A new trench near Still River Road, dug by the Department of Public Works as part of its ongoing work on drainage systems around town, has caused a ruckus. Without any public notice or permits, the DPW dug a trench across an absentee property owner’s driveway and directed runoff into a neighboring landowner’s pond.
The 50-foot-long trench is designed to funnel water from a drainage pipe under the road toward a stream that empties into a pond behind the home of Still River Road residents Jack Whelan and Denis Wagner. Whelan and Wagner complained to both DPW and the Conservation Commission that the change would increase runoff emptying into their pond. The commission is issuing an enforcement order to the DPW to restore the riverfront area and stop work within 200 feet of the riverfront without a permit.
Whelan and Wagner spoke at the Conservation Commission’s Nov. 4 meeting to explain the situation and ask the commission to take action. Whelan said that he happened to be at home on Oct. 26 and noticed DPW workers digging the trench across an unpaved driveway next door. He called both the DPW and several members of the commission. There had been no public hearing or permits issued for the work, he said.
Conservation Agent Liz Allard told the Press that the trench was just bare soil when she inspected the site a few hours after it was dug, but after she called them, DPW workers stabilized it with matting and rip-rap (stones).
Whelan said that the pond was only 10 feet from the house and that he was worried about flooding. He was also concerned about untreated runoff damaging the habitat and noted that the pond has unusual visitors such as brook trout and river otters. The pond is also a significant asset in the total value of their property, he added. Whelan said that the trench was stable for the moment, but that loose soil could still be a problem.
Commissioner Patrick Doherty asked if they would hold the town liable, and Whelan said that if their property or their house was damaged, they would.
An additional concern was the work done on the driveway itself. There is no house on the property in question, and Whelan and Wagner said they had never met the owner, a Mr. Hoch. Whelan said that if the owner ever appeared, he would not be able to use his driveway. When the commissioners asked if the DPW workers had done any work on his own property, Whelan said they had not, but they had directed the runoff there.
Whelan said that before the trench was dug, water flowing from the culvert would spread out in several directions and only some of it would end up in the pond. The pipe would get blocked with sediment annually and DPW workers would dig it out, he said.
The DPW has a blanket permit to do routine maintenance on the town drainage system, but commissioners agreed that the work in question was not maintenance, but a whole new project.
“We need to hold Rich’s [Nota] feet to the fire,” Allard said, explaining that the DPW was a repeat offender.
Commissioner Wendy Sisson said that “we are being ignored” and that it was time to talk to the Board of Selectmen.
Public Works Director Richard Nota told the Press on Monday that the department had done “routine maintenance” there and that a neighbor had expressed concern about the stability of the area, but that he considered the work to be complete. He had received no official notification regarding the issue from the Conservation Commission, he said.
In a letter addressed to the commission, Whelan and Wagner wrote, “We were then, and continue to be, outraged by the complete disregard shown by the DPW with regard to wetland regulations and individual private property rights.”
