Ross ADR backs 2 Shanley Lane design with conditions after neighbor flood concerns

Ross Architectural Design Review members on Dec. 16 recommended the 2 Shanley Lane design review and related minor exceptions and variances move to the town council, but they attached several conditions and clarifications after hearing neighborhood concerns about drainage and site access.

The committee considered plans presented by town planner Alex and architect Keith Curley to replace an existing angled garage with a new 484-square-foot garage aligned to the main house, install a rectangular pool within the rear-yard setback, replace several fences and relocate pool equipment. Curley said the new garage would reduce an existing 15-square-foot encroachment into the front-yard setback but would leave a small sliver (about six square feet) in the side-yard setback that prompts the variance request.

Neighbors pressed the panel on stormwater and permeability. Longtime resident Douglas Moore told the committee he and his wife have “suffered two disastrous floods” in the lane and urged a careful review of drainage, saying recent high tides and heavy rains continue to cause problems. His spouse added that the front yard at neighboring properties is largely impervious and that prior choices of hardscape had worsened flooding. In response, ADR member Joey said staff will verify compliance and noted the applicants are reducing impervious area on the property by about 440 square feet.

Committee members broadly supported the design but sought changes to reduce impacts and future problems. Most members agreed the proposed west-side 7-foot mutual fence and a 6-foot Fern Hill fence screened by dense planting are supportable. Multiple members urged the applicants to raise the garage plate height to match the main house if structural math allows, to improve architectural coherence. The group also voiced concern that the proposed pool-equipment enclosure sits in the setback; the consensus was to move that equipment out of the setback or find a less intrusive location or approach. Several members questioned the driveway and gate geometry and encouraged the applicant to consider a single, wider garage door or repositioning so vehicles can access the garage without complex turning maneuvers.

Landscape architect Michael Yandle described a planting and screening plan, removal of invasive ivy, and use of an acoustic, pre-engineered equipment enclosure to mitigate sound. Members asked for more detail on planting sizes and long-term screening performance; staff and the applicant agreed to return with clarifications if needed.

The ADR emphasized its role is advisory; final approvals rest with the town council and building authorities. The committee signaled it does not require the application to return to ADR before going to council provided the applicant addresses the key conditions: relocate pool equipment out of the setback, attempt to align plate heights where feasible, and resolve driveway/gate access so the garage can be used functionally. The applicants were informed the council will receive the ADR’s recommendations and project materials.