e e e e e e e e e e [Music] [Music] St [Music] y [Music] good afternoon everyone it's July 18th 2024 and this is the zoning board of appeals meeting in chatam Mass pursuant to Governor H's March 29th 2023 signing the acts of 2023 extending certain covid measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law until March 31 2025 this meeting of the chadam zoning board appeal of appeals is being conducted in person and via remote participation every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings provided for in the order a reminder that persons who'd like to listen to the meeting while in progress may do so by calling 1508 945 4410 conference ID 920 882 24 pound or join the meeting online VI the Microsoft teams link on the posted agenda while this is a live broadcast and simoc cast on chadam TV despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide for real-time access we will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible in accordance with Town policy the public can speak to any issue hearing or business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair I'm going to tell you the procedural steps but I first I'll say that everybody um is well advised to shut off any self cell phones watches anything that makes a noise please shut it off thank you procedural steps the roll call of all board members um we will do that um now um yes uh David H Fe and uh I you approve the I approve method of meeting yes at act and I approve David S nexton I approve Steve Steve theor approves and Le Lee approves Randy podes I also approve and now we ask if anyone participating via the call on the phone um give the last four digits of their phone number and identify their name um first thing we do is the hearing notice is read by staff Sarah Clark to my right you are your representative will present your application anyone in favor of the application may speak for up to five minutes then I will read and summarize all is received by the board anyone against the appeal or application will have um some time to speak uh up to five minutes and if they have any questions during that period as well the applicant May then rebut testimony board members will direct their questions to anyone present then we hear any further information close the public hearing deliberate and usually we vote on the appeal or application all votes are taken by roll call and at the end of the meeting we will close clst via verbal confirmation and note the time of adjournment voting today will be David V David Nixon Steve dor Lee Hy and myself Randy podes and with that let's see we don't have any minutes so the first application will be um see 24- 068 application number 20 number 20 application number 24- 068 Friendly nominee trust care of James M Norcross Esquire PO Box 707 chadam Mass 02633 owner of property located at 23 mhill Lane also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 16c block 22 lot 6 the applicant proposes to change alter expand a non-conforming dwelling and a non-conforming lot via the construction of a partial second floor and an addition the existing dwelling is non-conforming and that is located 8 18.3 ft from the road where a 25t setback is required and 6.6 ft from the Norther L butter the proposed partial second floor addition will be non-conforming and that it will be located 10 ft from the road from no 10t from the Northerly butter where a 15ft setback is required the existing building coverage is 1,525 ft 17.4% and the proposed building coverage is 1,750 ft 20% where 15% is the maximum allowed the lot is non-conforming and and that it contains 8,743 ft where 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass G Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw attorney Norcross welcome welcome thank you uh good afternoon Jamie Norcross representing the friendly nominee trust um there's been a couple issues that have come up at the very last minute for my client that are resulting in them looking at some uh small design changes um so we've asked or asking if we could uh continue until September 12th this is next available meeting uh to make those revisions to the plans um and speaking with Leslie schneberger the architect she thinks that's plenty of time for her to be able to uh create the new plans and have those submitted in time for that meeting so our request today again would be to continue until your September 12th meeting okay thank you does anyone have any questions Dave Nixon could you give us a clue as to the small changes or the small glitches or sure so um I don't know Sarah do you have the elevation you could pull up would be help full so um the changes if you look at the uh the uh photograph on the bottom the self elevation that's looking at the house the front of the house essentially and so uh the proposals included doing that uh bump out on the far right hand side you see the U the door and the and the two windows and and the small window above the porch and then the second story above the porch and so they they uh certainly want to go forward with the change on the furthest change on the right that bump out but the second story Edition their Builder uh and the structural engineers has raised some questions about whether or not that's going to be feasible or how difficult that's going to be uh structurally in order to do that change so instead of doing that they may look to bump out the section of the building on the left that you see a little bit is that because of the age of the foundation or I believe that's part of it and the fact it's not going to connect all the way to on the leftand side they thought that might create some issues so they're they're taking a hard look at that and instead of going forward on this and perhaps getting approved but having to come back we just thought it'd be best to get final plans that would make sense does anyone else have any questions at all no I'll take a motion uh D yeah I'll move to uh Grant the request uh for continuance to September 12th I second that and how do you vote I vote Yes oh yep um V votes yes