##VIDEO ID:0PwzEV3EpiU## e e e e e e e e e e good morning hi uh I'm frankena and this is the November 19th 2024 meeting of the chadam historical commission uh there's a few announcements to make before we actually start the meeting uh please note this meeting is being recorded will be available shortly Hereafter for scheduled and ond demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device if anyone else is recording the meeting please notify the chairman anybody recording seeing none to proceed pursuant to govern Hy's March 29 2023 signing of Acts of 2023 extending certain provisions of the covid-19 uh measures uh adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law General law 3820 until March Mar 31st 2025 this meeting of the chatam historical commission is being conducted in person and via remote participation I've read this so many times I think I have it memorized every effort will be made to ensure the public can adequately assess the proceedings as provided for in the order a reminded that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while it is progress may do so by calling the phone number 508 945 4410 conference ID 507 443 578 hashtag or by joining the meeting online via Microsoft teams through the link and they posted agenda while this is a live broadcast simcast on chadam TV despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide for realtime access we will provide and post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible okay having said that the first order of business is a roll call Vice cheer Bob leer here Janet Tennyson here Stephanie Hamilton here Sandy Porter here Nancy bar here Robert Stevens Stevenson Stevens that's wrong right okay uh and we have uh Just for information and the chair is here so we have a quorum Robert's not online no okay uh we we will can then proceed just note for the public information we do have a open position for a uh alternate to the historical commission if anyone's interested we do appreciate help and participation okay we have the minutes of October 15 2024 any comments Corrections additions soltions I have a uh suggested correction on the second page fourth paragraph down um I believe I mentioned in the motion that um in addition to now I lost it hold on a second I had that piece out this the motion relative to its historical significance Bob yes and um mentioned that the the the items that are mentioned here but also that that building is uh it's in conjunction with a group of other buildings or structures similar buildings or structures but with that addition I'm fine with the the minutes and move their approval unless somebody else has a suggestion do you have it any yes okay all right uh no other changes going a motion to accept the amended minutes second thank you I got a motion in second there I guess Sandy also we had a tie okay we'll do a quick roll call Bob yes Janet yes Steph Yes Sandy yes Nancy yes and the chair votes yes I apologize I'm a little clumsy here this morning got Cel tunnel surgery and my hands not not working exactly the way I wanted to okay uh the first application unfortunately uh is 7075 hallway was asked for continuance I thought I saw Mr Riley here he is Bob can you can you shed some light what's going on this is like you know it's it's ongoing saga just to give us a little insight we do we pick a date when you're coming back I thought we did I'm I'm sorry I thought we did yeah just to a January meeting but I'm not sure specifically which date okay well the the reason for the request for the continuance is Sarah C Jeff's comments and so they want to take a look at the design again okay fine so it's January 7th Bill do you have a preference to the first or second meeting in January I think I'd go with the second since we need to redesign okay so that will be January 21st I just wanted you know for the public to know when it's being adjourned to I want the public to know also all right good I love it thank you very much Mr Riley okay uh can I have a motion to move uh for continuance to the January was the 22nd 21st I'll move thank you very much second okay quick roll call Bob yes Janet yes Stephanie yes Sandy yes Nancy yes and the chair vote okay thank you very much by the way in your packet in addition to these uh notice that Christina put out which uh case you couldn't read it uh there's the information that from Sarah Corf everybody got a copy of that okay so we know what's what's happening okay uh I was going to bring 89 Water Street up forward but I guess it doesn't matter uh because I want to do ston Road and that's uh January 21st that's you know different different agency so let's just stay with the agenda uh all right so application uh 24028 uh hurden with in accordance with chapter 158 50 ston Road there's two applications here there's 2428 and 24029 which effectively split the two the two pro the two units on the property in which they're looking for just for public information this is uh property which is uh not on the national register uh but there are form B's on on that complete property uh basically roughly year 1935 for one property and 1750 for another one so um I don't know how you want to proceed build your preference you want to split them up or well I'll just talk about the project in general okay the uh all right so uh I think the building which would be your principal concern uh is what we call it I guess we call the main house uh which was built sometime between 1750 I think in 1785 the uh the main section of that house uh is pretty much as it was constructed back then uh they put an addition a little kitchen in it uh on the left hand side as you look at the house and then they put an addition off the back uh we don't know when all of that was added sometime probably in the 50s and then then expanded again in the 1980s so they want to uh remove those additions uh and they want to they're going to construct a new addition on the back the principal change to the main house is they want to do a dormer uh on the back side of the roof uh so they will have access out to uh what's going to be a deck on an addition that they're going to put on the back side of the building so if you look at the proposed plans can you put those up uh Christina the site plan or the pardon me the building schematics do you have those you do good okay so what they want to do is they want to replace the existing addition on the left hand side uh with another addition that will be a bedroom uh then you want to add a connector uh between the main house and a proposed garage then if you look at the rear elevation U you see the chimney on the main house and below that or behind that is the Dormer they want to add uh so that they'll have access out to this proposed deck uh which is going to be on top of a first floor addition uh to the main house there'll be usable space in the lower level as well and then they're going to put in further addition uh behind the proposed garage and connector uh they will use Dormers to provide space on the second floor uh and then additional space on the first floor uh but I think the you the significant view from from your area of responsibilities is that uh the building is modified from the front uh will look essentially the same as it does today uh and that the proposed additions of the connector and the garage are similar to kind of additions that would be made uh over time from 1750 until today um so we think that you know those changes uh really don't decrease the historical significance of the building the do you have the site plan there uh Christina that well when you look at the property today uh there is a a building very close to the main building uh which they call the bunk house uh we don't know when it was built sometime we believe in the 30s or a little bit later uh and then there's a 19 oh that would be Susan Leo the uh uh then there's a second building which they called The Barn which is used as a bunk house uh and they want to demolish that building entirely and we think that building was also built in the 30s was that some from from your office on on all Susan Leo oh calling in from Vermont okay Susan hello hi I wonder why bill was here they don't usually let me come to these alone here it is I know uh so we believe the main building is historically significant and we want to preserve it uh preservation of that building has a substantial cost to uh you know plans that the family has to continue using the property uh so we think that the the uh you know the really important thing is maintaining that building which I think they're doing very well we think the subsidiary buildings candidly uh have no historical significance and uh so we'd like to be able to remove those uh as a part of the overall project so I don't know if Susan wants to add anything to that but that's I don't thanks Bill I don't know if you mentioned that the um historic core of the building is being relocated because the property was divided into two lots back in May so once the non-historic uh later additions are removed it will be relocated onto uh its new lot so I didn't know if you had mentioned that um and then the only other thing I would add is is that the proposed renovation or alteration or addition work which was in the project narrative uh will replicate the following that are on the existing building with the new additions the uh 9 over six sash windows the corner boards the wide and tablature the Deep molded EES and then the center chimney and um and as Bill said we just feel that the uh additions and will complement the existing histo historical features of the building and um anything that's being proposed for demolition uh is of not historical significant value or architectural value in our in our opinions I think that's all I would add thank you thank you Susan okay you know you you folks keep saying the non-historic the non-historic I didn't say nobody said non historic you said we don't think they have historical significance no the term non-historic was used you know you've got a good portion of this building building which is in the built in the 30s and you know and and in pretty good shape so it that's my personal element here uh but we we'll proceed but yeah you're you're attempting to preserve the original 1750 portion of the structure but it kind of gets lost in the in this in this de in this development so uh that's my general view just from 50,000 ft looking down on it um but uh well why don't you stand 100 feet in front of it and look at it that way because that way if I get if I get too close to it I'm really going to say no but I don't want to so why don't we why don't we just see where the rest of the commission is coming from uh we'll start down here uh Stephanie got any thoughts I'll pass for now say again I'll pass for now Janet oh the structure is obviously historic that it's built in 17 you know 1750 what else do you want to know no just your thoughts on the development if anything Sandy um I'd like to hear some more relative to the details yes please okay more details I have some questions um so for the 1750 core that you're talking about moving um you're not just talking about picking up and moving it and keeping it all intact it looks like you're removing and rebuilding the chimney and at the back in particular a lot of the roof and the majority of the back wall the original historic structure which is what our job is to retain as much of as possible um the original oldest part of the historic structure I'll say that you're I I mean I just want to ask you a little bit more about what you are taking off of the original 1750 to 1770 structure in terms of original materials that you're replacing uh the um would you like me to answer that yes sus I see Karen is here yes this is