[0:22] Noting that it's 7:04 p.m. on August
12th, 2026.
[0:30] I am calling the board of health meeting
to order. And first thing we'll do is
[0:35] since this is a virtual meeting, all
board members will announce their
[0:39] presence in alphabetical order. So Daryl
Beardsley present.
[0:44] » Steve Constantine present.
[0:48] » Rebecca Conwell present.
>> Good Chaporico present.
[0:54] » Okay. The next thing we have is um
whether there were any items not
[1:02] reasonably anticipated
by the chair 48 hours in advance of the
[1:08] meeting.
Is anyone aware of anything that is
[1:13] timesensitive that should be addressed
tonight before our next meeting?
[1:19] » Nothing from me.
>> Okay. Yes. I am also not aware of
[1:25] anything.
>> Mark is muted. I don't know if he
[1:30] » No, same here. I have nothing to add to
the agenda for tonight. Thank you though
[1:34] for asking.
>> Okay.
[1:37] All right. Um,
do we have a presentation at 710?
[1:44] Is there anyone or who is here in the
audience for something that is possibly
[1:51] brief as in five minutes worth?
[1:59] Okay. Uh hearing none, what we can do is
let's take the appointment of Stantech
[2:05] as a supplemental health agent or 168
Woodland Street. Would anyone like uh
[2:14] any discussion needed among the board?
We've done this before for Santech for
[2:18] selected projects as appropriate.
[2:24] Anyone have any comments or shall I make
a motion?
[2:28] » I think I'm fine with it. I think a
motion is in order.
[2:32] » Okay.
So, uh, do we have a motion to or I I
[2:38] move that we appoint Stantech as the
supplemental health agent for 168
[2:43] Woodland Street.
>> So moved.
[2:48] » A second.
>> Okay. Any further comments? Hearing
[2:53] none. Daryl Beardsley I.
>> Steve Constantine. I
[3:00] » close.
[3:11] » Three minutes. Mark, 155 Maple Street
update. Or is that too complicated?
[3:17] » Uh, it's not complicated. I was hoping
the homeowner would be here. Uh we set
[3:22] some uh guidelines for this property and
actually deadlines I should say or at
[3:28] least that they have the plan into us by
the end of this month and it be
[3:34] installed by the end of the year. Uh I
informed the homeowner and the
[3:39] contractor.
Um I was hoping the homeowner would be
[3:43] here uh that we would be discussing it
but she's not that I can see. But I can
[3:48] update her beginning of next week or
tomorrow on the status. But uh I have
[3:54] not yet seen a septic plan submitted for
this property. This is the property that
[4:00] has a failed title 5. It's now passed
due for the installation of a
[4:04] replacement septic system. Um, so pretty
much I'm hoping that I can report to you
[4:11] at the September meeting that the plans
are in and you know we'll start the
[4:16] review process. It has to go to
conservation prior to the board of
[4:21] health. I expect that's going to take a
little bit because there's a pond not
[4:25] too far from that location with the
location of where the septic systems
[4:30] going.
>> Yes. Okay. All right. So not yet. Yes.
[4:35] keep us updated about if and when the uh
plan comes in. So,
[4:40] » I will do that. Yeah,
>> good to go for the next meeting.
[4:45] » Yeah, we can put that on at the end of
this meeting. I'll just add that to it
[4:49] as well uh to give an update on 155
Maple.
[4:54] » All right. Since we have a the
presentation coming up and Tom, I'm
[4:58] assuming that you have something you
might want to show. How about if we
[5:03] experiment with getting the uh
share screen?
[5:08] » I would I would love to share
>> permissions over to you.
[5:12] » Okay, Tom, I just clicked to make you a
co-host. You should be able to screen.
[5:17] I'm going to stop sharing. Let me know
if you now have that ability.
[5:23] » Ah, it lets me do the share.
>> Amazing.
[5:27] Then I will give it to you to take it
away.
[5:31] Fantastic.
[5:37] » Well, thank you.
>> One minute if you don't mind, just so we
[5:40] can
>> No, I don't mind.
[5:43] » Oh, you can pull it up. I think we're
close.
[5:48] » I I have pulled it up. Can you see? Uh
>> Oh, I'm not seeing it yet.
[5:54] » I'm seeing it.
Oh,
[5:58] » I I see it. [laughter]
[6:03] Okay,
>> I see it.
[6:06] » I can see it.
>> Okay,
[6:10] » Darl, I was on a farm pond committee
meeting last week and some of their
[6:15] members had an older version of Zoom
and they had trouble seeing it. H
[6:22] » yes, I did get a message today
that when I said allow for audio and
[6:29] video, making the audio, but not so
great on the video.
[6:35] I thought it was just not transmitting
me. But anyway, I will listen
[6:40] attentively.
[6:45] » Actually, uh I sent the PDF to uh Sarah.
Maybe she can email it to you. Yeah, I
[6:51] can do that.
>> And and the rest of the board.
[6:56] » Yeah,
>> whatever is easy.
[7:06] Didn't know we had an official start
time.
[7:11] » Well, we're past it, so you can start at
any time. Well, thank you for inviting
[7:16] the uh open space committee to spend a
few minutes with you uh really giving
[7:21] you an introduction
to uh our major redo of the plan which
[7:27] uh the current plan's about eight years
old. I'm I'm here with our chair, uh,
[7:32] Sam Nelson,
and our our purpose is to give you a
[7:36] little flavor of the revision. We hope
to be finishing up this fall, and that
[7:43] we hope to have actually a a uh printed
and edited document that we can send
[7:50] around for public comment uh before the
end of the year. But uh in uh in
[7:58] thinking about how to start this, I
thought I' I'd go with a couple graphics
[8:03] and one of the one of the more exciting
things in the open space world uh in
[8:07] Sherburn, at least to me, is our newest
property. I hope several of you have
[8:12] been to the new trustees property on
Bullard Street, Melbourne Farm. It's 195
[8:19] » beautiful
>> 195 acre beautiful farm. It straddles
[8:24] the uh Milis line, hence the name
Millbourne. The uh original owners named
[8:31] it that Milis and Sherbornne.
But uh it's an outstanding property. And
[8:37] the other exciting thing is it's our
first Sherborn property with publicly
[8:43] accessible trails. the trustees did an
outstanding job
[8:50] leveling some of the the trails and
making them uh uh uh accessible. So,
[8:56] that's fantastic. I think many of you uh
have lived in town uh for quite a while,
[9:02] so you I assume you're aware, but I
wanted to show you some of the maps
[9:07] we're uh using for the plan. I mean,
Sherbornne is uh ble blessed with a
[9:13] tremendous amount of open space plan.
We're about 78 for 78% forested.
[9:22] And you know, compared to our
neighboring towns, we we really have a
[9:26] tremendous amount of both private and p
public open space. And of course one of
[9:32] the first benefits to that you see on
the the right hand map uh basically a a
[9:38] heat map of heat uh showing relative
surface temperatures and you know in a
[9:45] week like this we are really lucky
compared to a lot of our neighbors.
[9:50] » Beautiful.
>> We're a cool town. [laughter]
[9:54] » Cool town. Good.
>> My my slight is not not advancing.
[10:00] [laughter]
[10:03] Sorry about this. Let me exit.
[10:10] Let me stop sharing and go back. I
apologize.
[10:25] Okay.
Uh I added this slide special to your
[10:29] committee. Uh
uh I was uh getting involved a lot more
[10:34] with uh open space and I'm on the board
of a land trust and I went to a land
[10:40] trust annual conference uh in the spring
Massachusetts land trust coalition and
[10:45] this pediatrician just gave a fantastic
presentation on the benefits of uh open
[10:52] space and recreation to uh to her
patients. So if you're not familiar with
[10:58] some of this work given that you're in
the uh public sp uh public health world
[11:04] you might might take a look at it but it
was really really eyeopening what she
[11:08] shared. Now what is the open space
committee? Uh I wanted to uh make make
[11:15] sure you're aware because we're not uh
you know the most visible committee
[11:20] around since we just do uh open space
plans about every 8 to 10 years. But our
[11:26] primary mission is the protection of our
uh open space the environmental and
[11:33] recreational resources in Sherborn. We
are required by the state to uh create
[11:39] this open space and recreation plan that
in that includes you know our organized
[11:47] and formal rec recreational activities
in town.
[11:52] uh in in in this planning process, we uh
come up with lists of goals and
[11:57] recommendations and strategies
and we assign those to different town
[12:03] boards, committees, nonprofits,
etc. And near the end, I'm going to show
[12:09] you a couple things we're we're hoping
to assign assigned to you for homework.
[12:15] And uh the the state had required these
updates every seven years. It's now gone
[12:20] to a 10-year format. And that's the plan
from uh eight years ago. Hoping some of
[12:26] you may have seen it, but if you're
interested, there's the link. The
[12:31] committee itself, there's eight of us.
Uh you see the membership here or one
[12:36] associate member, Kelly Mcclin, moved to
Medfield, but luckily we still have his
[12:43] uh his help. But many of these names you
probably know. Marian Nitra from the
[12:48] select board. Uh myself, I'm also on the
groundwater protection committee and
[12:53] recently rolled off the energy and
sustainability committee. Nick
[12:57] Rodenhouse is a retired uh Welsley
College uh ecologist, professor. Nicole
[13:04] Weim Meer chairs our disability advisory
committee. Kevin Stevenson's an IT
[13:11] professional. Dave Welch, many of you
know from our rec commission. And we got
[13:16] some great uh support from a number of
uh staff members that you know. Uh
[13:23] here's a busy slide. I want to quickly
introduce
[13:28] or define what we mean by by open space
and and and and really we're focusing on
[13:35] what lands are have some level of
protection
[13:40] uh both at the uh local and state level.
Sherbornne's roughly about 10,000 acres.
[13:47] Makes the math simple. Uh we have
permanently protected right now about
[13:53] 30% of the town. About half of that is
owned by the town and most of that is
[14:00] conservation land in this darker green
or town forest in this lighter green.
[14:06] But there's plenty of other uh town
lands besides that. The state has about
[14:12] 156 acres.
125 acres of that is Farm Pond, a great
[14:17] uh pond and and you go on and on. Uh
Mass Ottabbon about 300 acres of the 500
[14:24] acre Ottabon.
Trustees are close to 400 acres now with
[14:30] with Milbourne plus they have several
conservation restrictions. Uh the
[14:36] Sherborn Rural Land Foundation has 250
acres uh land trust and the Upper
[14:43] Charles Land Trust 80 acres. Besides
this third 3,000 acres, we have what's
[14:50] called temporarily protected land in
special tax status with the town whereby
[14:58] people have put a portion of their land
in chapter 61 forestry, chapter 61A
[15:04] agriculture or 61B open space protection
and they get a break in in their taxes.
[15:14] So that gives you a lot a lot of flavor
of uh the different uh land ownership,
[15:20] land uses and on top of that uh if you
look at more more or less the white
[15:26] shaded area of the map with all the
parcels cut out that that's all your
[15:30] properties as as you know you and many
of your of your neighbors have plenty of
[15:36] open space. So that that's why Sherborn
is in such great shape when it comes to
[15:41] open space. Here's just an outline on
the right of the uh uh current state
[15:47] guideline for the open space plan. We're
pretty much done with three community
[15:53] setting. Four, environmental inventory
and analysis. I'm working on that with
[15:58] Nick Rodenhouse.
And uh the inventory of of lands. Right
[16:03] now, we're finalizing our needs and
action plans. And when we're done, we'll
[16:09] write the introduction and in summary
and uh ask for uh public comment
[16:17] in in uh creating the plan. One thing
that helped uh earlier uh around the
[16:24] beginning of the year, we did a major uh
survey of residents. I hope many people
[16:29] on this call uh uh contributed to the
survey. We got over 400 replies which I
[16:36] think is uh pretty good for Sherborn
survey. Just one one example of uh one
[16:43] of the questions here. Uh but what
bubbled up from the couple dozen
[16:48] questions in terms of priorities,
they're listed on the right here. uh
[16:54] water water resources was was
surprisingly uh the highest and things
[16:59] like organized uh recreation while while
important of course to a lot of people
[17:05] uh fell down with with uh lower
priorities.
[17:11] And from that uh analysis and all of our
work uh we've got six broad goals that
[17:18] that you see right here. water
resources,
[17:22] promoting biodiversity
uh and resilience. Uh for the first
[17:26] time, we we had a lot of uh focus on
climate change in in this in this plan
[17:33] and uh safeguarding open spaces and the
scenic character and of course
[17:39] recreation and the uh uh uh facilities
for our organized sports.
[17:46] I'm going to jump to
uh the needs when it comes to needs and
[17:54] strategies and actions.
Uh these are these are the seven major
[18:00] areas and and this is where we're coming
up with different actions and uh uh
[18:06] thinking about what what towns
uh boards and committees might might be
[18:12] able to help. and we we did this
similarly eight years ago and and some
[18:16] of and some of the goals have carried on
from there. When it comes to your board,
[18:22] it's the one that we really have a
direct connection is water resource
[18:26] protection and less so some of the
others. Although I think on things like
[18:31] open space, I can think of farm pond. I
think we have you listed for things like
[18:37] uh cyanobacteria and and things like
that that uh can affect the use of that
[18:44] resources.
This is one example of the uh action
[18:50] plan section seven with the needs
recommendations and possible actions.
[18:56] And I pulled up this one because it had
your name uh against some of the uh
[19:02] actions
and we'll share with this with you and
[19:07] we're interested in feedback now or
later and some examples from the uh 2018
[19:16] plan. the groundwater protection
committee uh did was not active at that
[19:23] time uh had gone dormant and one of the
one of the actions or uh strategies was
[19:30] to reinstate the groundwater protection
plan and uh and fortunately that was
[19:36] done and the groundwater protection
committee has been working in many of
[19:40] these areas and so I'm not going to read
all of these but uh uh certainly
[19:47] uh when it comes to both the surface
waters and uh groundwater, we're really
[19:52] uh I think it's very important to
document much more the condition of
[19:57] where things are that and actually that
comes to one request. You may or may not
[20:02] like it. We're suggesting uh you
consider uh uh updating your regulations
[20:08] to to uh uh require uh private wellwater
testing at at time of property transfer
[20:16] like like the D uh recommends for uh for
towns.
[20:23] So that is uh
some of our recommendations the board
[20:29] any I haven't allowed any questions
you're
[20:34] we're almost done here so any questions
on what we're we're showing here
[20:45] quiet group Sam you want to add anything
>> yeah I I guess I just would like some
[20:50] feedback from your group um We have um
as Tom said, we are suggesting that uh
[20:58] there is a requirement for well testing
at the at the time of home sale and we
[21:04] have actually designated board of health
as being the lead on that. So we would
[21:10] be very curious to know if that is
something that you are willing to take
[21:14] on.
>> I think we should have a discussion on
[21:18] that. It's come up a bunch of times. Um,
and I do have more experience in the
[21:26] commercial world with this or uh clients
and what it means for a property. Um,
[21:35] it
I would rather find a way to encourage
[21:40] people to test more frequently while
they're living there and not wait until
[21:45] they're moving. So, in the interest of
public health, to me, that's more
[21:49] important.
There's also
[21:52] financial implications of being the one
house who had to test because they're
[22:00] planning to sell and
[22:05] groundwater is moving. Groundwater is
not only affected by the people living
[22:09] on the property and their wellwater is
not a reflection of only their actions.
[22:15] So, I feel like it
it has some downsides to those who go
[22:20] first in uh in the selling of their
home.
[22:27] » We we definitely
>> it's a little it's a little more
[22:30] complicated and it also is not getting
at the idea of along the way people
[22:35] should know what they're drinking. Um,
and whether that's setting up programs
[22:39] that make it easier for the uh, so
people don't have to drive bar or hire
[22:47] if they don't want to hire someone to
come and take the samples, whatever it
[22:51] is that would make it simpler
for that $150 test or $200 worth of
[22:58] testing every few years. me that would
be a place I would rather put some
[23:04] energy but it's very hard for us as a
regulatory board to organize that
[23:09] because
[23:12] um it just is
and it it also implies like obligation
[23:17] to report to us on findings or not. But
really
[23:23] » my objective would be that people
understand where their water is and what
[23:27] might what treatment might be needed if
any.
[23:31] » Some some of our recommended actions uh
somebody on the committee used the word
[23:35] aspirational
uh you know we're not expecting this to
[23:40] happen in a year. This could take three,
four, six years you know to get
[23:45] regulations changed. So it's it's just
something we want to put out there and
[23:50] » have considered. I see Rebecca has her
hand up.
[23:56] » Go ahead, Rebecca.
>> Is muted.
[24:12] » Can one of the hosts unmute her?
>> I got it. I got it.
[24:20] There's feedback.
[24:23] » Let's see if we can do it this way
without feedback.
[24:28] » I think there is there feedback. Do you
hear it?
[24:31] » I think I think we can still still hear
you.
[24:34] » I'm moving that out of reach. See if
that helps. Um, as a physician, I agree
[24:40] 100%. I think one of the problems um
that is not only Sherburn's problem,
[24:46] it's also across the country is that
private wellwater is considered private
[24:51] property. The land the laws are
antiquated
[24:55] and it puts a lot of burden on the
individual. But I think as a public
[24:59] service
um it's important to know that
[25:03] information because not it's shared
resources. And so I agree with you that
[25:08] it should be required at the time of
transaction
[25:14] um for everyone to have awareness of
what their situation is. Um I know that
[25:19] there are different opinions and there
is some debate but it's required in
[25:24] other places where there's public water
supply.
[25:28] So I'm not sure that I think it would be
a good idea if we can upgrade those
[25:34] regulations. And I also think that
there's some initiatives going on at the
[25:39] federal and state level to try to
upgrade the to change some of the laws
[25:45] it because it's the vast minority of
homes that have um our situation which
[25:52] is private wellwater and private septic
systems. So sometimes
[25:58] pe people I was going to say patients
but I think sometimes people don't even
[26:03] know the risks and that's an almost more
important reason to get the information
[26:08] so that we can help them to understand
how compensation could be made what
[26:13] efforts need to be taken to protect
themselves from public health risks that
[26:18] could be happening to themselves or to
their neighbors. So, I agree. Um, it's
[26:23] and I think part of the reason that it's
complicated is because of the perception
[26:27] that although it's actually true, but
this is where the board of health comes
[26:31] in, we should be making every effort we
can to protect drinking water in order
[26:38] to protect property values in addition
to public health because I think
[26:43] sometimes people's perspective is they
don't want to affect their property
[26:47] value. But the reality is
we can help with that by enforcing our
[26:52] regulations.
[26:57] » Great. I
>> which I'll just add we do every time we
[27:01] meet and every day.
[27:05] I I think one of the other um concerns
of the open space committee is that not
[27:11] only would testing protect the uh
potential uh new home purchaser, but
[27:17] it's also a way to start to collect data
on our our wellwater. If if if testing
[27:22] wells is voluntary right now, we're you
know we may collect some information. We
[27:28] but it depends on volunteers. But if we
are beginning to require testing at the
[27:35] time of home sales, then we are building
up a um a database which could be very
[27:41] useful in tracking the quality of uh of
groundwater as we move onward.
[27:48] Otherwise, otherwise we're just kind of
relying on voluntary testing to try to
[27:54] create a database which um may may work
but it uh it may not work. So, I think
[28:00] that was just one one of the other
concerns that we were thinking about as
[28:04] we were uh proposing this this motion.
>> Good. Thanks.
[28:09] » Some of the things that we've talked
about in the past uh not the board of
[28:15] health, but the former groundwater
protection committee makeup um
[28:21] was supporting some sort of testing
program. again. I mean, one year I was
[28:28] going to pick up containers and I just
called a whole bunch of people I knew
[28:32] and said, "If you want to participate,
I'll get the containers and I'll bring
[28:35] them back." The lab, you just have to,
you know, specify to the lab what tests
[28:41] you want run and pay for it. Um, and I
showed people how to fill up containers
[28:46] and all the rest. But if it was not a
regulatory body,
[28:51] it might be able to be organized so that
people were getting the test results.
[28:56] And then there might be some way rather
than pinpoint a particular property
[29:02] who participated in that
um and have their data is to do kind of
[29:10] a grid
and just have people note the grid that
[29:15] they were in. and the test results
um to make it a little more anonymous.
[29:22] And also some of this comes from right
out of grad school. I worked on
[29:28] something looking at how do you value
um mun the water serving
[29:35] a town whether it's a municipal water
supply or individual wells. How do you
[29:40] put a price tag on that for an industry
who has contaminated the groundwater?
[29:46] And Wburn was happening kind of early
on. Um, Actton is a a town more like
[29:52] ours that has a similar situation. And
the housing market went drastically down
[29:59] in Actton. And I'm talking
how many years ago? 40 years ago. So um
[30:06] or more uh so that is the impact I don't
want to have. I want to have awareness
[30:16] of
uh what people's um drinking water
[30:20] quality is like. It might help reinforce
what we can do programmatically within
[30:26] the board of health. That can help us
defend our regulations.
