Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCC DRI TR90046 SmithPt Subdiv.dec.10-11-90PROCEDURAL HISTORY Review of the proposed development by other agencies occurred as follows: [1] No filing was required under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 30, Sections 61-62H. [2] A preliminary Subdivision Plan for the project has been reviewed and accepted (conditionally) by the Town of Yarmouth Planning Board on January 17, 1990. [3] A Conceptual Development Plan and a Site Plan Approval Application have been submitted to the Town of Yarmouth Site Plan Review Board on April 27, 1990. [4] A Notice of Intent has been submitted to the Town of Yarmouth Conservation Commission on March 31, 1990, for the excavation and installation of piping for potable water transmission to single family home cluster subdivision. [5] The Cape Cod Commission held a hearing on an Exemption Application on Thursday, August 16, 1990, in Barnstable. After hearing the presentation by the applicant, the Exemption Application was denied. This application for a DRI permit under sections 12 and 13 of the Act was filed with the Commission on June 15, 1990. A duly noticed public hearing on the application was conducted by the a sub-committee of the Commission pursuant to of the Act on August 29, 1990 at 3:00 p.m. in the Town of Yarmouth hearing room, Yarmouth, Massachusetts. The sub-committee continued the hearing to September 13, 1990 at 2:15 p.m. at the Commission office located on Main St. in West Barnstable. The sub-committee then closed the hearing and left the record open until the end of the meeting scheduled for September 24, 1990 at 2:15 at the Commission office. The sub-committee made their recommendations to the full Commission on October 11, 1990 at the 3:00p.m. hearing. The Commission voted to approve the DRI application of Fayette Scheuch for the proposed Smith Point subdivision with the conditions recommended by the sub- committee. Materials Submitted for the Record Materials submitted by the Applicant include: -An application titled "Cape Cod Commission Development fo Regional Impact Exemption Application, July 1990", received July 27, 1990. This included plans and documents which show the project location, describe the character and environmental effects and document permitting efforts up to the present. -Plans included "Preliminary Plan for Smith Point Subdivision", by IEP inc. dated December 13, 1989 with revisions dated 10/19/8911/14/89. -Plans titled "Preliminary Plan for Smith Point Subdivision" also by IEP inc. dated 4/19190 with revisions dated 10/19/89 and 11/14/89. These plans document proposed property boundaries, local topography, roadway and utility information and wetland resource delineations reviewed on-site with Mr. Brad Hall, Yarmouth Conservation Commission Agent. -Two completed ground water studies conducted by Geologic Services Corporation, Orleans, MA. -A water resources protection study for the Town of Yarmouth prepared by IEP, Inc., August 1988. -An application titled "Supplemental Information for Cape Cod Commission Development of Regional Impact Exemption Application, 9 August 1990", received August 9, 1990. - A list of abutters to the proposed development submitted on June 15, 1990. - A memorandum dated 29, August 1990 from IEP, Inc., responding to staff comments. -Nitrogen loading calculations from IEP, Inc. - A water table map of the project location site. -Draft Conservation Restriction granted to Trustees of Reservations, received 9/12190 -Smith Point Architectural guidelines, received 9/12/90 Additional Materials: -DRI Referral letter with attached information from planning board and site plan review committee. -Letter from Arnold B. Chace, Jr., abutter to property. -Letter from Brona Simon, State Archaeologist at the Massachusetts Historical Commission. -Three (3) Cape Cod Commission Staff Reports, dated August 29, September 13, 24, 1990. Testimony At the August 29, 1990 hearing, the Commission heard oral testimony from the applicant, their representatives, Commission staff and other interested parties: The following spoke in favor of the project as proposed: Mr. George Dallas, esq., Gaston & Snow; Ms. Judith T. Wall, IEP, Inc.; Mr. Chris Reel, IEP, Inc.; Mr. Jim Freeman, IEP, Inc; Mr. Allan Scheuch. Mr. Dallas provided the history of the Smith Point site area and described the proposed project. He stated that there would be no significant impacts from the construction of the new homes. Ms. Wall and Mr. Reel, presented a plan of the site which highlighted resource areas, building and septic leachate envelopes, and proposed roadways. Mr. Reel spoke about septic flow/nutrient loading and pier impacts on the areas resources. Mr. Reel stated that there would be no significant impacts on the areas resources and further stated that the development, as proposed would not have any regional impacts. Commission staff comments were made by Dorr Fox, Chief Regulatory Officer; Tom Camberari, Water Resource Coorinator. The main concerns addressed were nutrient loading from proposed homes, and the cumulative impacts of two new piers on the natural resources within Uncle Roberts Cove. At the September 13, 1990 hearing, the Commission heard oral testimony from the applicant, their representatives, Commission staff and other interested parties: The following spoke in favor of the project as proposed: Ms. Judith T. Wall, IEP, Inc.; Mr. Chris