Dave Potter of PAR reported the results of recent subsurface investigations at the proposed Woodford Middle School site.

Potter said the team completed borings and larger test pits to evaluate soil conditions, groundwater and environmental contaminants. Results were similar to a 2024 preliminary geotechnical report: a layer of fill is commonly about 4 feet thick and in some borings dips as deep as about 6 feet, which may require additional over‑excavation and structural fill during foundation work. Groundwater monitoring from test pits showed seasonal groundwater rises to within several inches of the current finished grade in some areas.

Because of that high groundwater, geotechnical engineers recommended installing a perimeter subdrain and, in places where building floor slabs will be below the water table, additional below‑slab drainage. Potter said the originally proposed location for an on‑site wastewater treatment system (near the softball outfield) is not suitable because of groundwater proximity; as a result the team is evaluating alternatives: (1) move the on‑site system to an existing leaching area in the back corner where suitable soils were previously identified; (2) consider reuse of the existing leach field (with noted concerns); or (3) pursue a public sewer connection. The town’s DPW contact Adam White has provided rough cost information for extending sewer lines; consultants said public sewer is roughly 2,500–2,700 feet from the site (near Phillips/Church), and a lateral/lift station to reach it would be a long run and could be costly.

Environmental hand‑dug test pits were sampled and sent to a laboratory; lab data have just been delivered to the consultant team and are being reviewed. Potter said the team will schedule a second day of test pits with the state inspector (DM) to evaluate alternative on‑site wastewater locations and stormwater areas and will produce lifecycle cost estimates for each alternative, including the cost of pumping and long‑term maintenance where applicable.

Next steps: additional targeted test pits with the state inspector, review of lab results, a comparison of lifecycle costs for on‑site versus sewer connection options, and estimates for any sewer lateral or lift station work if the town pursues a connection.