Ross ADR recommends forwarding 78 Shady Lane pool and variance to Town Council after design changes

The Ross Advisory Design Review recommended that the Town Council consider a design-review recommendation and associated variance for a proposed pool, patio and outdoor kitchen at 78 Shady Lane after the applicant revised the plans.

Alex (planning staff) told the ADR that the applicant had moved pool equipment into the garage, increased the rear setback for the pool from the originally proposed 5 feet to 9 feet 8 inches, and corrected the planting specification from "15 gallons" to "24 box" English laurels on the south side of the property. Alex asked the ADR to discuss the merits of the project and provide a formal recommendation to the council.

The applicant's representative said the revised plan lowers fence heights (from a previously proposed 6 feet to 4 feet), changes gates to wood and that they had secured a second letter of approval from the neighbor at 80 Shady Lane. The applicant also said they had worked with the neighbor at 1 Locust to provide additional privacy screening.

ADR members described the design changes as improvements but expressed differing views about allowing a pool on the lot. One member said the lowered fence and material changes were appropriate and that moving the equipment into the garage was acceptable so long as it "doesn't take away usable parking space." Another member said the lot is too small for a pool and warned that approving the variance could deepen inconsistencies in enforcement of Ross setback rules. Steven (ADR member) said he found the revisions "kind of in concert with the design guidelines" and supported forwarding the project to council. By the end of the discussion the ADR (excluding two recused members) voted to forward a recommendation to the Town Council in favor of the project; members characterized their support as cautious or lukewarm in some cases.

The ADR noted the matter remains a council decision; staff reminded the group that the council considers ADR recommendations but may take a different action. The record shows the applicant increased the pool setback and moved mechanical equipment inside the garage; the ADR asked staff and the council to confirm whether the equipment placement would preserve a conforming off‑street parking space. The applicant also said the pool equipment would be raised in relation to base flood elevation (as stated at the hearing).

The ADR recorded the recusal of two members who live near 78 Shady Lane before the discussion; those recused members did not participate in the recommendation vote.