Reel, IEP, Inc.; Mr. Allan Scheuch; Mr.and Mrs. Scheuch. Commission staff comments were made by Dorr Fox, Chief Regulatory Officer and lisa Hanscom, Regulatory Planner/Environmental Biologist. The main concerns addressed the cumulative impacts of two new piers on the natural resources within Uncle Roberts Cove. At the September 24, 1990 meeting, the Commission heard oral testimony from the applicant, their representatives, Commission staff and other interested parties: The following spoke in favor of the project as proposed: Mr. George Dallas, esq., Gaston & Snow; Mr. Chris Reel, IEP, Inc.; Mr. Allan Scheuch. Commission staff comments were made by Dorr Fox, Chief Regulatory Officer; Patty Dailey, Senior Regulatory Planner, and lisa Hanscom, Regulatory Planner/Environmental Biologist. The main concerns addressed the cumulative impacts of two new piers on the natural resources within Uncle Roberts Cove and the proposed wording addressing archaeological resources on the site. JURISDICTION The proposed Smith Point Subdivision qualifies as a Development of Regional Impact (DR I) under Section 12 (c) (3) of the Act. Section 12 (c) (3) requires review of "any development which proposes to divide land of fifty acres or more which was in common ownership as of January first, nineteen hundred and eighty-eight." The application was referred to the Commission by the Town. of Yarmouth Planning Board. The application and notices of public hearing relative thereto, the Commission staff's notes and exhibits and all written submissions received in the course of our proceedings are incorporated into the record by reference. FINDINGS The Commission has considered the Development of Regional Impact application of Ms. Fayette Scheuch for the proposed Smith Point Subdivision, and based on consideration of such application and upon the information presented at the public hearings and filed into the record, makes the following findings pursuant to Section 12 of the Act: 1. The proposed site for development is within a peninsula which is surrounded by Commonwealth tidelands with Nantucket Sound, Lewis Bay and Uncle Roberts Cove being the adjacent waters. Nantucket Sound and Lewis Bay are used extensively by the public for commercial and recreational activities (including public transportation, commercial and recreational boating, fishing, shellfishing, swimming and other water related activities). 2. Uncle Roberts Cove is presently open to both commercial and recreational shellfishing, and is used by recreational boaters. All of these waters are owned and used by the public and are of regional significance. Smith Point's proximity to these regional natural and coastal resources make its location one of regional concern. Mitigation to protect the resources includes: -Limiting construction within designated "building envelopes" to keep buildings away from sensitive resources. 3. The potential septic flow combined with the location of the proposed septic systems east of the groundwater divide, which runs along the spine of the peninsula, raises concerns about the cumulative impacts of nitrogen loading to Uncle Roberts Cove and adjacent areas. Therefore, mitigation to protect water resources includes the following: -Limiting the number of bedrooms on each lot, thereby limiting nutrient loading impacts. 4. The project includes an existing liscensed pier/wharf at the south eastern end of the property. This structure was built to serve the existing house and cottages more than 20 years ago. The location of the existing pier/wharf on one end of the development does not provide adequate access to the proposed lots 1-4. The project proposes two new pier structures (one permanent and one seasonal). The inner harbor of Uncle Roberts Cove, as stated previously, is open to both commercial and recreational shellfishing. As stated within the applicants request for a DRI Exemption, the area is also a habitat for many marine invertebrates and wildlife species. Based on the location of the existing pier/wharf and the sensitive resources within Uncle Roberts Cove, the mitigation to protect these resources while allowing access to deep water for the proposed lots includes the following: -Limiting the total number of new piers/floats for this eight lot subdivision to one (1) for the purpose of serving lots 1-4. -Limiting the size of the one additional pier/float, and not allowing any additions to the existing pier/wharf structure. 5. Massachusetts Historical Commission has found that the project area possesses a strong likelihood for containing significant archaeological sites and possibly unmarked human burials, etc. To protect these resources the proponent must conduct an intensive archaeological survey prior to any development activities, as defined by the Cape Cod Commission Act c. 716 of the Acts of 1989, as amended. The survey must be completed to the reasonable satisfaction of the Cape Cod Commission in consultation with MHC. The results of the survey will be incorporated into the planning stages of development to avoid impacting any burials and sites that may be discovered during the archaeological survey. CONCLUSION Based upon the findings above, the Cape Cod Commission hereby concludes: The Smith Point Subdivision with the following conditions will cause it to not have significant impacts on the unique natural, coastal and scientific values in which there is a regional, state and national interest in protecting and preserving. The Commission hereby approves Ms. Fayette Scheuch a Development of Regional Impact permit, pursuant to Section 12 of the Act, with the following conditions: 1 . If the Applicant fails to meet one or more of the conditions listed, this DRI permit shall lapse and the proposed development shall be automatically deemed in violation of the approval. 