Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sewer Capacity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board hears detailed engineering briefing as sewer capacity and lake outfall testing loom
Summary
Public works and Stantec outlined the town's three‑firm engineering model, the distinction between plant processing capacity and effluent disposal constraints, and a plan to prioritize fixing infiltration and inflow (I&I) issues. The board asked staff to begin systematic sampling of lake outfalls and to return with mapping and next steps.
Public works Director Steve Randall told the Wolfeboro Select Board on May 6 that the town uses three engineering firms—Wood and Curran, Underwood, and Stantec—for operations, capacity studies and road/infrastructure work, and that pairing firms gives the town specialized oversight and continuity.
"We have a culvert that is too large for us to replace under our maintainer license; we need permitting and wetlands work—we go to them," Randall said, describing Stantec's and the other firms' distinct roles. He said the firms meet with public works monthly to coordinate projects and cited Mill Street, Highland Terrace and other local projects as recent examples.
Board members and residents pressed the panel on the town's sewer capacity and on conflicting figures that have circulated about the plant's utilization. Resident questions during public comment asked whether the sewer plant was at 92 percent capacity or closer to 50 percent.
Randall and engineers explained the difference: the plant's processing ability (what the treatment works can biologically or mechanically handle) and the town's ability to dispose or otherwise move effluent (ribs, lagoons, sprayfields) are two separate constraints. "There are two heads to that coin," Randall said, noting that the town's ability to get rid of effluent is currently the more binding constraint and that infiltration and inflow (I&I) into collection lines is significantly eating into disposal capacity.
Randall outlined recent work to reduce I&I—jetting lines, installing air bleeds and targeted repairs—and said addressing those leaks first will deliver the fastest improvement in effluent capacity. "You can fix what you own before you continue to try to build new," he said.
Jonathan Burke and Jerry Fortin from Stantec described funding pathways (drinking water SRF, clean water SRF, DOT/state aid and competitive grants) and urged a phased approach: pursue water funding where available, then sewer funding or stormwater grants for adjacent elements, and sequence construction to reduce local cost burdens.
On lake water quality, Randall said a drain pipe to the lake was recently hydro‑excavated, a degraded section removed and the remaining run capped. The town will imminently sample all outfalls that discharge to the lake and follow a trigger‑based investigation: "We'll start at the outfalls, and if something hits, we'll work our way back up the line," he said. He said the health inspector and the town will perform groundwater and outfall sampling and install dye tests where necessary.
Board members asked for clear, dated capacity numbers on the town website and for a prioritization of "hot‑spot" fixes along the trunk line. Randall said staff will produce maps, sampling plans and a clearer public dashboard. The board did not take a formal vote to fund a specific expansion at the meeting but directed staff to proceed with targeted sampling and return with a plan and cost estimate.
What happens next: public works will sample outfalls and share results with the select board; staff will prepare maps of I&I hot spots and an options memo on whether to prioritize repair actions or formal expansion and on potential funding sources.