Karen um so if you go back ex who I'm sorry who speaking Karen Kempton okay why don't you just int introduce yourself Karen uh this is Karen Kempton architect of this project thank you uh if we can go back to the yeah what you have shown there so the existing main house um if you look at the lowerer right hand corner of the re the rear elevation and I believe you went inside at the site visit did you go inside the house okay so there's an existing large wall opening into that addition that was done later so we're keeping that wall opening uh not adding any more opening onto the first floor walls at all going around the house and other words the front elevation of the main house Remains the Same the left elevation uh when you were inside there are two doorways uh that went into that main room those doorways are going to remain so we're not taking any more of the existing wall out um that's shown on the left elevation okay um you can see two doorways are going to remain and they will be the link to the new addition so again we're not removing any of the wall on that side of the house okay on the other side of the house on the right Edition um I don't know if you recall but there was a bay window put in it and they use that area as a dining room so we're taking that bay window out that's that big um green box on the on the right elevation and that will be the um access to the new addition so again we're not removing any of the existing wall section we're just using areas where the existing windows were which were a later um addition to the main house anyway as far as the rear of the house did you go upstairs at all no no okay uh there's noncode compliant Headroom upstairs even though there's two bedrooms upstairs and the staircase going up there obviously is very Steep and doesn't meet meet code so the idea is that we're going to keep the staircase in the same place but make it code compliant in order to do that we need more Headroom on the second floor which is the reason why we put um a a dormer on the rear of the house which um takes up about 3/4 of the uh roof line um the existing Rafters will remain we will build over the rafters for the new Dormer but again that was something you know we have we've done in the past it's done historically to allow families to expand stand on the second floor uh of capes was you know historically they would add Dormers uh shed Dormers to to the house and this is on the rear of the house as well um not that that should make a difference but that's the main portion of the main house that we're removing and again it's for code compliant Headroom on the second floor um as far as the proposed new elevat what we struggled with was we want to keep the ridge line if you can go to the um proposed elevations right there you go so we want to keep the ridge line obviously of the main house where it is because we want keeping the rafters we're not making it higher but as I said the the issue is Headroom on the second floor so we're the idea was then to create this Barn likee structure that uh refer is um the bunk house or whatever we're calling that that um structure that's behind this house by using those two arched garage doors so we're kind of referencing historically to that and by having this garage look more like a barn which generally barns are larger than you know the main house we're disguising the second floor in that area um by creating This Barn look so that was the difficulty of trying to um keep the main house Ridge line as it is even though there's very little space on the second floor but create a new barn likee structure that would hide the second floor space and the connector piece also uh hides some of that second floor space um so if you look at the rear elevation where we're adding that Dormer um the main reason isn't necessarily to get to the deck uh we basically put a flat ceiling over over that addition because we didn't want any more gables on that side so we thought we'll just keep it flat make it a deck but we needed again Headroom for that Dormer so that's why that Dormer is is there Headroom for the second floor of the existing house so that's the main reason that Dormer is there not necessarily to get out to a deck um so if you have any more questions I'll I'll be here to answer them what does it mean to the Integrity of the existing historic oldest part to take off all those pieces like you know in the past sometimes it all sounds great we're saving the structure but when you actually get in there and start tearing down bits and pieces of it um it doesn't actually make it so what do you know about what's there and have you assessed you know the actual feasibility of taking off the pieces and still retaining the original right the only thing we're taking down are the rear uh portion of the roof Rafters to add that new Dormer and the new Dormer will be built over um the existing Rafters that we're going to head off um so that's what you see um if you look the ridge line is there and then you've got about three F feet of actual existing Rafters that are going to remain and then the new shed Dormer will go over those Rafters so there's still remain on the inside of the house um they'll just be cut at head head height so again that's the only part of the existing house we're removing because all the other openings in the walls on the left right rear uh are going to be reused as the access to the new additions we're not removing any more of the walls um on this project and the chimney right the chimney um is is right in the center of the second floor you have to kind of walk around it um in the past we've been able to take the chimney down and recreate it uh with a faux chimney so that it looks exactly like the one that is there okay so basically I guess this is more of a judgment than a question but I'll say it there seems to be a lot of extra space being added to this house and yet we're kind of decimating the upper story of the original very intact you know 18th century structure to make space to make living space that meets modern codes and yet you're adding a whole bunch of other living space so I don't know if that's a question but it seems like there's a lot of changes that are being imposed that perhaps could have been accommodated in other living space that's the end of my comments at the moment well it's it's just to to add what you're saying Nancy or uh Susan you know any thought for just saving the house and not taking it apart the way you're taking it apart you know I to move it elsewhere on the property and and try to maintain you know a 1750 home I mean I guess the point is that when I look at it it's gone it's really gone uh you know it's completely encapsulate I mean I know you made a good attempt to to try and save it I I just it's find it very hard to to feel that we can say that this historic structure which I think we're going to determine it is historically significant and we're saying your changes do not affect the historical significance of the problem prop I mean it's just it's an oxymoron it's just not it's not there oh can I respond to that yeah sure the family wants to have usable space on the second floor yeah so that's why they're making the changes on the back side of the building yeah and with all due respect to ny's comments I would say 90% of the original structure is going to remain so I know about that but it's a good good number so you know the so what they're trying to do is create space that's suitable for their family the look of the property has seen from the street uh the main building doesn't change and so uh and none of the Interior on the first floor changes you know the're the the uh so the the essence of the building is still there uh and I appreciate nany's comp well why don't you put this space somewhere else well they want to have the whole building usable and the the uh and as we've talked about before you know changes that could have been made made uh that were traditionally made uh to historic homes over time uh one of those is a dormer so we're putting a dormer on the back side of the building you know so the uh I think that it's uh unfair to characterize it as that the historic significance is being destroyed if if I could just say I think from my perspective one of the things is the difference in massing of the additions and other structures in comparison with the oldest core and in the existing house the oldest core is the predominant structure in terms of height and everything goes off in a very traditional adding smaller structures backwards and to the sides and in the new way of doing it although you are adding additions and those things are something that happens over time the massing of those additions and of the overall structure is such that it's very different than the actual historic way that the house itself developed the the oldest part of the structure is now in the back it has a very big Dormer like it's a clip in the back it's a you could not tell where the unless we were had the red marks you could not tell from the back of that drawing where the old structure is from the front it can be identified but it's also overwhelmed by an addition an L like a connecting addition that's taller than it and then another connecting Edition that's a barn I I hear you about them trying to be you know barn and reflect things I'm just saying massing is important and when you do changes to do them sensitively that's really something that should be taken into account let me let me before you respond Bill Susan can I ask a a question I'm looking at the drawing uh and I assume you can see it too it says front elevation yeah I'm going I think you're probably want Karen to address this okay and then and then I look below and it says rear elevation is that supposed to be the backside of the front elevation yes correct it looks like it's going down a hill with a two do you see where the chimney is to the right again do you see where the chimney is the right the chimney chne in the chimney right no the other chimney that is the historic structure that chimney that's the ridge that's the same Ridge right there and changed yeah that is that bill is that the is that the ridge of the historic structure right there yes and this yeah right there this is the Dormer they're talking about okay but where is that in the front then it's behind this one of the things I guess I guess one of the is the fact that it looks like Frank let me explain I think Nancy comment uh misunderstand the drawing so here's the connector yeah between the historic house uh and the new barn yeah okay so this Ridge which is the addition is back behind the connector and so you know yes it's difficult okay to look at it but okay you know it's it's probably I don't know 30 30 feet behind it okay that's a fair fair clarification so that the so the I understand the concern about the massing but because she's moved the ridge so far to the back okay uh we think so the front portion the the break is actually the actual height of the connector and then behind it there's another addition that is twostory right it's but it's the ridge is probably 30t behind it okay thank you all right Nancy want to stop for a second yes Bob I'm having I guess the same issue that Nancy is about trying to an elevation which you're always sorry I'm having same similar observation to Nancy because I'm having difficulty comparing the elevations which don't give you that depth that we were just talking about and it looks like this giant monster there um which is hard to kind of figure out what uh it's clearly I I agree with you that the core is maintained in the front and I agree with Nancy that that you don't need to have that much on the other side it's tends to overwhelm the core but on the back the core