Additional Recommendations

There are many benefits to creating a regular sampling plan to gather water quality data for each of the outfalls to Farm Pond. This work would include characterizing the runoff from the skate park as well as the CMP stream, which could be used as an educational tool to promote the Town’s stormwater management efforts. This study would also involve a more in-depth investigation on the influence of groundwater as a potential transport mechanism for pollutants. Understanding where these pollutants may enter the groundwater would be an important factor to study. This investigation could also address the possibility of the groundwater flowing beneath the aqueduct into Farm Pond. Additionally, while some of the outfalls may not be currently accessible, Framingham can work toward identifying ways to safely access all of the outfalls. This may be difficult for some of the outfalls on the eastern side of Farm Pond because they are located next to a railroad station. Framingham officials could try to negotiate with private property owners to gain sampling access with the intent of improving Farm Pond’s water quality. By adding locations to the sampling plan, more information can be gathered in order to identify which outfalls have the highest stormwater loadings contributing to the pond and how they change through every season. Additionally, a regular sampling plan would provide baseline data for any new construction

70 projects that are built in the area. For example, once the bike path and skate park are built near the pond and the CMP stream, new sampling measurements should be taken to ensure the projects’ stormwater management systems are working properly. If a constructed wetland Best Management Practice (BMP) is built at the outfall of the CMP stream, the sampling procedures and locations we used throughout this project would provide adequate data to see any changes between pre- and post-construction.

While sampling, we encountered some challenges, especially during wet weather events. We have determined some recommendations so that future samplers can avoid the same problems. Samplers should try to use a wheeled cooler to make it easier to transport all of the samples. We recommend this because the samples became heavy by the end of sampling. Another way to address this issue is to start with the farthest location and work your way back to the location closest to your vehicle. Alternatively, you can take smaller bags of bottles to the site and leave the cooler near the car. During wet weather events, consider having an extra person available whose only job is to take notes on the field data. This person should bring an umbrella or an E-Z Up canopy tent so that the notebook for recording field data and notes will stay dry. He or she should also bring back-up pens or sharpies in case one stops working. When collecting the turbidity samples, make sure large debris such as big pieces of leaves or twigs are not collected in the sampling containers. Large pieces of debris can skew the laboratory results and cause outliers in the data. It is important to keep in mind that the coliform tests are the most time sensitive because they have to be completed within 24 hours of collecting the samples. We recommend either preparing and placing the samples in the incubator when you get back from sampling or immediately the following morning. We also recommend preparing two dilutions of each sample

71 along with a normal sample. This will help to identify a more accurate estimation for samples above 1,000 MPN/100mL.

During our project, determining the flow of the stream was one of our difficulties. One way to improve upon our flow measurement techniques would be to use a Hydrolab HL4 Multiparameter Water Quality Sonde. Samplers would take it out to the sampling site and leave it in the water for the duration of the storm event. One concern about using this method is that it would be left out in a public area where it is susceptible to theft. In this way, it is possible to monitor any change in flow even when you are not physically at the site. Another way to obtain more accurate flow measurements would be to improve the depth measurement techniques by measuring from the same reference point locations.

In order to estimate a more accurate depiction of the curve numbers for the watershed, it would be helpful to update the GIS soils layer. This would be valuable information to have, but it may be difficult to accomplish. As was shown in Figure 11, there were large data gaps of area not classified as one of the four soil types. For the CMP stream watershed, 45% of the area was classified as null values. The Location G watershed did not have soil classifications for 76% of the land. Because we estimated the null areas’ soil types based on the next closest classified area, this could have skewed the curve number values from their actual values. While this may not lead to significant impacts on the watershed runoff estimations, improving the quality of the GIS soil layer would be more accurate for detailed modeling. It is important to note that the Massachusetts state GIS soil layer was used in our modeling, which provides a general overview of the area but was not detailed enough for our purposes. We suggest that Framingham use the state GIS soil layer as

72 a baseline for making their own town soil layer. This would be helpful because Framingham’s GIS land use and contour layers were much more detailed than the state GIS layers.

While our project focused on the specific CMP stream watershed area, these additional recommendations can be used to characterize the nature of Farm Pond’s surrounding area and other outfalls into the pond. The results from these recommendations can be used to expand the scope of future investigations on Farm Pond and its water quality.