Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permit Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After contentious exchange over removed trees, Somerset council approves 4905 Cumberland amendment with permeable‑paver condition
Summary
The council approved an amendment to 4905 Cumberland Avenue to add a detached garage and driveway after debate about earlier unauthorized tree removals; approval was conditioned on the applicant pursuing permeable pavers 'to the maximum extent possible' subject to Montgomery County approval and returning an administratively reviewed plan.
Somerset, Feb. 24, 2025 — The Somerset Town Council voted to approve an amendment to the site plan and stormwater management plan for 4905 Cumberland Avenue, but added a condition requiring the applicant to pursue permeable pavement for portions of the new driveway where county rules allow.
The item drew a prolonged public record. Neighbors and counsel accused the applicants, Guido and Charmaine Bacchiale, of removing four trees without town permission in April 2024; neighbor counsel Michelle Roosevelt asked the council to deny the amendment on that basis and argued the council had previously removed a garage from an earlier application in part because of tree‑removal concerns. The council record shows prior fines and a reforestation requirement tied to earlier unauthorized removals; neighbor counsel characterized the amendment as an effort to regain the benefit of the removed trees.
Applicant counsel, Matthew Ward, said the applicants had been penalized for earlier unauthorized removals, had accepted reforestation obligations and were now entitled to pursue improvements that meet code. Technical testimony from CAST Engineering (Eric Tid) and the town consultant described the current stormwater design: a landscape infiltration facility plus a relocated dry well, together providing more runoff capture than required. Eric Tid testified that the combined facility exceeded the town and Montgomery County design requirements by a modest margin.
Council deliberations focused on two questions: whether the earlier tree removals barred further improvements, and whether the recent town ordinance clarifying the setback treatment for certain retention/bioretention devices (Ordinance 11‑23‑1, adopted Jan. 24, 2024) changed the prior setback interpretation that had made the garage infeasible. After a closed session for legal advice, the council administratively noticed the January 2024 ordinance and allowed limited reopening of the record so parties could address the effect of that ordinance.
In the open record, council members considered an amendment proposed during deliberations requiring the applicant to propose permeable pavers for the portion of the driveway where county permitting would allow permeable materials. The amendment requires the applicant to coordinate with Montgomery County Department of Permitting Services, submit a plan that reflects county approval of permeable pavers and provide the administratively reviewed plan to town staff. That condition passed and was incorporated into the approval.
Neighbor counsel argued the application should be denied on equitable grounds because of the earlier tree removals; applicant counsel said the reforestation, fines and code compliance addressed those issues and asked the council to approve the amendment. The council’s motion to approve the amended plan carried after the amendment about permeable pavers was adopted. Council directed staff to place the administrative submissions in the record and to ensure the reforestation obligations remain honored.
The council did not overturn prior enforcement actions; the record shows fines and reforestation obligations remain in place for earlier unauthorized tree removals.