2. Prior to the construction of Smith's Point Road, a conservation restriction on Lot 8 shall be granted in perpetuity by Fayette Scheuch to the Trustees of Reservations, or similar conservation organization, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. A copy of the final agreement shall be provided to the Cape Cod Commission; 3. None of the eight lots in the development may be further subdivided in order to facilitate additional residential, commercial or industrial buildings (but this condition shall not prohibit subdivision to accomplish relocation of lot lines or to permit additional "non-buildable" lots); 4. Lots 1 through 7 shall be used only for residential purposes and such other purposes ancillary thereto as permitted under the Yarmouth Zoning By-Law from time to time; 5. No residential structure shall be placed on Lots 1,2,3 or 4 except in the "Approximate Building Envelope" (approximate house and septic areas shown as shaded areas on plan) delineated on the plan entitled "Development Plan for Smith's Point Subdivision" by I.E.P., Inc. dated April 19, 1990, included in the DRI application; 6. No more than one residential building shall be constructed on Lots 1 and 5. Nothing contained in this decision shall prohibit the construction of guest houses on Lots 2,3,4, 6 and 7. 7. Nevertheless, the lots shall be restricted to a maximum number of bedrooms as follows: Lot No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Maximum No. Bedrooms 6 8 8 8 7 7 8. Each lot owner is responsible for any and all actions of all contractors, subcontractors or other ~~rkers, employees etc. employed by them or on their behalf. 9. Trailers, mobile homes, camper vehicles, camping trailers, RV's, and other mobile livinq quarters are not permitted_unless uninhabited, and stored within enclosed structures. Stored boats must also be unoccupied, and may be so stored only in Unole Robert's Cove or at the Cove's edge or eleewhere as the Association shall from time to time designate. The "winter" storage of boats is not permitted along the shoreline of Uncle Roberts Cove unless the boat is stored in an enelosad boat house and out of sight. One or two small tents, for use only of the immediate family or guests of Lot Owners and containing no kitchen Or toilet facilities, may be erected on any Lot for not more than thirty days per year. 10. No motor vehicles of any type shall be permitted on beaches, dunes or trails or any areas outside of the Zone of Improvement or Smith's Point Road except as necessary to maintain such areas or in the event of an emergency. 11. At no placQ on the Property is huntinq permitted unle$s determined by the Architectural Review Committee to be necessary to contr.ol and/or manaq@ certain animal or bird populations or to prevent nuisance therefrom. 12. No foundation excavation or construction of concrete foundations shall be performed between June 15 and the Wednesday after Labor Day. -8-5821D A. Prohibited Cses. EKcept as to reserved rights set forth in paragraph B below, Grantor will neither perform nor permit the following acts or uses on the; Prel"lises: (1) Con.,;tructing or placing of any building, tennis court, landing strip, mopile home, swimming pool, asphalt or concrete pavement, sign, fence, billboard or other advertising display, antenna, utility pole, tower, conduit, line or other temporary or permanent structure or facility on or above tl,e Premises, except for fences appropriate to the conservation purposes of this Conservation Restriction; (2) Mining, excavating, dredging or removing from the Premises of soil, loam, peat, gravel, sand, rock or other mineral resource or ~atural deposit, except as necessary for proper drainage or soil consGrvation and then only in a manner which does not impair the purpose of this Conservation Restriction; (3) Placing, filling, storing or dumping on the Premises of soil, refuse, trash, vehicle bodies or parts, rubbish, debris, junk, "laste or other substance or material whatsoever or the installation of underground storage tanks; (4) Cutting, removing or otherdise destroying trees, grasses or other vegetation, exoept as provided in paraqraphB below; (5) Activities detrimental to drainage, flood control, water cons",rvatiofl, water quality, erosion control or soil conser,ation; (6) The us~ of motorcycl$s, motorized trail bikes, snow>nobiles and all other moto):'" vehicl(~s, except as reasonaply necessary in exercising any of the reserved rights in paragraph B, or as required by the pOlice, firemen or other governmental agants in currying out their lawful duties; (7) Building, starting, or maintaining fires, except that fire n,ay be used as reasonably necessary in exercising the rights reserved in subparagraph B (4 j belovl; (i» Any other use of the Premise .. or activity thereon which is inconsistent with the purpose of this Conservation Restriction ur which would materially impair other significant conservation interests unless necessary for the protection of the conservation interests that are the subject of this Restriction; and 2' (9) Conveyance of a part or portion of the Premises alone, or division or subdivision of the Premises (as compared to conveyance of the Premises in its entirety .. ,hich shall be permitted) without the prio~ written consent of the Grantee. B. Reserved Rights. 