is gone um so I now whether that um substantially impacts negatively impacts its historical significance is is the issue I think can I can I a second Susan do you have any more perspective I'll be honest with you you know I'm only an electrical engineer I the drawings the way they're presented is very difficult for me and hopefully it sounds like others to understand the perspective of what the heck we're looking at and it's extremely complex and the straight straight on view orthographic do you have any other views of it that would help us better understand what you're trying to do uh this is Susan and I I was just going to add just quickly Karen then I'll turn it over to you if you look at the proposed uh site plan that the draft site plan uh I think it's the next one Christina hold on one second she's trying to get it yeah even that there's one more um yeah actually that's not bad right there where Karen is showing the driveway coming in um in that core if you see the front porch the core the main historic core that we're saving is that square with the front porch and then you can see the additions actually set back and and I'll just turn it over to Karen at that point but that's that helps me to understand uh what What's proposed yeah well that's well that's a better that's a better way to look at at it uh Susan and I think you can hopefully understand our confusion at least for my objective of what the heck we're looking at on the so-called rear view you said front porch is and I can see it now it's sticking out St the stoop yeah there different terms I call it a front porch but okay so it's it's not a covered porch it's just a step no okay thank you right oh okay says farmer porch it's the front yes clarified it's just yeah um if you look on the first floor plan of the proposed A2 A2 A2 A2 yeah so the main core of the house is that Central rectangle that's made up of the dining room existing study bath you can see you know you can see that the main part of the house the addition we're doing is that living room that's behind it which is only 16 ft deep and that's the um balcony above because we didn't want to add roof line to that and then as you go over to the right that's where you have the kitchen and then sort of all the mudroom area that square footage is basically the same square footage that we're removing from the existing house that's that stretches out behind it as an elf do you see the opening where the dining room is the opening that goes between the dining room and the living room yeah that remains unchanged that's the existing opening that's there now that goes into that addition that was done whenever 30s 50s not quite sure and it runs very long um against the back of the house we're basically just taking that space and and twisting it uh so that it runs horizontally instead of vertically uh so it's not taking away any more space of the rear of the house the addition is done to the right of the main part of the house does that help at all yes Stephanie you say there aren't many changes but even the chimney has changed the chimney had a little KOA on top of it and it's flat on the even that's changed if you the chimney look at the photos it's the same as shown in the photos no it's not um well not according to this that I'm looking at well it will be it the intent is that it will be created to match the existing chimney that's there okay cuz in the drawing you've got to it made okay oh Stephanie can I give page she's got on theer I've got it no I've got I all of it I think that shows you the existing chimney see see what's it's different than the drawing no but that's the that's the yeah I know is it available electronically bill that what you're showing it it's there excuse me just so the public get some idea if they're following this is that the drawing you talk about Bill hold on no no it's uh which drawing is it well you have to show me one it's the one that shows no it shows the the house and the bunk house on the same page shows the rear of the house it's the second page of the macis form okay hold on let give Annie a chance yeah she's good but she ain't that good so I I just got to say sus it and and um and uh you know it's a it's a pretty complex situation and unfortunately you know way with all due respect you guys usually do great applications and it's it's it's kind of difficult to understand keep going Annie you know and that's what's going on here you know so you're there that's it all right yeah so there you go that's what the roof looks like that's what the chimney looks like today and that's what it's going to look like afterwards okay yes Sue this is Sandy I have a question is that is that a working chimney is there a working fireplace yes it is I can answer that oh okay thanks Bel but my followup to that is and you're planning to remove the chimney and replace it the visible part of it with a faux chimney you're going to take down the big brick chimney on the side do you want to address that Karen as as far as far as moving the oh you're muted oh you're showing the fireplaces remaining well the fireplace in the center of the house will be changed to gas fireplaces but the chimney uh will look like the chimney that's there now when you say the chimney on the side I believe you're talking about that addition that's on the left hand side um if you go back to the photos again yeah that's all that piece is being taken down oh it's it's uh okay so we're just talking about the center chimney of the main house is going to be recreated yeah so all the material that is related to those fire that chimney is being removed from the house the original chimney from 1750 yeah the one yeah the one that's not lined one second okay yeah I'm not making a judgment I'm just asking clarifying yes the interior one more um AC Le structure will be removed that one and you'll build a a fox a fake chimney that looks like it but it will not have any of the original materials correct correct no okay all right thank you you're welcome Stephanie thank you Nancy you don't make it easy for us guys all right well no do we have any more the chimney looks like this today and it's going to look like that afterward yeah we got it we got that bill I think we do okay uh anybody else have any other comments or questions guess I have a question on the um page A1 which is the proposed rear and what is on the backside if you will of the historic house is a I don't know what to call that thing octagonal or semi octagonal something I believe that's new isn't it Karen the G underneath no no a there a something that looks like a gazebo a dining KN a dining nook one at a time guys who's answering the question is there some historic basis for that I mean you're trying to maintain the main house that looks like just where did that come from well in the first place it's on the back wall of the addition back count it's not related to the main house at all backs do count Bill and there there's this is a view from the water too if anybody can recognize this house next year from what was there before from the water they'll get a prize Well I would agree with that that's now that it's unusual well I know but all right let's not get into an argument there's nothing to argue about question argu I'm I'm glad we're agreeing that's all you know the the building the parts that were added or created in the 1750s are going to remain with the exception of a portion of the back roof yes in the chimney that's true bill but I think the the the issue here is that the so-called let me put it another way yes you're you're attempting to to keep the core the so-called core of the building the historic 1750 building the other potentially historic Elements which you keep referring to non-historic the 30 let me finish and don't interrupt me you very much can you just not interrupt me Mr Mr Riley thank you very much Mr Riley you stop talking you stop talking Mr Riley or else I won't stop talking because you keep saying said something you're incorrect you keep stop interrupting me sure I know it's difficult for you sometime but try it thank you please let me finish my comment sure no matter how inaccurate it is go ahead you you don't stop talking do you okay my comment to you and to the applicant okay we understand what you're trying to do in my opinion okay in re in keeping the so-called historic building but it's it's kind of lost in my opinion with these new additions to the to the building and it it's really not there anymore okay and I I I'm having a problem to say a that this is B building is historically significant and the changing you made do not historically do not affect the historical significance of the building and and I don't know how to I don't know how to tell you how to do it that's not my job you do it we don't do that but we'll tell you what we don't like and what we could potentially do to try and create that it's a very complex building structure that you're creating around the so-called historic 1750 building and that's the problem yes Nancy um I I I think just to add to that I think from what what we're I'm hearing from my colleagues and what I feel is that the histo the growth of the old house over time is very very much related to its history and its significance and the way that core that was built in 1750 or 1770 has grown with the addition of L's going back and you know that is very historic so removing all that although they're not as old as the original changes can in our minds change the historical significance because you're removing the history the the historical progress over time that is so iconic okay anything else you folks want to add I just have one Mr yes if the plans were different and you had the before and after on the same page maybe this confusion wouldn't be as much yeah I would like to suggest that Nancy uh excuse me um Susan and um Karen Karen right uh and while I'm having a senior moment here with our lovely architect if do you think you could potentially give us a better view of it I mean I know it's a very complex I'm not sure where you are with your building plan so to speak this is just sketches and Concepts but do you think you can give us another shot in terms of explaining why you want want us to proceed to allow this to be demolished you know the the uh not the n750 and replace it with what you're replacing and still maintain somewhat the historical Integrity of the original uh 1750 building I'll be happy to explain say again I'm happy to explain why you should approve it but we'd like to see it well we want to see it it's not clear to this commission right now that we understand what you're attempting to do in the way you're presenting it you have two choices okay we can vote on it I don't want to vote on it I don't think you want us to vote on it we're asking you to take to go back and take another shot at presenting it in a way that it's more clear to this commission and the public exactly what you're doing and understanding the questions that are being asked here are down to minutia and it shouldn't be it should be clearer to us what we're approving and how we're how it's going to proceed so that's all we're asking and I'm giving you the opportunity to do that Frank yes ma'am can I answer that who's who's speaking Karen this is Karen Karen the architect I'm happy to show the front elevation of proposed and new on the same page so that you can see it um and do even a 3D uh block image of it so that you can see the new versus the old uh of what we're removing and what we're building but the main issue if again if you look on the Form B that and uh you were speaking about the additions that were done over time to the main house those are all single story additions it it a ranch house was basically added to the back