Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors raise flood, septic and wall‑height concerns at Rocco Drive two‑family proposal; site walk and peer review scheduled
Summary
A proposed two‑family development at 03 Rocco Drive prompted abutter concerns about flooding, stream permanence and a 9‑foot retaining wall. The applicant’s wetland scientist described the site as having an intermittent stream and 44,000 sq ft in the 100‑foot buffer; the Commission voted to continue the hearing, schedule a site walk and pursue a peer review.
The Commission heard a detailed presentation for a proposed two‑family development at 03 Rocco Drive from Christina McEvoy of Goddard Consulting on behalf of applicant Bruno Orlandi (OA Homes). McEvoy said the site is an undeveloped forested parcel with an intermittent stream and bordering vegetated wetlands flagged in March 2024; about 44,000 square feet of the parcel lie within the 100‑foot buffer and the proposal would involve roughly 11,000 square feet of buffer‑zone work, of which roughly 3,900 square feet would become impervious for house and driveway footprints. Erosion controls and a stockpile/staging area outside the buffer were described.
Multiple abutters expressed concerns that the intermittent stream floods during heavy storms and that new fill, a retaining wall and development might cause water displacement toward neighboring basements and septic systems. An abutter said the stream filled “probably 12 feet deep” during a storm and worried about peak‑flow impacts. McEvoy and consultant Tom Schutz said stream statistics were run; the basin size was presented as about 0.25 square mile and the 99% flow duration as 0.004, which they said were below thresholds for classification as perennial under Massachusetts regulations. Commissioners asked for additional detail: a PLS stamp on plans, structural details and a certification for the taller portions of the proposed wall, peak‑flow or 100‑year‑event analysis, and copies of replication monitoring for prior work in the area.
Commissioner Speaker 10 moved for a peer review and a site walk; following discussion and a roll call, the Commission voted to continue the matter to the next meeting and to schedule a site walk so commissioners and consultants can inspect the area in person. The Commission requested the applicant provide a structural detail for the retaining wall, a statement from the design engineer certifying the wall where it is highest, and peak‑flow hydrology numbers to demonstrate whether the project would alter flood flow paths.
