Duxbury homeowners seeking to modernize older properties on non-conforming lots faced a detailed technical review this week as the Zoning Board of Appeals weighed building heights and drainage impacts. At 83 Gernet Road, Julie and Nate Tilden successfully navigated a continuation of their hearing after making significant design modifications to address the board’s previous concerns regarding the scale of their proposed new home. Designer Heidi Conan of HC Design informed the board that the plans were revised to reflect more precise measurements. Per the hearing on April 9th, we did amend the average grade and we lowered the house roughly 12 inches, Conan said, noting that the two-and-a-half-story structure now sits further below the town’s height limit.

The technical nature of the Gernet Road project required detailed explanation from Austin Chardier of McKenzie Engineering Group, who clarified how the team calculated the average grade on the 7,500-square-foot lot. We took the whole front edge of the property 20 feet off the proposed structure, front lot line to lot line, and did a weighted average, Chardier explained, addressing questions from the board regarding the elevation relative to the street. Member Philip Thorn closely scrutinized the figures, noting, I'm trying to understand the numbers. It appears to me as though right in front of the house, the street doesn't sound to me as though it's between 8.9 and 9.7. Despite the density of the waterfront neighborhood, Nate Tilden emphasized his efforts to remain a good neighbor, telling the board, I have the support of at least three neighbors; the letters are in the file. I've sent everybody... letters with the plans and encouraged them to come speak to us.

Chair Wayne Dennison reflected on the challenges of Duxbury’s older, smaller lots compared to modern zoning standards. It seems to me that everywhere in Duxbury ought to be 40,000 square feet, but we have multiple properties in the northern part of Duxbury immediately along the water that are 7,500 square feet. We've approved a bunch of them, Dennison remarked before the board moved to finalize the case. Motion Made by P. Thorn to close the hearing. Motion Passed (5-0). Motion Made by W. Dennison to approve the special permit as depicted and reflected in the revised plans dated April 16th and the plot plan dated April 13th. Motion Passed (5-0).

The board also turned its attention to 48 Mayflower Avenue, where Mark and Kelsey Murphy proposed a rebuild of a 1924 structure. Kelsey Murphy shared a personal connection to the land, noting she grew up in the house directly adjacent and named her daughter after the previous long-time owner. The house we designed is supposed to be a more modern take on what's already there, she said, pointing to the preservation of the Gambrel roof style. Mark Murphy detailed how the new design would actually reduce non-conformity. Our proposal will improve upon the existing non-conformities by decreasing both the total non-conforming coverage area and improving all non-conforming setbacks, he noted, adding that the plan also introduces off-street parking for the first time.

The application initially faced opposition from neighbors on Spring Street regarding the location of a shed and potential rainwater runoff. However, the applicants clarified that the neighbors had rescinded their formal objections after further review. Addressing the remaining drainage concerns, Building Commissioner Jim Walowski advised the applicants to use dry wells. I want it noted for the record to maintain that water on your lot and consider using dry wells for your gutter system, Walowski said. Associate Member Borys Gojnycz questioned the shed’s placement, asking, Doesn't the shed need to be so many feet off of the road? Walowski clarified that the same setbacks apply to both accessory and principal structures. Member Emmett Sheehan expressed his approval of the aesthetic, stating, I think you're truly keeping in with the spirit of the neighborhood, especially the old neighborhood and the cottages.

Associate Member Tanya Trevisan, who participated via the Mullin Affidavit after reviewing previous records, joined the rest of the board in a series of unanimous votes to permit the project. Motion Made by T. Trevisan to close the hearing. Motion Passed (5-0). Motion Made by W. Dennison to approve the plans for the dwelling. Motion Passed (5-0). Motion Made by T. Trevisan to approve the shed as proposed. Motion Passed (5-0).