of this house um what we are trying to do is to have actual Headroom on the second floor for bedrooms upstairs as well so that we don't have to increase the footprint of the first floor by having everything all the bedrooms on the first floor we like some second floor space um and that's what is adding to the massing of the addition but again it's hidden behind this Barn likee structure uh on the front but that's the main issue is um the additions that were done over time on the main house are all single story Ranch type editions and the owners need second floor space um and so that's why we have that second floor space on the new addition at the rear so I I'm happy to do the two fronts together I'm sorry you're breaking up I'm happy to do one we don't just need the front can you hear me we need the n's talking s compar how it spread over the site now and hold it hold on you're going to start over Nancy in your enthusiasm I'm sorry in Your Enthusiasm you didn't press the button Susan hold on I just Nancy would like I think we appreciate the offer to have the front comparison I think what the rear is is troublesome and problematic for us I think we would like to see the current rear of the property and showing us the bird's eyee view of how the property currently sprawls and versus the new one would also be helpful that's that's where we're you know like you're not making it real clear I I just think you're not making it clear that it is it's not a ranch stuck on the back it's a series of small little L's that progressively go around corners and get smaller it's a very very different kind of mass in than what you're proposing and I think we just want to see that is that I could make a comment is that okay Susan no it's car again but yes as I said I can do that but uh the time um uh an expense to do the comparisons um I'm not hearing necessarily that that's still going to be um approvable by the board even though I'm going to compare them before and after it it's kind of sounding like that you want the additions at the rear to look like the ones that are there now which are all one story I don't well that's that's one person's opinion I just think you've got to make the board more comfortable from my perspective bill you want to say something I think the board is completely disregarding the cost involved to the family and preserving U the main structure thank you they're preserving 90% of the main structure you're supposed to reward people who do that not punish them bill will you you know you're you're being extremely confrontational here you know the board is doing what the board does and if you don't like that I'm very sorry okay you you're going to have to be a little bit more patient than you are with the fact that the board is confused and I'm attempting to make the board less confused so there could be a clear a decision I don't want you walking away from here with an 18-month demolition delay I would like it to get resolved and all I'm asking you and your architect and the applicant is to give it another shot to make it easy for us to understand what we're approving it's as simple as that it has nothing to do with we don't care for the people we have a lot of concern for it and we do appreciate the time and expense they're going to and attempting to save it that's it well then let me ask can you do that let me ask a question can you do that let me ask a question yes sir if we does the board we know how Nancy feels does the board expect the additions on the on the rear to be single story good good try Bill we're not going to tell you how we're going to decide I'm asking for additional information to tell us to help us on a decision all right I'll talk to my clients thank you as a result of that I think we're going to continue this to the next meeting that'd be great boy you're really not in a good mood today there Mr Riley I love see thank you very much I need a motion for continuing the application um I move the chadam historical commission continue this matter to December 3rd with the acquiescence of the applicant second thank you very much and I lost my pen in this confusion okay Karen has a question I won't be able to have the revised Plans by December 2nd I'm leaving tomorrow for 10 days so okay we can give another date hold on it'd be helpful if the architect were here too what's the other date December 17th um if I modify my motion to December 17th is that acceptable is that okay Susan yes this is Karen it's acceptable okay second second mod motion we'll do a quick rad call you got an extra pen Bob yes Janet yes Stephanie yes Sandy yes Nancy yes and the chair vote Yes uh thank you very much Susan can I ask you a question okay did you always have the title regulatory specialist um I've had that title for about 10 years actually I've been with the company 25 years as of last Friday and I was the uh manager of uh research and development before then it's the first time I actually saw it or really looked at it thank you very much enjoy your vacation okay let's move on the next application is um 24030 again heard in accordance with chapter 158 81 89 Water Street Paul I think that's you this is a rather straightforward application unlike the previous one so I'll let you quickly this is a national register this property the overall property is a contributing structure in the National register district and the applicant was before us uh previously in April and April April and we did approve the changes but apparent there was a an Omission but why don't you give him your perspective sure uh Paul mun from SV design here representing the Seymour family and their their home at 89 Water Street believe Lee Seymour is on the call here and our contractor Chris bck is in in the audience um back there's Lee uh back in April we talked about an addition to the to the main structure which was approved and we appreciate that that opportunity to present that project to you and uh within that application on our site plan we did call for this the shed to be removed um it wasn't discussed specifically it didn't make it to the meeting notes and it was flagged during our our building permit application for the addition okay so in some ways it's an administrative change if if we agree that you know the building what were to allow them to demolish this this shed uh anybody have any other comments Steph Janet J uh Sandy no no Bob I just would in looking at the materials the shed is mentioned tangentially on one of the B forms but not there's no description of it and from my observation earlier and again yesterday it it is not historic it's probably not 75 years old and if it is it's not historically significant it shows up on the 1991 Form B and from our evidence looking under underneath we're seeing some PT Lumber we're seeing plywood in the sheathing we're seeing replaced studs so it's at the very least been rebuilt all right unfortunately we need a series of motions U I guess uh reaffirming the historical significance is not not appropriate not of the C of the shed yeah my so I think the motion would be that it's not historic a set is not historically significant right did you make that motion Bob um yes I moved the chatam historical commission find structure the shed located at 89 Water Street is not historically significant because it does not meet any of the definitional Criterion section 158 D2 a b or c of the bylaw therefore the commission does not impose a demolition delay okay second Janet thank you very much any other comments from the public okay uh Bob yes Janet yes Stephanie yes Sandy yes Nancy yes and the chair vote yes thank you thank you okay boy what a differ than you all so much this is Lee Lee the applicant on the family I know I don't think I'm on video but if you can imagine a very cute four-month-old baby here who will be the next Generation I'm sorry of family members on this property she's waving hello and it's very grateful who's talking the owner the owner he has a baby that's why he couldn't be here thanks Le there just wanted to say thank app I mean I know that people do things that try and persuade us you know M Mr Riley Mr Riley was trying to tell us we're evil you put a baby there right you know cute undo undo congratulations all right thank you very much holiday thank you all so much okay um I got myself flustered there with Mr Riley I guess the one thing we didn't do yet or now we're about to do is U 24 031 38 Sandy Shores Sandy shoes Okay this application is to be heard again with chapter 158 it is uh a Form B on the property it is not in the National register District District but we do have to have a discussion oh here you are are you going to give me trouble too geez I I hope we have a really great conversation Paul mun SV design here representing the owners of 38 Sandy shoes uh the Sandy shoes home was built in 1930 it's tucked between private uh Lane Sandy shoes that abuts the golf course and Shore Road um the uh structure itself is a a cape colonial revival there's not many of these in chadam uh and specifically on Shore Road there's a couple that are very similar that we've used as precedent studies for for our additions and we'll talk about that a little bit more as we get uh through the application um the home itself has very particular detailing the the coins on on the uh the corners of the corner boards the inure and sofit structure along the front elevation or the sh Shore Road elevation um the large chimney structure the ornate detailing around the the entry door um as well as the L that projects back towards Sandy shoes uh the existing materials are comprised of uh CMU block Foundation where there is a foundation there's a few areas where there's there's a concrete slab and nothing underneath it um the existing siding is an oversized cedar shingle Shake uh we've got painted trim we've got an asult roof that hides a cedar roof underneath it and the existing windows are comprised of a lot of 12 over 12s 8 over 8s uh 12 over Eights um mostly double hongs there's a there's a couple of casement windows on the um Sandy shoes side um some have been replaced previously others have been painted shut for a number of years the uh windows that don't attach to the in taure uh have a copper cap or copper wash over the top as part of the trim package which we really uh love and really enjoy uh the the project here includes some some additions the footprint expansion here uh if we add up all the all the additions is about 360 square feet um so we're we're not adding a ton of square footage by way of building coverage the addition here uh shown existing East Elevation existing East Elevation on the top proposed elevation on on the bottom uh starting on the left hand side we have a section of addition here um where we're creating or replacing what was formerly a patio turned sun room into a a family room space um we've taken the colonade or or or covered porch uh element from the Sandy Sho side of the house and brought it to this Shore Road side of the house um part of the original blueprints uh show an an original scheme for this house had a second floor over this area so we brought that back and put a second floor over this this new addition as we move across the elevation you can see the single window Dormers have been expanded to a double window Dormer uh standing in these bedrooms on the second floor and having a little peek-a-boo window out to the to the um the bar out to the shore out to the water um this expansion gives us a little bit more opportunity to see a reason why the house is placed where it is um as we move along to the right side of the house uh We've did we've done a 4-ot bump out to the kitchen area um where we have those uh French doors on the first floor and a shed Dormer on the second floor