St I st the boor votes yes I vote Yes and as do I unanimous thank you very much thank you so that was 912 yep okay next on our list is 162 Shore Road C Piper realy Mr litfield Sarah will read that application application number 24- 071 c Piper realy trust care of William G litfield Esquire 330 Orleans Road North chattam Mass 02650 owner of property located at 162 Shore Road also shown in the town of chadam assessors map 16d block 15 Lot 29 the applicant proposes to change alter expand non-conforming structures and a non-conforming lot via the partial Demolition and relocation of the existing dwellings relocation of the studio and construction of a new dwelling the existing dwelling is non-conforming and it is located 1.5 ft from the noria butter the existing garage is non-conforming and it is located 5.2 ft from the Norther butter and the existing studio is non-conforming and that is located 0.5 ft from the southern leab butter and 10 ft from the coastal Conservancy District the existing exterior mechanical system appliances are non-conforming and that they extend over the Northerly and Southern Southern Butter's property lines the proposed partial second floor Edition will be non-conforming and that it will be located 10 ft from the Northerly of butter where a 15t setback is required the relocated dwelling now garage with one bedroom will conform to all setback requirements the proposed dwelling will be non-conforming and that it will be located 2.8 ft from the north of butter where 25 foot setback is required the relocated studio will be non-conforming and that it will be located 7.1 ft from the Souther leab butter and the exterior mechanical Appliance for the structure will be 6.4 ft from the southern leab butter where a 25t setback is required the existing building coverage is 3,201 ft 7.8% and the proposed building coverage is 473 squ ft 99.9% where 10% is the maximum allowed the lot is non-conforming and that it has1 18.9 3 ft of Frontage where where 150 ft is required the property contains 41,100 12 ft of buildable Upland in an R40 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protected bylaw welcome Mr Lichfield attorney Lichfield thank you madam chairman members of the board Bill Lichfield here in behalf of Tom and Michelle Jennings Tom is in the rear in the blue shirt and all all the way back but unfortunately Michelle could not be with us today but Tom mcneel a principal of hutker architect is and his associate Jonathan Fox Is With Us online excuse me our design team includes Wilkin and eological uh Ryder and Wilcox and Stephanie squin from Ryder and Wilcox may be joining us virtually Joe Waller of Simpson Landscape Architects all of whom have been involved in this property over the last couple of years in developing what we believe you will find to be appropriate plans for 162 Shore Road we've been before the conservation commission two or three times the historical commission a couple of times for multiple but successful hearings with both of them uh frankly we received words of praise for the sensitivity of the plans uh and our responsiveness to suggested modifications given the location um and the history of the structures on the site both of those boards took a strong interest in and an extensive review of the plans um and with the exception of the septic system to be reviewed by the Board of Health this is our last stop we of course Always Save The Best For Last that's why we're here with you but the degree of scrutiny is appropriate for this location this isn't just any site 162 Shore Road is is uh Sweden Eris it's known as surir it's known as The Old Weller property or the windmill house it's known by all of those names and probably others and the antique salt box which we're proposing to uh move and restore is known in the historic Community as the Joshua bur house that's sort of a segue into a little bit of the history of the property because I think that's important the house in question was built about 1,800 down on Water Street in the village and was moved to Shore Road around 1913 similarly the windmill uh which were seeking to move out of the coastal Conservancy District setback and further back from arms way hasn't always been there either uh it was originally built about 1850 down in cockal Cove uh and moved uh at some point to katat which I'm told is on Cape Cod I've never heard of it but I'm told it's in the fouth area uh then it was returned to chadam about a hundred years ago uh according to the historical commission the windmill was for a number of years used as a tool shed uh Tom and Michelle do not have that in mind for it and while it may not matter to this appeal there was until about 40 years ago a third house on the property uh house that was built around 1800 next door to the town office building downtown on Main Street that house was relocated to Shore Road uh early in the last century but was sold by former owners of this property and moved to Orleans about 40 45 years ago uh in any case while it is a vastly overused word in modern times the word iconic has been ascribed to this property uh to to The Windmill and to surir generally or at least it was uh when you could see the Joshua bur house and you could see the windmill that's no longer the case but that is an important aspect of why we're here today because we proposed to make the Joshua bur house the focus of the property uh for the neighborhood and for the many people who travel up and down Shore Road historically known as the boulevard and to create and maintain public sight lines to The Windmill and also to chadam Harbor we're all aware or I think should be at least of of the loss of public views of the water over the years and approval of this special permit with a condition which were proposing will be a positive and important step toward maintaining views of the harbor and the windmill and again as relocated and shown there uh making the Joshua bur house the focal point of the property we're proposing to move the windmill out of the coastal Conservancy District setback as I said uh