[30:30] Lots of good things. But it shouldn't be
waiting till sale. It shouldn't be
[30:35] isolating the house that's on the market
at the moment until everyone becomes
[30:40] more aware. Um, when we bought here,
partially I'm in the field and partially
[30:47] lenders would require water testing for
some period of time. I guess that
[30:53] doesn't happen anymore, but it was very
easy to just tell a homeowner, I want to
[30:59] grab a sample. Um, and then you can make
sure that, you know, you don't, most
[31:04] people don't even want to trust the
results of the current homeowner. They
[31:08] could have gotten, you know, filtered
water from somewhere and stuck it in
[31:13] test tubes and had the test run. So,
it's actually better if the incoming
[31:18] homeowner does the testing if that's the
part you want to get at is for the
[31:23] incoming people. But, I am concerned
about who's here now. Uh and making sure
[31:29] that you know again if something needs
to be done at either on a house by house
[31:36] basis for treatment or in terms of what
we're aiming for in terms of regulations
[31:44] around um behaviors and different
chemical use and that sort of thing then
[31:52] that's where I'd want to put the effort.
I see the others causing a lot of pain
[31:58] without the desired effect.
[32:02] » Good.
>> Yes, it would lead to gathering data. I
[32:05] agree with that, but it would be slower.
>> This is a good starting discussion and
[32:10] we'll we'll separately maybe through the
groundwater protection committee uh
[32:14] continue these discussions. But I just
wanted to finish up with this slide just
[32:19] again reaching out if if you got any
other ideas uh what what you like or
[32:25] dislike what's going on in the town
regarding our open space regarding our
[32:29] recreational uh facilities and programs.
please reach out to uh Samurai and we'll
[32:36] make sure we get uh things into the
plan. And again, we'll be back to you uh
[32:41] later in the year hopefully with a uh a
uh edited and complete uh draft for
[32:49] public comment. But thank you for your
time tonight. C
[32:53] » can can I add one more
>> can I make one more comment please? One
[32:57] more question. Um and that is um ticks.
Um as you know um there is some concern
[33:05] about tickborne diseases and as uh the
best way that we can reduce tickborne
[33:14] diseases is to reduce the deer
population in town which is hugely
[33:19] overpop populated. And there are many
reasons why it is um it might be valid
[33:25] to try to reduce the deer population.
everything from the destruction of
[33:30] native plants to the amount of deer who
are starving in the winter now because
[33:34] there's not enough food to eat. Um so
one of the suggestions from the town
[33:39] forest committee is to expand public
hunting and um we know that um uh depart
[33:48] the board of health is interested in
public health and uh trying to expand uh
[33:54] deer hunting in Sherburn might be a big
task um people love deer um and may not
[34:02] recognize the public health dimension of
it But we were curious whether the board
[34:08] of health would be supportive of an
effort by led by the town forest
[34:13] committee to try to expand hunting. Now,
we don't have a we don't have a strategy
[34:18] yet. We don't know exactly what expand
hunting means. They haven't come up with
[34:22] one, but if that were to take place, we
were curious on whether board of health
[34:27] would be willing to sign on to that
effort um or not
[34:32] » or at least consider it. say that was
that's exactly the topic I wanted to
[34:37] bring up with you uh to find out because
to me that is a good intersection
[34:42] between our open space and public health
uh is the tick issue and whether it ties
[34:48] back to the deer or mice more or which
one um
[34:56] » could it also
>> I am interested in talking about that
[34:59] but I will and I don't know if it was
recorded but sometime during
[35:05] COVID around this early period of COVID
I think that's when it was and someone
[35:11] in town must know um the exact date is
someone from the state fish and wildlife
[35:19] I believe came and spoke about
what it means to manage deer populations
[35:26] and how much management would have to go
on what the numbers are of deer that you
[35:32] would need too. Um
all
[35:36] uh and then how and safety around that.
So right now there is the program where
[35:44] the Rocky Narrows um woods I don't know
if there are others in town but bow
[35:49] hunters are permitted in there. They
have to be a certain distance from the
[35:54] trails and know not on Sundays or
something like that. I can't remember
[35:59] exactly all the rules, but uh that's an
option. There's a group that you can
[36:06] individual property owners can contact
and they have vetted hunters for safety.
[36:14] Uh we permit a bow hunter or have had a
few bow hunters on our property. um had
[36:22] some very delicious uh venison bordin I
must say
[36:26] » uh some winters but
it's and Dober has a program for uh deer
[36:33] hunting but the percentage of deer that
are ultimately
[36:39] bolden do is a fraction of what it needs
to be to really
[36:45] um according to this fish and wildlife
person to really make a dent in IC
[36:51] population. So that's the tricky part of
it is if you want open space to be
[36:56] enjoyed by everyone, although the deer
hunting season is relatively short,
[37:02] um it would
maybe pose a conflict depending on how
[37:08] widespread you want this program,
but somewhere out there there may be a
[37:13] recording of that. And it was an
excellent presentation.
[37:18] Daryl, I I think I attended that, but uh
we can we can get that person or similar
[37:24] fish and wildlife resource out here
again because
[37:27] » they're constant learning more and more
about uh populations and and strategies.
[37:33] So,
>> that might be something to do.
[37:37] » And is any anyone else on the board
interested in
[37:42] pursuing this topic with open space and
concom? I'm definitely
[37:49] » I'm very interested. But I was going to
comment that one of the other problems
[37:53] that we're seeing is that the other
vectors include all the mice and the
[37:59] moles and the squirrel, you know, like a
the problem is that the nymphs are
[38:03] living on a lot of animals. And um it
was kind of scary over 10 years ago when
[38:10] I was reertifying for my boards. The
second time
[38:14] the there was some paper about um robin
in England that was carrying a nymph. It
[38:21] was like really scary because there a
lot of animals that are carrying the
[38:26] ticks and so it's not just limited to
the deer. So and global warming is only
[38:30] making things worse. I don't really
know. It's a little bit scary because
[38:35] [laughter]
I'm not really sure what to do except
[38:38] I'm secretly hoping that all the wild
turkeys are having feasting on the
[38:43] ticks, but I [laughter] have no idea.
Anyway,
[38:48] » no, but but with 78% of forest, I I
don't think we would expect anything
[38:54] else, right? And the neighboring towns,
the forest car is dwindling. So, all the
[38:59] deer's coming in here.
>> Yeah. That's true. We have the
[39:04] » right. So, so um but that's where we we
choose to live with and and
[39:12] so so so introducing Turkey is maybe a
good idea. I mean I don't know.
[39:20] It it sounds like you are at least
sympathetic with the goal of trying to
[39:25] reduce um the tick population which is a
you know a vector for carrying disease
[39:31] and exactly how that's going to be done.
You might be willing to engage in
[39:36] conversations with open space and town
forest committee to to think about a a
[39:43] possible plan. Is that is that right?
>> Yes. And like Daryl mentioned, we
[39:49] probably should involve Mass Wildlife or
>> some other organization that has more
[39:56] information and more technical knowledge
about these things.
[40:01] » Um rather than you know I mean we could
spend hours but there are people who've
[40:07] got PhDs on on controlling ticks perhaps
you know. Well, we have some very good
[40:13] PhDs on the town forest committee who
are uh very knowledgeable about this.
[40:17] So,
>> Fantastic. Yeah.
[40:19] » Certainly certainly lead discussions on
deer management and tick reduction
[40:24] strategies,
>> right?
[40:26] » Maybe we should co-host a some kind of a
panel with multiple different
[40:32] specialists. A few years ago, like long
time ago, when my children were very
[40:36] young, there was something like that in
at the high school where they had
[40:40] multiple different specialties. I think
it was much more medically focused, but
[40:44] it didn't matter because it was the same
subject. And I think there's a lot of
[40:49] interest and obvious and there's a good
reason to be concerned. So,
[40:55] I mean, I would I could talk for hours,
but I'm sure there are a lot of people
[40:59] who would be interested. I think it'd be
very valuable even though there's
[41:02] controversy within the medical world.
It's um we we all can see that there's a
[41:10] problem.
[41:13] » I had another [clears throat] thought
about the water testing and all that. So
[41:17] when we moved into Sherban, I was
extremely concerned about this because
[41:23] coming in from Boston where the public
water is tested very often and you know
[41:30] they have to you know limit they have
very strict limits and all those things.
[41:36] So, so we did do testing for the first 5
years every year just to ensure that
[41:43] that um that you know all the levels
were okay.
[41:49] Now every area is different. So one of
the questions I kept asking myself was
[41:57] what are the things I should test for?
Yeah.
[42:02] um should we and so so we used one of
the testing companies in Norwood to do
[42:08] these tests and I just said do whatever
you can you know [laughter]
[42:14] uh so so so figuring out what to test
for that's that and making a list of
[42:21] that may be a useful and um
>> useful enterprise
[42:28] » if I could share uh I I als also chair
the groundwater protection committee and
[42:33] we we have all that guidance on our
website.
[42:37] » Oh, you do? Okay. The other
>> Yeah. The the other thought I had was at
[42:42] some point and I was I was I was even
yesterday talking to Mark Oram about
[42:47] this and Mark said, "Tom, you've spent
so much time and effort and creating
[42:52] databases of of all these things. I
mean, this is amazing work what you're
[42:57] doing." Um so so um
>> so instead of trying to identify the
[43:07] property or the or the grid or the
location let's say let's take Sherban as
[43:12] a whole and if anybody did water testing
they could fill the data anonymously
[43:22] on in the database. it's got no
implications to their property value.
[43:29] It's got nothing to do with it with any
of this. Uh and then we would have a
[43:35] database. So So would that would that be
a good way to do it? It's it's a great
[43:40] thing to do and the groundwater
protection committee has learned a lot
[43:43] from two studies that we did uh one uh
with the state uh and uh your board uh
[43:52] was uh involved with it also for PAS
testing. Unfortunately, it was only done
[43:58] on like 35 properties in town, but we
learned a lot and it was anonym strictly
[44:04] anonymous,
>> right? And uh we we learned that we have
[44:08] a PAS issue in this town and and our
levels were much higher than comparable
[44:14] towns. Uh and secondly, we had a uh a
nonprofit in Worcester AAP. They did a
[44:22] uh more simpler broadcast survey of uh
13 common contaminants.
[44:30] Uh that was done on 41 homes in town an
anonymously
[44:36] and from that we learned that 40% of the
private wells uh exceeded one or more of
[44:43] the uh one one or more of the uh
parameters. So we we learned that uh
[44:51] there's not enough testing going on in
this town and and that
[44:56] there's there's water issues that aren't
aren't being addressed.
[45:00] Right. And and like Daryl said, I think
Daryl made a very important point that
[45:04] that people living here should be
testing. It's not that you test when you
[45:08] leave the town.
It's
[45:12] » I do encourage people. In fact,
>> in fact, our cap is doing another we did
[45:18] a seminar for the town three or four
years ago. Our cap is doing another one
[45:22] connected to climate change in Wells and
they're certainly going to be talking
[45:26] about testing. That's actually next
month. And uh I had that posted on the
[45:30] town website. Uh
>> now if we the the other thing is if we
[45:36] could hire one company to to do the
tests
[45:42] uh they may even be willing to have
someone who would who would transport
[45:48] the water from the town or there we
could have a collection center or
[45:52] something.
>> Actually something that other towns have
[45:54] done,
>> right? the the homeowner pay pays for
[45:58] the test but uh the agent takes the
sample and ships it to the lab.
[46:04] » Yeah.
>> Other towns do that.
[46:06] » So so yeah. So so we have multiple
strategies uh if that is that is the
[46:12] reason for people not taking up testing
but but I would love to do testing at
[46:17] least once a year, right? And maybe a
neighbor a neighborhood gets together
[46:25] and they stagger the testing so that you
know roughly around one test a month in
[46:32] a particular neighborhood
>> you know would would be would be
[46:36] something that that's worth considering
>> right
[46:42] » you know I just remembered I you know
again being the groundwater protection
[46:46] committee uh I get at least once a month
an email from a resident asking with
[46:51] questions about water testing. And I got
a very unfortunate one uh two months ago
[46:57] for the very first time. I've I've
looked at a lot of water data in this
[47:01] town, probably hundreds of private
wells. Uh this uh family
[47:09] had nitrate
above the 10 milligrams per mill uh
[47:14] federal and state limit. I've never seen
that in my life. a private well over 10
[47:20] milligrams of nitrate. So,
uh,
[47:25] you know, there there's there's reasons
to be testing. We encourage people to do
[47:29] it, but there's just not enough.
>> Sorry to interrupt. Would this maybe be
[47:35] better for a future meeting? I just feel
like we're getting really into the
[47:40] nitty-gritty of everything and I agree
that this is a very important
[47:44] conversation to be having. I just we
could spend hours on this and I I don't
[47:49] want us to we have some people here for
other things. Um
[47:53] this may be something we want to
continue or not you know up to up to the
[47:57] board obviously.
>> Um can I make one last point before we
[48:01] change the subject? The it's
historically the collection of data for
[48:08] public health purposes um required by
law with a transa with transactions is
[48:14] precedented. That's why premarital, you
know, when people get married, they're
[48:18] required to do syphilis testing and
other things because there's a value to
[48:23] the public good when the information is
collected. And so it wouldn't be
[48:28] something that hasn't had a precedent if
we were to to
[48:34] were to consider um collecting this
information. And the I think the reason
[48:39] that the state for example requires um
upgrading of I don't know a structure to
[48:47] code for example at the time of a
building permit is to force people to
[48:52] follow
to keep things um beneficial to the
[48:57] greater good rather than to just
individuals. And that's I think the the
[49:01] board of health um might need to
consider looking from that perspective
[49:07] because it's not although individuals
might object it may have a benefit to
[49:10] the to the entire town with shared
resources if we were to require it
[49:19] since
um encouraging people doesn't always
[49:24] work.
[49:28] That's why making it easy was my
preferred path. But anyway, yes, lot to
[49:33] discuss on that.
>> Let's set aside time to do this um
[49:39] you know in more depth uh
with more people also who would like to
[49:47] address this particular issue.
Um but this has been good. Uh thank you
[49:53] Tom
all these for illuminating. Thank you.
[49:58] » Yes.
>> Thanks.
[50:00] » And there's some other things to talk
about around open space, but we'll save
[50:04] that for another time. I'll chat with
you on the side, maybe.
[50:08] » Thank you, Tom. We can connect about
scheduling a time in the future to have
[50:13] this conversation with everybody.
>> Very good. I'll uh I'll wear my
[50:19] groundwater protection hat for that one.
>> Sounds great. Well, we can loop in Sam
[50:24] with his open space hat. Sounds good.
>> Again, thanks very much, folks. We
[50:29] really appreciate it.
>> Thank you guys. Have a good one.
[50:33] » Good night.
>> Take care.
[50:35] » Good night.
>> Uh so before we move on, because um that
[50:41] was our one scheduled item, I just want
to see if there's anyone waiting for
[50:45] something who might be a little shorter.
For example,
[50:50] one Whitney or 51 Western A. Mark. Yeah,
I don't know if uh the person for one
[50:56] Whitney Street's available or the person
for 51 Western A if they're here in the
[51:02] audience.
>> If they are, if they could let me know.
[51:07] » Yeah.
[51:10] Before we move on,
[51:16] I don't see I don't see any hands going
up and I don't hear any
[51:21] » I don't [clears throat] see the
applicant for um one Whitney Street
[51:26] here.
>> Okay.
[51:31] Or 51 Western
>> or 51 Western. Let me double check.
[51:40] Okay. So then let's go to um
how about
[51:48] Meadow Brook Commons
as I did see
[51:54] Ian Bond
unless they're here for other
[51:59] ventilating topics that we're talking
about.
[52:03] » No, I am here for Metore Commons. Thank
you.
[52:07] » Okay. All right.
Okay. So, uh I had been checking in with
[52:15] peer reviewers that we the town and the
board of andor the board of health has
[52:20] used in the past and had reached out. I
have [clears throat] to say kind of
[52:25] return calls I guess just got a little
slower because it was the summer, people
[52:30] are on vacation,
uh other kinds of changes going on. In
[52:36] any case, uh, and so I've been able to
contact,
[52:42] um,
one peer reviewer who we've used before,
[52:47] not always as a peer review, but
certainly as technical support for
[52:50] specialty issues related to Sherborn,
uh, including water quality testing. And
[52:57] that would be, uh, Drew Smice from TRC.
He's well acquainted with jurborn data
[53:06] conditions here. Um, and he has the
additional uh distinction that I wasn't
[53:15] finding elsewhere of
having worked with quaries
[53:21] on their um basically rock disruption
activities and the impacts on
[53:29] groundwater and and other kinds of
things. So that was unique in the um
[53:36] hydrogeeologist world that I was
speaking to. The other
[53:42] one of the other consultants that we had
used in the past was uh Dr. Pete
[53:46] Shanahan of hydroanalysis.
He has
[53:51] largely retired and is not uh even
though we were a client in the past for
[53:57] a number of things. I think concom also
used hydro analysis for um a number of
[54:03] projects, but he had a very strong
recommendation for Hodgej water
[54:10] resources and I did reach out to that
person and spoke
[54:15] with uh with the owner and
they certainly have the experience in
[54:22] the kinds of things that we might want
to look at including
[54:27] um the bedrock disruption
in terms of impacts and analysis related
[54:34] to that but not as direct um you know
with both the activity
[54:41] of blasting or drilling or hammering and
um groundwater modeling but objects
[54:48] water resources does a lot of modeling
and analysis
[54:54] uh for issues So I both of them seem
very strong. I am waiting to get
[55:02] a resume from one of them and then we
can distribute that out to the board. So
[55:07] I don't know if we'll be able to make a
decision this evening. And I also need
[55:10] final kind of hourly rates from them to
make sure it's in line with what uh
[55:18] other rates have been. Um,
so I've had partial information on that
[55:24] and it looks favorable
so far, but I just wanted to have a more
[55:29] formal read on what that would be and I
think they're both
[55:36] uh have time available in the near term.
So that also works out.
[55:43] » Was that Hajes?
H O D G S is that correct? Uh uh sorry I
[55:50] I was using kind of the possessive but
it's hodge water resources.
[55:55] » Hodgej. Okay.com.
[56:00] » Thank you.
>> Um
[56:03] » okay. But yes,
uh
[56:08] Drew has Smite of TRC has more years in
the field, but
[56:15] uh Hodgej has
uh depth of of analyticals.
[56:22] So they're kind of funible.
Uh and the other option that I will just
[56:29] throw out there for consideration is
that
[56:33] again to keep things moving along um if
there's any constraints on their time.
[56:40] Maybe we
lit them up since they both are tuned
[56:46] into what our issues are from my
discussions with them. So they know what
[56:50] it is we want to understand which is
narrow fairly narrow. uh is we could
[56:57] take the bedrock person and have them
work on that and we can take Hajj and
[57:01] have them work on on the irrigation
issues.
[57:09] So,
>> thank you for putting in that um
[57:15] research. It's helpful to have names. I
do have a just a few quick questions.
[57:21] Um, just one I do want to introduce
David Buckley. He's here with me from
[57:27] Toll Brothers. Jeff couldn't make it
today. And we're also joined by Rick
[57:34] Roll, um, who is our blasting consultant
as well. So, just wanted to make the
[57:40] board aware that they're here with me.
Um in terms of the peer review
[57:48] consultant um
>> don't have a preference on either to say
[57:55] um but I think it'd be helpful if we
start defining the scope of what we're
[58:01] submitting.
We have talked about submitting
[58:06] uh an earthwork permit, a well permit
and I think there was still
[58:13] uh discussion on if we were formally
submitting an environmental health and
[58:17] impact report. So I the consultant
themselves are going to want to know
[58:21] that as well what they're being scoped
to review.
[58:24] » Yeah. And then I would say in that idea
of splitting the peer review, I think
[58:31] our preference is always to stay with
one if we can. It's usually makes the
[58:36] process smoother where you have one
consulting getting to know the
[58:40] documentation, getting to know the site
and the constraints and can look at it
[58:44] holistically.
>> Um, so
[58:50] so I think those are my thoughts on
that. So, we're happy if you want to
[58:56] prepare a scope for them to respond to
on peer review, but I think we should
[59:01] clarify exactly what we're submitting
tonight as well if we could.
[59:08] » Okay. [clears throat] Uh yeah, I thought
I had
[59:13] to double check whether the email went,
but yes, we do need more information.
[59:18] » Absolutely. uh from you on
um certainly on the bedrock side in
[59:26] particular
>> um
[59:29] » you know how much from where
uh I've seen some information that I
[59:36] guess was part of another report
submitted to mass D possibly but I
[59:42] haven't had a chance to go through that
to see if all of what we need is in
[59:47] there or if that's more broad strokes,
but it seems like there's going to be a
[59:52] fair amount of material removed. So, you
are correct on the earthworks. It sounds
[59:57] like it's going to be, you know, orders
of magnitude above our 350 cubic yard
[1:00:03] kind of metric.
>> Y
[1:00:05] » for triggering certain things. Um,
so what's going to be removed from
[1:00:13] where?
How's how are the fines or whatever
[1:00:17] you'd like to call it going to be
managed on site uh while they're there?
