The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2011-04-04 Minutes wSrF°j%�� Comprehensive Water Planning o o � = Town of Brewster ,e F Committee l' )`i M .4 2198 Main Street N•Z 1 itl`i sf D 0 Rig!!!'!; N Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 (508) 896-3701 EQ 18;";0 oo`�� FAX(508) 896-8089 �iiirni81i1 imtn 0"\� Date Approved: 5/9/11 Vote: 5-0-2 Hughes J and Evans abstain TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE (CWPC) REGULAR MEETING Monday, April 4, 2011 at 4:30 pm Brewster Town Office Building Pat Hughes convened the CWPC meeting at 4:41 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with members, Lem Skidmore, Russell Schell, Elizabeth Taylor, and Dave Bennett present. Absent: John Lipman, Joanne Hughes, Bruce Evans Also Present: Sue Leven, Jim Gallagher, Chris Miller, Peter Johnson (BCT) Recording or Taping Notification As required by the Open Meeting Law we are informing you that the Town will be audio and video 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." Documents: 0404_A Scope of Work from SMAST, Ed Eichner dated 3/22/11, (from last meeting) 0404_B Town of Brewster Town-Wide Build Out, Sue Leven dated April 2011 AGENDA Citizen Forum — No comments. Discuss scope of work for Mill ponds provided by SMAST Leven spoke to Ed Eichner. Monthly status report emails are no problem. He said that a lot of the other things mentioned they can do but you will pay for it. We were looking for as much as we can get for the amount of money we have. He was trying to meet budget requirements. Hughes, P: Diurnal oxygen readings from the county? Instrumentation? Schell brought up task#3, 12 month outlet flow? Leven left the meeting to call Ed Eichner. She shared Ed's comments: • Stage recorder, level shown can predict the flow, no reason that SMAST cannot deal with higher stage of overflow • Less than 12 months flow can be compared to Herring River, but this is not ideal CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 1 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes • Eichner was concerned about on the other side of the divide, wants to compare 12 months. There is ongoing collection on Herring River. • Ground water vs. stormwater water shed. If it is clear there is stormwater infiltration then that will be incorporated. • He will talk to Department of Marine Fisheries regarding a permit to monitor stream flow • Oxygen concentrations— Russ can talk to him directly. Sediments are an important factor. Schell: Necessary for a water budget, not necessarily from SMAST. Hughes, P: Ed will be doing this overflow volume? Leven: Yes Schell: Flow from pond to pond themselves?Without a profile? Leven: I can't answer these questions. Sue gave Russell Ed's card. Hughes, P: Russ may wish to call Ed Eichner directly. Clarify technical questions and communicate with the committee. Schell: My inquiry is only on a technical basis. Task#3. Quest profiling, overflows, etc. Leven, Hughes, Schell discussed comments further. Schell commented about Ed's responses. Why not a written response. I would like to see a response in writing. Hughes, P: Russell —You should speak with Ed directly. Leven: I will request a written response. Hughes,P: This is ready to go. We may have additional funding for add-ons. Bennett: Any discussion on Phosphorus and Nitrogen testing in cranberry bogs? Elbow Pond. Leven: We had talked about not doing Elbow Pond. No public access to Elbow Pond. Water flowing into bogs then ponds. Hughes, P: During fertilization time, Spring. There was a discussion when and how and possible changes to budget. Miller: We are sampling all ponds this Spring. PALS group. I can do an extra sample. We receive calls when they are running the pumps. It is hard to get out there to sample on a day they are doing it. Hughes, P: We did want to allocate some funding to support PALS. Schell: SMAST task included identification of Phosphorus in storm water from Walkers Pond and Small and Elbow Pond. Did they have any issues? Does SMAST plan on covering this? Hughes, P and Schell discussed ground water watershed and storm water watershed. Leven: I sent Ed your comments. They can do anything the committee wants but it will require additional funding. Anything outside of the scope is additional funding Schell: Scope clarification. I don't consider this response appropriate. (Leven left to call Eichner) CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 2 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Hughes, P: ground water"water" shed and storm water"water" shed were different? Schell: Commented on Phosphorous