The most pressing topic of the meeting was the debate over whether the applicant should fund a peer review consultant for traffic and environmental studies. Concerns were raised regarding potential risks to local water sources, septic systems, and Aldridge Lake. Residents emphasized the importance of examining environmental factors before proceeding, given the ongoing legislative debates concerning flood zone maps influenced by climate change. The board discussed obtaining quotes from consultants and whether the applicant would cover the costs, ultimately agreeing to request a $10,000 budget for the studies, subject to the applicant’s approval.

Noise pollution and traffic impact were other issues discussed. A comprehensive noise study was requested, particularly concerning the sound levels affecting nearby schools and a daycare facility. The applicant presented an acoustical study, but residents and some board members called for a peer review to ensure the accuracy of the findings. The potential for increased truck traffic was also a concern, with estimates suggesting that the project could result in nearly six truck trips per day. The necessity for a traffic analysis was debated, and it was noted that past gravel operations on the same road had not undergone particulate studies, raising questions about the consistency of the board’s approach.

Environmental concerns took center stage, with residents highlighting the need for a water study to assess impacts on local water quality and management. Legal counsel clarified that while the Conservation Commission typically oversees wetlands and water resources, the board could address these concerns under special permit standards. The applicant assured that their gravel operation would promote groundwater recharge and avoid erosion off-site, but residents remained skeptical. Additional studies, including a hydrologic study and assessments of traffic and noise impacts, were deemed necessary before any decision could be made.

The board also discussed the impact on local infrastructure, particularly the need to widen and pave Trumpy Avenue to meet subdivision standards. Historical approvals and legal opinions were referenced, emphasizing that compliance with road standards was essential for the project to move forward. Concerns about the adequacy of current road conditions and the potential financial burden on taxpayers for necessary upgrades were voiced by residents.

Public health and safety were recurring themes throughout the meeting. Residents, including those with chronic health conditions, expressed fears about the potential impacts of increased truck traffic and noise pollution on their wellbeing. The board acknowledged these concerns and agreed to incorporate them into the noise study. The need for independent evaluations to provide a comprehensive understanding of the long-term impacts of the project was emphasized.

The board reached a consensus on requiring several studies from the applicant, including an air pollution mitigation study, a title search, a traffic analysis, and a peer review by a civil engineer. The applicant’s representative requested a 60-day extension to complete the necessary studies, which the board agreed to, planning to reconvene and review the studies in their next session.

They emphasized the importance of thorough evaluations before granting any permits, highlighting the board’s responsibility to safeguard community interests.