[1:00:23] Are you planning to use it for fill
anywhere on site
[1:00:28] um
[1:00:31] for the
[1:00:36] season the high groundwater relative to
foundations? And certainly if you're
[1:00:44] thinking of putting foundations into
bedrock, like carving out bedrock and
[1:00:49] dropping in a basement,
um that for drainage, it's I would
[1:00:55] assume going to get very difficult. and
our interest in the drainage and the
[1:00:59] reason for the two-foot separation
between the bottom of the foundation and
[1:01:04] historic high groundwater, not just
observed groundwater at any particular
[1:01:09] time, even if it's in a wet season. Uh
we want we're aiming for historic,
[1:01:14] especially following drought years, um
is to reduce the chance of mold in
[1:01:24] people's holes. So that's the point of
that. So if you could think about it
[1:01:29] that way. And again, the only time we
have permitted
[1:01:34] uh foundation to be on bedrock
is when one side of what I'll call the
[1:01:41] basement was open right out to ground
level. So that then there is the
[1:01:49] potential for channeling
the redirecting water around the
[1:01:55] basement and then out to grade and it's
more gravity a gravity system rather
[1:01:59] than relying on pumps and more
extraordinary measures especially in
[1:02:04] spring weather um periods.
>> Yeah. So those are some things that
[1:02:09] would be helpful to know and you should
know that for the board of health. Uh we
[1:02:15] would not rely on
uh you know numbers that maybe you've
[1:02:20] been collecting along the way about
where that historic high groundwater is.
[1:02:26] That is something that gets observed by
the agent for the board of health out in
[1:02:32] the field. So, if you're planning on
doing that, you can do it once by having
[1:02:39] the agent with you when you're doing it.
Um,
[1:02:43] » does that make sense?
>> It does, but I do want to speak about a
[1:02:48] few things related to that regulation.
Um,
[1:02:54] first, it does fall within your
regulations that are applicable to title
[1:03:00] five systems. So, it's written in on
your additional bylaws for septic
[1:03:06] systems. This project is served by
municipal sewer, so is not
[1:03:11] jurisdictional to those specific
requirements.
[1:03:16] However, Toll Brothers does share your
same concern and understands that a wet
[1:03:22] basement is going to result in
an unhappy homeowner. Right. This is a
[1:03:29] development that will be operated by a
homeowners association.
[1:03:35] Um, and
they will be installing foundation
[1:03:40] drains which are open to gravity around
all the perimeters of their foundations.
[1:03:45] It is their policy to do this whether
the homes are in groundwater or without
[1:03:52] groundwater.
Um, so it's something that they've
[1:03:55] learned through there are multiple
developments throughout the country that
[1:03:59] helps alleviate that concern. So I think
we'd be working through to the same goal
[1:04:06] on that. Um, we have just found a
different method.
[1:04:13] I do have Rick here to speak about just
processing of bedrock on site. The
[1:04:22] document that was cited was part of our
uh final environmental impact report the
[1:04:29] FIR that was submitted to the Meepa
office. So this is part of our whole
[1:04:35] broader intervation transfer act
permitting that we're going through to
[1:04:40] be enable us to bring water to the town
municipal water and that was I'd say a
[1:04:47] quick highle estimate. We will be
fine-tuning
[1:04:51] our earthwork estimates as we go through
this process. Um, and we'll be
[1:04:56] developing kind of like heat maps
showing you in depth of anticipated
[1:05:01] bedrock cut as well as cut to fill. We
are working through the efficiency of
[1:05:07] the site to help try to balance it to
the best we can to minimize that
[1:05:12] earthwork. And we're also working with
our neighbor at Koolage Crossing to
[1:05:17] support them as well where they do have
a need for material. So trying to get
[1:05:23] that um I'd say more efficient and we
are happy to report those details as we
[1:05:29] work through this. Um so I'm hearing
we need to detail more about our
[1:05:35] earthworks,
>> detail how we're protecting our
[1:05:39] foundations.
Um I guess just again to my and we're
[1:05:45] going to be submitting a
um
[1:05:50] earthwork earth removal permit as well
as a well permit for the irrigation
[1:05:55] well. Is it also an environmental health
impact report or are we how is that is
[1:06:04] that what the board is looking for?
[1:06:09] it. You know, most
we've done few EHIRs in town, they have
[1:06:17] typically been tied to larger or
otherwise unusual septic system
[1:06:24] situations.
>> Okay. For the most part the that section
[1:06:30] is you know some of the requirements
that we had for the EHIR was targeting a
[1:06:38] dense you know large scale
of dense effluent plume um from a septic
[1:06:46] that does not apply here the area of
impact analyses and nitrogen loading
[1:06:51] calculations that sort of thing and what
the steady state level of nitro rogen
[1:06:56] would be in the effluent um and how far
down gradient from the system. Uh so
[1:07:04] the rest of it has been left to be
determined based on the project because
[1:07:10] there is such incredible variability
even with our single family homes in
[1:07:15] town incredible variability from one
property and project to another. So we
[1:07:21] have tried to make it so it would be
more flexible.
[1:07:25] I don't even know yet. I I don't except
for the things that we're mentioning
[1:07:29] that we would like to see and then have
some analyses done on what the potential
[1:07:34] impact is of the bedrock disruption
um you know might be or what other kind
[1:07:39] of best management practices we might
want to see or checking along the way.
[1:07:44] not sure yet which is that's what the
peer reviewer uh would be helping us
[1:07:50] with for practical measures to take
because it's a known phenomenon that
[1:07:59] even just drilling a well
uh the disruption of the rock or the
[1:08:06] bore hole
um can result in elevated levels of
[1:08:10] various minerals for a relatively short
period. period of time
[1:08:16] when installing a well. So, it's not
uncommon to see a spike, but when you're
[1:08:21] removing this much, and there have been
other things in Connecticut and some
[1:08:27] other locations where it's just
suspected that bedrock disruptions can
[1:08:32] sometimes result in leeching at a very
high rate and manganese is of particular
[1:08:39] concern for the kind of rocks we have
around here. Um
[1:08:45] so really our regulation very
specifically right now is just that
[1:08:51] uh as the the
the applicant will need to alert
[1:08:58] uh get a list from the assessor's
office. We can give you different
[1:09:02] guidelines of how to go do that and and
the timing and all the rest and what the
[1:09:06] notifications it should say. But
uh you will need to send out
[1:09:11] notifications
to
[1:09:15] property owners within a quarter mile of
not just the center of the site but of
[1:09:20] the site. So any edge of the site and
the assessor can provide that. They can
[1:09:26] figure that out and just give you a
list. And people just need to be
[1:09:30] notified that if they want before and
after testing pre- project and post
[1:09:37] project activities that they need to do
their testing, you know, by such and
[1:09:42] such a date before you start doing that.
So that's where our regulation falls
[1:09:46] just so people have something about a
before and after status.
[1:09:56] So that's
We're concerned about it. We've seen
[1:10:00] things happen in town with a few
projects.
[1:10:04] So that that's what it's all about.
[1:10:10] The bedrock disruption specifically the
earth removal
[1:10:14] that's also a concern because removing
uh certainly I assume you're not going
[1:10:20] to be removing top soils but we don't
want to see top soils removed because
[1:10:24] they limit you know the filtering
capacity. um for rainwater before it
[1:10:29] reaches groundwater and recharges our
supplies.
[1:10:37] So I think to respond to your questions
related or your concerns related to
[1:10:43] blasting,
we do have Rick on the line who can
[1:10:47] speak to general procedures that will be
followed.
[1:10:51] » Um
>> Rick, if you want to jump in here.
[1:10:55] » Yes. Um, thank you.
>> Okay. So, you don't have to do every
[1:11:00] detail because what
>> I'll be using this information and
[1:11:05] especially because we didn't include
like a presentation on the details.
[1:11:10] We're going to talk about the peer
reviewer. So, but whatever information
[1:11:13] you give me, think of like what will
help us
[1:11:17] uh tightly define the tasks for the peer
reviewer.
[1:11:24] Does that make sense?
[1:11:30] or is that possible?
>> Um
[1:11:37] I mean you can define you know whether
you're doing a mix of blasting,
[1:11:42] drilling, hammering,
you know, uh uh what do they call it?
[1:11:48] Like expansive grouts or something that
help fracture things
[1:11:54] that would be helpful. Um,
no,
[1:11:58] » we can certainly include that
information. I guess I just don't want
[1:12:03] to
>> delay the process, right? So, I think
[1:12:09] » we'll get our materials compiled, but in
the meantime, I do think it would be
[1:12:14] helpful to have a scope to give those
peer reviewers so we can get them lined
[1:12:18] up, get them drafting their proposals,
get them under contract, so when our
[1:12:22] materials are ready, there's not that
>> typical potential like two week to six
[1:12:29] week gap of getting somebody else under
contract as well.
[1:12:34] Um,
>> I just didn't know whether
[1:12:39] uh
was it Rick was going to speak about a
[1:12:44] lot of details that we would be writing
down now or will we get something in
[1:12:49] writing?
>> You'll absolutely get something in
[1:12:53] writing. We just want to,
>> you know, give the board a chance to
[1:12:57] hear
>> from our expert how things are going to
[1:13:00] happen and we can respond to questions
now as well.
[1:13:04] » Okay. No, and to me that feeds into the
peer reviewer process, but if it was too
[1:13:10] much detail, I would feel that we should
have listed it differently on our agenda
[1:13:14] because we are not
for open meeting law supposed to discuss
[1:13:20] things that don't fall under our
heading. So that's
[1:13:24] » okay.
>> Concern. I'm just trying to stay on
[1:13:27] track on a regulatory
requirement front. But I think
[1:13:32] describing what's coming um in a way
that we can use that to start prepping
[1:13:38] the uh both ask more questions of the uh
peer reviewer choices um
[1:13:47] and and get that moving would be good.
[1:13:55] Agreed. We would like to get it moving.
>> Yeah.
[1:14:03] » Okay. So, uh
Rick, you would like to speak?
[1:14:12] » Hello.
>> Hello. Yeah.
[1:14:14] » Can you hear?
>> Can you hear me?
[1:14:17] » Absolutely.
>> This is Rick Gro. Uh I'm Richard J. Gro
[1:14:22] Technical Services. I'm an industrial
seismologist that is specialized in the
[1:14:27] uh preliminary uh procedures for
blasting of rock in construction and
[1:14:35] mining and uh New England. Uh
Massachusetts has a very extensive set
[1:14:41] of regulations on both uh the
environmental respect for sites and
[1:14:48] surroundings and also for the active
drilling and blasting, hammering or
[1:14:54] other means of uh the excavation of
rock.
[1:14:58] uh Massachusetts probably has the most
extensive extensive set of regulations
[1:15:04] in the nation and it the reason being is
a we have a high water table a high
[1:15:11] population density and a lot of rock and
there's a demand for the land that that
[1:15:17] rock occupies. So uh this is a very
common procedure. It's handled by men
[1:15:23] who are uh are highly experienced,
licensed, and tested. And in
[1:15:31] Massachusetts, they have a zero
tolerance policy on infractions uh
[1:15:37] related to any aspect of blasting. So,
it is a very very strictly regulated
[1:15:43] process. This is not taken lightly by
any regulatory authorities and they are
[1:15:49] overseen by everybody
uh the food chain and the government. Uh
[1:15:55] they have a number of bosses that watch
everything they do and they have to
[1:16:00] account for their explosives annually to
the ounce. So there there's very little
[1:16:07] room wiggle room for the blasters that
do this work. it's done in a very safe
[1:16:13] and professional manner. That being
said, the first thing that they that you
[1:16:18] have to do is your preliminary. Uh in
this case, you're very concerned about
[1:16:23] groundwater because you're heavily
dependent on it for your drinking water
[1:16:27] resources. Uh and as such, the site plan
has already incorporated into what what
[1:16:34] is known as the SWIP, which I'm sure
you're very aware of the SWIP. They've
[1:16:38] put uh silk fencing all the way around
the site. There's zero discharge. Uh
[1:16:43] they manage their uh sediment so that it
doesn't leave the site. They manage
[1:16:49] storm water so it doesn't leave the
site. And that is a continuously
[1:16:56] uh scrutinized
component of the site dur during the
[1:17:00] entirety of the construction process.
Then what they do is they assess how
[1:17:06] much rock has to be excavated. A rock
rock excavation is about 10 times more
[1:17:12] expensive than soil excavation. So it is
behooves the contractor to minimize rock
[1:17:18] excavation to the greatest degree
possible by working with existing
[1:17:23] grades. And as you've seen their plans
that have been submitted, they have
[1:17:29] conformed all of the streetways, the
elevations of the foundations so that
[1:17:35] they're all relatively similar in depth
throughout the the breadth of the site.
[1:17:41] uh and that way they can uh best utilize
the uh material that's excavated to
[1:17:49] bring about uh their final grades that
are useful and uh structurally sound. Uh
[1:17:57] so then after that we have to notify
everybody that they're offered
[1:18:02] inspections. You're mentioning a quarter
mile radius from the property boundary
[1:18:07] for water testing. Uh that's actually
not uncommon. Uh more commonly that's
[1:18:13] done in a mining situation, but it's in
a large construction site, they would
[1:18:18] also do something of that nature as
well. Uh not everybody will take you up
[1:18:22] on it, but again, it's not unheard of.
Uh but in the Commonwealth of
[1:18:28] Massachusetts, everybody who owns a home
or any kind of improved property that is
[1:18:33] within 250 ft of any blast site, any
bore hole drilled with the intention of
[1:18:38] loading it with an explosive charge has
to be offered a pre-blast inspection.
[1:18:43] And this is a regulatory
uh requirement to get a blasting permit.
[1:18:49] The blasting contractor has to take a
letter from the person that performs the
[1:18:54] inspections to the fire department to
demonstrate who was offered an
[1:18:58] inspection, who had one done, and who
didn't. And at that point, they issue a
[1:19:03] blasting permit to the contractor for 30
days. Uh there there are many many steps
[1:19:09] involved in this process and there is an
enormous amount of scrutiny. It's very
[1:19:14] carefully planned and executed.
uh every foot of hole that they drill
[1:19:19] into the rock they charge for. Every
ounce of explosive that goes into the
[1:19:24] ground is charged for. So there are a
lot of people making sure that
[1:19:28] everything is done to a very tight
specification
[1:19:32] there. There's very little room for um
for uh or space for second guessing the
[1:19:41] this is a very very strictly regulated
process. Uh, as far as the continued
[1:19:47] blasting, while they're blasting, the
contractor has to maintain seismic
[1:19:53] monitoring at the closest structure for
every blast. And they have to make that
[1:19:58] available to the fire department on
request. That's the regulatory authority
[1:20:02] in town. Uh, within six hours of when
the blast takes place, should the fire
[1:20:07] department request it. That's a
regulation as well. So, there's no just
[1:20:11] taking a measurement and sitting on it.
uh they have to be able to make to
[1:20:15] produce it quickly. Uh as long as there
are no issues with them exceeding their
[1:20:21] limits, uh no li uh no problems with
things such as uh fugitive rock material
[1:20:27] coming off of the site, which is
controlled through the use of uh what
[1:20:32] are called blasting mats. They weigh
11,000 pounds each and they typically
[1:20:37] drape about eight to 10 of them over a
small construction blast to limit the
[1:20:43] material from escaping or becoming
fugitive from the site. It does
[1:20:47] ventilate enough that it allows the
gases to escape from the explosion
[1:20:51] process, but it acts like a net that
keeps the solid materials from being ex
[1:20:56] uh cast off of sight or or even out of
the the blast area. And as long as they
[1:21:02] adhere to all of these uh restrictions
for safety and precaution, they are
[1:21:10] continuously allowed to blast on the
site. They just go back every 30 days
[1:21:14] and show demonstrate they've not had any
complaints that are unresolved and
[1:21:19] they've not had any issues with
exceedences on limits for ground
[1:21:23] vibration or air blast or any um
fugitive rock issues. At that point, the
[1:21:28] fire department is compelled to renew
the permit for another 30 days. And that
[1:21:33] goes on so on and so forth until the
completion of the project. Uh, and
[1:21:38] that's basically what what we do.
This is a this is a standard procedure
[1:21:45] that is done in Massachusetts every day
all over the state. Uh, there's 11
[1:21:52] million pounds of explosives used in the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts every
[1:21:56] year. So there's a lot of blasting going
on. They've got this right, especially
[1:22:01] in this state. There very little to be
worried about.
[1:22:08] » Uh well, we're we are aware that when it
comes to blasting that the fire
[1:22:13] department is really the lead for that.
Um, however,
[1:22:18] uh, per our regulation, I guess you've
seen, we will require SDS's for whatever
[1:22:24] blasting agents are going to be used.
That will help us develop the
[1:22:29] notification that you will be mailing
out to people, informing them about what
[1:22:34] they might want to test their water for.
And we sounds like there's uh the
[1:22:40] inspections I assume of like people's
foundations or whatever. Uh the pre
[1:22:48] blasting contractor that goes out. I
assume that's structural investigations.
[1:22:53] But for the board of health, we're just
um preparing people with that kind of
[1:22:59] baseline of what their water quality was
pre activity. Uh so that
[1:23:07] is really just mailing and informing
people that it's coming is the
[1:23:12] requirement that we have for you. Um and
then we will be happy to hear about any
[1:23:17] kind of good management practices that
would prevent the leeching
[1:23:21] that's leeching of minerals from and
what do you refer to the material fines
[1:23:28] or
debris or I have no what it's called in
[1:23:32] your field.
Well, uh, as far as the explosives
[1:23:38] products, the vast majority of the
explosives products are comprised of
[1:23:44] ammonium, nitrate, fuel oil, and water.
Uh, that's called a bulk explosive
[1:23:49] product. Uh, they may or may not be
allowed to use those on the site
[1:23:56] depending on what what is discussed and
what is finally agreed. Uh they don't
[1:24:01] use any perchlorate containing
explosives in Massachusetts.
[1:24:06] Uh the expansive grout that you
mentioned has also been barred in
[1:24:11] Massachusetts because a it doesn't work
and b if it's misused it can cause uh
[1:24:17] shards of rock to be cast into the air
unexpectedly because it locks up against
[1:24:22] the collar or the hole and creates a a
bursting effect on the stone that
[1:24:28] confines the material at the collar of
the hole. uh as far as hammering is
[1:24:33] concerned. That's also what we call
secondary breakage uh takes a lot longer
[1:24:38] to do secondary breakage than uh
blasting breakage, primary breakage. And
[1:24:43] typically they try to design every blast
so that the rock they need to get out of
[1:24:47] the way is out of the way once because
the blasting contractor does not get
[1:24:52] paid to break the rock twice. He does
that at his own expense. So they have to
[1:24:58] make sure that their
[cough and clears throat] designs
[1:25:02] safely and effectively break the rock to
the satisfaction of the general
[1:25:07] contractor.
[1:25:10] [clears throat] And in doing so, the
explosives products are entirely
[1:25:15] consumed in the explosion process in the
bar hole. And what you were left with is
[1:25:20] carbon dioxide, water, and some NOX
gases which escaped the site.
[1:25:27] Excuse me.
So there there should not be any
[1:25:32] leeching of explosives products after
the blasting takes place. That is all
[1:25:37] evaporated with the explosion process.
There should not be um any chemical
[1:25:44] reactions with the rock as a result of
the explosion process.
[1:25:50] The rock is not going to change in
composition simply because it's
[1:25:54] disenfranchised.
And whatever chem what ground chemistry
[1:25:58] you have out there now, you will have
after the blasting is done because it's
[1:26:03] still the same rock. It's still the same
overburden and it's still the same
[1:26:08] groundwater that you've had there all
along. They're not bringing anything in
[1:26:12] extra.
[1:26:15] Uh we understand that it's more that the
surface area of material that is exposed
[1:26:22] to rainwater
um there's just more leeching potential
[1:26:28] if if the material is something that
would uh
[1:26:35] » well be you're you're making a point
that it's the surface active area of the
[1:26:39] of the newly broken rock that is
>> a potential leeching hack. hazard, but
[1:26:45] it's the same rock that they that it's
sitting on top of there. There's no
[1:26:50] difference in the chemistry of the rock
and there's no chem difference in the
[1:26:55] chemistry of the of the groundwater or
the precipitation.
[1:27:02] Where where's that change come from? Can
you identify the a source of new other
[1:27:09] than the explosive product that's used
to do the breakage material, but
[1:27:14] As I started out in the beginning,
it's even it's acknowledged even for
[1:27:20] drilling wells
in bedrock that it's not uncommon to see
[1:27:29] a temporary rise in mineral content in
the water that is coming because you've
[1:27:36] just chopped through rock and exposed
more surface and little pieces are
[1:27:40] present. That's that's documented. So
this is just a very similar thing. It's
[1:27:47] not just a bore hole. It's a large area
with a bunch of smaller pieces of rock
[1:27:52] with
I'll be dramatic. Okay, let's say there
[1:27:57] salts in the rock. Certainly that would
change if it's embedded and encased in
[1:28:03] in rock versus exposed on the surface of
the rock. lots more surface
[1:28:10] » as a result of being broken up. And I
don't know what kind of size you get
[1:28:13] down to with blasting or if it's a
complete mix of
[1:28:18] from dust to huge chunks. Um I don't
know. I haven't witnessed
[1:28:24] » related question
>> lasting up close. So
[1:28:29] » ask a related question. our concern and
again you don't have to we're just
[1:28:34] trying to provide data to the people
around it. So that's why you have to get
[1:28:40] a permit from us so that we can monitor
that to get the permit you have to
[1:28:44] notify the neighbors within a quarter
mile to do testing of their border.