remove the many many many recent additions to the Joshua bur house and relocate it as shown there uh relocate the historic core of it at the top of the hill uh again making it the focus of the property uh and then to build a reasonable and appropriate family home for Tom and Michelle and their daughters will be eliminating at least one non-conformity uh reducing some others and not exacerbating any we're also as I suggested going to propose a condition which I'll explain later one which will I think make this a genuine Improvement for the community as a whole so what I'd like to do if I could is to turn this over to Tom mcneel who can go over the goals that uh Tom and Michelle Jennings had in mind and the plans that hutker developed working with them and the others on the design team Tom will present the plans and then I'll go into the criteria thank you you I'm Tom mcneel from hutar Architects and I'll I'm just going to walk through the project a little bit and sort of how we thought about the design um you can go to the next page Jonathan my colleague is on sharing screen here so as you can see the existing house and additions that were on the salt box Are all uh the majority of the structure is non-conforming on the north side of the property and on the left side is Shore Road which currently has a tall hedge and um a couple trees that are planted there as well and the windmill is right up against the edge of the property uh on the south end of the property and you can see in this image the uh direction of the windmill blades are actually um you can see them right there one thing we're proposing to do is rotate them so they are visible from Shore Road okay you can move ahead Jonathan so what we wanted to do is preserve the salt box in the original form not only preserve it restore it to a something that is cherished by the community as best we can um so we Stripped Away many of the additions and things that were done over time to the original pure salt box form um so everything in red here is the removal of all many of the additions and changes who've been CH some of it is partly original but most of it has been changed and modified the majority of the salt box in fact from the interior has been modified as well um so we want to restore it as best we can and relocate it to the front end of the property the salt box is also something that we wanted to preserve keep and um make maintain visibility from both the water and from the road go to the next one Jonathan so this shows the two sections of the building that we're restoring and relocating the salt box is moving from the red there up to the front end of the road and what we'd like to do is sort of give that back to the community because so it's a cherished sort of um historic building that is restored by Doug whitla and put uh back to the community instead of what's there now which is a tall row of Hedges and a couple trees and then we also want to pull it out of the coastal zone and the 100t buffer as well as the windmill you see the original location of the windmill we want to pull it back from the coast um to help preserve it put it on a new foundation and pull it out of the 50-ft buffer zone if we go you can go to the next one Jonathan oh and we also um you can go back Jonathan thank you for the reminder you we're rotating the windmill blades right now the way it's set up there was a the windmill blades are actually blocked by the structure so they don't look like they operate you can't physically rotate them so we want to bring it to something that's more authentic uh looking so we are rotating them facing them towards Shore Road this way they'll actually look like they can physically turn so this is a highlight of the footprint of the existing non-conformities which are on the top you can see the existing house and garage are right up against the 50ft buffer zone and uh the windmill is also almost right up against the Coastal Bank so what we want to do is pull the windmill back out of the 50ft buffer and pull the new house plan back out of the one 100t buffer and improve the non-conformity the footprint is about 747 ft less than the current non-conformity the um setbacks are increased by um from 18 in to 29 in on the North side the windmill setback is increased right now from 6 in to we're proposing 7 feet and the volume in fact it's not just footprint but the physical volume of the non-conformity is getting reduced by 872 cubic feet go to the next one so this just identifies how we've uh the existing house and the new house how we've pulled the um how we've reduced the volume uh physically and also the footprint is overall um under the coverage requirement for the zoning requirements it's under the 10% requirement go to the next one Jonathan so what does that mean and how does it feel this is an example of the road right now as it sits there's a 8 foot about eight 7 to 8 foot tall hedge on the property with two large trees behind it we intend to remove that the set of uh Hedges and Bill's going to share a little more about how we're going to do that and how we're going to um support that with sort of some documentation um to the proposed design which is going to eliminate the Hedge expose the windmill potentially open views up over the Roses of Sharon hedge on the right side which is going to be kept lower and on the left as well um so this really celebrates and brings the salt box the historic structure to the community to the street and that serves as a um sort of a um you know a token of the history of this place and um it's important to us and the owners to preserve that go to the next one Jonathan so this is on the north side of the property if we go to the South this is the current view you're sort of looking directly at a hedge um and then if we go to the proposed view we eliminate that hedge we uh keep the plantings low along the street we create an access way a visual access to the windmill on this property and you can see how the windmill blades are actually facing in this direction so they're more visible from this