uh one of our precedent studies um 123 Shore Road uh really resonated with us on on this project and creating a balance in the elevation so here we're we're maintaining the hierarchy of this Center section we've got this main box that has this really great detailing on the corners it's a very well framed and now we're balanced on either side of it and the hierarchy of these um secondary L's that that come down and go back towards Shore Road are maintained as a as a design element we go to the next sheet please here there's a lot of Maintenance happening on this side as well as a small addition uh we've got the uh on the proposed or the existing North elevation on the top the two windows on the the small Gable and the back side of the garage um generally those forms are staying the section in between is bumping out about 20 in maybe 24 Ines and the roof line above is getting replaced as well the the structure in there along with the structure above that that Gable end is is bit compromised on the inside uh also on this elevation you can see our our Dormer on the second floor see if I can point to it so this this new shed Dormer here is the one we saw on the Shore Road elevation and this area of bump out is is part of the kitchen bump out the existing screen porch entry is remaining as a screen porch entry and again this this area is the area that is is bumping towards us with a new roof line happening on top of it um the existing uh garage does not have a foundation under it and uh this is why it it's um scheduled to be generally rebuilt uh but placed back in a similar very similar form we're going to transition that garage space into finish space the rear shed addition here um from what we can tell was built sometime in the 50s again no no Foundation underneath it we're going to create a um a similar structure and it's maybe more visible on the next elevation but something that includes a couple of bathrooms and and an outdoor shower go to the next one please the rear elevation here the forms in the plaum window of this Center section and the shed Dormer across the back the forms generally stay the windows will get replaced and and increased as we go um the side of the garage will include a a shed Dormer above uh and again rebuilding this this lean to shed structure against the uh the garage um we are infilling uh the covered porch areas here in this inside corner and and placing uh French doors here replacing the windows here with French doors as well on to other locations and then our our new addition here again creat space on the second floor and a family room uh space on the the first level next please so here again the the construction uh ambiguities in the in the existing here generally the reason why we're replacing the roof lines but again infilling this this colonade with a French series of French doors um replacing the garage door with an entry sequence here into this this family room space and then our addition here is um replacing the um former patio SLS sun room and creating a second floor area the the doors on both the shore roadside and uh Sandy shoe Side Are Meant To Be A play in indoor outdoor opportunities um if we can go to the original blueprints so here's here's an original site plan from uh what we expect is 1930 or maybe just before and you can see the the parking Loop that comes in from Sandy uh Sandy shoes and so that that area we're going to um decommission the parking Loop to create an open area for for family play um there's quite a number of grandkids that will be visiting this home over the course of many seasons and it's a prime opportunity to be inside this L and have this outdoor space that's protected and in private and it's play areas it's whiffle ball games it's all those things uh for family activ including outdoor dining and then the the opportunity to bring in on the The Shore Road side you can see we've got these very um defined Garden Terraces this this is an opportunity to bring this back to the classic uh Cape house and having these these Terraces you know blue stone patios with some some beautiful plantings around and the opportunity to go in and out here in in and out in this this front entry in this in and out in this kitchen area so these these are the things we're going to bring back into to our our landscape uh design to encourage This indoor outdoor opportunity and you know again standing on this this side of the property and seeing over the hom across the way on Shore Road and getting to that that water View getting to that really beautiful morning sun on this Eastern side is absolutely uh the use and the intent of these these Garden spaces and the reason why we have French doors going out to these spaces um if if you scroll down um all the way there's um a precedent image of of one of the neighboring properties so here this this one here this is 123 Shore Road and while the the massing is a little bit different the intent and the idea and if you could scroll in just a bit you know the the uh coining details on on the main section of this this block of house um a very intricate detailing around the front entry the the detailing over the the um first floor windows and then the balanced elevation we're seeing shed Dormer and some massing a shed Dormer and some massing they're not symmetrical but they are balancing the elevation and creating that hierarchy of main section second second L and then in our case the L wraps around that uh that north side you're going to put a driveway you ask for a driveway at to Shore Road we we're going to ask for a curb cut in some parking areas and is that a is that a town or just it's not a state road right um no it should be a town application are you also going to plant a lot of hydranges we have a wonderful landscape architect on the project that'll that'll have a a land go ahead um so so the the opportunity to have this house be a little bit more exposed to be seen from the public way on Shore Road and and explore it have people explore the opportunity to see it and then still have this private section off the the the uh Sandy Sho side really makes this house pretty special so we're we're excited about this this opportunity to work in the house and um and really bring it back to life okay very good uh thank you very much um you know you your presentation provides something which we do like I think Stephanie pointed it out you know existing versus proposed on one piece of paper um it makes it a lot easier to understand what you're doing um uh I appreciate the efforts and you know try to maintain it I do have some questions or comments about the Dormers Dormers and your extensive use of French doors but I'll let my colleagues uh go go at it first any questions uh Steph okay Janet Sandy I have to agree with you Frank that there are a lot of French doors in this I'm very partial to French does but wow you know that's a good point and if you leave that on there you know you make the point about the existing and I'm looking at that what you're trying to this is the neighboring property I know yeah but yeah there's french doors okay but your French doors are right in the front and if you look at what is there now it's a very very simple house like you said you know a cottage okay not necessarily the Cottages they have in an Tucket you know when they went to live in uh not in an Tucket into Rhode Island uh but it's it's it's cottagey and I I just think you you've overdone it with the French doors in terms of both sides you know and and the the the number of French doors versus what was there before uh in terms of a rather simple you know three or four windows and it gets further complicated from my point of view when you put on uh H2O no son of a gun H2O drawing H2O of HT H 2.0 H20 and and you look at that you know with those Dormers which are are right in your face and the French doors and the other you know the other Dormers it's complicated it's it's losing it's losing the Simplicity of the design uh and I I'm I'm having hard I'm have a problem saying that's not significantly reducing the uh streetscape and historic elements of the of the property and um don't know what any everybody else feels about that Bob well I I have that same sort of inate feeling it's too much but I can't really um certainly in terms of the the doors um and the additional Windows upstairs but I I understand Mr mun's point about wanting to let some more air and uh sight lines in on the second floor um now if I may respond the the ceiling height in the first floor is about 7 fo3 so it's really sitting right on your head and and the further you get back from the exterior wall the darker it gets so the the opportunity to to add some more light in these sections and have the ability to get outside is is really the Paramount opportunity for the for the owners um the the hierarchy of this elevation or the stacking of of undulation here we're really keeping this main block out and Main and prominent and I'm hoping that the shadow lines you're seeing here are are are showing that these areas are still pushed back from the main block a good way so it really does maintain that this this front block does sit prominent to the other additions and these shed Dormers are are pushed back into the roof lines as as much as we can get them to have proper windows on on that second floor level no I I I'm sorry I I appreciate that the maintaining that overall massing of it I think that's important which we mentioned previously was not not being done um but I think there is at least in my mind a middle ground between having a whole wall of doors and having doors and maybe two windows or three windows or something like that to cut down on this just expanse of millions is what you're going to be looking at yeah it's that that's my feeling and I not I'm not sure whether as Frank referred to that what you're proposing would materially diminish the iCal significance of the building I'm really having a problem with the the three sets you know six six French doors and you know put a light bulb in you know light you know what are we talking about you making a studio but there's a difference between a light bulb and and sun coming in for sure but it's not I don't think it's taking in the the Aesthetics of the original historic building I I'm not saying you can't do something but I'm I'm having it I other people n see um I think you've um reflected you know kind of that thought about the expanse of Windows I I understand you know being in the house it probably is going to be more pleasant um and I think you've said I I the one thing I was going to say I um was to reiterate or to reconfirm what you said during the site inspection which is that so many of those nice architectural detailing the coin the the the lovely um chimney some of like there is some lovely architectural detail that you will be endeavoring to save the original as much as we possibly can knowing that it's all encased in lead generally the the wood structure in that case stays pretty healthy but there are some Punky spots and some some rot that if if you the bottom the bottom block of this coin is is is rotted we'll replace it exactly as as it is but the the the area most specifically around that roof line the copper caps over the windows all of this detailing is meant to remain okay and so when I um I would say that the other thing that kind of strikes me and I'm not an architect or really you know enough of anyways on the rear side um where you are removing the porch um entry and um putting in more more doors um I I just feel like those arches and I see that you have tried to kind of incorp inate them like that that visual to me is part of the overall design sense of the original house and I guess I just wonder if that could somehow be uh