[1:28:51] » Can I ask a question which is related to
the point you're making Darl? Yeah.
[1:28:56] » U this is for our speaker. Um
you said in your presentation which
[1:29:02] thank you very much is excellent. Um
that the material is removed from the
[1:29:08] site and confined. How do you do that
when the water table is high?
[1:29:15] How do you cope?
>> Because the blasting causes the rock
[1:29:21] which contains lead, manganesees, other
heavy metals and other elements into
[1:29:27] very small particles which can which is
how it gets into the overburden.
[1:29:33] » Well, first of all, the the rock that
you're talking about this is volcanic
[1:29:38] rock. uh principally
is an orthite,
[1:29:43] silica,
um some other other minerals [snorts]
[1:29:49] aside from that that that have all been
extruded from mantle. Uh the if there's
[1:29:57] lead in the rock, there's it's going to
have been there all along. It's not
[1:30:01] going it's a blast is not going to
produce lead in rock. They, as far as I
[1:30:07] know, they don't even use lead in any of
the explosive products.
[1:30:10] » No, no. The rock that you're breaking
apart has heavy metals in it, manganese,
[1:30:18] lead, and other materials, which is the
reason that we, the board of health, are
[1:30:27] require some of these this information.
And I was curious because obviously you
[1:30:33] have a lot of experience with it. What
how you compensate for the material? How
[1:30:40] do you keep it confined to the site when
the water table is high? Because you're
[1:30:45] blasting the rock apart into little
pieces that are not found in nature,
[1:30:50] which is the reason that these heavy
metals are released is because these are
[1:30:55] » what you're referring to is re is known
as mobility.
[1:30:59] uh the the individual constituents of
the rock you are afraid are becoming
[1:31:03] more mobile increasing their
concentration in the groundwater.
[1:31:07] However, what first of all the the
material once it flows through the
[1:31:12] groundwater or through the ground, it is
coming in contact with other rocks and
[1:31:17] it is being filtered back out just the
same way that uh vados water water
[1:31:22] percolating through soil from
precipitation is scrubbed by the soil
[1:31:26] and the rock that it flows through. It's
not go it's not going to create this uh
[1:31:32] pool of contaminate contaminant that's
been leeched out of the rock and taken
[1:31:36] off site. First of all, the uh site is
designed so that water doesn't flow on
[1:31:41] the surface offsite anywhere. It's
called 100% capture. The second thing is
[1:31:48] is that you have water that's already in
the ground when there's a high water
[1:31:52] table that is putting uh resistance to
any more water flowing into the ground.
[1:31:59] It's more likely to flow off the surface
or just stay wherever it's being
[1:32:03] retained to like within the sweat. So
there's there's not going to be this uh
[1:32:09] spike in any minerals. and you take the
the readings before and after in the
[1:32:14] local wells to demonstrate that that's a
that's a common uh that's a common
[1:32:19] procedure
>> that there's a little out outside of
[1:32:25] America but in other countries where
mining activities are quite common.
[1:32:29] There is evidence of blasting and other
mining activities that when the rock was
[1:32:36] broken into small pieces, it has
contaminated the local groundwater,
[1:32:41] which is the reason we're asking these
questions because we are trying to
[1:32:45] protect the drinking water. But when the
bro the rock is broken apart by the
[1:32:51] blasting procedure, the very small
particles leech or leak and they can um
[1:33:00] get into the overburden in quantities
which would not be otherwise found in
[1:33:06] nature. And so that's how they get into
the drinking water. So that's why I was
[1:33:10] asking how you you said you have 100%
capture. How do you accomplish that?
[1:33:15] They put a a ring of hay bales and silt
fence entirely around the site before
[1:33:20] they start digging. That's the first
thing that's done. They It's the It's a
[1:33:26] regulation. I believe it's federal that
they do that. It's not just state. It's
[1:33:32] the they have to capture all their water
and contain it on site that and in doing
[1:33:39] so a lot of these problems are
mitigated. Uh the second thing about
[1:33:45] this is is that if there were any of
these contaminants in the rock, they
[1:33:50] would have been liberated by the act of
the people who drilled the wells and
[1:33:55] then drew water out of them daily for
years and consumed them. They
[1:34:10] site. And the reason being is is that
they
[1:34:14] to the rock that they were blasted out
of than to the surroundings that lay
[1:34:18] outside the site area.
Okay. All right. Let's not go down this
[1:34:25] path much more. We've just seen with
projects in town that the the rise
[1:34:32] manganesees has been the problem that
has showed up on a number of occasions
[1:34:36] and it was dramatic and it impacted the
use of the water. So we're just trying
[1:34:42] to
make provisions for that. So
[1:34:46] » yeah,
>> we're good. It sounds like you're going
[1:34:49] to do some protective things. I just
want to mention when he's talking about
[1:34:52] SWIP that stands for SWPP which is a
storm water pollution prevention plan
[1:35:00] that uh state and federal regulations
have requirements for different
[1:35:07] activities that you need to control
storm water quality and construction is
[1:35:13] one category of that that is covered
there industrial various industrial ag
[1:35:20] agricultural categories etc. So that's
what the SWIP is. Um so storm water
[1:35:26] pollution prevention plan which it
sounds like. All right. So you're going
[1:35:29] to work on that. Just a quick question.
It sounds like do you typically do
[1:35:34] testing of uh some wells in the area
beforehand?
[1:35:40] Because our regulation is to provide
that in the absence of that being done
[1:35:45] but we haven't had blasting before. So,
uh, is there any,
[1:35:52] you know, if you do that as a routine
measure for your projects?
[1:36:00] » Here, here's how a pre-blast inspection
is handled. It is a visual inspection of
[1:36:05] the property and you can look at the
wellhead, you can look at the filtration
[1:36:11] system in the house, run the water,
things like that as a visual inspection.
[1:36:17] If you're going to do a
>> but it's not it's not a take a sample
[1:36:22] and bring it to a lab for analysis.
Well, that's if you're just if you're
[1:36:27] just incorporating
>> overlapping requirements that you're
[1:36:31] already doing something that we're going
to then
[1:36:34] » right if there's a water well on the
property
[1:36:38] if there's a water well on the property
the person doing the pre-blast
[1:36:42] inspection has the uh has an obligation
a professional obligation to look for
[1:36:48] whatever he can see of that system and
to document its condition.
[1:36:54] That's part of the regulation. The
regulation is written in the language of
[1:36:58] the regulation such that it says it
understands that certain things are not
[1:37:03] readily visible to the inspector because
the inspector is saddled with doing
[1:37:08] everything within 250 ft of a blast
site. it the job might be enormous
[1:37:13] already and it's just not physically um
um or not functionally convenient to the
[1:37:22] contractor to do that much work.
However, that's where when they specify
[1:37:28] a water test be done beforehand, you can
you can take care of that at the same
[1:37:34] time that you take care of the pre-blast
or you can have two separate entities do
[1:37:38] it as well. I've seen it done both ways.
>> Uh so just so we're clear, our
[1:37:46] regulation does not require that the
applicant carry out the testing of water
[1:37:52] in all of those homes. We just require
that folks get notified so they can go
[1:37:58] get their water tested.
>> Yeah. That that that we would not be
[1:38:02] expect we would not anticipate doing
anything more than our regulations as
[1:38:06] there as we were just saying. Normally
it's a visualized inspection. I mean
[1:38:11] we've we've done blasting numerous times
on many many different job sites. So you
[1:38:16] know we would we would not be involved
in that. That's not typical.
[1:38:21] » Okay. But you do do the structural
inspections of people's home
[1:38:25] » as as we just mentioned as a requirement
>> before you start and after you.
[1:38:30] » Yep. That that that's a requirement.
It's 250 ft. Um, it's not a quarter mile
[1:38:36] for for for structural, but you know,
that's that's regulations.
[1:38:40] » Are you aware, if I may, Darl, are you
aware of our regulations? Uh, I'd
[1:38:45] suggest you look at them for bedrock
disruption. It's 305-3.10
[1:38:51] in our regulations and that will help
guide you to what you need to do in my
[1:38:55] view. Thank you, Darl.
>> Yep.
[1:39:01] And as I said, we will prepare version
of the the letter that you send out. You
[1:39:06] just are responsible for sending it out.
Okay. Um All right. So, this uh has
[1:39:15] explained a fair amount that you will be
capturing material
[1:39:22] again. Are you planning on reusing any
of that removed material as still
[1:39:27] elsewhere?
or you don't have to tell me all that
[1:39:32] now, but if you could include some
information in whatever you write up.
[1:39:36] » Yeah, absolutely.
>> So, we understand the movement of
[1:39:38] materials around um the property and it
sounds like it'll be across the two
[1:39:43] properties and that's fine. We do kind
of think of this they're very different
[1:39:47] projects, but they are intertwined.
Um
[1:39:52] so, that would be helpful.
[1:39:59] Okay.
>> Okay.
[1:40:02] » So, we
>> um so we are submitting the well permit,
[1:40:10] the earth works and then is the board
then considering granting us a waiver to
[1:40:16] the EHIR or what's the path for that?
>> I think requiring the EHIR because it's
[1:40:24] such a big project. Okay. Just wanted a
yes or no so we noted how to proceed.
[1:40:30] » The vote might board might vote on it.
>> Could we
[1:40:35] do that today?
Uh,
[1:40:41] as I was saying,
we've had very few EHIRs. They've been
[1:40:47] more formulaic when it's the septic
system that we're on top of. But this is
[1:40:54] something entirely new for Sherborn
the kind of a project. So I don't know
[1:41:04] that I mean I have not yet come up with
something that I would specify uh but
[1:41:10] I'm only one board member. other board
members could speak up about what they
[1:41:14] think might be on the horizon, but I
don't think we know enough to specify
[1:41:20] what those requirements would be. We've
talked about some of the bedrock.
[1:41:25] Certainly again would like the the peer
reviewer to take a look at um you know
[1:41:32] since they are familiar uh presumably at
least one and I think it would be
[1:41:37] essential to have that particular peer
reviewer for that expertise alone um and
[1:41:43] familiarity
of just verifying about the procedures
[1:41:50] that you're going to have in place for
managing that and minimizing this
[1:41:56] potential leeching of materials from
material that has been broken down into
[1:42:04] a greater surface area. So,
uh that's that is part of what why we
[1:42:11] want that um regular consultant with
that expertise. So,
[1:42:18] but it may be covered mostly covered by
the other rules and regulations that are
[1:42:24] in place. And that goes for storm water
uh also to some degree since we have
[1:42:31] often relied on what planning board and
conservation commission are able to
[1:42:37] accomplish. like to remind
>> interest
[1:42:41] » at our first meeting that there was an
agreeance to
[1:42:46] defer to the other boards to the
planning board as well as the
[1:42:50] conservation remote uh conservation
commission for
[1:42:55] » the
um storm water regulations but I'm
[1:43:00] interrupting and Mark has his hand up as
well.
[1:43:04] Go ahead, Mark.
>> Darl, all I was going to explain is that
[1:43:08] whatever the board decides, the
regulation I cited 305-310,
[1:43:15] that's in the EHIR regulations. So to
eliminate the EHI regulations could
[1:43:22] possibly eliminate the need to do
bedrock disruption process processing
[1:43:27] with what was mentioned earlier you
knowifying near butters a quarter mile
[1:43:32] around and so forth. So, I'd suggest the
board if you're going to eliminate the
[1:43:37] EHIR, which I don't suggest unless it's
duplication for other boards, is that
[1:43:44] you at least designate the bedrock
disruption as being required. Thank you.
[1:43:51] » Okay. And I guess right, I'm looking at
our regulations differently and I view
[1:43:55] that as a requirement. The EHR was for
like extra steps of analysis.
[1:44:02] um
try to predict
[1:44:06] impacts of a project and again that
prediction of impacts from a large
[1:44:12] septic system there's plenty of examples
about the modeling mod flow all the rest
[1:44:18] you know so there are methods for that
this one there are
[1:44:25] less clear methods for predicting what
the u mineral content in bedrock
[1:44:31] fractures will be post having blasted
apart
[1:44:37] uh rock above that bedrock and the
bedrock fractures. So I don't that's the
[1:44:42] part I'm not sure we can wholly
accomplish but there are other
[1:44:46] approaches such as managing how one does
it uh judicious judicious use of
[1:44:54] blasting agents. Um, so there there may
be other things that we would require,
[1:45:00] but we don't have enough information yet
to specify that. Not like we're trying
[1:45:05] to save up and have something
[1:45:09] a monumental surprise later on. We're
really trying to make something
[1:45:14] practical for this project. And again,
we're just starting to get going on more
[1:45:20] of the information about the details.
I do appreciate the practical approach.
[1:45:26] This is the third meeting where we've
asked this question and we are trying we
[1:45:32] just want to work with the board. So I
do see Rebecca has her hand
[1:45:35] » but we had also asked for more
information about
[1:45:39] » how much was going to be disrupted and
how and we did not know that a report
[1:45:44] had gone to NEPA that contained some of
that information until just a few days
[1:45:49] ago. So,
we didn't know that that we were
[1:45:54] supposed to go find it to that other
route. We didn't get any emails that I
[1:45:59] know of containing that. So,
[1:46:06] must Sarah unless we got something
earlier, but I was watching for
[1:46:10] information to come in and watching for
what the irrigation plan was going to
[1:46:14] be. I gather that was also in the FEIR
um to some degree. I don't know if it
[1:46:20] has all the details that we'd want to
see, but that's that's what we needed to
[1:46:26] be able to start to formulate. So,
we just hadn't seen it.
[1:46:35] » Rebecca,
>> I'd love to have been specifying it now.
[1:46:40] » Yeah, I agree that it would be really
helpful for us. Part of the reason not
[1:46:45] only would it be beneficial for you to
design the project for the site, but
[1:46:52] also it would be beneficial for us
because of our responsibility to the
[1:46:57] abutters.
[1:47:04] So we'll do our best to take the
information if you can.
[1:47:10] Uh, the FBI I think is fairly tightful.
Do you think the FBI has all of the
[1:47:16] information that we need?
>> The FBI does not address blasting.
[1:47:24] » Okay.
[1:47:34] So, it would be helpful for us to have
that. Uh is there
[1:47:41] how extensive is the irrigation
plan?
[1:47:46] It addresses irrigation I think in a
very high level way. We were scoped by
[1:47:51] the water resource commission, the state
authority that will approve the inter
[1:47:55] race and transfer act to explain the
relationship of the private wells that
[1:47:59] the
um applicant has installed and how those
[1:48:04] will be controlled or acknowledged when
we have drought conditions and how we
[1:48:09] are minimizing the irrigation flow. But
it does not um
[1:48:16] quantify
[1:48:19] exactly projected flows. Um,
>> and are is it clear to you that because
[1:48:29] those wells have been drilled, but they
are not regulated by Mass D because
[1:48:34] you're not using them for public water
supply
[1:48:38] that it's under our jurisdiction.
>> Yes.
[1:48:41] » And we don't permit we don't permit
wells for irrigation unless for
[1:48:46] agricultural
>> did. So,
[1:48:49] » can you point me to the regulation that
does have that prohibition? Um, I have
[1:48:55] been through your regulations. I have
actually engaged council on this
[1:48:59] question because I've heard it multiple
times presented in the town and from
[1:49:04] what I can see, you have a de facto
prohibition on irrigation where you
[1:49:09] allow one well per property and that
well cannot serve both portable and
[1:49:15] irrigation demand. And in this case
where we have our boil source
[1:49:23] served by the water district that we are
creating and bringing in and investing
[1:49:29] $9 million to provide to the town. Um we
don't rely on our wells for irrigation.
[1:49:37] So I just I haven't found that
regulation. I've heard it stated. I just
[1:49:42] haven't found it.
Uh I don't know the numbering offand
[1:49:50] Mark if you have it at your at your uh
fingertips but we will send you that. Um
[1:49:57] it's also
uh
[1:50:02] if it's not explicitly
written out it's how we have applied it.
[1:50:07] We made it clear in our documentation
that
[1:50:12] the need for irrigation has to be
justified to us. The burden of proof is
[1:50:17] on the applicant.
Yeah,
[1:50:20] » we have treated wells on people's
properties as supplying their needs for
[1:50:27] um for the dwelling and people obviously
do some watering to some degree, but we
[1:50:34] don't allow a second well on the concept
of somehow there's magically more water
[1:50:41] uh because you've sunk a second well and
that water wouldn't otherwise be used uh
[1:50:46] for the drinking water of your neighbor.
Um, we view it as a shared resource. Uh,
[1:50:53] we're working off of bedrock fractures,
not easily mapped, not hard to know what
[1:50:58] the quantities and yields are.
Certainly, different parts of town have
[1:51:02] different yields from their wells. Uh,
so it was a a measure to
[1:51:09] get people more aware of water use. And
from what I saw the number of
[1:51:17] something like 12 to 18,000 I don't
remember exactly gallons a day
[1:51:22] anticipated being used by the system.
That is essentially for irrigation
[1:51:29] a loss of groundwater that's going to
affect that transpirate that's going to
[1:51:35] be gone and not be like a septic system
where
[1:51:40] we somewhat have a closed cycle of
pulling water out of the ground and most
[1:51:43] of it goes back in by a septic system.
So that is our concern because we have
[1:51:49] seen a lowering of water levels in
bedrock fractures. People have been
[1:51:54] deepening their wells lately or having
to drill new wells or
[1:52:00] make taking other measures to get more
water, but deepening has
[1:52:06] and certainly happening with greater
frequency of waves. Um,
[1:52:11] and that's our concern. We only have
fractures. We don't have any major
[1:52:15] aquifers in town that we can tap into.
And we don't
[1:52:22] I I won't say we because the whole board
hasn't deliberated, but I'll tell you my
[1:52:27] perspective is that
[1:52:32] certainly when one we're okay with
establishment watering to establish any
[1:52:37] vegetation that you're planting that I
know will be required probably by concom
[1:52:43] um in certain areas of the property
because of the wetlands etc. But
[1:52:50] mostly
people's landscape is surviving just
[1:52:54] fine without being irrigated for the
most part in town. So
[1:53:00] irrigation systems lead to a lot of
overwatering
[1:53:04] um frequently.
>> Darl, I see Mark has his hand up as
[1:53:08] well. Can we
>> maybe give him a chance to speak too?
[1:53:13] » Sure.
>> Thank you. Um, thank you for your help.
[1:53:17] I am chair. [laughter]
[1:53:22] But if if I'm becoming repetitious, then
I'd happily switch over. Take it away,
[1:53:27] Mark.
>> Okay. I No, one second.
[1:53:32] » I always I always await my chair to
direct me when I can speak. It's the
[1:53:36] chair that runs the meeting. Uh, in
respect to your question, Darl, it's
[1:53:40] 305-2.7.
the amount of wells allowed. So, it
[1:53:46] specifies everything you just mentioned,
including that even a business, a
[1:53:50] multiple lot to treat it as a single
lot. So, um I'd suggest your lawyers and
[1:53:55] you're welcome to call us, too, but you
review that with your lawyers. That
[1:53:59] regulation 3052.7
talks about addition.
[1:54:10] Looks like we just uh lost Mark.
[1:54:16] Um I know that he is in a in a location
with not the best internet connection.
[1:54:24] So
um Darl, how would you like to proceed
[1:54:29] here?
>> Uh I think we can keep going. Um you
[1:54:34] know, he's not part of our quorum and I
assume he'll try to call back in. So, if
[1:54:38] the co-hosts can just keep an eye on
when he is trying to get into the
[1:54:43] meeting.
>> Of course.
[1:54:46] » Oh, here he is.
[1:55:02] » I do also just want to make a note of
the time. Um, we do have a number of
[1:55:07] other items.
>> It is getting late
[1:55:10] » and I apologize to everyone.
I apologize. I apologize for the
[1:55:16] disconnection. I don't know how much you
heard. I'm just referring everyone to
[1:55:20] 305-2.7.
And if any questions come out about or
[1:55:24] please continue to keep um our whole
staff in the email loop as well because
[1:55:28] I'm not getting all the emails. I
appreciate that as well. Thank you all.
[1:55:34] » Okay. So the general message is we're
not keen on seeing that kind of volume
[1:55:40] loss of water from our shared resource
[1:55:46] for large scale irrigation that is
more cosmetic
[1:55:53] for establishment. Again establishment
is a different thing. One must water to
[1:55:57] get the plants started
but after that we don't want to see it.
[1:56:03] And in droughts, we don't want to see
watering.
[1:56:12] That would be my guidance at the moment.
But I've spoken plenty. Uh are there
[1:56:18] other board members who would like to
weigh in on any concerns?
