe drains, catch
basins, outfall pipes. Most of the other places tend to be a leaching catch basin. (Local road)
Schell: Comment. Don't the storm water issues, under the Mass 4 program, include a lot besides Catch basin --
IDDE program, town wide. Your Suggestion of going on the basis of what we already know, chain of active ponds.
Do water balance and phosphate/nutrient levels for these ponds. You are automatically putting your arms around
ponds through the elbow pond, cranberry pond, wetland adjacent from Walkers Pond. Would it also include input of
excess nutrients, from Elbow Pond as conveyed as storm water runoff?
Eichner: Yes, it often comes down to the available funds. My suggestion with storm water: You have requirement
responsibility, targeting infrastructure, existing town services?
Schell: If you proposal included nutrient balance. How could you avoid taking that into consideration?
Eichner: Town services?Additional money? I agree it is important to get there. It's just a question of how you will
prioritize your available funding. This is how we have been with other towns. Maybe it takes a couple of years to get
to where you want to be.
Schell: Seems to me it is a problem if you say you are going to do a water and nutrient budget. You would have to
say this is not complete because of funding. Since you are generating an expectation that the job will be done.
Eichner: This is what we did with the Brewster Ponds Report. Tackle the things you do know about. It is really a
question in how you spread out the responsibilities. (Town capabilities, volunteers, etc.)
Hughes, P: Remind all that we can get some synergy. In a previous meeting we did allocate 15k bridge funds to
assist DPW with mapping drain systems.
Schell: Is this just being done on an ad hoc basis or a bigger plan?
Hughes, P: There is not an overall plan. Did you catch up with Bob Bersin?
3
Leven: We discussed with Chris the things that can be done now. Bob Bersin and I have not met.
[5:28 pm] Elizabeth Taylor left the meeting.
Hughes, P: If we can provide some funding for DPW and set some priorities then we want to do this. Right now for
} next 9 mos. We are looking at investing this money. It does feel like piece meal. Address next steps.
Hughes, P: Add to it with volunteers monitoring the ponds. In some ways we are in a holding pattern.
Schell: When can you share with the rest of the committee?Appropriate to have such a plan?
1
Hughes, P: Establish a plan with these funds.The next steps on the pond study are very important. (Bridge
projects.)
Schell: What I am hearing is discussion about allocations of funds, not hearing implementing of plans.
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 6
Leven: We are looking at the cost and timing of various options so we can put this together X amount of money, to
look at the different opportunities available and make a plan from that. We want to make sure we get the biggest
bang for our buck. We want projects that mesh together well. We are not now saying our plan is this and Ed has
come to tell us how much it will cost. We are saying a variety of recommendations were made in the Pond Study.
What can we do with what we have?
Schell: Great. It seems to me that you still need a plan.
Hughes, P: CDM did the initial assessment. They have identified series of recommendations. In order for us to
achieve a complete plan. Some of these touch on the ponds. We are fortunate to have an existing pond study.
There are a number of steps we need to take to finish our plan. Tonight we are trying to identify what are the key
areas we can investigate?
Schell: It seems to be what we are talking about -- An extension of what is in the CDM plan and how we can
implement it? I am hearing again that you are doing this on an ad hoc basis and not it being on a plan. There still
should be a plan.
Miller: Back in Sept. 2009 when Ed developed this report, we came up with specific recommendations for each
pond. It included costs. We do have an ideal plan if we have the budget. The issue is now that we don't have the
budget. If we don't have the budget then how can we chip away at the plan? We have a very detailed plan and it
will give us the details we need. It is on the web site. "Brewster Fresh Ponds Report and Water Quality Status...."I
can give you a paper copy.
Usowski: If we don't do something now then when we go to ask for more money we need to have a list of what we
have done. It would be nice to have a list of what we have done that contributes to the master plan.
Bennett: I agree. We have done an assessment so far. There might be a difference of what a goal is vs. a plan.
What we are doing on these bridge projects is addressing the overall plan. Ponds are a large part of the objective.
When Ed completed this study, there were several recommendations to get more data to verify conclusions.