retained in some way both in that view and the the small entrance way and I don't know if that's anyways that's just a thought that I had was that those arches seem to be part of the architectual the opportunity here is to Commander that space as interior space without creating a major addition so we're trying to expand theoat of that L to be within the scale that it is now and and still feel part of part of the hole this is one of the the the reasons why we brought that sort of colonade structure to that front uh addition where where we have those archways now and and that covered porch sequence where we're we're taking the essence of this detail and bringing it out to to the front right so it's going where it wasn't and it's not going to be where so I don't I mean that would just be something I would say like even if you keep it as there's that's a whole Bank of of again French do and I don't know if there's some way for them to be developed where you still get a s like you did on the front with a little bit of a feeling that you've got that that Arch um I think that's I think every everybody said everything else that I would say think you can go back and take a look po well it it feels like I won't get the votes today so let me um continue to the next hearing and we'll present something that has maybe a few less French doors I appreciate it and I don't think there you know I'm sorry you were going to say something well I was just going to ask Paul if there was room for negotiation particularly on the uh proposed East Elevation um to bring back the windows on the bottom as opposed as opposed to the French doors which which which element uh East Elevation the front oh the front the French oh the East Elevation yeah okay you're saying no French doors well hold on once second let's let Annie pull it up it's H20 I'm just asking if there's room for negotiation on those yeah I think I think we're we're all kind of saying the same thing sure and and and I I think it might be useful if we could you could ask to take another look at it well we'll take another look at it our our our owner is passionate about uh this house and and has been very passionate about the changes we've we've presented to him so far appreciate the time effort and the money of doing all of this and and understand I only have one grandson not 12 and are they all at the same age or they all come at the same time uh there's a range there's there's a good range okay good all right so requested continuance to the next hearing all right December 3rd would be the date can I be heard was somebody speaking hello yes I am I'm the next door neighbor oh okay uh all right sure we we're going to continue it but go ahead can you introduce yourself sir uh my name is Thomas Goodwin I'm here with my wife uh Judith Goodwin and uh we live at 369 Shore Road which is just North we're the ne the next door neighbor to the north so uh my question is on our side of the property is the the existing structure versus the new structure is that the same setback from the property line we will not encroach any closer to the property than in the current house okay that's that's really it and um and so far I think everything is U um it looks fine to us let's put it that way looks fine to us we were very close to the to the previous owner uh quite close to her um her uh fol actually built our house and then this house became available and they they moved next door so that's just uh um you know a little background but uh anyway no I I think everything the architect's done looks fine the setbacks the same it's fine with us uh all looks good very good uh do you have to go to zoning yes we have a a lot that's less than required in the in the zone that it's in so um we're not creating any new non-conformities other than a small lot sir so just for information relative to this setback you know it's outside our jurisdiction but if he's going to zoning you know a suggestion that that's when you want to make your your your your uh your comments known to the town in terms of uh how it's approved thank you very much appreciate it thank you okay so we have a mo we need a motion to continue this to December 3rd well um December 3rd okay oh yeah R sorry about that thank you Bob I'll be here December 3rd anyway so yes okay all right okay then I move that the historical commission continue this matter to December 3rd 2024 with the uh acquiescence of the applicant I second thank you very very much Steph okay we're going to do a roll call Bob yes Janet yes Steph Yes Sandy yes Nancy yes the chair Paul thank you very much thank for your time may I just say one thing yes ma'am I wonder if those French doors on the paper they look very close together but I wonder if if on the house itself there's a problem I think they'd be spread out more am I right they the in different areas they're closer than others so underneath that Portico the covered area they're they're they're spread 2 ft apart 18 in apart the other areas in the kitchen they're a little bit closer okay they could be rounded too you know the yeah it can be you're giving away the secrets we had it done yeah we've done it okay okay all right thank you very much Paul okay we're going to take a five minute break intermission control room is that okay so we're taking a 5 minute break and I mean five minutes guys okay uh thank you very much Paul oh Paul e e e e e e e e e e e e e e thank you very much uh we're going to reconvene the uh November 19 2024 meeting of the historical commission after our quick break okay we're into new business uh and uh there's two items on the new business and the first one is the review and possible approval of the Nickerson bar restoration a CPA Community preservation uh request for historical preservation funds so in your packet we have a u a copy of the application has it been submitted to CPC yes okay so why don't you introduce yourself and give us a quick introduction to your application okay I'm Bob Nickerson I am president of the Nickerson Family Association and I'm here to talk about our ask to CPA for additional funding so um we just get going so um in 20121 we uh acquired the historic Barn um we came to you before at that time so we actually go went for CP CPA funding at that time and we successful in getting um $300,000 um so I jump to the next screen already about 40,000 has been raised from NFA uh and about 75,000 remains in our original Grant from CPA so what were our objectives I mean first it's being restored and reconstructed on an NFA site and it will be used for host Gatherings and meetings and educational programs uh the stri structure is cited adjacent to our 1664 Homestead of William and an Busby Nickerson which is on our adjacent property owned by uh the conserv tram conservation Foundation um and uh Frank has been very helpful in trying to get or L led the charge on this National register which I think you're going to talk to on the next um next section so you can see on here um I can point at it so obviously this is our site this is where the barn is this is where the dig site was and these are approximate locations of the structures at the dig site okay and honestly there's a there's a like okay so preservation of historical materials was key for us keeping the original surfaces of all the Barns and Timbers intact was very uh much a charge of ours every effort was made to replace any rot and strengthen any timber or wood to wood joint on the exterior of the face when possible we're going to see some photos coming up the work on the barn is being done with tools and methods that were used when the barn was built that's really important to understand because of the time constraints and efforts the frame will be raised by hand without use of machinery many of the original post feet the bottom part um are completely compromised old Timbers must be scarf jointed um to the bottom of the post and wood towood Jin joinery secured to the handmade hardw with handmade hardwood pegs that went the wrong way okay with regards to missing uh or needing needed posts or beams antique Timbers will be utilized whenever possible and when we're placing tenons in the wind braces and Hardware Timbers will be fit to match the original tenants a s significant number of photos and videos have taken to document this whole restoration process okay I'm going to just I'm going to click all these just to give you an idea I wanted to get a idea of what this the barn looks like so this is different faces so these bents so this is like a so if you look in here this is a b c and then there's a wall this way so this wall would be here this would be down the center and this would be here and look at this this particular spot and this spot we're going to look at those examples so these are columns or posts at those locations we'll look at those in a second and then these are interior bents so that's this way okay and this is when we took the bar apart so you can see all that so we didn't know all the rot was in this Barnet we didn't find that until we had it totally uh taken apart so what are the milestones we took it apart in 2021 and 2022 we did dendr chronology on the structure which means we actually try to get the age of the M pieces and we thought when at the time that this was a 1700s Barn it's not it's a later barn but it's not just a barn it's a barn with multiple pieces from barns what's that we did a barn started to fail they would take out sections they'd take them from another barn that was failing and put them in you're going to see some of those photos in a second um so those are the dender chronology notes the site plan was approved by CH chadam conservation and 117 and approved by planning board and 130 of 2023 we install uh silt fencing to be able to put the foundation in the site work with the foundation was in 4523 the foundation is 423 just sort of see all these steps that we went through and you probably had that now this is uh quite interesting we're going to see some pictures of that and I'm going to show you some videos I'm going to kind of fast forward through them because I don't think you want to spend all that time but 22 two 22t beams two 164 Footers four four-footers four 12-footers all were made and cut by hand from trees okay to replace the material um we're going to install pressure treated uh Sills um 8 by8 p PT so pressure treated for the Sills and then we built a deck on top of the deck we're going to actually put the barn Sills that hold the whole Barn together up why are we doing this it actually raises the interior of the barn about 10 in so you can actually walk under the original Rafters so it's still functional but still the same size so we need additional funding we're asking for 275,000 we're estimating additional $300,000 so we're looking for obviously we're going to look for additional sources all the rafters must be replaced all the posts have foot rot and have to have the bottom section removed um and cut and scarf jointed some of the posts require significant repair such as post 2B which we're going to see in a minute and as a reminder again hand tools and original methods only okay got BL so here are some good examples remember I told you look at one a 1 b 1 C that's the bottom of those posts and you'd say well just replace the post if we replaced every piece in this Barn we'd be building a brand new barn that's not what we want we want the original structure as much as possible so what we'll do is we'll cut off this section make a scarf joint and this continuous piece will be reinforced and we'll show you what we did I'm going to show you we did on a couple of those so here is 2b 2B was that Center Post in the whole Barn had all these different Pieces come into it and it created a joint so bad it broke