[1:56:26] » Yeah, I have just just listening to the
presentation that was made. Um
[1:56:32] I I know it was brought up that I can't
remember how many tons of explosives
[1:56:36] were used for um this kind of work in
Massachusetts, but um the one thing you
[1:56:43] really have to remember is that the town
is very unique. I'm sure only a small
[1:56:47] fraction of those explosives were used
in towns that are are similar in a
[1:56:54] profile to to Sherbet. Um,
so that's something that that I think
[1:57:00] really needs to be looked at. And then
the other thing is I' I'd love to try to
[1:57:04] find or see what studies have been made
um
[1:57:10] with towns similar to Sherwood. In other
words, having wellwater and seeing
[1:57:17] what was the impact. Did an impact
happen immediately? Did something happen
[1:57:21] two years down the road? Um, things like
that. It's just just more information
[1:57:25] that I'd like to see. Um it again, we we
we live in a fairly unique community in
[1:57:33] Massachusetts. There just aren't too
many towns that are 100% private. Well,
[1:57:38] um and the impact of something like like
this could could be substantial.
[1:57:48] I will add that when they
found out the the issues with
[1:57:54] perchlorate, um, mask just had all the
public water supplies across the state
[1:58:01] run per chlorate tests so they could get
a handle on what the distribution was.
[1:58:06] that was tightly tied to um where
blasting was done, where you know the
[1:58:14] cuts of 495 through uh bedrock outcrops
um say in the northwest of Boston. uh
[1:58:24] high levels there. It was tied to
particular companies and
[1:58:31] uh the highest levels were tied to
particular companies where they think
[1:58:35] they weren't using the uh blasting
agents as efficiently
[1:58:40] uh so that they might be destroyed
through use. I don't know what if the
[1:58:45] dynamics of chlorate are different from
whatever um
[1:58:50] ammonium nitrate or whatever else is
being used. uh in
[1:58:55] the agents that will be used for this
project, but
[1:59:00] does it really all go to NOx uh and and
enter the atmosphere and does it
[1:59:05] precipitate back out on the ground? If
it's raining, does that change the
[1:59:09] dynamic? Anyway, we're still concerned
about nitro rising nitrogen levels and
[1:59:14] groundwater. So, these are our concerns.
[1:59:20] Do you have any comments?
>> Yes, there perchlorate containing
[1:59:25] explosives are illegal in Massachusetts.
They they have to submit their MSDS
[1:59:33] sheets on every product they're using
when they apply for a permit. And if it
[1:59:38] cannot contain any perchlorates because
there was an issue with the con uh the
[1:59:44] presence of perchlorates in groundwater
about 20 years ago and it was from a
[1:59:50] project in the Blackstone Valley Mall I
believe. So yeah, you're you're not
[1:59:54] going to see perchlorate containing
explosives. As far as nitrate is
[1:59:58] concerned, you have a far bigger problem
with nitrate coming out of uh septic
[2:00:03] systems, golf courses,
um even automobile exhaust than you do
[2:00:09] from remnant nitrate out of an explosive
because the explosive is entirely
[2:00:14] consumed. The nitrate is the oxidizer
that makes the nitrogen or makes the
[2:00:19] explosive burn. So that's where the
nitrate goes. So you there's not going
[2:00:25] to be any pollution from either of those
that you have to worry about. Plus that
[2:00:30] these are very shallow cuts.
The deepest they're going to blast is
[2:00:35] about 20 feet or less. The kind of sites
that you're worried about are big pits.
[2:00:41] They are 50, 60, even 100 feet deep
and have far broader and higher uses of
[2:00:49] explosives than you will see on a site
like this. This site would use a
[2:00:54] relatively minor amount of explosives
compared to the uh what's done on large
[2:00:59] road cuts and quaries.
[2:01:06] » Okay. And um are there diagrams in the
FIR showing this? Because
[2:01:13] until you just mentioned 20 ft, I had no
idea of the extent.
[2:01:21] Well, uh, as far as the site plans,
>> uh, the site plans demonstrate the
[2:01:27] existing ground surface and where all of
the utilities are going, so you can see
[2:01:32] exactly how deep they're going to have
to dig.
[2:01:37] Uh the the vast majority of this site
has is the flank of a uh solid rock
[2:01:43] landform
and the areas that are closest to where
[2:01:47] they're to the surrounding homes are
going to have little or no blasting
[2:01:52] because that material is all natural
overburden. That's all sand and gravel
[2:01:57] down at the flanks of of this landform.
Everything in the flat the valley flats
[2:02:01] is four feet of sand and then another
four feet of gravel underneath it.
[2:02:09] Okay,
not the best filtering, I assume.
[2:02:15] Anyway, okay, fine. We'll have the peer
reviewers work on that. Um, Bose,
[2:02:23] any comments from you?
[2:02:27] No,
>> I think we've raised we've raised a lot
[2:02:29] of interesting questions and Richard's
so confident in making the point that
[2:02:35] there is no potential threat but do you
have say a site where you did something
[2:02:43] similar and you've tested water around
the area and there were no changes.
[2:02:47] Um do you have data that you can show
us?
[2:02:52] uh like like what Steve suggested, you
know, is there historic data? Do do
[2:02:56] these changes happen within 6 months or
within a few years?
[2:03:02] So,
>> so, so these these these are the
[2:03:06] concerns and as you expose more rock,
there's more area for water to interact
[2:03:12] with rock and and the point that Daryl
was making was that there is more
[2:03:18] opportunities for leeching into
groundwater.
[2:03:22] C can I just may though you you're you
process a construction site, you dig
[2:03:28] down, you expose your rock, you blast,
you either remove it or you process it
[2:03:32] and you reuse it on site and then you
grade it with normal wood fill and then
[2:03:38] you build a home there. It it's not like
you're leaving a blasted ledge sitting
[2:03:43] there for years and even then it it's
the same rock. But it's not just sitting
[2:03:48] there. I know you have this, you may
have this visual, but it it filled over
[2:03:54] and
>> filled. David, what what you're
[2:03:57] suggesting is actually even more
terrifying
[2:04:01] because you're pulling this rock out
that was sitting hidden from water for
[2:04:07] maybe centuries,
right? And no escape route for minerals
[2:04:13] that were contained in that rock into
groundwater unless there was a fisher
[2:04:18] there. And now you're breaking it into
small pieces and spreading it all over
[2:04:22] the place. So that is an even terrifying
situation, isn't it?
[2:04:29] » That same rock has been withering
indefinitely in the past.
[2:04:34] » And
yeah, this is this is an endless
[2:04:37] question uh endless discussion. But but
you know uh you see where we're coming
[2:04:43] from though from
>> Yeah.
[2:04:45] » Yeah. And we will, this is why we will
have the peer reviewer who can spend the
[2:04:51] time with us to explain it or allay our
concerns. And
[2:04:56] so [snorts]
I think
[2:05:01] I think you've heard the kind of
information that can be helpful to us.
[2:05:05] If you can pull that together, we'll do
our best to turn around quickly and ask
[2:05:10] more questions if we see gaps
to
[2:05:15] formulate something for the peer
reviewers to get them going. Peer
[2:05:19] reviewer or
um
[2:05:23] and and just start working on this. Are
there issues or not? We're just trying
[2:05:29] to be precautionary because once things
go wrong, it's too late.
[2:05:35] and our job is to just um
protect our water resources essentially.
[2:05:42] It's our primary job. So,
um,
[2:05:48] and
so as you're pulling together
[2:05:51] information about what we've been
talking about, the things that you think
[2:05:54] will address the concerns that we've
expressed, if you have more questions
[2:06:00] for us about, you know, do you want this
or not, please do just send an email or
[2:06:06] something, let us know. And uh I'll also
be asking, you know, is there anyone
[2:06:14] else on the board who would like to help
with
[2:06:18] review? Well, I mean, we should all be
reviewing the information as it comes
[2:06:21] in, but we can't all talk about unless
we're in an open meeting. So, I don't
[2:06:26] know if there's anyone in particular who
wants to
[2:06:31] uh communicate on this
[2:06:38] or you can think about it.
>> Yeah, we'll get back to you.
[2:06:42] » Whether you have time
[2:06:46] to do it and when Julie's back, we'll
check with her, too.
[2:06:53] So,
um,
[2:07:00] so these are probably not all the things
that you wanted to hear this evening,
[2:07:03] but Liz and and Rick, uh,
do you have any other
[2:07:11] questions for us now? Otherwise, we
still have a
[2:07:16] » no work to get done tonight.
I think just when is the
[2:07:24] next meeting and getting us on the
agenda for that as well.
[2:07:28] » You're right. So, um
>> September second.
[2:07:33] » Yeah.
>> Yeah, that's what I thought. Great.
[2:07:36] September 2nd. Um we will be working in
the meantime. We can have a subgroup of
[2:07:41] two work on something to to you know
>> okay
[2:07:46] » get some information back but we can't
go beyond to again for open meeting law.
[2:07:51] So
>> you could put a there is a north shore
[2:07:56] water sewer district commission meeting
cited for that as well. So if we could
[2:07:59] just work together so we're on the
agendas at split times that would be
[2:08:03] helpful.
>> Okay.
[2:08:06] » I can coordinate with them.
>> Appreciate it. Thank you.
[2:08:09] » Worse.
>> Okay.
[2:08:13] » All right.
>> All right. Well, thank you very much
[2:08:15] though for bringing uh this was helpful
to at least get I feel like I know much
[2:08:21] more about what the project might be
looking like. But um again, if you can
[2:08:28] point us right to what we should be
looking at in the documents
[2:08:33] um
>> we'll help get you what you need.
[2:08:38] Um, you know, and I appreciate the
board's help and appreciate your
[2:08:42] concerns. I definitely believe, you
know, a peer reviewer will significantly
[2:08:46] help you with your process here. We are
eager to get them on board so that you
[2:08:49] can help get the guidance that you need.
Um,
[2:08:53] » you know, we are advancing numerous
other approvals right now. So, as you
[2:08:58] can understand, you know, that that's
part and part of why, you know, a little
[2:09:02] bit of the I would say frustration, the
urgency in our voice of trying to make
[2:09:06] sure we sort of advance things,
understanding what our requirements are,
[2:09:10] which is why we'd ask the question about
EHIR, if it's required or not, because
[2:09:14] if it is, we just want to advance it and
get it going. If it's not, then yeah,
[2:09:18] it's not. We we just
>> No. And I don't want to hold you up on
[2:09:20] that, but I also don't want to have you
doing things that aren't necess.
[2:09:25] » We we don't either. We we agree. I just
think for us and to give you some
[2:09:29] perspective from from our end, timing is
very critical. There there's a lot of
[2:09:32] moving pieces and a lot of different
state entities that we're up against
[2:09:36] some other timelines and that's why we
need to advance all the different
[2:09:40] channels. Your your board being one of
them um expeditiously and we're
[2:09:45] concerned that we don't know the permit
that we or not process what we need to
[2:09:51] submit I guess to you that that's what
we're
[2:09:56] pressing.
>> Yes. Yes, I can appreciate that. So, uh,
[2:10:01] as someone who works on permitting for
industrial facilities, I understand that
[2:10:06] stress.
>> You understand?
[2:10:08] So things that would really help is if
you're going to stay on attempting to
[2:10:15] get irrigation,
if you can please,
[2:10:20] you will shorten your process if you can
orient it right from the start to be
[2:10:25] something that is merely to address
establishment of plants. That will be
[2:10:31] different for us.
uh other board you know members had
[2:10:36] expressed that at a prior meeting. So
um but a a largecale
[2:10:42] constantly used irrigation system is
going to be very difficult
[2:10:49] for us given what we see happening with
the water resources in town as
[2:10:56] the town grows and as climate changes or
whatever the reasons are or frankly
[2:11:01] anywhere on the planet practically where
groundwater is being pumped. pumped up
[2:11:09] to the surface for use. There is never
the recovery in the groundwater levels.
[2:11:15] Uh wells just continue to be deepened
phenomenon across the world. So um
[2:11:22] that's what we're trying to avoid.
It would be outrageously expensive for
[2:11:28] us to run
water from the MW
[2:11:33] into town. We have 60 miles of roads and
there's a lot of bedrock.
[2:11:39] So it is and a relatively small
population
[2:11:44] and frankly not everybody can be tapping
into the MWA system. So we're trying to
[2:11:49] be as sustainable as we can be. We
practice it for the most part folks in
[2:11:54] town based on the behaviors we see in
town. We'd like you to be part of that.
[2:12:01] I guess that's the pitch.
[2:12:05] So, um, the more you can do to get to
that, that will make the process go
[2:12:12] easier so and faster.
[2:12:22] Oh. Um, but again, all with questions,
ideas, links to things we've discussed,
[2:12:29] whatever else, please feel free to to
send it over.
[2:12:40] Okay.
Um, and I'm not hearing anything else
[2:12:45] from anyone on the the project team. So,
I guess we're going to move on to
[2:12:54] another agenda item.
Unless you want to,
[2:13:00] Liz, I see that you're off.
>> Just going to say thank you.
[2:13:06] » Okay.
>> Yeah. Thank you for uh coming to inform
[2:13:10] us. That was very helpful.
[2:13:15] Okay.
[2:13:21] All right.
[2:13:24] Get to
[2:13:28] Okay.
[2:13:34] Okay. Let's do
[2:13:40] one. Whitney Mark.
>> Sure. And I apologize. I know I my uh
[2:13:46] audio for some reason doesn't work on my
cell phone versus the computer, but the
[2:13:51] computer just lost power. Uh one Whitney
Street. Uh the board had reviewed it and
[2:13:56] asked the question. Uh just to give you
a little history, this is uh the site
[2:14:02] that has a septic tank and a cesspool
after it. Uh so no design flow.
[2:14:07] » We're going by the four bedroomedroom
assessment that was done on that house.
[2:14:12] And um they were planning to put just a
master bathroom in the second floor. And
[2:14:19] they have a sun porch below it that's
conditioned. And we've been told now
[2:14:26] that they can't do the bathroom upstairs
without reconstructing the sun room
[2:14:32] that's conditioned on the first floor, I
guess, due to support issues. And the
[2:14:38] board did note that that wouldn't be um
the that there would be a need for
[2:14:44] another decision by the board if that
was the case. And that's why I'm
[2:14:47] bringing it back to the board
>> and
[2:14:53] » because now they're
>> D have any specific guidance?
[2:14:58] » Yeah, they did. They did. They Yeah. And
they said as long as you're not
[2:15:02] constructing a room, a bathroom is not
considered a room. That bathroom would
[2:15:06] be okay, the master bathroom on that
second floor bedroom.
[2:15:10] » But this is a room. So that changes the
whole scenario of when DP wants the
[2:15:18] local entities to require updates to the
septic system is when you're redoing a a
[2:15:24] room. So and this is a room and that's
the issue.
[2:15:28] » Yeah,
>> they put it in our laps unfortunately
[2:15:33] and
>> they're tough decisions at the local
[2:15:36] level. the state had originally just
said cesspools not allowed then we
[2:15:41] wouldn't even be here they would have to
update this
[2:15:44] » but that's not the case and so we have
to take a case by case and it's usually
[2:15:48] during the process of a building
application so now that
[2:15:52] » the sun room has to be reconstructed
that is indeed where it triggers the
[2:15:58] septic system to be upgraded unless the
board feels differently
[2:16:05] Okay. So from D's perspective and and
this is in a different territory than
[2:16:11] the um that flowchart that we have uh
about percentage
[2:16:18] um of house expansion or remodeling that
goes on and how much starts to look like
[2:16:25] new.
>> We don't necessarily just apply because
[2:16:29] this wouldn't meet that 50% I don't
think for this. No, this this would be
[2:16:34] okay with the 50%. What it is that
reconstructing a
[2:16:38] » sun room that's conditioned and to
reconstruct a room
[2:16:42] » creates now and triggers the need for an
upgrade to the septic system. Since one,
[2:16:47] we don't know the design flow. We don't
even know if that sun room, even if it
[2:16:52] falls into the assessment of the four
bedroomedroom, if it would even be a
[2:16:56] septic system that can support four
bedrooms. That that's the unknown
[2:17:00] because it's accessessful without
>> with a tank in front but without any
[2:17:05] design flow. So is it a two-bedroom? Is
it a threebedroom? Are we allowing them
[2:17:09] to recondition a room that may not even
fit into the room count of the unknown
[2:17:13] design flow? That's the reasoning behind
it. I know it's hard for homeowners to
[2:17:18] understand this, but it's the
unfortunately it's the objective of D to
[2:17:23] upgrade septic systems at the point of
building construction of rooms. The
[2:17:28] bathroom was different, but this is a
room and it's a reconstruction of a room
[2:17:32] that we don't even know if the design
flow will allow for it. So that's that's
[2:17:36] where this stands.
>> Now, are they going to reconstruct?
[2:17:42] » Very tough.
>> Are they going to reconstruct the
[2:17:46] foundation, too?
>> Yeah, they have to do that. And I think
[2:17:50] they were hoping they could keep the sun
room so there would be no need to
[2:17:56] reconstruct it because they understood
the consequences if that was the case.
[2:18:00] But they came back to us to explain the
owner uh came back to explain they do
[2:18:06] need to reconstruct the room, the first
floor sun room that's conditioned.
[2:18:11] » Yeah. For safety, I would assume.
>> Yeah. I don't think they can hold on to
[2:18:16] what's Yeah. I don't think they can hold
on to what's there uh the way they're
[2:18:20] proposing it because uh
>> No, but if they if they build rebuild
[2:18:24] the sun room, is that okay?
>> No. According to the state, that's not
[2:18:30] okay because that's considered a room.
>> And we don't know the design flow of the
[2:18:36] septic system.
>> Okay.
[2:18:37] » And rooms come into the bedroom count
totally. Uh it's you add up the number
[2:18:42] of rooms and then divide by two and
that's how you determine the bedroom
[2:18:46] count. If we had a design flow for this
property, it'd be a different story if
[2:18:51] it was a fourbedroom and they were just
reconstructing this room.
[2:18:55] Uh but we don't have a design flow. So
we really don't know if this room would
[2:19:00] even fit into the design flow of what's
there because cesspools have no design
[2:19:06] flow. They never did per test. They
never did any deep holes to consider
[2:19:12] groundwater. And so that's why you sell
the house. So, and this one is a
[2:19:18] cesspool which had a septic tank put in
front of it years ago, but that didn't
[2:19:22] give it any design flow. The original
system is a cesspool with no design flow
[2:19:28] if that helps.
>> So, so Mark, when you say
[2:19:31] » and it's interesting, so Oh, go ahead.
Sorry.
[2:19:35] » Oh, just real quick. So, so Mark, when
you say upgrade, um, that means a whole
[2:19:40] new septic, correct?
>> That is correct. A replacement septic
[2:19:43] system. That would suffice. They may
need waiverss, but that would um be a
[2:19:49] replacement septic system to answer your
question. Even for one, even for one
[2:19:54] additional room
>> with the elimination of the the cess
[2:19:57] poolool and the septic that was put in
front of them.
[2:20:00] » Yeah, the septic tank they might be able
to save. I don't think it's a two
[2:20:04] compartment
and that's not the expensive part of a
[2:20:10] septic system. It's the the designing
doing the soil testing and designing a
[2:20:14] septic system to be the appropriate
distance from groundwater and to be
[2:20:18] designed large enough to meet the perk
rate. So if the perk rates a very high
[2:20:23] perk rate, slow perk rate, then the
system has to be larger. If it's a
[2:20:28] faster perk rate, then it it doesn't
have to be as large. Uh but that is it's
[2:20:33] it's a it's not an easy it's not an easy
uh overview with the homeowners and and
[2:20:39] you know but it is the objective of D to
get sessables out of the environment
[2:20:43] because they're not environmentally
sound.
[2:20:46] » Yeah.
>> Thanks Mark.
[2:20:48] » You're welcome Steve.
>> So the the sun room is currently
[2:20:53] conditioned right?
>> I believe so. Yes.
[2:20:57] » Yeah. So, we're it is really just
replacing
[2:21:01] the room as is, you know, with a better
foundation,
[2:21:05] but that's still
not in D's model because of it being
[2:21:10] assessful. It was an assess pool,
>> that would be okay. Okay.
[2:21:15] » So, that's kind of one step here. And
then um
[2:21:18] » and I yeah
>> if they
[2:21:23] integrated that room into the rest of
the first floor somehow
[2:21:28] » possibility
>> bigger room. I don't remember I don't
[2:21:32] have it in front of me now what it
looked like. Um
[2:21:35] » exactly. I remember vaguely, but
>> yeah, they could
[2:21:40] » if they changed that
>> the threeseason room, would that
[2:21:46] eliminate it as a room?
>> Yes. Yes, it would, Darl. That's
[2:21:50] » I'm trying to think of options for them.
>> No, I that's a very good option to not
[2:21:54] condition the sun room would be better.
You know, it would be creating a sun
[2:22:00] room, seasonal sun room, so there's no
conditioning. So, it wouldn't be
[2:22:04] considered a habitable room uh per DP.
