Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Blackstone selectmen direct staff to pursue Option 2 for Bellingham Road drainage
Summary
The Board of Selectmen voted unanimously Aug. 20 to direct the town administrator to advance engineering for Option 2 on Bellingham Road, a higher-construction-cost alternative intended to reduce the number of land takings and potential impacts to Fox Hill residents.
The Town of Blackstone Selectmen voted unanimously Aug. 20 to direct the town administrator to move forward with engineering and permitting for Option 2 of a proposed Bellingham Road drainage project.
Town administrator Chad Lovett told the board the engineering firm Turning Point priced three options: Option 1 at $268,995 (the lower-cost route behind five properties, daylighting at Fox Hill), Option 2 at $303,670 (crossing the street to town-owned land with fewer takings), and a third route judged cost-prohibitive because of topography. Lovett said Turning Point was unable to finish construction drawings, and the town has asked another firm to complete the design work so the project can go to bid (Town administrator Chad Lovett).
Selectmen pressing for caution emphasized potential downstream effects. Selectman Mary (first moved the Option 2 motion) said she favored Option 2 because it reduces property impacts, but urged staff to verify where the water ultimately would discharge and to avoid compounding flooding elsewhere. Another member warned that diverting flows could shift drainage problems onto other neighborhoods, citing previous improvements and undocumented private drainage connections.
After discussion about land-taking tradeoffs and the risk to Fox Hill residents, the board voted to “direct the town administrator to proceed with Option 2” so staff can finalize drawings and prepare for bidding and any necessary right-of-way takings. The motion was made, seconded, and approved by voice vote with no recorded dissents.
Next steps: the administrator will solicit the follow-on engineering contract to complete construction drawings and will return to the board with cost estimates, proposed contract language, and a timeline to put work out to bid. The board noted some funding may come from warrant articles and existing capital funds.
Vote and procedural note: the board took a voice vote on the motion; members stated “aye” and the chair declared the motion unanimous. The board asked that the engineer examine potential outfall points to avoid transferring water problems to nearby properties.
Article provenance: topic first appears in the meeting packet and discussion at SEG 846–905 and the motion and vote at SEG 1024–1043.
