Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutComprehensive Water Planning -- 2011-10-11 Minutes \\\\\\\\\\u\u\tuinrnrununo/o//i oae we? %� Comprehensive Water Planning Committee = Town of Brewster 2 3 u + i�hi 1110;= 2198 Main Street o 11,(.iii�w'_'_ fi . Brewster, Massachusetts 02631-1898 "'% (508) 896-3701 x1233 FAX (508) 896-8089 �4 Date Approved: 10/24/11 - Vote: 7-0 TOWN OF BREWSTER MINUTES OF COMPREHENSIVE WATER PLANNING COMMITTEE (CWPC) REGULAR MEETING Monday, October 11, 2011 at 4:30 pm Brewster Town Office Building Chairman Lem Skidmore convened the CWPC meeting at 4:33 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with members Dave Bennett, Bruce Evans, Pat Hughes, Joanne Hughes, Dan Ryan, and Elizabeth Taylor present. Absent: Russell Schell Also Present: Jim Gallagher, Sue Leven, Peter Johnson, Chris Miller, Jim Geisler 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 audio tape this meeting they are required to inform the chair." Documents: 101111_A Interview Questions, handout from Leven for the committee `Note--both GHD and HWG Proposals on file. Citizen Forum Jim Gallagher informed the committee that citizens have called him from the Elbow Pond Area and are concerned about water quality. He told them to come to a meeting. Status of Phase II RFP: Meet with Consultants, GHD @ 4:30 pm, HWG @ 5:30 pm GHD Presentation: J. Jefferson Gregg, P.E. Program Manager Darlene Zellinski, E.I.T. Project Manager Nancy Farrell Public Relations Manager Nate Weeks, William Hall, Principal Gregg presented a PowerPoint presentation to the committee. He gave a summary of their experience with the surrounding towns and introduced the team. Gregg reviewed the proposed project outline. PowerPoint Highlights: • Project Basis • Existing Practices • Nutrient Management • Integrated Solutions • Regionalization • Public Education Zellinski presented to the committee. Zellinski reviewed the Project Basis. How will the MEP Reports be used? CWPC 10- 11-11.doc Page 1 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes a Bridging Projects—Storm water, Build out, GIS, Ponds Study and development of future conditions. Existing Practices—existing cluster systems, proposed small treatment plants and GWDP's, mgmt practices, BOH records. Drinking water—existing supply and treatment, water quality, consumption patterns, management practices and conservation measures Storm water—bridging project, management practices (private vs. public) Nutrient Management—GIS, future flows—bridging projects, nutrient loading, future conditions, priority area. She shared an example from Dennis. They identified priority areas. Integrated Solutions—pollutants of concern, source of pollutants, regulatory requirements, management approaches And Regionalization Needs Assessment Report—existing conditions, future conditions, priority areas, approaches, leading into Phase III. She shared an example from Mashpee. They identified priority areas. Public Participation—Where does Public Participation fit in? Farrell presented to the committee. She noted the advantage of working with an established group. She suggested working together in a workshop to share ideas. She discussed a public education and involvement plan. Gregg summarized GHD's strengths. He stated they bring a knowledgeable and experienced team to this project. Leven read the questions for GHD. Questions for individual firms: GHD 1. Do you consider the potential impacts of climate change to be an important factor to integrate into Brewster's comprehensive water management efforts?Yes. 2. Please provide us with more detail on what you consider to be the key issues for Brewster to consider with regard to current and future management of Nickerson State Park. Gregg explained is a state run facility that has gone through some septic improvements. It should not be left out of the planning process. The park is a big piece of Brewster. It is in your best interest to learn more about what they are doing. *Darlene is the project manager. Committee Questions: Taylor asked about the Conservation Law Foundation case and switching gears quickly if something happens. Gregg explained the Town of Brewster needs to focus on your needs. Move forward and get support from your community, county and state. William Hall addressed the committee and stated the work you are doing would not be tossed aside even if the CLF forced a regional solution. The risk being undertaken at this point with the CLF issue out there is relatively small. Hall hopes they would build upon what you are doing. Hughes, P asked about Nickerson State Park. She asked if there are examples of how towns have worked with state owned land. Weeks noted yes, Provincetown and the National Seashore and the Mass Military Reservation. Evans asked about seasonal use of homes. Is it easy to estimate? Gregg said the build out analysis will give you this information. He explained you can look at water use of seasonal areas. Weeks recommended looking at water consumption data and incorporate into a GIS system. Does existing seasonality fit with future prediction of seasonality? 