Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drainage Sidewalk topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge action on Otter Creek Lane drainage after sidewalk project redirected runoff
Summary
Multiple residents told the Select Board that a recent sidewalk and curbing project near Otter Creek Lane has redirected stormwater onto private lawns and into basements. Speakers asked the board to review engineering designs, culvert sizing, and grant options; the board agreed to collect videos and pursue on-site review with contractors.
At a long public-comment hearing the Select Board heard repeated complaints that the 2014 sidewalk and later curb work have altered stormwater flow on Otter Creek Lane and nearby properties, leading to standing water and new basement seepage on properties that had not historically flooded.
"There needs to be proper drainage," said resident Mikaela Brown, who described repeated runoff that now channels off the road and onto neighbors’ lawns. Multiple neighbors provided photos and videos and asked the town to review engineering assumptions. Another resident (speaker 4) summarized his review of historical imagery and legal research and said, "We got a pretty good case," urging the board to examine whether the project diverted surface water in violation of state standards.
Board members acknowledged the scope of remediation could be large and noted a reserve of roughly $36,000 from ARPA that had been set aside for stormwater but stressed that the amount may be insufficient for full-engineered repairs. The board said staff would collect resident photos and videos, check planning and permit records (including whether any after‑the‑fact permits were issued for a private driveway culvert), and arrange site visits with local contractors and volunteers (Chris Acker and others) to evaluate lower‑cost fixes and the need for formal engineering work.
Residents raised immediate fixes such as clearing culverts and replacing an undersized private culvert with a 15‑inch diameter pipe; the board asked the zoning administrator to review permit history and to report back, and agreed to pursue options for an on‑site evaluation before committing to expensive capital work.
