The most notable discussion revolved around water pipe specifications for new developments, with Glenn Folo of Realy presenting engineering recommendations to the board. Folo challenged Grow Engineering’s suggestion to downsize pipe specifications from the town’s adopted 12-inch minimum to a smaller size. He argued that maintaining the 12-inch minimum is important for future town expansions. Folo stated, “the reason that we adopted the 12-inch minimum pipe size was so that… we have mains installed that will accommodate the future needs of the town.” He emphasized that the cost of installation would not be impacted by maintaining this standard, as groundwork disruption would occur regardless.

The conversation expanded to the implications of transitioning from a 10-inch to an 8-inch main, with concerns about pressure loss and hydraulic flow. Folo expressed skepticism about increasing the main size when it connects to a smaller pipe, questioning its ability to handle the proposed 32-unit subdivision’s needs. He also highlighted the necessity of replacing outdated asbestos pipes.

Kristen, presumably an engineer, contributed by referencing a revised drawing for routing pipes from Whopping Road, raising maintenance and access issues. The board discussed the importance of a 20-foot easement for maintenance access and insisted on proper documentation before water activation. Folo defended the design choices but acknowledged the need to adjust plans to meet board expectations, stating, “I kind of always tell them just do whatever they want to make them happy.” The board underscored the necessity of clarity in engineering plans, with members expressing discomfort in approving proposals without a clear representation of the layout.

Another topic was the proposal of a lease agreement deemed below market rates by the town council. A motion was made to have Chris sign the agreement as the tenant, positioning him as the point of contact for any arising issues. The board also received updates on drinking water samples, ongoing paving projects, and infrastructure improvements, highlighting effective communication between the road crew and the highway department.

The meeting further delved into utility management for duplex developments, focusing on the layout of water and sewer lines to avoid sanitary cross-connections and facilitate repairs. Discussions emphasized the importance of proper separation, individual unit control, and adherence to regulations. Concerns about squeezing too much utility infrastructure into limited space prompted suggestions for developers to consult engineers for more practical solutions. The conversation also touched on planning for future conversions of apartments into condominiums, stressing the need for foresight to prevent complications down the line.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to water meter technology comparisons, particularly between mass installation and the Badger system. Mass installation was favored for its compatibility with all cell carriers and its free pilot program, contrasted with the ongoing fees of other vendors. The board discussed establishing a plan for meter replacement and securing funding for a new well before the April town meeting.

The board also addressed an abatement request from a property with an unexpected sewer bill, debating whether to approve the abatement at the lowest pricing tier due to previous billing inaccuracies. Additionally, issues with new irrigation installations that bypassed permitting processes were noted, with suggestions for requiring permits to ensure compliance. A specific case of unauthorized installation on Elm Street was highlighted, with discussions on accountability and potential registration requirements for wells used for irrigation.