concentrations. Skidmore: Agrees with Bennett regarding cranberry bogs. Do sampling if we can do it. Hughes, P: We are concentrating on the Mill Ponds complex concentration for SMAST. (Due to limited budget.) Are there other ponds that you could get samples? Miller: Long Pond. Bennett: There is a question of the issue of Phosphorus source from cranberry bogs and especially in the Mill Pond area. Physical testing would potentially allow us to dismiss and move on or note it is a significant factor. People at Elbow Pond are extremely vigilant about monitoring. We could incorporate any data we get. Reach out to PALS people that work at Elbow Pond. We are interested in collecting a sample when discharging the water back into the Pond. I could go that day and take a sample. We have a lot of information from CGA about best management practices but individual practices may vary. It is important for us to have one sample at one event to understand the nutrient loads. Miller: We don't have a PALS volunteer from that Pond. I go do it myself. (North side by canoe) Bennett: Tom Lincoln? Miller: SE side, huge bog, commercial activity. Bennett will contact Mr. Lincoln to see if we can get a volunteer. Mr. Sandy Zevon?Ask Elizabeth Taylor Coordinate through Chris. Pat or Sue can contact Cranberry Growers Association and ask if they might talk to the bog owners. Try to sample when discharging. Bennett, Miller, & P. Hughes discussed sampling, cranberry growers, CGA, further. Hughes, P: Support PALS with extra samples. The committee discussed process, SMAST labs, etc. (Committee talked about build out, waiting for Leven to return) Hughes, P: Let's go forward with a contract for sign off, further clarification. Additional funding? Propose if it is $2k or less, authorize Sue to make agreement. Schell: Kettle ponds comment. Sub task easily broken out. Have a local surveyor establish elevation bench mark, etc. overflow cross section is what you need to establish a flow. It makes more sense to do locally than to have SMAST do it. Hughes, P: Asking for guidance from the committee? Bennett: I'm not objecting to getting started with coring. If there is a significant question Russ have dialogue and emails copied to us. A little bit concerned about the cost. $40k? Leven: Work on $40k and we can make adjustments. Scale back? Or since this information is gathered over a year, incorporate that into Phase II. Bennett: We aren't collecting redundant information just to collect information. SMAST and PALS Storm water- $10k help DPW move along. Why study Phosphorus input? CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 3 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Hughes, P Bennett and Miller discussed further. Hughes, P: Could say the same about the cranberry growers. PALS don't collect sediment cores. Committee discussion continued. Bennett: Task 4, if you know where storm water catch basins are, investigate those. Hughes, P: Trying to identify the significance of the contribution. Keep it. Bennett: I disagree with you. Hughes: First vote to move ahead with proposal, can amend tasks later. Like to avoid voting by individual tasks. Schell: Likely significant contribution from catch basins, stormwater from Slough and Elbow pond. Necessary in order to determine stormwater overflows after a '/4" of rainfall. My understanding was that SMAST would do this type of sampling. DEP recommendation. Miller: Stormwater—we have DPW who already knows these are issues. We need report, with data about phosphorus, take report to selectmen to vote to fix these. Taylor made a Motion to approve moving forward with scope of work, to the satisfactorily resolution of CWPC comments with Mr. Eicher, authorizing Sue to add up to $2k more before coming back to committee, Second Skidmore, All Aye, Vote 5-0-0. Schell amend motion -go ahead with scope of work subject to satisfactorily addressing CWPC comments Bennett: Primary tasks only Taylor: Question about the $40k budget. Question to Chris Miller: Pond's report, shrank down to fit into the budget requirements. What can we do with $40k? Bennett: Recommend we proceed, natural resources? Miller: Yes, I recommend Bennett: additional coring $10k, does your recommendation include this? Miller: We met and discussed with Ed. Primary $40k scope, not add-ins for now. Discuss draft RFP for Brewster Build out and Phase II outline Hughes, P: Russ's comment on B. Future Conditions b.) - is good Leven read Schell's comments. Schell: Good idea to do this. He commented on CDM report process. Hughes, P: 3. Meetings—add before final report is done Build out done by major