Posted on behalf of Tom Woodman.
To the Residents of Chesterfield,
On March 9th you will be given an opportunity to vote on a Steep Slopes Ordinance being championed by some of our townspeople, who have persuaded the Chesterfield Planning Board that such a regulation is necessary for properties located within Spofford Lake’s watershed, which encompasses an area of roughly four square miles including the Lake. I am writing this letter because while I certainly see the need and support their objective of protecting the Lake from further sedimentation, I heartily disagree with the way they are going about achieving that goal. So you may better appreciate my concerns about the overreach of this ordinance, I should like to share with you the following definition of the word ‘Steep’ according to Webster’s dictionary. ‘Steep is having a sharp rise or highly inclined slope; precipitous; such sharpness of rise or slope as to make ascent or descent very difficult.’
As the Steep Slopes Ordinance is currently written, any earthwork (excavation for foundations, septic systems, and driveways; removal of stumps; creation of fields; or other disturbances of topsoil or vegetation) performed on a slope with an incline over 10 percent (a one foot vertical rise in a ten foot horizontal run) will trigger restrictions. Earthwork performed on slopes with an incline greater than 15 percent but less than 20 percent will require an exemption involving one and possibly two professional engineering studies at the landowner’s expense, and an enforceable management plan for water runoff professionally designed for the property and recorded on its deed, also at the landowner's expense. Earthwork on slopes steeper than 20 percent is prohibited outright with no exceptions.
To keep things in perspective and give you a sense of just how gradual slopes in the 10% to 20% range are, the Americans with Disabilities Act specifies that access ramps for wheel chair use may have an incline up to 8 1/2% and are unnecessary on includes less than 5%. Even elderly folks living in Kansas would not regard a 20% slope as steep, much less a 10% one. To present this Ordinance to voters with the word ‘Steep’ in its titles is not a misnomer, it is a misrepresentation designed to sway uninformed voters into passing legislation that is more far reaching than it purports to be or needs to be to protect the Lake from sedimentation. The fact that the requirement for a water runoff management plan tied to a property owner’s deed applies only to new construction and not to the existing properties in the watershed, a number of which have played and continue to play a role in causing the Lake’s current woes, indicates to me that this proposed Ordinance is as much or more about limiting responsible future development as it is about seriously addressing the needs of the Lake.
Furthermore, the prevailing belief held by the ardent proponents of this Ordinance and the members of the Planning Board that denying affected landowners the reasonable use of their land en masse to protect Lake Spofford without any evidence that a particular project on a particular property will in any way harm the Lake, flies in the face of commonsense, basic fairness, and likely the law, if challenged. While most everyone would agree that certain projects would be detrimental to the Lake and should not be permitted, they would likewise agree that many others, accomplished with a keen eye to preventing further sedimentation of the Lake, would not be problematic even on a steep slope. Unfortunately, the proposed Ordinance as presently written with its stringent slope restrictions and broad reach, and its prohibitively costly and capped exemption does not distinguish between the two, which will assuredly lead to some landowners’ rights being usurped without cause, without compensation, and without recourse except through the Courts at everyone’s expense, taxpayers included. The way it is now being presented to voters, if passed, this so-called Steep Slopes Ordinance will, in fact, encapsulate in the Town's regulations an ordinance where the ends do not justify the means — not something most sensible people would do knowingly.
In the 63 years I have lived in Chesterfield, I cannot recall a more one-sided and misleading proposal being put before voters. I am hopeful you may share my opinion that this erroneously labeled Steep Slopes Ordinance should not be adopted for want of a more balanced slopes ordinance that protects the Lake and better respects the property rights of your fellow taxpayers. If you are of a like mind, please be sure to go to the Chesterfield Town Garage between 10 AM and 7 PM on Tuesday, March 9th, to cast your vote, lest you find similar severe restrictions coming soon to a slope near you.
Respectfully yours,
Tom Woodman
P.S. In the interest of transparency, I live in the Lake’s watershed roughly nine tenths of a mile from its nearest shoreline and passage of this Ordinance will unnecessarily restrict my use of my property and adversely affect my livelihood and those of the five local folks who work with me.