Schell: It is good to be in action mode. I still think it is helpful to have a plan. It can be a dynamic plan, revised as
you go along. I don't mean to limit it to just gathering data.
Bennett: I have an administrative question. Who develops the RFP that is publically advertised? Who does the work?
i.e. storm water, ponds of so many acres. What if the RFP's come in greater than $15k? Can we revise the scope of
work to meet the budget?
Eichner: SMAST could do this. Or you could go through an RFP? We would probably respond to it. Re: Storm Water
— If you have existing town resources and get the work done without additional cost to the town then I recommend
this.
(Some discussion regarding town records, state highways, collection system....)
Hughes, P: RFP's? It may be that only a couple pieces of work require a RFP?
Bennett: A cap? If costs more than XX, need a RFP? ($20k)? Who would generate the scope of work?
Leven: You would want a scope of work. I would do it and the committee would review it.
Hughes, P: It could be managed by Natural Resources or Sue.
(Some discussion of the process within the group)
Bennett: Shortfall in the budget. If we don't use it do we lose it?
Leven: It is important for us to have a plan for what we have now. Right now a chunk for the bridge projects and a
chunk to begin to advertise for the next phase of work. Then, go to town meeting and let them know we need this
much more for the rest of the work.
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 7
1
Bennett: Bridge project used as an introduction to an article?
r
Leven: In May we are in the process of doing or have done these bridge projects in anticipation of doing this other
piece. We are expecting to do this and need an additional sum of money to do the next phase.
4. Hughes, J: How much confidence do you have in best management practices for the cranberry bogs? Can it still
affect the pond quality?
4
Eichner: Sure it can have an effect on the pond. Any land use is going to have an impact on water quality for a
pond. Cranberry bogs are difficult to generalize. There are different kinds of bogs. It depends on the crop you are
managing and the person actually doing the management. There are different nutrient needs, export different
amounts of nutrients. How water is used?Whether taken from a pond and put back into a pond?There are all sorts
of circumstances. We recently have been doing a lot of work with CC Cranberry Growers Association. We are trying
to get a handle of what is going on.
Hughes, J: Wareham Report. They are thinking about buying and retiring cranberry bogs?
g
Eichner: Be careful with the Wareham example. It depends on the circumstances. They are looking at a nitrogen fix.
Most bogs are further up in the water shed. The nitrogen concentration is significantly less than what gets into the
ponds. It is important to understand how that water sits within that water shed.
Schell: In the recent past Brewster has bought two cranberry bogs. (near Upper Mill and one south of Pine Pond)
Hughes, P: Any other questions for Ed?
1
1 Eichner: Reinforce - Look into government contracting.
Hughes, P: Recently read in newspaper or on-line. Cranberry Growers have recently got some money to evaluate
ponds? Curious if they have chosen the bogs? Perhaps include a Brewster bog? Contact the Executive Director?
Eichner: We will run lab samples for them. DEP did an analysis of White Island Pond and developed TMDL, 2
cranberry bogs, (cranberry growers were targeted as the problem) we were asked by the growers association to
look at the actual data. The data did not seem to fit that story. The sediments were more of the problem. We used
the AUV. The growers have said lets be proactive and figure out the water quality is close to our bogs.
Hughes, P: Harwich waiting on Herring River report. This is a good region for this type of work.
Eichner: We hear from the growers that this is a traditional agricultural use for this region.
Hughes, P: If we had a bog included this could benefit what we are trying to do.
Miller: Could include Hinckley Pond in Harwich
[Ed Eichner left at 5:58 pm]
Other Business:
Hughes, P: Final recommendations for the bridge projects:
Leven: Reviewed Action Items. See page 14.
Hughes, P: Amount of money we invest in the bridge projects?
Leven: $ 200k, 100k for bridge, rest for the next phase. Dependent on budget shortfalls.
Health dept. — Depends on how easy it would be to get parcel id's to find each other? Consider spending it
professionally instead of doing it in house.
Gallagher, Bennett—Agrees.
