Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montgomery DRB approves conversion of Highland Springs camp to single-family residence, 4-1
Summary
The Montgomery Development Review Board on Oct. 30 approved an application by Richard Bessette and Christa Chambers to change a camp at 258 Highland Springs (Parcel S118.175X) to a single-family residence, citing septic compliance; the motion passed 4-1 after an amendment attempt by one member failed for lack of a second.
The Montgomery Development Review Board approved an application on Oct. 30 to change the use of a camp at 258 Highland Springs (Parcel S118.175X) to a single-family residence, passing the motion 4-1.
Applicant Christa Chambers told the board she and co-owner Richard Bessette "have owned the property for over 10 years and believed it was already approved as a single family dwelling." Chambers said the couple built an addition in 2012 and now seek to reclassify the structure to comply with State septic regulations by converting the second bedroom to an office.
The property, 15.8 acres in the Conservation 1 zoning district, required Conditional Use Approval for a single-family dwelling in that district. The board reviewed evidence submitted as Exhibit A, including the DRB application dated Oct. 1, 2025; a town tax-map excerpt showing the parcel; a hand drawing of the proposed dwelling, private driveway, well and septic; an email exchange with the zoning administrator; a Septic System Condition Report from Working Dog Septic Service dated July 18, 2025; and a building/zoning permit application received Sept. 25, 2025.
Board members questioned how the property would be used and whether wooded areas would be developed. Suzanne Wilson asked if the property would be used "only on weekends and when they visit," and Chambers said it would. Barry Kade asked whether applicants planned to develop wooded areas; applicants said they would not. John Kuryloski asked what the septic had been permitted for; Chambers said she believed it might have been permitted for three bedrooms.
During deliberations Mary Garceau moved to approve the change of use; the motion was seconded and carried. Barry Kade moved an amendment to add a condition to preserve the property's natural character, but that amendment received no second. The minutes record that a roll-call on the amendment showed four votes against and one in favor, but the board noted the amendment vote was invalid because the amendment had not been seconded and "should not have been considered." The original motion to approve the change of use then passed on roll call: Parma Jewett, John Kuryloski, Suzanne Wilson and Mary Garceau voted yes; Barry Kade voted no.
The board indicated it would issue a formal decision within the timeline allowed by statute and local procedure.
