Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coastal Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conservation commission continues 30 Marshfield AB ADU proposal, requests DPW input and corrected impervious-area calculations
Summary
The Scituate Conservation Commission continued a proposal for a detached ADU at 30 Marshfield AB to July 6 after commissioners asked the applicant for DPW comment on a sidewalk/seawall issue and revised impervious-area calculations that exclude unpermitted accessory sheds.
Attorney representation for the applicant opened the 30 Marshfield A hearing and described a proposal to add a small detached accessory dwelling unit elevated to base flood elevation, replace a cesspool with a Title 5 septic, remove two noncompliant accessory buildings and plant about 1,400 sq ft of native vegetation.
Attorney Delissi, representing owner Steven Trip, told the commission the net lot-coverage increase would be modest (from 23.1% to about 24.2%) and emphasized mitigation steps including removal of the cesspool, elimination of a west-side patio, restricted vehicle movement and planting to enhance resource function. Delissi said an expert, coastal geologist Stan Humphre, had walked the commission through performance standards and concluded the work would not worsen overwash or flooding for abutters.
Commissioners focused on three technical issues. Commissioner Jen said her calculations indicate the project may trigger stormwater review, while the applicant's calculations did not. Brendan pressed whether several accessory sheds and a large patio that appeared between 2020 and 2019 should be counted in impervious-area math; commissioners recorded uncertainty about whether older, unpermitted sheds should be included. Penny and Roger asked for detail on plans for removing part of a walkway and concrete wall in the town way and requested comment from the Department of Public Works on any changes to the public sidewalk and seawall.
Brendan suggested enforcement action for unpermitted sheds, noting they should not be used in civil calculations: “They shouldn't be there. Um perhaps there should be an enforcement order for those to be removed and then we could discuss the project.” Attorney Delissi responded that several items could be conditioned in an approval but agreed to provide corrected calculations and utility/ sequencing details.
After discussion the commission voted to continue the hearing to July 6 to allow the applicant to provide: (1) DPW comment on the sidewalk/seawall question, (2) corrected impervious-area calculations that do not count unpermitted structures, and (3) comprehensive utility and sequencing information including septic and erosion-control details. The motion to continue passed with recorded votes in favor by Commissioners Jen, Roger and Frank.
Next steps: the applicant will return to the commission on July 6 with the requested documentation; the commission indicated it could condition approval on DPW guidance and any needed stormwater permitting if corrected calculations trigger additional review.