But if it's a habitable room, um that's
[2:22:10] a whole different story. And you know,
we just saw this on another property in
[2:22:16] town where we uh the board saw two
systems and but at least they had well,
[2:22:22] one was put in not correctly, but we you
know, but we knew the design flow of the
[2:22:26] other one. So, it's a little different.
This one we don't have any records of
[2:22:30] design flow. So that that's the whole
issue here is can this system support a
[2:22:36] four bedroomedroom
say nine room house and you know it's
[2:22:41] unknown that's the unknown and that's
where the state feels that that's the
[2:22:45] time to upgrade the septic system.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[2:22:52] » It's not an easy sell to the people. I
tell you I I I understand.
[2:22:56] » Right.
>> But I can ask the you know I wish they
[2:22:59] were here tonight. They did know about
this.
[2:23:01] that if if they can't be maybe we'll
have them at the next meeting but ask
[2:23:06] them can you design that space below the
new bathroom ba bathroom the new master
[2:23:13] bedroom bathroom can you design a space
below to be part of one existing
[2:23:18] habitable room
>> because then they wouldn't be changing
[2:23:22] » either that
>> or make it three season
[2:23:26] » yep that's a nice option
>> so now there are three options
[2:23:31] uh one bigger room somehow downstairs
that looks like one room and not like
[2:23:36] multiple rooms. Um or functions as one
big room does have to look functions as.
[2:23:42] And then
>> the three season sun room unconditioned
[2:23:47] space um
or redo the septics upgrade the septic.
[2:23:56] » Yeah. And these are hard cells. Maybe
eliminate a room somewhere else.
[2:24:01] » Yeah.
>> Is it tied to that room like if they did
[2:24:04] other adjustments?
>> Yeah. I don't know that
[2:24:07] » except that room but lowered the one.
Although that seems kind of counter to
[2:24:13] what the ET is saying,
>> which is you can't just straight away
[2:24:18] you upgrade that room.
>> Yeah.
[2:24:21] » Um
>> because it's already there. I don't
[2:24:24] know. I don't know.
>> It's a tough one. It really is. And but
[2:24:27] it's nice that now we can call them. I
can get back to him beginning of next
[2:24:31] week and
>> let him know the three options, you
[2:24:34] know, that they have
>> and see what they can do. They're
[2:24:37] working with a septic installer who
works in town quite quite a bit.
[2:24:41] » So I I think they hopefully they're
getting I'm sure good guidance. I mean
[2:24:46] » in all respects someday if they ever
sell the house, they may have to do it
[2:24:49] anyways. So you know,
>> yeah,
[2:24:52] » we try to explain that to them. We don't
want to make them force them to do
[2:24:56] something as a whole new septic system
replacement, but sometimes it it might
[2:25:02] be that the septic installer might has
had maybe he's already discussed that
[2:25:07] with them as well.
And I guess the other point is that if
[2:25:12] it's a cesspool there,
>> yes, it with a tank
[2:25:16] » likely a pretty old system and it really
has
[2:25:20] uh probably run its lifespan already.
>> Mo most likely if they have to mention
[2:25:27] being underperforming, but
>> yeah. Well, and when you see them
[2:25:30] putting septic tanks in front of these
cess poolools, it tells us that or
[2:25:34] leeching lines off them. It tells us the
cesspool was already in some demand for
[2:25:41] better functioning. You know, septic
tank does help to help the waste going
[2:25:47] into the cesspool, but it still isn't
environmentally sound because we don't
[2:25:52] know where the groundwater this
property.
[2:25:54] » Do we do we have any records of when the
septic system? We we we do not
[2:26:01] » think
>> I could then usually we have those but I
[2:26:04] could not find any records for when the
septic tank was added to the ces pool.
[2:26:08] » So we're very limited on what we have on
this property.
[2:26:17] » Right. And what's what's the
>> what's the average length of cesspool I
[2:26:22] mean of a system?
I mean the average system is 30 by 40.
[2:26:29] Yeah. If you were putting in a
replacement system and you're going in
[2:26:33] between say the 10 and 30 minute branch
rate, it's usually 20 ft by 30 feet of
[2:26:38] leeching area. It either could be a
trench, a bed. A bed would need a
[2:26:42] variance from the board and shallow pits
will not work. The state does allow
[2:26:47] shallow pits, no longer deep pits. And
that's where cesspools don't play into
[2:26:52] the regulation either. All they allow
now is a two-foot septic pit. And so
[2:26:56] most people will design systems with
leeching trenches.
[2:27:02] You get more more for that. You know,
more square feet for your gallons needed
[2:27:08] per day.
[2:27:12] » Okay. Yeah. Could just be great.
>> Yeah. depends on where they want to comp
[2:27:22] I mean it is a big jump in cost for
their
[2:27:24] » Yeah. Oh, I I get it. I truly respect
that and it's and so when I do call the
[2:27:30] owners, I'll give them the options the
board discussed and and also offer them
[2:27:34] to come back and meet with the board
themselves if they so like.
[2:27:37] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. And sketch out they could do some
[2:27:41] rough sketches if they wanted
>> of options that we could go over with
[2:27:45] them.
Okay.
[2:27:48] » And if I hear anything different, I'll
try to reach out to Claire
[2:27:51] » and explain this got expanded. I'll see
>> where they go with reconstructing rooms
[2:27:57] that have no design flow because that
that is its own little definition in a
[2:28:02] way.
>> Try to give them the benefit of the
[2:28:05] doubt with anything possible.
[2:28:10] » All right. Uh, does anyone else have any
other ideas or questions on that?
[2:28:17] Otherwise, we can go on to 51 Western.
>> I know it. We're not too far. It's in
[2:28:23] the same neighborhood. Actually, they're
all within All three of my items on the
[2:28:28] agenda are all within a mile of each
other. 51 Western A. board. Uh I
[2:28:33] actually approved a building application
had noted that the room was not to be
[2:28:38] conditioned because they wanted to
insulate it back I think it was a few
[2:28:42] years back and and then you'll see from
the letter from the building
[2:28:46] commissioner that he went in to view
something over there and I guess he was
[2:28:51] planning to do an he's planning to do an
addition where or changes to the kitchen
[2:28:56] reduce the bedroom by making a master
bedroom. So, two bedrooms are going into
[2:29:00] a master bedroom/c closet. Um, so he's
actually reducing. It's a good thing
[2:29:06] what he wants to do, but what was
discovered is he put conditioning into
[2:29:11] the room over the garage. There's no
water according to the building
[2:29:15] commissioner or connect septic
connections, but it's still a finished
[2:29:19] room over a garage. And so with that
said, I didn't know
[2:29:24] » well I knew that it would be best to
share this with the board and see how
[2:29:28] you want me to proceed since now there's
been a violation of building something
[2:29:31] without permit. Not building it per se,
but putting in conditioning without
[2:29:35] permit.
[2:29:40] » Yeah, go ahead Sarah if you may. If I
may, Darl to Sarah.
[2:29:43] » Sorry. I just want to check uh you I cut
out my sound a little bit for a second
[2:29:47] there. We're talking about
>> uh 51 Western
[2:29:52] » Western
>> um 51 Western AB
[2:29:58] is We don't have the plans of the
garage.
[2:30:03] » No, we don't. All we have is the All we
have is what Chris defined it as. And I
[2:30:08] agree. We do need those plans to see
what it looks like. Yeah.
[2:30:10] » But we don't have the plan. I'm just
going and thank you Sarah for bringing
[2:30:14] that point up because I'm just going by
what Chris Tanny's reporting back to me,
[2:30:18] our building commissioner.
>> Right. I just wanted to double check to
[2:30:22] [laughter] make sure I wasn't
>> No, I appreciate that. No, we have not
[2:30:25] seen that plan yet. And I think that
would be important to make sure it's not
[2:30:29] two rooms, you know, and make sure it's
just one large room over the garage
[2:30:33] » or more than one room
>> and make sure that the garage is only a
[2:30:37] garage and not like an office in one
corner or something. Um,
[2:30:43] » yeah,
>> you know, another room that we might not
[2:30:46] expect
there as well.
[2:30:49] » I I see that by what they want to do is
actually helpful. It does reduce the
[2:30:56] room count, but again, um it I I'm only
reporting it to the board because it was
[2:31:02] a failure to draw a permit out to
condition that room. And they were
[2:31:05] specifically noted in the building
permit. I specifically noted the room
[2:31:10] was not to be conditioned. So, it's a
violation of what was stated and and
[2:31:14] approved for. Uh but
>> yeah,
[2:31:17] » it's done. It's, you know, something
that the board needs to know and the
[2:31:22] board could actually say rip out the
conditioning. But in my view, I would
[2:31:26] suggest that if the room count stays
within Well, it's getting reduced that
[2:31:32] this room over the garage should all fit
in. But at the same time, I'm only
[2:31:36] reporting it since it's unique in its
own way.
[2:31:40] » Oh, I found a sketch. It's not really
>> I thought I saw something. It's just one
[2:31:47] lodge area. Correct, Sarah?
>> All they showed us was um
[2:31:53] it was hidden in an email. I'm pulling
it up right now. It's loading in
[2:31:57] PowerPoint. It's really just a They just
sent us a square.
[2:32:03] » Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah, it
should be defined what it's used for.
[2:32:07] And that was a good point.
>> I asked for pictures. I think we asked
[2:32:11] for some pictures as well.
>> Excellent. So, pictures and a plan would
[2:32:14] be great, but I I do want to Yeah, go
ahead. I'm sorry.
[2:32:19] » Yeah. Oh, right. I was thinking, is
there a basement here?
[2:32:25] » No basement one way or the other. No
basement at all.
[2:32:29] » Yeah, that's what they've told us. I
don't know if there's no basement, but
[2:32:32] there's no finished basement is what I
was told.
[2:32:35] » Okay. I guess it'd be nice to verify
that given what just went on.
[2:32:38] » Yep. Yeah, I can. Hopefully Chris also
walked in the basement, especially after
[2:32:43] he saw the upstairs of the garage. So,
>> yeah.
[2:32:46] » All right. Uh, right. Garage, upstairs,
and down.
[2:32:51] » Okay. Oh, the whole thing's a slab.
>> Okay. Well, that makes that simpler.
[2:32:56] » Well, that's We tested the soil right
across the street from this house, and
[2:33:00] ground water's high, so I can see why
they probably are on a slab.
[2:33:05] » Yeah. Okay.
>> And then it looks like the sun room is a
[2:33:09] four season since they didn't call it
out any differently and whatever. They
[2:33:14] don't show a door.
>> Yeah, I agree. I assumed it was a
[2:33:19] finished a condition room.
>> Yeah.
[2:33:24] » Maybe why they needed that room close.
>> Yeah. So,
[2:33:31] » but I'll wait for the direction.
>> Yeah. And then I guess just the kind of
[2:33:36] reasonleness
card without dimensions, too. The new
[2:33:41] kitchen looks quite extensive and looks
like it fills up
[2:33:45] » all the way to the utility room.
>> Yeah. And that was a question I had too.
[2:33:50] What is the utility room? But I think
the room count will still be okay.
[2:33:54] » But it you don't see
>> Yeah,
[2:33:58] » but it is on a slab. So maybe it's
>> Yeah, it could be their their well pump
[2:34:04] unit and all that. the pressure tank.
>> But I should ask them what that utility
[2:34:08] room is or explain what's in there. And
is it
[2:34:15] » Yeah,
somewhere in the kitchen design stuff.
[2:34:20] It looked like
from the kitchen there's a sliding door
[2:34:25] or something leading in. So you can see
from the kitchen in. So it can't be
[2:34:30] completely undone, but it might be just
a very nice laundry room.
[2:34:35] Yeah, true.
>> But I can question that too. I wish they
[2:34:40] were here. I No one wanted to show up
tonight
[2:34:43] » and they were all notified in the middle
of
[2:34:48] » Yeah, I get it. I get [laughter] it.
Understand.
[2:34:52] » All right. So,
enough information for now to get to the
[2:34:58] next step with questions. Sarah, you
pointed out things to ask them for and
[2:35:03] whatever. So,
>> yeah, Sarah, if you don't mind, the
[2:35:09] three bullets need pl pictures and plans
of the garage. We know the basement's
[2:35:13] not finished. So, that and what's in the
utility room. If you want to reach out
[2:35:16] to the homeowner before I get back on
Monday, you're more than welcome to do
[2:35:20] that.
>> Sure, I can do that. Hopefully, they'll
[2:35:23] get it to me by Monday.
>> And that would even be better. Thank
[2:35:27] you.
[2:35:31] Okay.
>> And then 46 Western a is off. Correct.
[2:35:36] » Yes, that's correct. But Bose just asked
a question, Darl. I don't know if you
[2:35:41] heard him. Was that you, Bose, that was
asking the question?
[2:35:44] » Yeah. Yeah. Mark, uh, is that a detached
garage or is it attached?
[2:35:48] » It's detached. It's It's I believe it's
detached. I worked right across from
[2:35:52] there. I believe it's a detached garage.
>> Sarah, do you know that? I believe it is
[2:35:57] cuz they would have shown it off the
house.
[2:35:59] » Yeah. Um it's a detached garage. Let me
see if I can um
[2:36:05] » Yeah, I I would draw it up, but my
computer just died. So,
[2:36:10] » let me see if I can find the It's a
detached garage, and there's um some
[2:36:16] steps
from the garage. It's a little bit
[2:36:20] higher up,
it looks like. And I'm trying to find
[2:36:24] where where I saw that.
>> Okay.
[2:36:29] » I believe it is. I mean, I worked right
across from there. I believe it's
[2:36:32] detached.
>> Here we go. Let me I was able to pull up
[2:36:36] their
>> building permit when they built the
[2:36:39] garage, which is when it was uh
permitted to be not conditioned.
[2:36:47] » Yes. Thank you for doing that.
Um, so this is the front view of the
[2:36:54] garage and this is the back view.
[2:36:59] And this is like the
[2:37:05] » Okay. Well, I appreciate that, Sarah.
And and we'll try to
[2:37:09] » Yeah, we'll try to get some more
answers, but I just want to make sure
[2:37:13] the board's okay if um I'm okay to
approve it, even though they violated a
[2:37:18] permit. Um with the changes in the house
I think whatever happens the if they
[2:37:25] don't change the house then the room has
to come the conditioning has to come out
[2:37:29] of that room. If they do change the
house
[2:37:31] » and cut down one bedroom then I see that
as the solution to having the garage
[2:37:38] room over the garage conditioned.
If the board's okay with that.
[2:37:45] How do you enforce that
>> uh through the building commissioner? He
[2:37:50] would have to assure that they're not in
any way uh deciding to change what the
[2:37:56] building permit has requested.
[2:38:04] » Okay.
>> I don't know who just asked that
[2:38:07] question. Was that you? Um Rebecca, how
you enforce that?
[2:38:11] » Yes.
>> Yeah. Yeah. That's how it would happen.
[2:38:14] they would have to comply with the
building permit being issued. If and
[2:38:18] we'll have to let Chris know if they
decided not to do this, then we have to
[2:38:22] come back and readress this of removing
that conditioning in the garage because
[2:38:27] by what they wish to do, that will be
the solution in my view as long as the
[2:38:31] board's satisfied with that.
Now, does the board have jurisdiction to
[2:38:40] to
look at um if the building deviates from
[2:38:46] the permit or is it the building
department that has the jurisdiction to
[2:38:50] » the building department in most cases
Bose will do the final inspections and
[2:38:54] we rely on them to make sure they're
followed as as approved. But there have
[2:39:00] been a few cases if it's a new house, we
go through the new house to make sure
[2:39:05] the building plan was as accurate as it
was when originally approved. But for
[2:39:10] additions, we rely on the building
commissioner finalizing those. And
[2:39:16] » I can ask the building commissioner if
when this does get approved, if the
[2:39:20] board's okay with that, is to uh confirm
when all the work is done as as noted by
[2:39:26] the permit that was uh pulled out for
that was obtained by the applicant.
[2:39:38] I hope that helps.
[2:39:43] » All right. I was trying to remember. I
know, Scott. What's the
[2:39:50] current sizing bedroom wise of the
system?
[2:39:54] » Oh, I don't have that in front of me,
Darl. And that's the one thing I was
[2:39:57] looking for before the meeting started.
I believe it's a
[2:40:00] » Yeah,
>> not for sure. I believe it's a
[2:40:02] threebedroom.
>> Sarah, you don't have the septic
[2:40:06] information with you, do you?
>> I can try and find what I do have.
[2:40:12] » Okay. Okay. So, actually, if they
wanted to call it a bedroom, I think
[2:40:18] they could because they they're down to
two bedrooms.
[2:40:22] » Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[2:40:30] » We can look at that.
[2:40:36] We have a septic plan
[2:40:41] from
here. I found it.
[2:40:48] 1970,
but it's
[2:40:51] » okay. I thought it was old. Yeah.
>> Mhm.
[2:40:54] » Is it Does it show Do you know a
threebedroom?
[2:40:57] » It is a threebedroom house system. looks
like it
[2:41:06] don't know if it has a
design flow of
[2:41:12] looks like it has the estimated flow is
300 gallons per day.
[2:41:16] » Yeah, that that sounds like the old way
of doing things. But I I can look at
[2:41:20] that when I get back. So, if you want,
don't worry about this. We can hold off
[2:41:24] till Monday. I was hoping the applicant
would be at the meeting, but I'll I'll
[2:41:28] take if I'll ask Jean to pull the plans
and Oh, you can pull the plans, Sarah,
[2:41:33] and I'll take a peek at them.
>> Yep.
[2:41:36] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay.
[2:41:40] Uh, all right. Let's take care of food
permits because those are timely,
[2:41:46] timesensitive.
So, um,
[2:41:52] let's pick something
[2:41:58] to
Sorry, at this point I can't remember
[2:42:01] all my notes on them.
[2:42:06] » Do you want me to reshare the agenda?
>> Uh, no, that's okay. So, we have the
[2:42:11] Tasty Gelato truck. Mhm.
>> And I don't think I saw anything that
[2:42:18] stood out to me as unusual there.
[2:42:23] Um,
oh, uh,
[2:42:28] best of your understanding, is this one
ready to be voted on?
[2:42:34] » Everything's in any conditions.
um for the tasty gelato truck.
[2:42:42] I believe
[2:42:46] that their um ice cream truck vending
permit expires on August 13th.
[2:42:53] However, that can't be renewed until the
same day. Um but we have worked with
[2:42:59] them previously and we know that they'll
get us the the ice cream vending permit.
[2:43:04] So, I would just say conditional to
receipt of a of an updated ice cream
[2:43:09] permit.
>> Okay.
[2:43:13] All right, then. Um, does anyone else
have any other questions about that
[2:43:18] before I make a motion?
[2:43:22] Okay. So, do we have a motion to approve
the temporary food establishment permit
[2:43:31] for the Tasty Gelato truck conditional
to receiving their updated certificate?
[2:43:40] » So moved.
[2:43:47] » Second.
>> All right. Excellent. Uh any further
[2:43:51] discussion hearing? None. Daryl
Beardsley I.
[2:43:55] » Steve Constantine I. Rebecca Hanwell I
>> Bakali.
[2:44:04] » And then we have Nic uh Catholic
community who is going to have an event
[2:44:11] at
um Sweet Meadow Farm which I know Sweet
[2:44:17] Meadow does periodically.
And
[2:44:22] check if I had a question. I was a
little confused about something on this.
[2:44:28] Um,
[2:44:32] make sure
they had checked off
[2:44:40] uh
preparation and retail sale of time
[2:44:45] temperature controlled foods prepared on
site.
[2:44:50] Uh,
[2:44:53] is this a
food truck? I didn't think it was a food
[2:44:58] truck or anything. Are they barbecuing
or
[2:45:01] » they're barbecuing?
>> I just didn't think Sweet Meadow had
[2:45:04] ample
>> barbecue
[2:45:06] » water and all the rest.
>> Um, but Sweet Meadow Farm does have a
[2:45:11] food permit, a food establishment
permit. So there, if you look at their
[2:45:15] uh application that's in the meeting
documents, they have a facility approval
[2:45:20] letter from Sweet Meadow Farm that
allows them to use their bathrooms and
[2:45:24] handwashing sink.
>> Um, and they have a valid license permit
[2:45:29] with
>> Okay.
[2:45:33] » But they are barbecuing. They have a
grill.
[2:45:37] » Okay.
All right. So it's not super
[2:45:41] water intensive. Okay, great. So, um,
anybody else have any questions, further
[2:45:47] questions about that?
Okay. So, then do we have a motion to
[2:45:53] approve the temporary food establishment
permit
[2:45:57] for Native Catholic community?
>> So, moved.
[2:46:04] » Second.
[2:46:07] » Um, I do have a question. Sarah, are
there any conditions we need to impose
[2:46:11] on this?
>> Just remaining in compliance with all
[2:46:14] applicable laws.
>> Okay. Uh all right. So friendly
[2:46:20] amendment to the motion is the
compliance with all applicable rules and
[2:46:26] regulations.
Are we ready to vote?
[2:46:31] » Yep.
>> Okay. Daryl Beersley I.
[2:46:34] » Steve Constantine I.