5:30 pm -HWG Scott Horsley presented to the committee and introduced the team. They distributed copies of the PowerPoint. He gave a summary of the company. Geraldine Camilli, GIS (doing work for Brewster now) Mark Nelson, Project Manager Katie Resnick, Planning Scott Horsley, Principal CWPC 10-11-11.doc Page 2 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes PowerPoint Presentation Highlights: Why the Horsley Witten Group? Pleasant Bay Fertilizer Management, shared examples Pinehills Nutrient Interceptor Wells, integrated water mgmt, example Storm water Retrofit Example, Water Street, Plymouth MA, example Taunton River Watershed Management Plan, example EPA's Office of Water Strategic Plan for Climate Change Customer references are available. Nelson addressed the committee. He continued with the PowerPoint. Working on plan for the nation (climate change). It comes back to local actions that impact climate change. (Septic, ground water, extreme events, etc.) He reviewed the scope of work. 1. Wastewater Needs-Know TMDL, waiting Bass River and Herring River data, Good Phase I data 2. Water Supply Master Planning—GIS project, Build out data 3. Storm water Compliance and Improvements—Looking at regulatory code, MS4 permitting requirements, education 4. Pond Water Quality Planning 5. Outreach Camilli gave a GIS update. They are working on data collection and have identified locations for training. Re: Build out, reviewed Town regulations; identify preliminary assumptions for build out, waste water.... Nelson addressed what's next. Water sheds and Nitrogen credits. Other Nitrogen Offsets—fertilizer mgmt (golf course), regional negotiations—land purchased from Orleans. Areas impacted by sea level and water table rise-GIS layers. Namskaket Marsh Brewster Credits addressed. What does Brewster stand to gain?Alternatives to centralized treatment Water Supply Planning Beginning of a water supply plan. Good water quality in town. What is next?Water conservation and irrigation management. Future demand from build out numbers. Emergency Response Training What's next? Example retrofits process, water street bio retention facility, and 3 sites for conceptual design —grant money to fix. Table top exercises Pond Water Quality Planning Septic Perpendicular to a pond Lawns with vegetative buffers, shared example Maximizing pond protections Outreach examples: St. Croix sample project website—Resnick presented project information to the committee. Public education posters and flyers, Smart Growth/Smart Energy Toolkit Handouts for people in pond neighborhoods, door notice with info. on the back side. Shared an example. NY state watershed video example Nelson reviewed Project Phasing—He stated they are very open to discussing this subject. Wastewater and Outreach, (Remaining tasks pending budget approval) Nelson showed various outreach posters developed for other clients. Questions for individual firms: HWG 1. Please give us a brief overview of the potential impacts of climate change to Brewster's comprehensive water management efforts. Addressed earlier. 2. Do you consider the current and future management of Nickerson State Park to be a significant factor as Brewster develops its comprehensive water management plan?What are some of the key issues we should be examining? It is worth looking into. CWPC 10-11-11.doc Page 3 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes 3. With regard to staffing this project please explain what you mean by % available—does that mean for example, that an individual proposed would spend that percentage of available time on this project? Done at the time of the RFP. Horsley explained how much current availability not what is contributed. 4. You note the status of a number of.your projects as on-going —would you explain whether that might affect your ability to complete this project within the timeframe included in your proposal? No. Call and ask our clients. We do a lot work with EPA. On time and on budget. 