1".11 acts and uses not prohibited in paragraph .11. are. permissible. Not.t,tithstanding the provisions of paragraph A, the following acts and uses are also pe~~itted but only if suoh uses and activities do net materially impair the purpose of this conservation Reetriction or other significant conservation interestS: (1) Walkirlg, birdwatching, bathing, sunbathing, fishing, clamming, swimming, picknicking (but nO fires) and boating. (2) The construction, maintenance and marking of trails for pedestrian use. (3) Maintenance of a wood road located on the Premises as reasonably necessary for the USes hereinafter permitted. (4) In accordance with generally accepted fores't.ry conservation practices, selective pruning and clearing to control or prevent hazard, disease, or fire, to manage wildlife habitat, and to clear and maintain the trails and wood road referenced in SUbparagraphs B(2) and (3) above. (5) Sand dune stabilization and replenishment, including without limitation, altering, fencing, fertilizing and planting thereof, installing. oL j e'tties and· groins', and dradqinq, plaoing and fillinq in connection with such stabilization and replenishment; provided, however, that no jettie.s or groins shal.l be constructed, nor any dredging, placing or filling of material be undertaken, without first providing notice to the Grantee as provided in Paragraph C, below. (6) The erection, maint~nance and replacement of a reasonable number of regulatory signs (such as "no trli<spSl51liingll or "no hunting" signs) I each not to exceed four (4) square feet. (7) Prosp$cting for fresh \,,,,ter and the construction, maintenance, repair and replacement of wellS and piping for the removal. and transport of fresh water, provided any above-ground structures are kept to the minimum size necessary for such operation. The exercise of any right reServed by the Grantor under this paragraph B shall ba in compliance with the then-current Zoning By-Law of the Town of Yarmouth, the Wetlands Protection Act (General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40) and all other applicable 3 federal, state and local law. The inclusion of any reserved right in this paragraph B requiring a permit from a public agency does not imply that the Grantee takes any position on whether such permit should be issued. c. Notice and Approval. Whenever notice to or approval by the Grantee is required under the provisions of paragraphs A or 8, Grantor shall notify Grantee in writing not less than sixty (60) days prior to the date Grantor intends 'to undertake the activity in quastion. The notice shall describe the nature, soope, design, location, timetable and any other material aspect of the proposed activity in sufficient detail to permit Grantee to make an informed judgment as to its consistency with the purposes of this Conservation Restriction. \~hara Grantee's approval is required, Grantee shall grant or withhold its approval in writing within sixty (60) days of receipt of Grantor's written request therefor. D. Proceed5 from Extinguishment. T'he Grantor and the Grantee agree that the donation ot this Conservation Restriction gives rise for purposes of this paragraph to a property right, iwmediately vested in the Grantee, with a fair market value determined by multiplying the current fair market value of the Premises unencumbered by this Restriction (minus any increase in valu .. attributable to improvements made. after the date of this grant) by the ratio of the value of this Restriction at the time of this grant to the value of the premises, without deduction for the. value of this Restriction, at the time of this grant. such pl'oportionate value of the Grantee's proPQrty right shall remain constant. If any ohange in condition~ ~v~r gives rise to extinguishment or other relea.se of the Conservation Restriction under applicable law, then the Grantee, en a subsequent sale, exchange or involuntary conversion of the Premises, shall be entitled to a portion of the proceeds equal to such proportionate value, subject, however, to any applicable law which expressly provides for a different disposition of proceeds. Whenever all or any part of the Premises or any interest therein is taken by pUblic authcrity under power of eminent domain, or if all or any part of this Conservation Restriction is otherwise extinguished by act of public authority, then the Grantor and the Grantee shall cooperate in reoovering the full value of all direot and consequential damages resulting from such action. All related expenses incurred by the Grantor and the Grantee shall first be paid out of any recovered proceeds, and the remaining proceeds shall be distributed between the Grantor and the Grantee in shares equal to such proportionate value. The Grantee shall use its share of the proceeds in a manrLl3r consistent with the conservation purpose set forth herein. E. Access. The Conservation Restriction hereby conveyed does not grant to the Grantee, to the public generally, or to any other person any right to enter upon th~ Premises except as follows: Thera is hereby granted to the Grantee and