>> Rebecca Honeywell I. Those
[2:46:46] Nash bowls
[2:46:51] and is this one all set to go? Any
conditions we need to
[2:46:58] » with this?
Okay. Actually, I did have qu at the top
[2:47:02] of the application
on permit type,
[2:47:07] unless you know it was just a very light
check off.
[2:47:11] » I wasn't seeing any check offs.
>> Um, it's it's a new manual
[2:47:18] » and they're technically ice cream
bending.
[2:47:24] » I think it's just really light. I just
don't think it's scanned right. You've
[2:47:27] been having some scanners.
>> Oh, okay. Okay.
[2:47:30] All right. Yeah, I could see like little
weird markings here and there. Just
[2:47:36] » No. Okay. So, it's all set otherwise.
>> Yeah, they have nothing outstanding.
[2:47:40] Everything's all set.
>> Okay. All right. And do we have a motion
[2:47:46] to approve the annual mobile food
establishment permit
[2:47:52] for Nashville of New England conditional
to compliance with all applicable rules
[2:48:00] and regulations?
>> So moved.
[2:48:04] » Second.
>> Any further discussion?
[2:48:10] Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I. Steve
Constantine. I
[2:48:14] » Rebecca Han I
[2:48:22] » um
All right. I'm going to do the minutes
[2:48:27] because we have to re make sure we
review or vote on the I believe the June
[2:48:34] minutes.
Um,
[2:48:37] » we technically could push them till
September because we voted on the June
[2:48:41] 3rd minutes at the last meeting.
>> Okay. Uh, is anyone else ready to vote
[2:48:48] on the other June um 15th meet minutes?
>> Ready to vote.
[2:48:56] » Oh, I'm ready.
>> I had no edits.
[2:49:01] » Okay. I had relatively minor edits.
Sarah, did you have any questions about
[2:49:07] the edits I sent in? Maybe you didn't
get to see it. I just sent it this
[2:49:11] afternoon. I'm
>> looking over them now. I don't see
[2:49:13] anything.
[2:49:17] » Yeah, I think it was kind of small.
[2:49:21] » Okay, then let me just get the right
date.
[2:49:26] » June 17th.
[2:49:30] » 17th. Okay.
Uh so do we have a motion to
[2:49:37] approve the June 17, 2026 minutes with
the uh minor edits that have been
[2:49:45] submitted?
>> So moved.
[2:49:51] » Second.
>> Any further discussion?
[2:49:56] Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I.
>> Steve Constantine I. Rebecca Hanwa I
[2:50:06] » and is anyone ready to vote on the July
7 15 17 I can't remember what number it
[2:50:14] was
15 I think
[2:50:17] » I know
>> I readal
[2:50:29] Anybody else? Or shall we defer to the
next meeting?
[2:50:33] » I'm good with that with the July ones.
>> Okay,
[2:50:37] » let's defer. Yeah.
>> All right.
[2:50:41] And I just need the actual date or or
someone else can make the motion if you
[2:50:46] know the date. Exact date.
>> July 15th.
[2:50:51] » Okay. It is the 15th. All right. So, do
we have a motion to approve the July
[2:50:56] 15th minute 2026 minutes um with the
administrative edits as submitted?
[2:51:06] » So moved.
>> Second.
[2:51:12] » Any further discussion?
Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I.
[2:51:17] » Steve Constantine I.
>> Rebecca Hanwella I.
[2:51:27] Uh so now we have
bunch of things that are more
[2:51:32] complicated that are left. Uh
and it's 9:55.
[2:51:40] So I guess one I would probably want to
take now because we need to get moving
[2:51:47] on this opioid baitment fund use.
>> Yeah. Um
[2:51:54] so one question is
is there a subset of board members who
[2:52:01] are interested in working with staff and
we also are getting support now from
[2:52:09] um you know there are others in the
Charles River public health district be
[2:52:15] able to ask questions of and we've had
outreach from the state because they can
[2:52:20] see that a lot of towns are not using
the funds just because it's a lot to
[2:52:25] figure out and so they're eager to get
the ball rolling of expenditure of that
[2:52:30] fund. So there's also been outreach to
us by email of uh any questions or help
[2:52:37] that um we might need. So, I just don't
know if there's anyone who's intrigued
[2:52:42] by figuring out where to spend the money
and on what. And and we have talked in
[2:52:49] the past with Dover about
buying some of the monies to the
[2:52:55] regional school system
uh jointly to see, you know, to do the
[2:53:00] outreach to kids.
That's
[2:53:05] something that's been discussed for
years uh about that the monies. It
[2:53:10] doesn't have to be 100% on that.
>> I just think people to look at the
[2:53:16] choices and what the tradeoffs are and
local needs and what makes more sense to
[2:53:22] just leave it to regional centers for
some kind of help.
[2:53:27] » Restrictions too. Are there any
restrictions with how it's used?
[2:53:32] Yeah, there's a lot of
>> they have been loosening up. Yeah, there
[2:53:35] are but better than it started out which
was really restrictive. It has improved.
[2:53:43] » Okay.
>> I think it's really important
[2:53:46] interested. I don't have a huge amount
of time right now, but I might in a few
[2:53:51] months or, you know, in the future. Um
there was a group of parents when my
[2:53:58] children were young that did a fantastic
job of
[2:54:04] um they had like posters and all these
things that were distributed in the
[2:54:08] school system um about the sort of
normalization of substance abuse risks
[2:54:17] and it was great. It was really
creative. It was really effective. Um,
[2:54:21] several of those families have are no
longer in the Dover Sherburn area. And I
[2:54:26] would love to see if we could use some
of those funds to even repeat the exact
[2:54:32] same materials. We could probably have
access to some of them and just send
[2:54:37] them out again if we have some funds.
That might not be very labor intensive.
[2:54:43] So Rebecca, there is there is a group of
parents who have such programs within
[2:54:49] within the school now.
>> Well, that's great. Um because my kids
[2:54:53] are grown up, I don't know what's
happening now, but I I think it's great.
[2:54:57] I'd love to
>> be involved if there's a group. Um I
[2:55:01] just don't know if I can do it by
myself.
[2:55:04] » Right. No. So So there is a group and
they've
[2:55:07] » they they're doing amazing stuff with
the kids. It's it's really impressive.
[2:55:11] So I mean they they they could be
recipiented of the funds for sure.
[2:55:18] » Yeah.
>> The board used to have in its budget um
[2:55:23] » some thousands of dollars each year that
we would give to those groups to to
[2:55:29] print up the materials or invite in
special speakers or have other kinds of
[2:55:33] events. So um or do the social norming
surveys and and outreach. So
[2:55:43] » and also I think the school hires
consultants to do you know uh surveys
[2:55:50] with kids about substance abuse and
other behavioral things. Um that could
[2:55:57] be another way to spend this money
>> unless there is restrictions on how much
[2:56:05] can we spend on education
um rather than you know
[2:56:13] » um
>> sorry
[2:56:15] » no no you're totally fine there's just
no restrictions on that um
[2:56:20] and
>> I well what I was going to say was
[2:56:24] unless there is there pressing issues
with with opioid addiction
[2:56:30] um among individuals within our
community and they would be well served
[2:56:36] too with the money and with some support
and
[2:56:40] » we do
[2:56:44] » sorry
>> go ahead
[2:56:45] » I just wanted to say um I do have two
drafted uh program proposals that have
[2:56:50] been discussed in town hall um and have
been brought brought to us
[2:56:59] uh by us, the board of health, um
specifically outdoor just increasing
[2:57:05] access to the sharps disposal kiosk and
also um using the funds to help support
[2:57:12] our the availability of nlloxxone and um
harm reduction tools for residents
[2:57:20] and um for our first responders as well
because there's um some issues there.
[2:57:28] So,
[2:57:32] not issues rather.
>> Do you want to
[2:57:35] » is that the kind of
>> I get the container the sharps container
[2:57:39] thing and maybe making it so it could be
outside, but I guess
[2:57:46] I'm not sure. I think that's
that I feel like spending more money on
[2:57:51] that when we have a serviceable
kiosk that we already bought. And two
[2:57:59] like to see the funds go to some new
dimensions. Um
[2:58:04] » well um the the kiosk that we have has
um will in the in the long term
[2:58:14] has well for primarily the kiosk has re
I have received feedback that there are
[2:58:20] some accessibility issues in terms of
getting into the police station and also
[2:58:26] in speaking with a representative from
the state technical assistance there's a
[2:58:31] stigma around having a sharps disposal
kiosk as a harm reduction technique in a
[2:58:37] police station. And so I've spoken with
some other towns in the area,
[2:58:43] specifically Hopkin, who moved their
sharps kiosk from the police station to
[2:58:49] an outdoor location. And they've had a
really positive response from their
[2:58:54] residents as well. Um, and they've just
seen more engagement in harm reduction
[2:59:01] practices in the town through relocating
their sharps kiosk from the police
[2:59:07] station.
What is the best way for us to know what
[2:59:13] you're be what you're learning when
things are submitted to you um, etc.
[2:59:18] Because I would love to know what's
happening. Um, yes.
[2:59:23] » Um,
>> um, well, so the police, the not the
[2:59:27] police chief, apologies, the fire chief
gave me a phone call earlier this week
[2:59:32] um, saying that they were having a that
they needed to purchase more uh,
[2:59:36] nlloxxone for the ambulances. and we
began talking about uh potentially
[2:59:42] expanding that outreach program to
purchase Nlloxxone for all of the first
[2:59:47] aid kits in municipal buildings and on
public lands in town. So for the
[2:59:52] library, town hall, the police
department, things like that, just
[2:59:55] having more nlloxxone available. And
there's a program called Massachusetts
[3:00:01] Clearing House, which is through the
Department of Public Health where you
[3:00:05] can get free resources about Narcan. So
that just happened this week. Um, and
[3:00:10] that's why I I put it on the agenda for
this week as well. Um, and also the
[3:00:15] sharps kiosk happened last or two weeks
ago
[3:00:21] when I when I reach I personally reached
out to Hopington because we have
[3:00:26] something called the municipal opioid
abatement dashboard where you can see
[3:00:32] what different municipalities have spent
the money on. And um I was reading about
[3:00:39] how they used the funds to support the
outbur. So that was all uh sort of a uh
[3:00:46] in office initiative that was conducted
and if you would like me to loop you in
[3:00:51] on that more I'm I'm happy to do that.
>> That'd be great. Thanks.
[3:01:00] So, as always, anyway, if there's people
interested in diving into this, that's
[3:01:06] great. Sarah, continue collecting the
information as you have been. That's
[3:01:10] been good. Um,
and
[3:01:14] right, I
I know we have these funds, but I kind
[3:01:20] of want to
just my nature rather than spend $4,000
[3:01:25] on a new thing. I wholly agree with
moving the current sharps um container.
[3:01:31] I'm not sure why people feel more
self-conscious because
[3:01:36] right now I'd say most of what gets
dropped off there is for just people's
[3:01:41] medications. So I don't know that
uh you know the act of putting sharps in
[3:01:49] the the unit
is indicating anything about other than
[3:01:56] that
you could potentially be abusing drugs
[3:02:01] or you just need something and maybe
that's still private or revealing or
[3:02:06] you're dropping it off for somebody
else. I don't know. and for the
[3:02:11] relocation
um maybe being somewhere where when the
[3:02:16] clerk's office is open late like it is
for some time part of the year on one
[3:02:23] night just so people have access to
those services. Um, you know, they could
[3:02:28] still drop stuff off kind of after work
hours.
[3:02:35] » And kids and certainly providing the the
additional supplies for the ambulances
[3:02:41] sounds great. Having more of that around
town.
[3:02:45] Um,
[3:02:49] » Darl, I was
>> feel like we kind of have this sharp
[3:02:51] thing largely covered, but
>> maybe that's the wrong interpretation,
[3:02:56] but
>> uh, if someone else wants to dive into
[3:02:59] this topic though,
>> yeah, just real quick,
[3:03:02] » step back,
>> I I agree. I think because it's not
[3:03:08] it's not just people that have opioid
problems, it's people with di diabetics.
[3:03:12] It's a lot of different things. Uh, and
I think the nice thing about the police
[3:03:17] station is it's open 247. So people can
go after work, they can go on weekends,
[3:03:24] they can pretty much go there anytime
they want.
[3:03:26] » So the the issue with the police station
is is it is open 24/7. Um, but the I
[3:03:32] don't know when the last time you were
actually able to go outside of 8 to 4
[3:03:36] normal business hours is you have to
ring a doorbell,
[3:03:40] » right,
>> to get let in. and the doorbell is
[3:03:43] connected to a regional um dispatch
center and they don't know necessarily
[3:03:48] that the sharps disposal kiosk is
located in the police department and I
[3:03:53] have experience as an administrator it's
my responsibility to maintain the kiosk
[3:03:57] so I do perform regular checks to make
sure it's not full make sure the
[3:04:01] batteries aren't dead make sure that you
know it's still working properly um and
[3:04:06] I've myself had to wait for upwards of
20 minutes in the little vestibule
[3:04:11] waiting for someone to let me in. I rang
the doorbell. I told them I was there
[3:04:15] for the sharps kiosk. I ended up waiting
there for until an officer actually came
[3:04:20] and let me in. Um, and that happened
several times to the point where now I
[3:04:24] have a key fob to let me into the
building just that front section to
[3:04:29] access the kiosk. Um, and I've had
several residents who have attempted to
[3:04:34] get into the police station to get to
the kiosk and they were unable to do so.
[3:04:38] And so they actually brought their
containers to the board of health and I
[3:04:41] was able to put them into the kiosk
because again I have that administrative
[3:04:44] key fob for the front door. Um so when I
say there's a bit of an access issue,
[3:04:50] that's what I mean is that there have
been multiple reports of individuals who
[3:04:55] have come up to us in the office and
have shared that they had a hard time or
[3:05:00] were waiting a while to get into the
lobby of the police station. Um, also
[3:05:06] » maybe that's something we should bring
up with the police because I think
[3:05:10] that's an issue. Um,
>> sorry I interrupted you.
[3:05:15] » That's okay. Um, it's it's definitely
And then additionally, if you recall, we
[3:05:21] did that uh initial survey when I first
started about a year ago and there was
[3:05:26] some feedback about the location of the
Sharps kiosk. And so, um, if it's
[3:05:31] something the board is interested in, I
have more information on it. But if the
[3:05:35] board is happy with it being in the
police station and would rather explore
[3:05:39] other avenues, then um, I will support
that as well.
[3:05:44] » Yeah, I'm just I'm just having a hard
time trying to think of a better spot. I
[3:05:48] know getting into the fire station is
difficult. Um, doing something at the
[3:05:53] dump, you've got you're only open five
days a week there. Um,
[3:05:57] » so we have a couple proposed locations.
Um, the first being the the DPW. They
[3:06:04] have an enclosed
porch area that is completely covered.
[3:06:09] So there's no impact of weather. Um, and
it is open 24/7. Um, and it is private
[3:06:16] to the point where, you know, it would
sort of remove that stigma aspect to it.
[3:06:21] and it was we were told by the
Department of Public Works director that
[3:06:26] that would be okay. Um, and it's easy to
monitor and access. Additionally, we
[3:06:32] could put it outside of town hall, which
is again, it would be outdoors,
[3:06:36] accessible 24/7. The goal with
relocating it would be that it is
[3:06:41] accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, 365 days a year, rain or shine. um
[3:06:47] and people could just drive up, drop it
off and and you know, wipe their hands
[3:06:52] of it for privacy reasons. That is sort
of the
[3:06:56] » would we
>> would we be able to use the current
[3:07:02] thing over at the DPW and not have to
spend an extra 4,000 save for other
[3:07:07] applications?
>> It is possible. I
[3:07:11] » covered enough that it's that it would
survive and not be destroyed by weather.
[3:07:17] I spoke with our representative of um
the the organization or company that we
[3:07:23] use is called Chrysalis and I spoke with
the manager of Chrysalis about
[3:07:29] relocating to that area and she
explained to me that the kiosk I don't
[3:07:34] know if any of you have used it it's
electric so
[3:07:38] when it is full there's a sensor that
locks it and it relies on batteries and
[3:07:44] there's a concern with it being outdoor
that that could be impacted um just with
[3:07:49] you know when wind and rain is it could
go underneath the overhang. However,
[3:07:56] » I would feel
that
[3:08:01] it would be
okay to do that. Um, personally, I would
[3:08:07] feel more comfortable if, you know, we
had someone
[3:08:12] sort of take a look at it and see if
there was anything we can do to the
[3:08:15] existing kiosk to make sure that it
would be okay underneath the overhang.
[3:08:20] However, the kiosk that is designed to
be outdoors is um larger and it actually
[3:08:28] accepts more sharps than the existing
kiosk. So, we would be able to um
[3:08:37] spend less in between pickups. It would
be a little bit easier to maintain. Um
[3:08:42] that's just one of the benefits. And
also just for reference, the
[3:08:50] total cost of the kiosk for the next 10
years is only about 12% of our total
[3:08:58] opioid funds that we would be receiving
just as a reference point for cost.
[3:09:06] » Yeah.
>> Sir, what's the cadence for pickup?
[3:09:08] » I I just want when you're done, I want
to say something. Go ahead.
[3:09:11] » Oh, sorry. the cadence for pickup has
been increasing. Um
[3:09:16] I have the numbers here.
Right now we're looking at about every
[3:09:22] eight weeks.
I would
[3:09:27] » work. I didn't even realize this was an
issue, but I my I would say let's start
[3:09:33] by talking to the police and find out if
there's a way to improve responsiveness
[3:09:38] because maybe it applies to other
issues. I mean maybe there are people
[3:09:42] who have problems and they're not
getting a rapid response. That would be
[3:09:47] an important thing and we could just
have a conversation it seems and find
[3:09:52] out what you know what is the process
because obviously the easiest thing path
[3:09:58] of least resistance is to just improve
responsiveness so that we you know it
[3:10:04] just works the system works better. I
think
[3:10:07] » it's worth looking at. Yeah, definitely.
[3:10:12] Yeah. The other thing just so people
know the background too. Um when we
[3:10:17] decided to do this kiosk, it was
uh I think there was an opportunity of
[3:10:27] some sort. Um,
it was about safety for people at the
[3:10:33] transfer station and and elsewhere that
sharps were being disposed of
[3:10:38] improperly,
but there was concern within the town
[3:10:43] and I think we had some special monies
or something for it. So,
[3:10:50] however that worked out
across advisory and select board and
[3:10:56] others, there wasn't
huge support for the idea of
[3:11:01] underwriting,
you know, with tax dollars.
[3:11:07] um stuff that most people in town could
afford to dispose of them, you know,
[3:11:13] with the mailers.
Somearmacies provide the services. You
[3:11:17] could buy a little container to put it
in and drop it off at the pharmacy. Some
[3:11:21] doctor's offices take things. So, the
idea of the program growing is fine, but
[3:11:28] it's for it's
funds for a specific set of people. So,
[3:11:35] there's a little bit of that, you know,
but overall, we don't want the sharps
[3:11:39] floating around and people coming in
contact with them. Um, but just to let
[3:11:45] you know, there's that mixed sentiment
out there. I don't think it's really on
[3:11:49] many people's radar unless they're
listening to this discussion. But, uh,
[3:11:55] anyway,
>> I mean, there definitely some public
[3:11:59] security risks by not having it. I think
there's some advantages to having to
[3:12:04] being at the police station
[3:12:08] and so I think
>> the police originally wanted it.
[3:12:13] » What' you say? So that the police
originally wanted it there because
[3:12:18] » yeah,
>> they just like the idea of having
[3:12:20] oversight over both the unused
medications
[3:12:26] and um which again are collected and
disposed of properly. Hopefully people
[3:12:32] aren't dumping anything down their drain
uh given that we're on septics. So, um,
[3:12:39] but in any case, it's right, it's a
chance for them to oversee that. Not
[3:12:44] that these devices are easy to break
into for people to get the sharps.
[3:12:51] » Darl, so what you brought up was
um about doctor's offices and and
[3:12:57] pharmacies. Maybe maybe it's a it's an
education thing. Maybe the primary
[3:13:02] source is going to be the police
station, but if people feel
[3:13:06] uncomfortable about
going to the police station, then we
[3:13:11] need to spell out what the alternatives
are.
[3:13:14] » Yeah. And you can buy little ma return
mailer things like online x number of
[3:13:24] » little containers. They're pre-labeled
and you mail them off to sterycle or
[3:13:28] whatever it is that takes the stuff and
make sure to thermally treat them and
[3:13:33] kill off whatever might be there and
um recycle the metal or whatever.
[3:13:41] So yeah, there there are alternatives.
This is not the only.
[3:13:45] » Okay.
>> Well, the So, since we have a company
[3:13:50] picking up these sharps,
why don't we just move it to the
[3:13:54] transfer station? People collect it in
At least that's what we do in the labs.
[3:14:00] We generate sharps all the time. We have
a sharps container that we drop the
[3:14:06] sharps into. And once a week there's a
company that comes and picks all these
[3:14:11] boxes up. But in this case, you fill up
your box and you take it to a transfer
[3:14:17] station and drop it into a designated
box in the transfer station. That that
[3:14:22] would be the simplest, isn't it?