water sheds. A. Existing Conditions. Sue has indentified what the town will provide to ' the consultant. Schell: Gave Hughes a handout, further consideration and guidance for B. Future Conditions. Taylor reviewed. CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 4 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Hughes to Skidmore: Your focus on the mechanics of managing a contract... Skidmore: What they plan, what they did, what has been complete, actual completion, ratio, plans for next month, and deviations from original contract. Depending on how long the contract is, monthly updates might be reasonable but could be too long. Bi weekly may be better. Miller: How long should the process be? Hughes, P: A couple months. The committee discussed costs, consultants, timeframe, etc. Hughes, P: CDM has a good planning department. We might consider asking them for a proposal. Kathy Lambert suggested CDM for linking water records with assessor's database. 1) have technical staff 2) most familiar with how we would want to use it. Schell: Assessor's database can be queried on basis of watershed? Hughes, P: Yes, already done for MA estuaries project. We can request that data through the MEP. Dave Young said we could ask for technical analysis done that supports MEP. Taylor: Kathy has a lot of this information on the computer. Gallagher: We have parcels on the map. There is a watershed layer out there. Which parcels are in which watershed is easily done. Explained process. The committee discussed the process. Bennett: Get an independent assessment and compare final deliverable to the other towns. I want the work to be done independently. Calculate on our own basis and then compare with what the other towns have said. Hughes, P: Purpose of the RFP is to have a new comprehensive build out for Brewster. Wording needs to be changed since it comes from the Phase I RFP. Miller: 1A—do we have this? Can it be exact or close? Schell: Comment. Watersheds (to be provided by Town) Commented on data comparison with other town's data. Miller: Use watersheds as defined by MA estuaries report. Schell: A. h. watersheds (to be provided by town) Hughes, P: Yes, MA estuaries program and refinement of DCPC Hughes, P: Does town have these layers? Bottom of page#1 b. agreed on by the committee Bennett: Meetings—change to four times. C. a discussion and review of draft report analysis before we get a final version. Skidmore: Regular status reporting? Hughes, P: Will send a contract to sue for consideration. CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 5 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Bennett: How much will meetings cost? Leave a line item for additional meetings? I think it will take 2 months. Miller: Deliverables as a presentation at a public meeting? Hughes, P: Public meeting to discuss ponds information? Leven: Change SMAST to include a public presentation. Hughes, P: Yes, Cost into Phase II. Miller: Ask Ed if he is planning to do a presentation. He has done in the past. Hughes, P: Change in intro. Looking at other town's data? Miller: Delete 2nd paragraph? Consultants know what the IWRP is. Hughes, P: Delete last two sentences. I like the clarification. Leven: wastewater in this? From Taylor comment. Mention wastewater management? Read a suggested statement. Hughes, P: We could add what an integrated water resource plan is... Wastewater management treatment... Bennett: for manageable nutrient sources... Hughes, P: Highlight particular resources and uses that we are concerned about. Identify specifically...The DEP guide. The committee discussed further. Bennett: Add, 2nd paragraph first sentence. By control of manageable nutrient sources in (waste water, fertilizer, storm water runoff) I would eliminate last two sentences in the second paragraph. I like the idea of the consultant looking at the projected loads and how his technique is similar or different... Hughes, P: A. existing conditions— Miller Miller: It doesn't say where it will come from. Not sure if we will have everything they need. Leven: If marked town will supply then town will supply. Miller and Leven discussed further (state class codes, open space, etc.) We have water shed layer CDM used. Johnson: Protected open space. How defined? Leven: Space owned by not for profit, conservation under purview of conservation commission. Deeded for conservation purposes. Public water supply is done separately. Included 61A? Hughes, P: We didn't resolve this part of the report. The committee including Peter Johnson discussed 61A and open space, golf course, Sea Camps, etc. Gallagher: Any transfer out requires a transfer in. Hughes, P: Additional use for build out, looking at water—water sheds, particular parcels can become important. Shared an example. CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 6 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Miller: Bates (dirt road by-law), Barrows (could be a sub division) examples. Hughes, P: Look at for the future build out -the golf course and Sea Camps. Areas open but not open space protected. Leven: These properties will be discussed and reviewed. Bennett: Discussion, Sea Camps 100 acres. 