in half so what are we going to do we don't want to just get a brand new post and put it in so our Timber framer cut out this section of the lower half of the post he didn't work on this part yet he built this piece to fit in there this say a slight angle here and here to lock in so this piece will lock in he will do the same Cuts here and lock in and then we'll put pegs in here and this post will be continuous so that 2B posts will be the same post with a repair here wow okay then we get to this section this is 3B so 3B had a lot of rot in here so all the way up here the post keeps going I have a picture of that this was rotted way down low this was taken cut out this piece is put in and then this whole thing is cut out and this whole Edge is cut so it's very flat and you'll see in the next photo this piece is cut to match it and if we go to the next photo that's it this is a piece of maple this will be glued in that will be as good as it ever was before and yet we get to have the texture of the original structure still there there again the best you can do on restoration you can't you can't you have to replace the rotted areas and that of course is our Timber framer so here are some photos of the hand hun Timbers this is a 22 foot log comes in you'll see in a minute these are some uh 18 uh 12-footers and then these are cut in half so you have this but I need I want Rafters that are smaller so these are cut in half and they're Pits on we're going to see that that too okay so these are three videos I'm going to jump forward at different points to keep a lot of time I've already had them cut down but okay all right I guess I was looking at my watch I'm sorry okay so this is what you do these are the steps to actually take a LW and actually get a a workable piece out of it and I guess the I don't know how to get sound on sounds on there so here he is taking taking the original um pieces that he had purchased I mean just basically pieces of logs right so you can see all that work oh now I've got ahead let's go sorry come on this work on the other one I don't know why it's not working here oh come on this is the best one too come I'm sorry let's go to the next one all right this is this is uh pit saring we're going to jump to this maybe we can go back to the other one real quick and it'll work um because it's really important to see all those parts that you have to do in order to make those new sections so he's lining it out this is a piece that he's already made by hand from a log and which had have been the previous video he's marking this okay it doesn't allow you to jump forward like it did on my computer Robert I'm gonna have to move you y so I'm not going to be able to show these because this going to take too long all right I I think we we certainly got more so the next the next one I'm just going to show you this is not going to run but just to show you the next section so here is where he's actually making scarf joints on new material okay and then the last picture shows you the actual scarf joint so he takes those beams he makes all these intricate Cuts By Hand they go together the wooden pegs go through totally tightens it up can't move can't bend all locked in so all these have to be extremely precise to be able to slip right together what are the wood pegs made out of they're Oak usually Oak yeah all right I'm sorry Bob you I know I know you got to get going so I'm sorry too a long a long morning so far all right uh well you know Neil to say you know the one thing which is missing from your presentation unless you said it and I wasn't paying attention where this Bond came from oh yeah I did have it I probably slipped through it because I'm kind of fast INF Infamous 68 shell Drive which is commission spent about six years or maybe eight years you know trying to save that the house property which we really had a lot of evidence that this was William Nickerson Jr's property and the house still exists you know it's there the exterior uh but this was probably the only part of that whole building complex that we were able to save and uh and I know for my personal we feel very very honored and the fact that you guys took picked up the task uh to to take it and to save it and keep it into chadow I mean we don't know if Will lion Jr was there but certainly descendants of that and other people from the 17 1800s so it's reallyy significant does anybody have any questions or do we have a no-brainer here that we feel uh very strongly about this can I make a motion absolutely I'd like to make a motion that we send a letter of recommendation to the CPC to um for the Nickerson Barn thank you second all right uh any member of the public wish to speak thank you very much uh no other comments uh motion to approve Bob thank you very much appreciate it Janet yes step yes Sandy yes Nancy yes and CH Bob I'm sorry we R out of time for you but hey do something different next well you know this is not for the this is this anybody who does this preservation stuff has got to be there for the Long Haul uh too long sometimes okay I'm going to move quickly we do have a couple things I have to report on or ask uh you know comments the first one which is appointment uh is in a new business we're still here I'd like to move put forward uh Nancy bar as her our clerk replacing our dearly beloved Steve Burlingame uh and uh motion to that effect I move that we appoint Nancy bar as the clerk for the chadam historical commission second second thank you very much Nancy do you want it I okay any other comments uh Bob this is a vote now right not a comment all right yes Janet yes Stephanie yes Sandy yes Nancy yes chair votes yes thank you very much welcome uh one just quick couple of things Nancy you know we all know who Nancy is and her experience and I think she's going to be a good addition to the to the the to th those of us on the commission having said that uh Nancy has already undertaken with Christina a look at the website which we felt needed to be updated and so so Nancy has some ideas and some thoughts which we'll be sharing with Christina and hopefully updating our website uh the other thing I'm going to comment about Nancy is was the author of our famous place by the Sea uh nany's taking another look at the book to see if there potentially is some things that we could do to uh make it more accessible to the public than it is right now so that's the second thing that she's already working on and so that is appreciated okay uh we're going to move quickly to Old business uh the way I have it laid out uh the item of updating the uh survey plan in accordance with our recommendation which we made a couple of months ago uh Katie Donovan has identified the funding and is in the process relative to uh the the idea of getting a statement of work in RFP uh broken out in the sections that we could fund it in accordance with our funding uh applic uh funding requirements so that's good it's finally going to be moving on uh the second item was uh William and an Nickerson seem we got a Nick Nickerson kick today uh the uh the doe or determination of Eligibility uh we have received no substantial comments to the draft report thus far and if that continues uh in my conversations with olly herbster who has done the report and is ready to uh to work on it we will be submitting the the determination of Eligibility to mass historic by the end of the month what that means is it this again is just a letter and draft report and says we believe we the historical commission and the archaeologist who did the work believe that this site is potentially eligible as a national registered uh site we feel pretty confident between Greg cier the architect the archaeologist who did the work and Holly harpster the archaeologist who did the report that we have a very good chance of that happening once that happens if it happens in 3 months 6 months or a year who knows then we have to go back to the to the to the well if you will and and prepare of an actual application so it's a process that takes on uh and uh we we have let me just check my notes we have received a couple of letters of support from the U Nickerson Family Association and protect our past working with the cape card commission Sarah Corf and I believe we're going to get a letter of support there and I see in the audience there's someone here two people from the from the chadam conservation foundation and we hope that would work Lauren you want to say a couple of words introduce yourself please thank you Frank um my name is Lauren arano I'm the executive director at the chadam conservation foundation and for those of you who are not aware CCF is Cape cod's oldest Land Trust we're a private donor supported Community Land Trust that preserves open space and perpetuity for the benefit of the people planets animals and ecosystems of chatam and through and we do that through acquisition stewardship education and advocacy um and we respectfully request that the historic commission table any discussion about our property on Route 28 in chatport until we've had a chance to meet with you um and for you to meet with our staff and our trustees and our members so we can agree about on a collaborative name um to properly recognize this site to be agree on what I'm sorry I'm not catching that I mean I have asking Frank I'm asking Frank for you to table this whole discussion and the application until you've had a chance to meet with our staff our trustees and our members in terms of designating this site and making that application well Lauren you know with all due respect when I first reached out to you about a month or so ago when we have this I did request that you know I have an opportunity to come talk with you and and nothing happened and and then there was the question let me finish and then there was the question of there was a concern about a misstatement in one of my reports one of my let emails to you which I hopefully I've corrected there's there's a number of factual errors in the report first and foremost the site is located fully in holy on the property of the chadam conservation Foundation we are the current stewards of that land number one okay we're not necessarily opposed to designation or an application to the National Historic register okay and we're going to be happy to write a letter of support we are simply objecting to the name that you have assigned it the Dig is wholly and fully on CCF property and we would like to acknowledge the Millennia of indigenous peoples who have lived upon and used that land the Nickerson occupied that land for a couple of decades and CCF is the current Steward of that land having purchased it from the young family in 1988 okay okay I tens of thousands of Native American artifacts were dug up on that site and we want to make sure that the history is acknowledged respected and valued so let's sit down with the native Land Conservancy or some tribal um representatives to agree on a collaborative name for that site before we make an application okay well I have I have no objection as I said to you I first reached out to you and asked for that you know if it was possible uh I didn't feel you know I got a response for that but I'm happy to do that Frank we have a we have a long email chain Frank so let's not be disingenuous let me let me finish I'm not being dis let me tell you no excuse me Frank we have a long email chain please please let me let me just make my point okay I'm happy to do that as I said in the past and so is Holly herbster the archaeologist who's preparing the report and you know we fine if that's how if that's what you want to do but I want to make it clear to you that we acknowledge in the report the in the report Frank but again I'm going to reiterate myself and I'm going