Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Flood Hazard Application topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and board press for engineering, state review as ZBA considers Sleepy Hollow flood‑area house plan
Summary
At its April 1 meeting the Ferrisburgh ZBA opened public review of Mark Morrisette’s application to replace a one‑bed seasonal camp with a three‑bed year‑round residence in a mapped Flood Hazard Area; neighbors submitted photos and videos of frequent flooding and the board continued the hearing pending state review and a site visit.
Ferrisburgh town staff and neighbors pressed for more engineering detail and state review after hearing Mark Morrisette’s proposal to replace a one‑bed seasonal camp at 466 Sleepy Hollow Lane with a three‑bed year‑round residence elevated 2.6 feet on piers. Katie Hill, the town Zoning Administrator, told the board that under state law the board cannot finalize a conditional use approval until either state comments are received or 30 days have passed. She also warned that forthcoming bylaw changes could change how such applications are reviewed.
Morrisette described plans to remove the existing dilapidated camp, install holding tanks for wastewater (engineer‑designed approvals pending), minimize tree removal, and use the property seasonally for family members rather than as a rental. Board members, notably Vice Chair Dave Mentzer, pressed him to revise floor plans so the layout cannot be read as multi‑unit or transient lodging under state building codes and to provide stamped structural engineering for the foundation and flood‑resilient construction; Morrisette agreed to revise and obtain required engineering certifications.
Several neighbors submitted photos and video evidence documenting "frequent and significant flooding," played for the board and entered into the record; Megan Price told the board access can require boats during high water and said the proposed residence—about seven times the footprint of the existing camp—may be inappropriate given observed flood levels, wetland and habitat concerns, erosion risk, wastewater management in a flood‑prone area, and potential lighting impacts on migratory birds. Additional public commenters asked about water‑service capacity, responsibility for shared roads, and emergency access.
The board concluded that additional information and formal state review are required. The board scheduled a site visit at 6:00 p.m. before the May 6 meeting and voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to May 6, 2026. The continuation preserves the record for state comment and gives the applicant time to submit revised plans and required engineering certifications.