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 8
1
Hughes, P: Could this professional also integrate assessors and water dept's records?
Leven: Database project.
Bennett: Central software package?
Leven: Arc GIS.
Skidmore: It is more important to get the data organized property before being used by GIS.
Leven: To create data that is usable in a format we have that is put together a way that is usable to us.
Miller: The town has been looking at moving to electronic files. They have been talking about it for awhile.
Hughes, P: Conversation with Kathy?
Hughes, J: We may not know the possibilities?What is the optimum? What can Bill Gates do for us?
Hughes, P: We know we want certain data sets in the right format and availability. We want it integrated with our
other databases for analysis. Better wastewater flow.
Miller: There are 1000's of towns that have already done this.
Hughes, P: Tonight, these are the things we should invest our money in. The scope of work, RFP—outside
professional services. Or 15k to Bob Bersin. Let's be clear.
(some discussion Skidmore and Bennett re: Eastham BOH)
Bennett: Eastham has a good system setup. You can look up records by parcel and lot.
(Some discussion regarding files, access, research, etc.)
Miller: Any cost estimates to do these steps? It is hard to vote a budget without scale of costs.
Hughes, P: We vote priorities tonight.
Hughes, J: Agree we should go ahead but setting priorities without completely reviewing the new updated CDM
report?
Hughes, P: We are in line with the CDM report.
(Some discussion occurred regarding the new report and what is included. Current priorities that have bee
discussed)
Hughes, P: From last meeting:
Water dept records
Storm water outfall
Ponds
Septic system (3 out 5)
Build out (CDM recommending only the Pleasant Bay Water Shed) (4 out of 5)
Hughes, J: Narrow it down?
Miller: Any other steps? Build Out. GIS?
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 9
Leven: Maximum build out under zoning. (Does not have to do with water use.)They look at through GIS, what is
on the property now , is it developed? Max. potential?What is the difference between what is out there and
jmaximum potential.
Y.
Hughes, J: Water sheds. Build out could be helpful to see what it all looks like.
Lipman: With a build out analysis you can see what that water shed might look like in ten years?
Parameters. Open space, golf course. What is development potential. Scale—very aggressive, more predictable.
Miller: What data do we need to perform it?
Leven: Need accurate description of what is underground? (A lot of mixed use.) i.e. commercial with residential
Bennett: Don't we have someone that walks around and looks at all the houses?This is done by private org. Vote
the priorities, dollar amounts if we are not committed after the RFP if the number changes. John would know what it
would cost to do a build out Let's agree on priorities, change RFP if necessary, allowed to do his
Leven: Add in the work in Harwich, to cover our share of it. 15—20 k(Hinckley Pond water shed) Harwich
contacted us because the majority of the water shed is in Brewster.
Miller&Leven: On Ed's map it is the center blue area Around Sheep Pond. Huge amount of Brewster information
here.
Bennett: Does there request include money for testing these ponds?
Miller: They are going to look at some of the water shed in Brewster. We are doing some of this work already.
Leven: This goes with what Ed was saying about taking a set of ponds and look at the information. Connections of
all these Brewster ponds into Hinckley's Pond. We can get a better understanding of how the water moves.
Hughes, P: Is that where we invest our ponds money instead of Stony Brook?
Leven: Not necessarily. We can do work with Harwich and it might be worth trying to do pieces of both and the
Stony Brook water shed.
Hughes, P: It makes sense for 15 20 k to go in with Harwich, I recommend we do the ponds work that Ed
suggested Stony Brook system, for all the various priorities, go for it These are all things we are saying we need.
4
Other Business:
Hughes, P: Prioritize List:
Bennett: water records, well information, septic information — put into usable form.
We all agree this is important.
Hughes, P: List:
Water dept records
Storm water outfall
Ponds
Septic system
Build out(CDM recommending only the Pleasant Bay Water Shed)
Bennett:
IT-water records, well info., and septic data—All GIS
PONDS - water quality— Ponds, Harwich project, Mill Pond, Cranberry bogs
Storm Water—
Leven: From meeting with Frank and Heinz, read through their original RFP, pull out info, get it back to Harwich
early 2011. All of you have received a copy of the RFP from Harwich.