its representatives the right to enter the Premises (1) at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner for the purpose of inspecting the same to determine compliance herewith and (2) after 30 days 4 prior written notice, to take any and all actions with respect to the Premises at the then fee owner's cost as maybe necessary or appropriate, with or without order of court, to remedy, abate or otherwise enforce any violation hereof. F. Legal Remedies of the Orantee. The rights hereby granted shall include the right to enforce this Conservation Restriction by appropriate legal proc&edings and to obtain injunctive al'ld other equitable relief against any violations, includinq without limitation relief requiring restoration of the Premises to its condition at the time of this grant (it being agreed that the Grantee may hava no adequate remedy at law), and shall be in addition to, and not in limitation ot, any other rights and remedies available to the Grantee. Grantor covenants and agrees to reimburse the Grantee all reasonable costs and expenses (including without limitation reaeonable counsel fees) incurred in enforcing this conservation Restri.ction or in taking reasonable measures to remedy or abate any violation thereof. By its acceptance, the Grantee does not undertake any liability or obligation relating to th!! condition of the Premises. Enforcement of the terms of this Restriction shall be at the discretion of the Grantee, and any forbearance by the Grantee to exercise its rights under this Restriction shall not be deemed or construed to be a waiver. If any provision of this Conservation Restriction shall to any extent be held invalid, the remainder shall not be affected. G. Acts Beyond Grantor's Control. Nothing contained in this Conservation Restriction shall be construed to entitle the Grantee to brin~ any action against th~ Grantor for any injury to or chang~ in the Premises resulting from causes beyond the Grantor's control, including, but not limited to, fire, flood, stcr ... , earth movement, and acts caused by trespass on the Premises not contributed to by acts or omissions of the Grantor, or from any prudent action taken by the Grantor under emergency conditions to prevent, abate, or mitigate significant injury to the Premises resulting from such causes. I. Duration and Assignability. The burdens of this Conservation Restriction shall run with the Premises and shall be enforceable against the Grantor in perpetuity. The Grantee is authorized to record or file any notices or instruments appropriate to assuring the perpetual enforceability of this Conservation Restriction; and the Grantor appoints the Grantee as Grantor's attorney-in-fact to execute, acknowledge and deliver any such instruments on Grantor's behalf. Without limiting the foregoing, Grantor agrees to execute any such instrument upon request. The benefits of this Conservation Restriction shall be in gross and shall not be !u,I,;ignable by the Grantee, except in the following instanoes from time to time: (i) as a condition of any aSSignment, the Grantee requires that the purpose of this Conservation Restriction oontinue to be carried out, and (ii) the assigne&, at the time of assignment, qualifies under Section 170{h) of the Internal RRvenue Code of 195., as amended, and applicable regulations thereunder, and under Section 32 of Chapter 184 of the General LaWS as an eligible donee to receive 5 this Conservation Restriction directly. Grantor and Grantee intend that the restrictions arising hereunder take effect upon the date hereof, and to the extent enforceability by any person aVer depends upon the approval of governmental officials, such approval when given shall relate back to the date hereof regardless of the date of actual approval or the date of filing or recording of any insttument evidencing such approval. J. Subsequent Transfers. Grantor agrees to incorporate the terms of this Conservation Restriction in any deed or other legal instrument by vlhich Grantor conveys a!"ly interest in all or a portion of the Premises, including, without limitation, a leasehold interest. Grantor further agrees to give written notice to the Grantee of the transfer of any interest at least twenty (20) days prior to the date or such transfer. Failure of the Grantor to do so shall not impair the validity of this Conservation Restriction or limit its enforceability in any way. K. Termination of Rights and Obligation~. Notwithstanding anything to 'Chs contrary contained herein, the rights and obligations, under this Conservation Restriction, of any party holding any interest in the Premises terminate upon transfer of that party's interest, except that liabili'CY for acts or omissions occurring prior to transfer, and liability for the transfer itself if the transfer is violative of this Conservation Restriction, shall survive the transfer. L. Estoppel Cert1iicate;;. Upon request by the Grantor, the Grantee Shall within twenty (20) days execute and deliver to the Gra~tor any document, including an estoppel certificate, Which certifies the Grantor's compliance with any obligation of the Grantor contained in this Conservation Restriction, and Which otherwise evidences the status of this Conservation Restriction as may be re~Jested by the Grantor. No documentary stamps are required as this Conservation Restricticn is a gift. 6 Executed under seal this ________ _ day of ________ , 19 __ COMMONHEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 55. , 19 __ Then personally appeared the above-named Fayette S. Scheuch and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be her free act and deed, before me. Notary Public My commission expires: ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT The above Conservation Restriction is accepted this day of , 19 THE TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS By Its ________________________ __ COMMONWEALTH OF }~SSACHUSETTS ______________ , ss. , 19 __ Then perscnally appeared the above-named and acknowledged the foregoing instrumen~t~t-o-cb-e~t~h-e~~f~r~e~e--a-c-.t~a-n~d deed of The Trustees of Reservations, before me. Notary public My commission expires: 7 , .