5. Please provide more of a discussion of completed projects. Addressed in the presentation Committee Comments: The committee likes the door hangers regarding Long Pond. Hughes, P likes the poster boards. Taylor commented she is glad to hear they are asserting the town's rights with Namskaket Marsh and Town of Orleans. She is impressed with the Pleasant Bay watershed idea. There was continued discussion regarding Orleans. Nelson explained we need to be creative and productive in dealing with the Town of Orleans Skidmore asked about next steps—discuss what you have heard. Skidmore asked about funding. Leven explained further. Both consultants' numbers are very close. The committee discussed funding and the process for approval of funds. The committee agreed to meet and discuss presentations on 10/17/11. Pat Hughes will not be at the 10/17 meeting. She will email her vote to Leven. (This area intentionally left blank) CWPC 10-11-11.doc Page 4 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes Questions for Both Firms: QUESTION GHD HWG 1.)What do you see as to the similarities Gregg compared Brewster's needs to Nelson stated the big difference is and differences in the CWMP development Mashpee's. He stated it is similar to wastewater management solutions. in Brewster relative to work already Eastham.They did needs assessment for Brewster is not a big contributor to coastal conducted in the abutting towns? Dennis. Chatham was different. Brewster is areas. It is a different investment. Large rural and more spread out.Weeks agreed scale sewering is not likely to be the and stated contrast with Orleans. answer. (like Chatham and Orleans) Ponds Interaction with Orleans is an advantage to are a priority.Wastewater is solvable. Brewster.Weeks believes Brewster is Horsley: Smaller centralized solutions, similar to Eastham as far as Ponds work. _ homeowner solutions,etc. _ 2.) Please describe the ways in which you Gregg stated the most important thing is to Regional management—addressed in the think Brewster should approach regional begin discussions with neighboring towns. PowerPoint Presentation management in each of the watersheds the Weeks explained you should know the Town shares with Orleans, Harwich and neighboring towns and develop Dennis. If sewering is needed in a • opportunities. Let them know about your neighboring town's portion of the plans.Anticipate how CCWP collaborative watershed,but not in the Brewster portion, is going to start enforcing regional what are some management measures considerations.Attend water protection that together the towns can implement? collaborative meetings. 3.) Based on a previous project of similar Farrell noted it is hard to say. She likes Nelson mentioned public outreach scope, please provide some detail on the articles in local paper,web site materials, meetings. St. Croix example. In public outreach/participation element of the telephone surveys,town meeting Gloucester, RI, a mailed survey helped project—for example what forms of campaigns.We alter process if not with public participation, 23% response communication engaged the most number working. Skidmore asked about rate. Horsley explained posters and flyers of citizens and, did you change your effectiveness of local cable coverage. are successful. Hughes, J asked about approach based on initial Farrell stated a lot of people watch, but cable TV. Horsley and Nelson agreed it meetings/feedback with the public and/or don't rely on it only. Hughes, J asked about can work. Horsley has done recent work on the committee you worked with? documentary. Farrell says they work with TV for the Sandwich local channel. local videographers/schools. She explained you need to balance quality and cost. Leven asked about experience with local press. Farell explained they can write op pieces,flyers in the paper(fact sheets) 4.) Do you anticipate the need for re- Once we see the build out analysis then Nelson stated they would look at build out evaluating nutrient source contributions to we can make a comparison. data and come up with the right number. It Pleasant Bay and the TMDL relative to is part of the scope of work. The MEP data recent Zoning changes in Brewster? is good. 5.)Does your proposed work include Gregg explained once we have build out Nelson explained it is worth paying independent evaluation/peer review of information we can look at that impact and attention to it and being up to speed. He nutrient assimilation of the Namskaket compare to other reports. See if there is a has confidence in Peter Weiskel's work. River/Marsh currently and relative to the need for reevaluation.Weeks explained proposed expansion of the TriTown not unlikely there will be reevaluation. Treatment Facility?Please explain why or Analysis would point out data gaps and why not. identify future needs. A needs assessment is important. 