to repeat what I've said in our phone conversation we would like to sit down and talk about the proper name of this property okay not your suggestion it's not my suggestion it's just what we have been calling it The Nickerson Family Association have not faed and have failed to engage with the current stewards of the land we have stewarded this land since 1988 this the the Nickerson had lived there from 19 from 169 whatever 64 to 1690 you absolutely said to me that you would not engage in this conversation so please don't be disingenuous I'm not I'm not saying I wouldn't engage in it just as I said a month ago fine but I haven't receed FR you have not said that and I'm here and I want it on the record that you have not said that I have not I have not received the request for that and that's fine the the the you have you have an email from me to ask for to sit down no we've been exchanging emails but you never actually said Frank we have a meeting such and so can you come I'd be happy to come and zoom in or bring Holly to get your com SP with Holly and I've asked her to correct the errors that are in the report well correct but we need to know what it is you want and we let me just just make this very clear before we end this whole thing what I started out here you know a month or so ago was to request comments we haven't received any comments we received a concern about Frank you You' you've had a number of comments and question let me finish no excuse me Frank you have not up until yesterday did not answer a question and that was only because Bob prompted you we have clearly stated what we are looking for what what is that you know if it's just let me just pleas interrupt me if it's a meeting I said fine we can have a meeting but I never receive any comments from you this is what we quote you I refuse to include any reference in the name of this site I didn't say that Lauren I think you're making this more than it is so yeah fine we we're not going to table anything we're just not going to continue we're doing nothing more than here to try and solicit comments and the purpose of this on the agenda is nothing more to see if the members of the commission had any comments A and B to give them an update of where we are and I think I reported that and that's where we are now if you would like a meeting with please ignore if you one second if you would like a meeting with the chair myself okay and Holly herbster that's fine I got no problem with that I'm glad we're finally doing that yes Janet don't you think it would be a good idea if we had a meeting with the chadam conservation Foundation since they own the property and then go forward from there then we can go forward from there yes like I actually agree with you and I as I said in my defense CU I seem to be being attacked here that I did ask for that and I haven't received anything so fine we have no problem we wouldn't have asked for comments if we didn't feel we wanted comments so this is this is the only way we're going to make you feel happy from a safe faith not a matter of making them happy it's a matter of of what's see there's a misunderstanding here the the potential National register area for the Department availability is not just the conservation Foundation it's other areas they're the owners of the property Frank so I think no they're not the owners they're not the only owners Frank the the look look we're having the meeting we're having the meeting Frank let's be clear and I want this on the record the dig site is fully and holy yes on the property of the chadam conservation Foundation yes that's correct thank you yes that's correct but the area with for the Nickerson family Homestead the Nickerson family Homestead is more than the chadam conservation property that is not what the application that's not what the so it's an interpretation we'll correct it if you want it to be corrected and that was I would like the facts and that was the that was the reason I asked for comments Lauren let's I propose we have a meeting with the chadam conservation foundation and the nickers well we we're going to do that yes okay thank you very much so we'll set up something with uh the thank you conservation Foundation I'll take care of it thank you well I think other members are are willing to be a part of it and I think it's a discussion that more than one person needs to be a part of Frank thank you very much I appreciate your comments you know just I will contact I will contact Holly herbster who was we delegated to do this to and try and respond to the comments we need to have specific questions in order to respond yeah that's what thank you Frank we're not we we are not looking for a meeting with Holly herster are you the chadam historic commission has taken this upon themselves to make this application and as the owners of the property we would like to be a part of that discussion yes thank you okay the next item on the agenda which is the uh talk about five which is the uh boat house nothing new to report there I would like to report that I have had discussions with Christine ogrady on the uh demolition by neglect uh update bylaw and she's is making some progress and she'll be reporting again hopefully at the next meeting but nothing substantial do I have anything to report on the uh demolition delays no no okay uh one thing just for under Chairman's report uh I have to make a report to the select board on December 3D uh if anybody's got anything that they think we should be reporting about our activity for the year I'd appreciate uh give send me an email let me know okay back to the issue of archaeological resources beyond the Nickerson Family Foundation uh there is a uh a potential as I've been calling it out under the chair's report the possibility to update the uh regulations for what's called a PNF a project notification for form to mass historic on the wetlands protection areas is is similar to what's going on now with zero Crosswinds Farms you know where we have something which is adjacent to the Nickerson family Homestead where they uh want to have uh a put a home in and we found out through a dig which was done by Craig cordier that there are some architectural resources so I've looked into and having the staff look into the potentially to work with kcom to see if we could do if you go back to the archaeological report in the recommendation and I'll share it with you there were recommendations from Holly herbster on what the the commission could do or the town could do to protect archaeological resources so that is going to be uh something which I'd like to talk about in the near future not that we have nothing else to worry about uh last but not least uh the monoy uh theater property there was a court decision on that property with the owner uh Greg Clark uh the decision was kind of 5050 uh the judge did not make a a firm decision one way or the other but wanted to send part of it back to the CBA so uh there's reason believe that potentially there could be some kind of a discussion and negotiation between the town and the owners that it could be moving forward the purpose of the historical commission which our involvement has been for the last eight or nine years is to ensure that the Washington Taylor houses the two houses on the street are maintained uh in terms of uh its historical Integrity those are the houses in which we tried at one point to get listed on a national register but we backed away when the property changed uh last but not least on that was the theater the theater's still there and if hopefully there can be some kind of a compromise between the owners and the town and that we could maybe see the theater come back that's enough that's all I have if anybody else has something else he wants to add yes I just have a question uh going back to the Chairman's report 107 Highland Avenue um is a demo permit is issued does that mean we have to re view them again which one is that I'm sorry I couldn't hear is it over or or do we will we be judging again on their plans Highland 107 Highland it says demo permit issued yeah that that's it that so they just they get the permit and they can build now and okay yeah I'm sorry I misunderstood what you was asking about thank you yeah once once these are listed here by Christina only to allow us to uh you know to to remember what's open you know you know what happens is we have these demolition delays and we don't think about them and this just merely just points out but un pointed fact after we issue our decisions there's really no Authority uh that we have in the process and it just plays out I to that issue Frank I I just have a comment I drive down C road to go to the m Museum oh oh my stars it's terrible yeah that there were two cranes and equipment like I'd never seen on that piece of property chadam is changing I guess our our objective here is not to change it but to slow it down a bit and uh sometimes we're effective and sometimes we're not and uh I can assure you uh before we adjourn the meeting that I will attempt to meet again with the Nicholson uh the chadam conservation foundation and clarify the issues of what we're actually doing in the comments have you guys looked at the report and read it yes okay I haven't received any comments from anybody uh and and that's part of the problem the fact that we have no comments we assume silence is Ascension and we're going to go forward with it and now we're attempting we're attempting to get a the letters of support it's nice it's not critical for the this to go forward uh so you know I'll meet with the Nickerson family the conservation foundation and the Nickerson Family Association to clarify the issue of the fact that this is not a Nickerson Homestead National red eligibility the entire town is uh has Indian artifacts so you know unlike n Tucket we're not declaring the whole town a national register area but I'll attempt to work that out and I'll let you know when that meeting is scheduled if anybody is really interested finally in helping me and assisting me in this you're quite welcome to attend can um Frank I I think like so they've made it clear that what they want is a change in the way it's named and designated well so it's more than that okay but that's what she said today and do you want us I'm just I'm just clarifying would you like us in giving if you want us do you want us to give written comments on our how we feel about that request well then now that she's brought it up sure go ahead yeah okay all right thing that well anyway we've been talking about this for five years and now all of a sudden it's not so it's kind of annoying Frank Frank the draft report just came out and it's the draft report just came out and it is voluminous and highly technical so don't blame the the five years on the I'm not saying we're submitting it tomorrow it I sent it out in October and if you have any particular comments fine it's a just a draft report and it's submitt is a draft I try to make that clear this is a draft to determine the eligibility once they said yeah this could be eligible then we've got to spend about 105,000 to write a report a final report nothing happens I think it's I do think it's fair that we know as the commission about an objection or a concern from the owners of the property of part of the property about the way the report's going as we're going through this because as you know things get hardened As you move forward so you want to address these issues up front and I'm I'm glad we know about it personally well okay motion for adjournment unless somebody has someone else to add I move that we adjourn this meeting second Bob yes Janet yes Steph Yes Sandy yes Nancy yep chair votes no I wish I could say I'm happy with this meeting but I'm not