-::> ' Exwrf!;rT" c> SMITH'S POINT ARCHIT!CTURAL GUIDELINES INTRODUCTION THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE The homeo~~ers are bound by coven~nts that, so far as possible, preserve and protect the natural beauty and serenity of Great Island. TO that end, no building, fence or other structure shall be erected or altered until the proposed site plan, building plans and materials shall have been approved in writing by the Architectural Review Committee (A.R.C.) consisting of two members of the Scheuoh family, ona outSide professional with a background in architecture and landscape design and one appointee of the Great Island Homeowners Association (GlKA). The two Scheuch family members and the outside professional shall be voting members, the GlKA appointee shall have no vote. THE GUIP!L!NES The A.R.C. has created Guidelines to assist all homeowners in the planning and construction of their new homes. Creativity is encou~agad, but there are basic standards set to promote a hanr,onious cotr.muni tv aesthetic at Smith I S. point. The Guidaline$ are intended to protect all property owners and to provide a simple uniform review process for approval by the A.R.C. THE DESIGN I~PROYAL PROCESS The Guidelines outlined here, we believs, are each essential to sustain th~ beauty and the oharacter of Smith's Point. STEP 1. A. b. STEP 2. REVIEW THE R~~EVANT DOCUMENTS The Oesign Approval ~rocess (this one) The Architectural Guidelines RETAIN PROFESSIONAL DESIGN CONSULTANTS Selection of an architect is required of all homeowners. Retaining a landscape architect is advisable if you or your architect are not adept at landscape or garden design. Have your consultants read and acquaint themselves with the relevAnt documents. HAVe your architect become familiar with GreAt Island through At least one extended site visit. STEP 3. OBTAIN A SURVEY Obtain a survey of your lot At a scale of 1" = 20'1 Hllve All bounds set in the field. STEP 4. THE PRELIMINARY REVIEW Arrange A dllte for the ~reliminary review by writing to LandVest, Inc., Chairman Consulting Services Department, Ten Post Office Square, Boston, MA 02109. Submit two copies of the developed design to the Architectural Review CC7I'.rnittee. These plans will reflect the "schamatic" stage of development in an architect's design process. This step in the review process allows the timely incorporation of the A.R.C. recommendAtions, avoiding revisions to the final Construction Documents. The desiqn must be presented with the followinq documents I a. b. c. d. e. f. q. h. i, j • k. Site plan at 1/4" • 1'-0" Or 1"-20' -show exact location of house footprints in relation to property setback lines and boundaries. Existing and proposed contours at two foot intervals. Buildinq indicated as foundation plan with entry Area delineated and roof and deck lines shown as dashed lines. First Floor elevation indicated Drives and walks. Adjaoent structures located. Floor Plana at 1/4" .. 1'-0" -all windows and doors with swings shown. Elevations. One; for each major exposure at 1/4" '" l' -0" • -principal materials rendered. -indicating overall height from rOlld qrade to ridge of roof. -indioating roof pitch in function of 12 (i.e. 6112) Samples -a sample of the proposed outside wall finish -roof sample -exterior paint sample -photoqraphs of the window and door types At the time of Preliminary Review, the COrnera of the house must be staked on the lot in the proposed location. All trees to be removed should be flaqged with red surveyors tape. Dates if available of proposed start and finish of construotion. STEP 5. THE FINAL RE"vIEW This review is ooncerned with checking the construction doc~~ents for A.R.C, Guideline requirements, and -2-5821D verification that the recommendations made at. the Preliminary Review have been incorporated. a. Site Plan at 1" • 20' -show septic tank field and well for water lervice h. Plantinq PlAn; include location of walks and drivel c. Floor Plan at 1/4" • l' d. Elevations, inc1udinq roof plans, slope and overhangs, if any, at 1/4" • 1', show proposed materials e. Typical fence, railing and deck detail £. Dates of start and finish of construction. q. Utility meter locations h. Physical limits of construction activity. The ~'chitectural ~aview Committee will stamp the drawing upon final approval. SM!TH'S POINT -ARCHITECTUPAL GUIDELINES The Great Island Guidelines are based on a hiltorical parspective: generally that of the vernacular at Cape Cod, Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard and more speoifically the 20th Century interpretation at Great Island itself. Within this architectural vocabulary there was a range of style and