I also think that there might be a value
[3:14:28] to getting the police input to the
reasons that they
[3:14:33] um think it's valuable for them to have
oversight because I think there are some
[3:14:38] other issues that play into that and it
might be and I think we just let's why
[3:14:43] don't we just start with communicating
with them get more informed
[3:14:47] » but the thing is
>> prevalent is this problem
[3:14:49] » Rebecca the moment you say that
that explains why there's a stigma to
[3:14:56] going to the police station. So the body
shafts that are being dropped in the
[3:15:01] police station may be insulin syringes
and
[3:15:04] » although of course I don't I don't know
what the prevalence of the pro of the
[3:15:07] issues. That's why I'm asking. I'd just
be interested in what they're in what
[3:15:11] their um what their is what are the
issues that led to
[3:15:16] » just to be clear the police have
absolutely no oversight on the sharps
[3:15:21] kiosk. It's just in the station. um they
don't make any of the decisions in terms
[3:15:27] of picking it up, maintaining it. Um so
>> it's all all me.
[3:15:33] » When you say you monitor it, you're just
monitoring how full it is or are you
[3:15:38] monitoring the contents of the box?
>> I have um looked at the contents of it.
[3:15:43] Um a lot of it is just sharps
containers. There are some, you know,
[3:15:50] laundry detergent bottles. Um, it
doesn't accept loose sharps and I have
[3:15:56] not experienced any loose sharps in the
several times that I have looked at the
[3:16:00] contents. Um, I'm not a medical
professional so I don't know.
[3:16:05] » Just a second. Just a second. Just so
that I understand. So, people are
[3:16:09] collecting sharps into laundry detergent
bottles and dropping it at the kiosk.
[3:16:15] » That's one of the accepted containers.
We've also had people put them in
[3:16:19] ziplockc baggies. Um, we've had people,
but the appropriate is
[3:16:24] » perfect. So, so why don't we just move
the kiosk to the transfer station? So,
[3:16:29] it's I mean,
>> because it's electric, so there's a
[3:16:33] concern with it being placed outdoors,
which is the the concern. And there's
[3:16:38] also um that is why I would propose to
purchase an outdoor kiosk. The outdoor
[3:16:44] kiosk also accepts individual sharps. It
has its own collection for that and it's
[3:16:49] slightly larger. Um,
I do not know if Chrysalis would allow
[3:16:56] us. It wasn't made exactly clear to me.
I can follow up more on that as well.
[3:17:02] » Okay.
>> Could we have more than one? Like one at
[3:17:05] the one at the transfer station and
there's more access like how and how
[3:17:11] much did I'm sorry if you said this. I
apologize.
[3:17:14] » Did you say the cost? Could you tell us
the cost of an out of a waterproof
[3:17:18] outdoor indooroutdoor
um
[3:17:22] machine?
>> Sure. So, the initial cost will be
[3:17:27] $4,545
for this year, which includes the
[3:17:33] initial cost of the kiosk. And I
budgeted for an additional four pickups.
[3:17:39] Um, one pickup is $100 or $110,
excuse me.
[3:17:45] And that will
be for this year. And then for the rest
[3:17:51] of the per foreseeable future, it will
likely cost around $990 to maintain.
[3:17:57] Because at the moment, we are doing
pickups every 6 to 8 weeks, more on 8
[3:18:03] weeks, leaning towards 8 weeks. Because
it's a larger kiosk, I'm expecting
[3:18:08] around 8 weeks for pickup. However, for
the budgeting purposes, I did overbudget
[3:18:13] assuming nine pickups per year at $990
total. So, uh that's where those numbers
[3:18:19] came from. And also on the towns that
have moved their locations,
[3:18:26] um maybe their numbers would give us an
indication of the advantage of having
[3:18:31] more anonymity
um for drop off. Is that was there a big
[3:18:35] increase in that? And does that
represent like the overall society in
[3:18:40] incidence of use or does it capture
um the population that was missed
[3:18:46] because of its location? It's hard to
know that and differentiate that.
[3:18:51] It's hard to differentiate it because
once it is moved outside um specifically
[3:18:56] with the town that I did speak with
Hington, they have a contract where they
[3:19:02] just do an they do a monthly pickup um
and so they don't do any further
[3:19:08] investigation because it is used more
frequently. So
[3:19:14] that is the understanding that I got
from them. I am more than happy to
[3:19:18] continue conversing with other towns.
Somerville had the first outdoor kiosk
[3:19:24] through Chrysalis. So, I'd be happy to
reach out to them as well
[3:19:29] and other towns who have outdoor kiosks.
Yeah, because that's an interesting um
[3:19:34] question and obviously it can represent
both of those mixed or missed um the the
[3:19:45] data like is it an overall trend or is
it a loss of a a specific subset that
[3:19:51] isn't using it?
But anyway,
[3:19:55] » the other thing I wonder is whether
the people who really want anonymity,
[3:20:01] and again recognizing that we largely
have a pretty affluent community, you
[3:20:08] really wanted anonymity, you'd buy the
mailers
[3:20:12] and you'd mail them in
without it's untraceable.
[3:20:18] So,
um I don't I just feel like the money
[3:20:23] could be better spent on some other
things than
[3:20:28] than a new kiosk. Uh and just also to
back up, the oversight that the police
[3:20:33] liked is just so people wasn't about
seeing who was dropping off uh unspent
[3:20:39] medications and sharps. It was about
people not tampering with the machines
[3:20:44] to get out those unused drugs or the
have access to sharps that they didn't
[3:20:50] have to buy for people who didn't have
the money to go buy sharps. You you know
[3:20:55] on an addict side of things
um because you're not getting
[3:21:00] prescriptions right that are getting
filled and coming with the sharps. So
[3:21:06] it's kind of a different um
They were just trying to prevent people
[3:21:12] from reusing cont already contaminated
needles because they were desperate for
[3:21:17] more needles
[3:21:23] and not for doctors issued medications.
So anyway, yes, tricky. It's all tricky
[3:21:31] though. And what else are we going to
spend the money on? But I like to think
[3:21:36] there's some way we could help people
more
[3:21:38] » if we had more people.
That would be the benefit of having more
[3:21:43] access for the general public. Um, which
could have an advantage. Would that
[3:21:48] decrease the demand for need for pickup?
Could that if we have more containers,
[3:21:54] maybe we could do fewer pickups and that
would lower the cost of maintenance
[3:22:00] after the obviously initial investment.
But I'm just curious.
[3:22:05] » In theory, yeah, that would be the case.
That would only work if all of those
[3:22:10] containers filled up at the same time.
>> Otherwise, if they're filling up at
[3:22:17] staggered times, you're still having
someone come out just to pick up one
[3:22:22] from one container within the town.
But if you could time it so all all of
[3:22:30] them, Sure. Then it would cut the if
they you had two, wouldn't it? To pick
[3:22:35] up two at once, you'd have the pickup
cost perhaps or not quite half, but
[3:22:41] close.
[3:22:44] So
anyway, okay. So that's just one of
[3:22:49] that's probably to me the tiniest part
of our opioid funds issues. [laughter]
[3:22:56] As somebody mentioned earlier, maybe was
Bose about, you know, we can
[3:23:01] We could send someone to a treatment
program that could probably use up, you
[3:23:07] know, if someone really needed extensive
treatment
[3:23:10] uh for rehabilitation, then that could
use up all the funds we have, frankly,
[3:23:17] you know. So, there's got to be
something in between that we could be
[3:23:20] doing. And I'd really like to think we
could do some prevention stuff, and it'd
[3:23:25] work. Um,
I don't think the town is anonymous and
[3:23:31] I don't know for providing much care to
people in town.
[3:23:36] I just can't imagine someone walking in
or something to the room. Yeah, we're
[3:23:42] just not big enough.
>> Well, the town knows have some input
[3:23:48] about this.
Oh, lots there is a lot of information
[3:23:54] out there that people have written up
all different, you know, different towns
[3:23:58] have produced stuff about what they've
been doing. There are a bunch of groups
[3:24:02] early on who mobilized to write up
guides or different things that towns
[3:24:09] could try. So, there's a wealth of
information out there.
[3:24:13] » No, to make it specific through it and
seeing what would fit for us.
[3:24:18] » Yeah. So, so what's the ground reality
in Sherban? Uh, is there is opioid
[3:24:27] addiction a major concern? Is it I mean,
HIPPA laws would prevent us from
[3:24:34] figuring things out like who is um
addicted perhaps. So,
[3:24:41] » yeah, we won't know who.
>> Yeah.
[3:24:43] » And it's hard for us to even know how
many,
[3:24:46] » right? Because
you know in bigger cities you get
[3:24:51] numbers differently because it's like
you know 332 people showed up at this
[3:24:58] hospital with X problems and you're just
going to assume they're kind of from
[3:25:02] somewhere nearby there but for us
>> we're close to all sorts of medical
[3:25:08] centers and again
>> you know you're right there's nothing
[3:25:13] right here that would tie our data Yeah.
And then they're also not reporting
[3:25:19] things below five as much as they used
to. I don't know if that applies to this
[3:25:23] too, but we could ask our public health
nurse what she's seeing. I know that
[3:25:29] there
[3:25:32] uh I feel like there was some
some count of like someone with an
[3:25:39] overdose and a bad reaction something at
some point, but I honestly don't
[3:25:44] remember what the number was.
>> One
[3:25:49] one in some number of years. I don't
know.
[3:25:54] » Yeah.
So that data actually is available
[3:25:58] through um the through BSAS. They
collect hospitalization data and they
[3:26:05] use patient information about where they
either have primary residence or um
[3:26:13] their permanent residence. And we do
know that in between July of 2024 and
[3:26:19] June of 2025 there were 32 substance
related hospitalizations.
[3:26:25] Now a substance related hospitalization
could be anything from alcohol to
[3:26:28] opioids to
um anything within sort of that is
[3:26:33] considered a substance related
hospitalization in the emergency
[3:26:37] department.
They do say that those numbers are
[3:26:41] collected um specifically from
two different data sources. Um I just
[3:26:48] want to make sure that I'm quoting these
correctly.
[3:26:54] Um,
>> could substance also be a prescribed
[3:26:58] medication that wasn't,
you know, that just had a bad
[3:27:04] effect or is it abuse?
>> It's generally they generally track more
[3:27:10] acute cases. So, anything that would
have to do with a chronic condition is
[3:27:14] not going to be considered a substance
related hospitalization through the
[3:27:18] emergency department. Um, that's my
understanding of the data set. I'd be
[3:27:22] happy to send it over and uh if you want
to look at it more together, we can. But
[3:27:27] just to sort of answer your question as
to the prevalence in Shervern, um there
[3:27:32] have been several overdose deaths in
Sherburn that we know of through the um
[3:27:40] through
the burial agent work. Um,
[3:27:47] » really?
>> I know that there there is one cuz
[3:27:50] somebody spoke up at town meeting once
when we were talking about when we were
[3:27:56] first getting the opioid funds.
[3:28:08] » Okay.
[3:28:12] So
>> the other thing we wonder is whether we
[3:28:14] could
help fund programs in another town that
[3:28:19] then we somehow recommend that people go
there again if they want the anonymity
[3:28:39] anyway. Okay. Um, now it's super duper
late.
[3:28:45] » Uh,
all right. So, lots more
[3:28:51] on that. Um, I don't see too many people
on and I'm kind of wondering
[3:28:59] if
>> there's nobody from the public still
[3:29:02] here, Darl. It's just the board and
>> Yeah.
[3:29:06] » And myself. Lightning. Yeah.
Um,
[3:29:11] I was thinking that we can move our
presentation of on discussion of mass D
[3:29:20] method for determining limited septic
system capacity
[3:29:26] » when design records unavailable.
>> Sure.
[3:29:30] » Another time and the same with if it's
okay with people only because now it's
[3:29:36] 10:33.
Um
[3:29:40] and then the permitting solid waste
haulers. We do need to move on that to
[3:29:45] some degree. Did look over the forms. Um
>> I like the carile form.
[3:29:54] » Yes, I like the car the best by far.
>> It's got a lot more information than the
[3:29:59] others.
>> Yeah.
[3:30:04] And then the only thing I'd like to see
is not tonnage but volume capacity of
[3:30:10] trucks. I think we'd do better with
volume
[3:30:16] than with someone else's estimate of
tonnage because there are, you know,
[3:30:21] kind of average weight of a cubic yard
of of uh recyclables
[3:30:29] and versus solid waste. Um, I think we'd
do better that way than them trying to
[3:30:36] maybe underestimate or not having any
clue as to how much it weighed. I don't
[3:30:42] think we should rely on their tonnage.
>> Personal opinion of working with
[3:30:48] » companies waste.
>> The only comment I had was I wasn't sure
[3:30:52] why why they asked for workers
compensation insurance.
[3:30:58] I would say that's pretty standard for
our permits. We require workers
[3:31:03] compensation insurance for our um this
for our SE hauler permits as well. Um
[3:31:11] and for for some of the food permits we
require insurance as well.
[3:31:16] » Yeah, I would think you want the vehicle
insurance.
[3:31:21] » The vehicle insurance is required in
Dover. um
[3:31:27] the vehicle registration and then the
certificate for insurance for public
[3:31:33] liability and their property insurance
is required in Carlilele Dover here.
[3:31:38] Sorry, I thought I was sharing my
screen. Um
[3:31:42] so when it comes to insurance,
>> certificate of liability insurance that
[3:31:46] Carile has uh indicated
and then it'll say you can ask for that.
[3:31:53] Well, the certificate will list what the
insurance is that someone has and what
[3:31:58] it covers.
>> Yeah. So, this is a little
[3:32:04] » Yeah. vehicle stuff
>> information.
[3:32:08] » Yeah.
No, that's pretty standard for a lot of
[3:32:12] things, especially stuff like this. And
then for the workers, they are
[3:32:17] if people are not managing their sharps
properly, you know, they've got to make
[3:32:22] sure that
they're doing something for their
[3:32:26] workers, some protection, hopefully
training,
[3:32:31] and appropriate
u gloves and all the rest.
[3:32:41] And I had a couple ideas about some
additions for this.
[3:32:46] » Yeah, I'd love to hear your ideas for
additions because um my goal would be to
[3:32:51] have the first draft to the board for
the next meeting. So that way um we can
[3:32:57] get the board's feedback on the initial
draft and then I can bring it to the
[3:33:01] working group and the other stakeholders
in town to get their secondary feedback
[3:33:06] and then bring it back to the board um
in October per the initial timeline we
[3:33:12] discussed. Um
>> so like we're here so I would like to
[3:33:17] have the initial
draft by the first meeting in September
[3:33:22] and so on and so forth.
[3:33:26] So any feedback is is welcome. I've been
taking some notes.
[3:33:30] » Yeah, I have some notes.
>> Yeah. Also feel free to send me an email
[3:33:35] with it.
>> Okay. And then um
[3:33:41] again, if people are dying to talk about
food permit fees and applications, we
[3:33:50] could. I'm still finding it, you know,
it's a complicated thing. I'd love to
[3:33:56] find a way to simplify it. I did
on that at the beginning of the summer
[3:34:03] and June or whatever whenever that was
first available and I haven't looked at
[3:34:07] it again, but there's still I still
think there are things we might be able
[3:34:11] to simplify a little bit more.
>> Um, I did create two documents that were
[3:34:17] in the meeting document folders that
were sort of just summaries. um they
[3:34:21] were a little bit more concise
in explaining rather like the full
[3:34:27] » Yeah, I still think there's some room
for further streamlining.
[3:34:33] » Okay.
>> But it's not simple because it's
[3:34:35] complicated bunch of information. Um
kind of repetitive but with some nuances
[3:34:42] here and there. So, uh,
feels like it's there's maybe an easier
[3:34:49] way though. Maybe not. I don't know.
Um,
[3:34:56] okay.
[3:35:01] Are people okay? If we're not, you know,
we have some things we can slide next
[3:35:06] time, maybe with more amendments so that
it'll be easier to rebuild faster
[3:35:12] in a meeting.
[3:35:18] And is anyone feeling badly about having
a discussion about the determining
[3:35:23] septic system capacity and design flow
records are unavailable?
[3:35:28] The simplest answer for that is our
standard procedure and the one
[3:35:35] recommended to us by D
is that when you really have no plans,
[3:35:40] no asbuilt plans that were definitely uh
for approved plans on record
[3:35:48] that you go with
the um
[3:35:53] records as close to when you think the
dwelling was built. because there are
[3:35:59] noise accessories records for some of
the antique homes in town. So, we might
[3:36:03] not even have that. But you get as early
as you can and see what they thought the
[3:36:08] building once.
>> Yeah, if I can answer.
[3:36:13] » Yeah, that's 100% correct. And that's
the process that we've been using all
[3:36:17] these years. So, you go with the
assessment records.
[3:36:21] » If there's nothing else available,
confirmed by DP many of times, there's
[3:36:26] nothing else. So that's that's all we
have to our options, you know, to look
[3:36:30] into bedroom count. But no, I agree with
you 100%.
[3:36:35] » Yeah.
>> Okay. Um but we'll have opportunities
[3:36:43] soon to apply that methodology and go
through it in detail. And we did it, you
[3:36:49] know, recently kind of through
other properties.
[3:36:55] Doesn't come up so frequently, thank
goodness. But again, with our older
[3:37:00] properties in town, it has been a
challenge.
[3:37:08] Any chance anyone would like to make a
motion to adjourn the meeting?
[3:37:12] » Darl, did you want to talk about the
next meeting agenda?
[3:37:16] » Yeah. Well, now we're going to be moving
a few of these things on there. The fee
[3:37:22] waver policy and this and the waist
haulers.
[3:37:27] » Um, for sure and and possibly that
discussion about the methodology, but
[3:37:32] again, maybe we'll have an example come
up and we'll just get to play it out in
[3:37:36] real life.
[3:37:44] um
>> uh peer reviewers.
[3:37:48] » Yep.
>> Hopefully for next time. Does anyone
[3:37:52] want to be part of reviewing the peer
reviewers?
[3:38:00] I could believe Julie would be possibly
willing to do that, but I won't
[3:38:05] volunteer her in her absence.
Um we also from the public health nurse
[3:38:12] will likely be um having some uh an
update and sort of a discussion on ticks
[3:38:20] and tickornne illnesses. Um
>> stemming from the conversation that we
[3:38:25] had today. Uh this I did bring this up
to her last week and uh she would like
[3:38:30] to you know come to a meeting and we can
talk about it some more and answer
[3:38:33] questions and just
>> reminding people that tick season
[3:38:37] doesn't end in September. Uh Rebecca
you're still muted.
[3:38:44] » Still muted.
>> Sorry. No, I know. Sorry. I forgot I
[3:38:47] actually just muted myself a second ago.
Um the I'm also happy to talk about some
[3:38:54] of the clinical part if anyone's
interested
[3:38:58] » on
>> but if that is better in the if that's a
[3:39:02] better um subject for like a clinical
presentation like a if we have an
[3:39:09] evening or something
[3:39:13] » that could be yeah maybe it'd be easier
right
[3:39:19] Okay, that that could work.
Then people could ask them, you know,
[3:39:26] » I could give a big I could give a whole
on it, but um you know, because it's
[3:39:31] complicated, but it's also really
relevant and interesting.
[3:39:41] » Okay.
[3:39:46] Actually,
[3:39:49] maybe you should meet with the uh public
health nurse about
[3:39:53] » That's what I was thinking. I'd be I'd
be totally happy to meet with her about
[3:39:57] it. We could maybe put something
together.
[3:40:01] » And I'm sure
>> there do it that way.
[3:40:05] » Sorry.
>> I think I think it'd be more productive
[3:40:08] just going to that
route rather than at a meeting. And also
[3:40:13] because our meetings are going to be
getting longer and longer as we're
[3:40:17] dealing with these two projects.
>> Maybe Sarah and I I'll call Sarah and we
[3:40:24] can do we can figure out the best way to
do it.
[3:40:27] » Yeah, that works.
>> Okay. All right. Thanks.
[3:40:31] » Perfect. Okay.
[3:40:35] Anyone ready to move the closing of the
meeting?
[3:40:39] » Uh yeah, I can make a motion. Uh like to
make a motion to close tonight's adjourn
[3:40:46] tonight's board of health meeting.
>> Second.
[3:40:53] » Any further discussion?
Hearing none. Daryl Beardsley I.
[3:40:59] » Steve Constantine I.
>> Rebecca Hane I.
[3:41:06] » And
>> all right. Good night everyone.
[3:41:09] Thanks.
>> I didn't really know that the uh folks
[3:41:12] from Metobrook were coming tonight. Did
you know, Sarah? I didn't know that they
[3:41:18] were going to come.
>> I did not know. No, can't say I did.
[3:41:21] » Yeah, but I am very happy that they did
because I we needed all this information
[3:41:28] that we hadn't seen yet. Um
>> just for the minute.
[3:41:34] » Sorry. Just wanted to note for myself in
the future that it's 10:45.
[3:41:39] » Yeah. Well, everyone have a great night.
[music]