1 acre lots? Leven: Certain percentage taken off the top for setbacks, roads, open space... Bennett: Potentially buildable, land locked land. Leven explained further. Bennett: Nutrient loads for the TMDL's, assumptions? 440 gallons of sewage for every acre lot i.e. 20 acre lot— 80 bedrooms? Leven explained. Not necessarily, smallest lot in Brewster 60,000 sq. feet. The largest is 100,000 square feet. What percentage is seasonal or year round? Discussion of year round vs. seasonal continued...Ocean Edge Condos. What total build out means... Leven: Elizabeth mentioned the degree we factor in 40B? Hughes, P: Yes, include this. Defer to Sue with the consultant, areas to consider 40B. Leven: Commission is sending a build out chart for E. Harwich area. Horsely Whitten charted build out, spreadsheet coming. Bennett: 40B cannot subvert regulations. Leven comment: Option to do a 40B on small parcels. You are correct in zone 2 you run into interesting issues. It might not be viable in certain areas. Hughes, P: Any other comments? Leven will edit document and include comments Hughes, P: Approve scope of work with changes recommending, Pat will review one last time with Sue. Bennett Made a Motion to accept the scope of work to be issued for Brewster build out as amended at this meeting, Taylor Second, All Aye, Vote 5-0-0. Discussion: RFP vs. scope of work process. RFQ, RFP, sending to multiple companies for a quote. Taylor: List of people to send it to? Hughes, P: Defer to staff. Leven: Possible companies to consider: Horsely Whitten, Ed Eichner did the build out work for Harwich (when with the commission), CDM did build out work in Harwich. Bennett: Send it to CDM. Taylor: Cape Cod Commission? Leven: We can ask them. They are working for Yarmouth. They are trying to qualify Yarmouth for 0% funding re: waste water, sewers CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 7 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Bennett: Ask John Lipman who he would recommend? His company? Leven: Will ask John who he recommends. Upcoming APA conference in Boston —will ask people. Discussion of CCC vs. private firms. Leven: Planning firm with good GIS. Stearns and Wheler? Next Meeting: 4/25/11 Bennett made a Motion to adjourn Skidmore Second All Aye Vote, 5-0-0 Next meeting is Monday 4/25/11 @ 4:30 pm. Meeting ended 6:22 pm Respectfullyyubmitted, if yrik Or/019- 1A—____ = ► 'r--' -- Kelly Moore, Sr. i r, pt. Assistant Planning rd CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 8 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes Action Items: Updated 4/8111 CWPC Meeting 4/4/11 Action Item: Comments: Status: Due CDM Done.Dave Young coming to CWPC Sue and Pat to meet with Dave Young week of 4/7/11. Leven meeting on 4/25. *Ask CDM to create a proposal for water dept. linking records to the assessor's database?Discuss next meeting. CDM to come to the 4/25/11 meeting. BRIDGE PROJECTS AND PHASE II: 4/25/11 Dave to contact Mr.Lincoln to see if we can get a volunteer to Bennett to follow up. take water samples.Call Dr.Sandy Zevon. *Elizabeth called and left message 4/8. Phone:385.9478 4/25/11 Request written response from Ed Eichner to questions Leven submitted by Russell Schell. (Scope of work for Mill Ponds provided by SMAST) Call Ed Eichner with further clarification of questions Schell Done Build Out Scope of Work-Edit document-include Leven comments from CWPC. Done Spreadsheet from Horsely Whitten Group-E. Harwich Build Leven Out Done Ask John Lipman for recommendations -companies to ask to Leven provide build out 4/25/11 Find companies to consider build out project Leven MISC: Cranberry Growers Association Leven Pending Check on the availability of PowerPoint presentations from the Waiting to hear re:meetings with the last meeting CGA,Taylor and Leven attended in 2010 growers,will ask for presentations. Contact CGA and ask if they might talk to the bog owners and 4/25/11 find out when discharging into the bog-to take samples. CWPC 4-04-11.doc Page 9 of 9 Audio recording—CWPC_040411_audiominutes