detailing present from the agriculture buildings to more elaqant houses. It is important for the architect to know the buildinqs of Great Island. The aesthetic success of the whole requires that the theme also be carried through with the landScaping and other site details. " These Guidelines are designed to assure the followingl -Ear,many in the forms and materials of the buildinqs on Great Island. -Architecture which i$ sympathetic to the traditions of Cape Cod. -Style, qeneral Cap@ Cod vernacular architecture to include the multiple connecting Cape with steep pitched roof style, saltbox style and historic farmhouse design. -Building materials and techniques which will age gracefully over the years. -~xchitectural elements whioh are responsive to the New England climate. -Preservation of the natural appearanoe and ecology of the Island. A. GENER..JV. 1. All construction shall be subjeot to the provisions of state and local codas. 2. Maximum building height shall be two-and-one-half stories, as defined by the town of Yarmouth Zoning By-Law, with the exception of Lot 1, on -3-58210 which the height limitation will be 25' from the plain of the first floor level but in no event shall more than 50' of the ridge pole. on any structure be above 28 feet. 3. Building location shall be determined by taking into consideration minimizing site lines to existing homes on Smith's Point and along the shore of Uncle Robert's Cove and maximizing view corridors to open land and waters if desired. All buildings must be located within Zone of Improvement Designations. 4. Variances may be granted, only if required by the unique character of the Lot whereby a failure to grant the variance would result in a hardship to the tot Owner and only if such variance is consistent with the general intent and purposes of the Architectural GUidelines, and will not have a material adverse effect on lots in the area. If a variance is granted by the Committee with respect to alterations or additions made after completion of the initial conltruction of the house on the lot, and such variance is disputad by any member of the Committee, including the nonvoting me~ber, as being inconsistent with the standards for variances, at the request of the disputing member made at the meeting at which the variance is granteq, the dispute shall be referred to an independent architect chosen by the Committee, for resolution, and the decision of such inqependent architect shall be binding. If there is such a request, the Committee shall make the referral within ten days after said meeting and the architect Shall make its decision within 30 days after said referral. B. EXTERIOR WALLS The desire is to heva colors that blend into the surrounding landscape ~nd veqetation. 1. The following materials are permitted as wall finishes for buildingsl a. White cedar shingles. Color must be natural or stains, such as, gray or brown b. Horizontal wood clapboard with riqht to clapboard all four sid$s. If all clapboarq, the color would be white or earthtone (all shadas of gray, brown or gray brown mixture). The desire is to have subtle -4-5821D variations of the above colors that blend into the surrounding landscape and vegetation. c. Brick -to be used at footings and chimneys only. 2. The following materials are permitted as finiahes for fencesl a. picket b. lattice c. split rail d. palisade C. ROOFS 1. The following materials are permitted for roofing: 2. a. white or red cedar shingle. -to match walls b. galvanized steel The a. b. -1" standing seam pattern only ~at garage, barn or workshop only -natural or green color only following materials are permitteg for guttersl wood -cyma recta profile only -painted white galvanhecl steel -half round profile only 3. The following configurations are permitted for roo£sl a. simple gable -s}~etrical, pitch min 9:12 max 12:12 -asymmetrical, pitch min 6112 max 12112 b. Simple hip -symmetrical, pitch 9112 max 12112 c. simple shed -asymmetrical, pitch min 4112 max 12:12 -if used against a principal building wall only d. flat with railings or parapets -if accessible from an interior room only -railinge pattern to be approved by the ~~C -railings to be painted white e. "Sow House" D. RQO~S Ii WINDOWS 1. The followinq materia.ls are permi.ttedl a. glass -5-58210 b. hardwood -painted, color to be approved by the ARC c. vinyl-clad wood. 2. The following are permitted operations: a. single and double hung b. casement c. fixed with fTame d. louvered 3. The following are permitted eonfiqurationsl a. reotangular or verticle proportion b. circular & semi-circular c. hexagonal & octagonal. 4. The following a;e permitted accaalori&11 a. operable wood ahuttera -painted, color to be approved by the ARC b. window boxes -painted, color to be approved by the ARC c. real wood mullions -square or vertical proportion E. TjUM 14"10 SHUTTERS I All colors allowed; except vivid colors, such as, orange, pink, purple F. QUTBUILDINGS • .1. • The a. b. c. d. e. following outbuilding uses are permitted: barbecues -brick to match ohimneys garden pavillions and greenhouses -to match principal building gazebos, trellis struotures and arbors -WOOd, painted white garages, workshops and barns -to match principal building guest houses and artists studios -to match principal building -not to exceed 1,000 sq. ft. footprint nor 1200 sq ft enclosed f. handball and squash courts and saunas -to match principal building q. in-qround swimming pools and outdoor tubs h. pool houses and equipment enclosures Notel All garbage, trash and rubbish placed outdoor shall be kept in covered containers, proteoted from animals and soreened from view outside the Lot, provided that this restr~ction does not preclude the compostinq of organic matter. -6-5821D .