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 10
Hughes, P: 4 priority areas
Data —well water, mapping, water dept records and BOH records
Ponds— Hinckley Pond work, Stony Brook- *price for all ponds and just Stony Brook from cMast.
Build out—Cost out full town or just Pleasant Bay
Storm water—Identification, on the ground water collection (DPW)
Hughes, J: Ed can give numbers for all of ponds or Stony Brook system
Bennett: Build Out - Pleasant Bay vs. whole town, John?
Leven: Pleasant Bay Build Out was done awhile ago.
Lipman: Build outs are good for about 5 yrs. back. It may not be that expensive.
Control Costs:
• Availability of data vs. going out and getting data
• How detailed you actually want to make it.
• Traffic, schools, etc.
Other uses in town?
There may be some material we can get from CCC. Ask them, $5 or $10k.
Build outs were about $7k a town. ($8-15k range.) It might make sense to do it for the whole town.
Bennett: Major water sheds break out?
Miller: Next phase?Any data that you have to have for the next phase? Nitrogen in Pleasant Bay? Priority for next
phase?
Hughes, P: It is a priority. Right now focus on ponds and ground water. Full town build out gives us some good
information.
Bennett Motion—Committee for prioritize 4"bridge" projects for funding. Includes storm water, pond study,
information updates and a build out analysis for the town.
Data—well water, mapping, water dept and BOH records
Ponds— Hinckley work, Stony Brook
Build out—full town
Storm water
Committee money unspecified.
Hughes, 7—second
All Aye
(Some discussion continued regarding RFP's and allocated money with the group.)
Schell: When does Phase II start?
Leven: That is what Phase II is. We do have some funding. A RFP out by town meeting.
Hughes, P: Phase II begins in Feb. or March. When we issue a RFP, likely February or March.
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 11
Bennett: Work on RFP's in the next few months.
Skidmore: I have reviewed invoices from CDM. I have made some recommendations. The status information is
incomplete. I recommend that status reporting be separate from invoicing.
Bennett: Would it be helpful to have someone from this committee review them?
Leven: It will become a priority of the project. RFP.
Leven: Rob from CDM asked to schedule a meeting 1/10/11? Not 1/10.
Hughes, P: Will not be ready. Don't want to put it off.
Hughes, J: 1/24/11
F
Hughes, P: Review the report and focus on information not syntax. Do we feel that the report is sufficient as we
move into the next phase of the report? Look at the recommendations. Final version.
Looking into the next phase, makes sense. Could minor changes help it make sense?
No minutes to review.
Next meeting:January 10,2011 at 4:30 pm
Motion to adjourn: Hughes, J
Lipman : Second
All Aye
Meeting ended 6:55 pm
Respectfully subm.p ed,
srI,
iviirài
ifi;11052 :4111"
/ A id _
e ly Moore
Sr. I-��t. Assistant/Planning
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 12
Action Items: Updated 12116/10
Action Items: CWPC Meeting 12/13/10
Topic/Owner: Comments: Status:
Talk with Kathy Lambert re DB integration with Leven Pending
departments
Meet with Tammi in Health Dept. Leven Meeting held. Information on
Regarding computer records&data files. computer can probably be
converted easily.
Follow up with the Cranberry Growers Association. Leven Information has been requested.
Who are the Brewster Members? Will try to get status before next
meeting. 1/10/11
Talk to Tom Cambareri, Bob Bersin (Chris Miller) Maps and paper vs. what is on computer? Waiting for them to collect
Berms? Storm water?Working vs. non information before meeting. Have
working catch basins, Discharge to the also been in touch with Paul
ponds? Other budgets. Anderson. Will meet after 12/13.
Leven
Review CDM Final version of Brewster IWRMP Committee In process
Needs Assessment from CDM
r
CWPC 12-13-10.doc Minutes 13
. \
\
\ i
\ \
\ \
\ \
/
\ /
\ \
4.
\ \
/.
\
ti-