Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Easement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board pauses decision on easement for Cobble Hill backup well, asks for tests and legal review
Summary
At a May 11 Select Board meeting, town staff briefed members on a request for a 175‑foot protective well-radius easement on town-owned land to serve Silver Lake Estates (Cobble Hill). Engineers described declining capacity and water‑quality shifts in the community well; the board requested more testing data and counsel review before deciding.
The Hollis Select Board on May 11 heard an initial briefing on a request for a protective well‑radius easement that would allow Silver Lake Estates (also called Cobble Hill) to place a backup domestic well whose 175‑foot protective radius would partially encroach on a five‑acre, tax‑deeded parcel owned by the town.
Kevin Anderson, the town planner, told the board Lewis Engineering approached the town requesting assistance to obtain an easement to protect a backup well for the 52‑unit condominium community. "The easement will be for their protective well radius for a backup domestic well," Anderson said, and noted draft easement language and a locus map were in the meeting packet.
Lewis Engineering's Bruce Lewis described the community's water supply history and why the HOA wants a second well. "The community right now takes 100% of its domestic drinking water from this well," Lewis said, and added the existing well has shown both capacity decline and water‑quality changes since it was installed. He said the proposed bedrock well would likely target roughly 10 gallons per minute and that state permitting requires pump testing and monitoring of neighborhood wells to assess impacts.
Board members pressed whether the backup well could be sited entirely on the developer's parcel without touching town land. The planning‑board liaison and others expressed concern that the subdivision was approved on the basis that a single community well would suffice and said they needed data showing why that is no longer the case. The chair asked staff to confirm whether any feasible on‑parcel location exists and to provide historical water‑level and quality records.
Members also asked that draft easement language be vetted by town counsel before any further action. Anderson and Lewis agreed to gather the requested information. The board did not take a vote; the chair said the item would be tentatively placed on the next agenda or moved out if the requested analyses and legal review are not ready.
Next steps: staff will compile prior pump test records and water‑quality data, check alternative on‑parcel well siting, have the draft easement reviewed by town counsel (Dresher), and return the item for a future Select Board decision.