-.. -"., -,--~ -·--... -v-,--'-"-.... ", ... '0'1' .. ",,.:--"' ..... , , ... -,-'~-'-'" 2. The tollowinq structures are not permitted I a. open carports b. above ground pool. c. paddle tennis court G. MISCELLANEOUS 1. Exterior lighting: No exterior flood lights shining on the water or noticeably visible from other homes. Safety lighting around docks must be focused down. 2. The following shall be located where best hidden from adjoining lots and the road: a. clothes drying yards b. electrical meters c. air conditioning compressors d. standby generators e. antennas f. satellite dishes which must be surround by a fence to completely hide it from the road or adjoining lots. 3. Tree! in excess of 4 inches in D.B.H. shall not be removed without the approval of the A.R.C. unless they are dead, diseased or dangerous. ,. Aceess stairways (designed to minimiZe erOSion) will be permitted on Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 to Nantucket Sound but only two sets of stairs for access to Uncle Roberts Cove in the vicinity of the new docks, if any, otherwiSe near the Lot 1 and Lot 2 boundary and the Lots 3 and 4 boundary. S. The above guidelines may be amended from time to time in order to comply with applicable Building and Zoning Codes. 6. Notwithstafidinq the above guidelines, all buLldinqa and structures shall be built in compliance with the applicable Building and Zoning Codss. Any requirement in these guidelines which is inconsistent with the Building and Zoning Codes, from time to time in affeet, shall be construed in a manner consistent with such Codes to .the extent possible and the Codes shall govern. 7. Landscaping -Buffers between lots are encouraqed through the Use of natural vegetation. -7-58210 Barnstable, ss. CAPE COD COMMISSION BY:----:-I'M----,-:-. ~r > ...J..;--( cJ-J---:-:-::::-~/1.,.->----_ Armando J. Carbonell, Executive Director Commonwealth of Massachusetts ~ 1-. '1 ~t--, 1993 Then personally appeared the above-named Armando J. Carbonell, Executive Director, and made oath that he executed the above Certificate of Completion and Release as his free act and deed and as the free act and deed of the Cape Cod Commission, before me ~\ir~s Notary Public My Commission Expires:. ___ _ 2 August 30, 1993 Sharon Rooney Cape Cod Commission 3225 Main Street Bamstable, MA 02630 RE: Smiths Point Cluster Subdivision, Yarmouth MA (MHC # 6055) Dear Ms. Rooney: The Massachusetts Historical Commission has reviewed the results of an intensive archaeological survey and data recovery program (950 CMR 70) per the Archaeology Agreement executed August 9, 1991 carried out by the Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. and Dr. Stephen Mrozowski of the University of Massachusetts, Boston for the Smiths Point Cluster Subdivision in Yarmouth, Massachusetts. The archaeological survey identified an Indian habitation site (MHC Site # 19-BN-647) which the MHC determined was eligible for inclusion in the State and National Registers of Historic Places. After review of the project plans, prepared by Schofield Brothers, Inc. dated March 27, 1991, and consultations with Fayette S. Scheuch, the project proponent, the MHC determined that the implementation of a data recovery program as outlined in the Archaeology Agreement would sufficiently preserve the archaeological research value of Site 19-BN-647 and allow the Smiths Point Cluster Subdivision to proceed without having an adverse effect on Site 19-BN- 647. MHC is satisfied that the field portion of the intensive archaeological survey and data recovery program has been completed by the Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. and Dr. Stephen Mrozowski of the University of Massachusetts, Boston in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716- 44740) and the State Archaeologist's Standards (950 CMR 70) thus fulfilling Condition 12 of the Cape Cod Commission's approval dated October 25, 1990. The MHC is also satisfied that Fayette S. Scheuch has carried out Stipulations 1-7 (inclusive) as agreed per the Archaeology Agreement. The project may proceed as planned without further MHC review. A form of "Certificate of Completion and Release" to be filed in the Barnstable Registry District is enclosed. Massachusetts Historical Commission 80 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727·8470 Office of the Secretary of State, MichaelJ. Connolly, Secretary In the event that unmarked human burials are inadvertently discovered during any construction in the project area, excavation activities in the vicinity of the burial shall cease immediately and the State Archaeologist shall be notified pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 38, Sec. 6B &6C; Ch. 9 Sec. 26A & 27C; Ch. 7, Sec. 38A; and Ch. 114, Sec. 17 as amended by Ch. 659 of the Acts of 1983. Please feel free to contact Connie Crosby of my staff if you have any questions. Sincerely, \,~ G.n-:J)a-ouf JQh B. McDonough Executive Director Massachusetts Historical Commission State Historic Preservation Officer JBM/CC enclosure xc: George Dallas Stephen Mrozowski Fayette Scheuch