Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-08-08-SAC-rpt.pdf C.0-9 Memo to the Sewer Advisory Committee from the Chairman - 8/8/77 Vacation plans have affected attendance at our meetings For this reason the Aug 2 meeting was cancelled, and this memo is an attempt to bring all of us, near and far, up to date MOST IMPORTANT we are scheduled to meet on TUESDAY, SEPT 13 AT 7 30 PM IN THE SELECTMEN'S MEETING ROOM We will finish by 10 Please let me know if you have a problem with this date Gerry Martin's report which was to have been distributed last week is attached. Thank you, Gerry (he is the only one who was really ready for that meeting) Work In Progress Barnes will continue to investigate sewer betterment policies Item Bedford has recently revised its formula by increasing the rate per foot charge from $6 to $12 They may have made additional changes which we might find out about Martin's memo should be read in conjunction with the Cohen/McSweeney memo of 2/5/73 which was distributed in June Nill is preparing a procedural statement for potential sewer service homeowners He has had first-hand experience with the information gaps which seem to occur between citizens and staff regarding sewer planning If he can improve on the methodology output (explanation of types of service, gravity, ejector pumps, compost toilets, easements) as well as the petition form it will be of considerable help to everybody We keep asking about ways to make private systems work Rycroft will contact Smith/BOH again about this, and will check on funding transfers for sewer projects Fricker said that she would find out about private systems in Maine while she is there this summer A booklet about on-site systems maintenance has been issued and hopefully will be available from the Southeast Regional Planning Agnecy soon Harvell has agreed to visit the EPA Division I office in Boston to discuss alternatives to sewering He may be able to report on this in September Crothers is checking, on the status of the MDC Mill Brook Valley relief sewer Senator Amick expects her petition on this project to leave the Joint Rules committee during the week of August 8; after approval, the Mill Brook sewer will be designed by a consultant whose report will be released between January and July (?) 1978 A public review process has to be included in the planning, and it should be possible to get information that is presently unavailable about details of the design and future costs which Bedford and Lexington will incur as a result of this project We will be working on a final report in September and October Please try to relate your areas of interest to a written section of the report We should have sections on 1) 100% sewering and what it means; a list of "B" streets remaining and cost estimates, is the 12/75 estimate of $1,716,000 still accurate? If expansion or replacement of existing septic systems is possible on "B" streets according to this memo, should the 100% (socalled) program be implemented? Where are new trunk sewers to be built? 2) di>scussiorilbf-al'-tez°n'atiies 'to' the<collecto?-system A\ cv S 3) recommendations on petition system and related policies of BOS/BOH/DPW/ENG 4) betterment formula changes ; suggestions for town meeting action 5) financial obligations pertinent to various proposals Thanks to everybody for your help and interest Your additions, corrections, and ideas are what will make our report worthwhile * * * * Here are some last minute thoughts about the Mill Brook Valley project Bedford has planned a $12 million dollar sewer expansion community system which they want to receive grant approval before the end of the current funding year this September Excess stormwater in the Lexington system during recent crisis periods has contributed along with identical conditions in Bedford to overload design capacities causing surface pollution of rivers and streams Until very recently these problems were ascribed to "obstructions" in the lines Both communities have now acknowledged that they are receiving runoff either deliberately or accidentally thereby surcharging their sewers To prevent households being inundated with sewage, the towns pump the excess at various discharge points until the crisis is over (several hours to several weeks) The Bedford consultant has suggested that an earlier consultant did not allow for "recognized peaking factors" when the Bedford/Lexington joint system was designed (it was completed about 1971) At this writing these factors remain a mystery If Bedford is allowed to connect directly into the enlarged MDC relief sewer it will be possible for Hanscom area, as well as other parts of Lexington,to increase discharge totals Thus, although overflow problems at recognized trouble points might be alleviated, we must ask what is to prevent overloads from occurring later when development again exceeds design capacity? For instance, MDC projections allow Bedford a resident population of about 18,000 in twenty years with an employment population of almost 30,000 ( now 13,000 and 20,000) which increases to 43,000 after the year 2000 This greatly increased workforce is a secondary growth aspect of the Mill Brook Valley sewer which we must thoroughly understand Our experience shows that engineering for sewer systems is often faulty Where will the new problems occur? We should also anticipate financial effects which will accrue to Lexington both from this project and from the system-wide MDC wastewater management improvements Finally, we should consider limiting sewer connections based perhaps on an inflow reduction requirement This could be accomplished by writing a sewer use by-law The Mill Brook Valley relief sewer is sponsored by Senator Amick because she believes that the MDC "should expand to the full and include all 109 cities and towns " In that scheme the Mill Brook Valley project at + $5-$6 million for construction provides a good start (it was originally scheduled ?or post 1980 in a much shorter form) `'„V; a--+1''(1 )3,1 I ,_ COPY TO Board Members 8-22-77 l it C ( '!