6.) Does your proposed work include Gregg stated this proposal does not Nelson said they are not proposing ground groundwater modeling calibration and include groundwater modeling analysis. water modeling. He does not see a need to validation of variables to current Weeks addressed and confirmed it is do for modeling. Maybe in the next Phase. conditions?Please explain why or why not important. Horsley said some analytical modeling Ground water quality data an important combined with the GIS data might be part of the needs assessment? p ossible. 7.) How can this committee work with your Farrell explained sharing information is Leven explained the wind turbine case. firm to reach out to the community before important.This helps out weigh naysayers. Nelson mentioned explaining the priorities, naysayers get a foothold? You have to be willing to educate and be good information and being responsive. respectful. The right context and answers. 8.) In Phase I the consultant recommended Gregg explained it depends on the mgmt. Hughes, J explained further. Nelson that the BOH more strictly enforce their policies of the town. Documenting, explained minimizing phosphorus input 300 ft. setback to environmentally sensitive regulating, etc.Weeks stated they wouldn't example. Maybe waive 10 ft. setback. areas. How would you handle a local make a recommendation. It would happen Climate change in coastal areas. Distance upgrade with no increase in flow within 100 in a future phase.We could identify the to shore lines and ground water, extreme ft.of a coastal bank? Hughes,J explained need. water events. Horsley mentioned further. technology solutions. (if not erosion issue) CWPC 10-11-11.doc Page 5 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes 3. Status of Bridge Projects: Data Synthesis-GIS/Build-out, Ponds, Storm water Geo-location. Skidmore has communicated with Camilli about the well data. It is in their hands. Leven said SEA is gathering information. Miller will check with Ryan on sampling. SEA is coming to the meeting on the 24th. Leven will distribute information before or at the 10/17 meeting. Skidmore resending SMAST questions to Leven 4. Orleans CWMP DRI Update Taylor updated the committee. Brewster has a nonvoting seat on the Technical Committee. Leven explained having a vote does not matter. Miller or Miller and Leven will participate. Review minutes from 9/12/11, Review action items Bennett made a Motion to accept the minutes of 9/12/11 as corrected, Hughes, J Second, All Aye, Vote 7-0 (Gallagher and Ice emailed minor edits.) The committee reviewed the action item list. Taylor made a Motion to adjourn, Hughes, J Second, All Aye, Vote, 7-0 The meeting ended at 7:00 pm. Next Meeting: 10/17/11(extra meeting) & 10/24/11 Respectfully submitted, pikAbot =44,40, Dav-V?r nett, Clerk Kelly Moore, e t. s istant Planning CWPC 10- 11-11.doc Page 6 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes CWPC Action Items: Meetin• 10/11/11 Updated 10/13/11 CWPC Action Item: Comments: Status: Status of Bridge Projects: Data Synthesis- GIS/Build-out, Ponds, Storm water Geo-location (HWG is the consultant) Storm Water: SEA Kirsten Ryan from SEA will present to the 10/24/11 committee on 10/24/11. Leven will distribute information before or at the 10/17 meetin• Miller will check with Ryan on sampling 10/24/11 Questions: Schell question about outputs to Walker's Pond. 10/17/11 Is SEA looking at town drainage to Walkers? • From Slough and Elbow into Walkers Pond Leven can check to see if SEA included this and email the committee. SMAST or SEA-Leven will check Skidmore resending SMAST questions to Leven Phase II RFP: Proposals are in from HWG and GHD Committee to meet and discuss the 10/11/11 10/17/11 •resentations from both firms. Orleans CWMP DRI Letter to CCC from Brewster BOS Leven to follow up 10/17/11 Cranberry Growers Association: Check on the availability of PowerPoint presentations Offer made to give PowerPoint presentation in Pending from the meeting Taylor and Leven attended in 2010 Brewster/Harwich with the CGA. Contact CGA and ask if they might talk to the bog A meeting will be scheduled soon with the Pending owners and find out when discharging into the ponds— association and the growers to take sam•les. Misc: Education General •ublic, Town committees and boards Pendin. CWPC 10- 11-11.doc Page 7 of 7 Audio recording—CWPC_101111_audiominutes