side and they're authentic in the fact that they can actually rotate and the Ros of Sharon hedge on the right side are being kept down as well from the beat um you know the house is made from shingles white trim the goal here is to have it blend into the coastline we've broken the scale down into smaller forms um and the intent is to make it feel like a series of cottages that were added on over time so each individual component isn't overly massive we've separated them by a gap between the C Cal section and the two sides um to sort of emphasize that aesthetic I think so this is a diagram um Tom and Michelle Jennings were happy to they met with um neighbors uh to make sure everyone was happy and if there was any concessions or any changes that the may we could make um you know we worked with them and uh developed this plan there's Zone in the front of the property which limits the height of the um plant material to 5 ft high and then the next from us Benchmark which is basically from the road slightly different than the road but very close to the road elevation so it'll limit that height to 5T then the next zone is B it limits to about 3 and 1/2 ft and then Zone C to about 1T and the reason why it s seems like it steps down is because it's from a benchmark Mark elevation not from the grade itself so it stays pretty much flat across no higher than 5T from the road um and it in fact slopes downward toward the property line to to maintain perspective view down to the water and with that I can let Bill explain a little further um the next parts thank you thank you Tom um I'll going into the the criteria and then talk more about the suggested condition as to adequacy of site including building coverage and setbacks not withstanding the slight shortage of Frontage we have multiple sideline and as Tom indicated Coastal Conservancy District non-conformities but the site has been adequate for uh the house or houses and the windmill for the last 100 years if you approve the special permit as I trust you will do you can do so based on the finding that the site is adequate for the preserved salt boox and windmill along with construction of a new family home coverage complies setback encroachments are either eliminated or reduced as the compatibility of size on the third sheet of the handout that you have the Lots in the neighborhood vary considerably in size our lot is actually the largest in the neighborhood uh it currently has coverage of 7.8% of the buildable Upland just 4.9% of the entire lot and it has currently three down from four structures it's in the mid-range of a gross floor area and has a relatively small living area if you approve the special pyramid again as shown in the third page of the handout it will remain compatible but the focus will now be on the salt box and the windmill the new house will be located downhill and behind the salt box the gross floor area is proportionate to the size of the lot uh coverage complies at 99.9% of buildable Upland 6.1% of of the overall lot the footprint even with the salt box and the windmill is smaller than that at of 157 across the street or 168 next door uh the latter lot being half the size of the Locust of of this property as to the extent of increase in non-conformity there is none uh the structures are being moved back from the shoreline we're eliminating the coastal Conservancy District nonconformity and also making it safer we're reducing both the North and southernly sideline nonconformities and coverage remains compliant While others in the neighborhood are up to 15% where 10% is is what the maximum allowed as to suitability of site uh the site is suit certainly suitable for residential use as it has been for the 100 plus years since the structures were moved there and expanded uh the had there has been as I indicated extensive review by the Conservation Commission we made very responsive uh changes to every suggestion that they made um the house itself is being completely removed from their jurisdiction it's entirely out of the adjacent Upland resource area and the windmill is being moved out of the no disturb Zone scale sighting Mass use and Vistas or streetscape there is as you are all I suspect aware uh a long history of views of the classic Windmill and the salt box and that came to an end maybe 10 years ago uh Tom and Michelle had absolutely no involvement in that situation but if you approve the special permit sighting of the salt box and the windmill are significantly improved the scale is appropriate the main house is not particularly visible but even from the water side thinking about the view that the other Mr Acton would have taken years ago it has a small and appropriate view from the water it's designed as Tom indicated to minimize scale but the single most important reason to proove the special permit is restoration of views of the windmill preservation of the salt box and Improvement of the streetcape you have in front of you I think it's the fourth sheet on your handout uh some proposed conditions and I will go through them with you so that Sarah doesn't have to read them later or that some member of the board if assuming you adopt them doesn't have to read them um in order to improve the public streetscape and enhance public and neighborhood views and vistas of chadam Harbor and the salt box and and windmill uh Tom and Michelle uh agreed to the following as a condition of approval One removing and not replacing the existing Privet Hedge and the two trees along the Westerly Street line The Shore Road sign of the subate property and as shown on the site plans that were up there earlier the the colored ones uh which will be on file with the board of appeals and we're asking to be incorporated by reference into the special permit we would agree that in zone a closest to the street uh the homeowner will maintain all planting vegetation to a to a height not more than 5 ft above a Stak set elevation which is 39.37 in zone B further toward the water uh approximately shown as of those plans the homeowner petitioner will maintain all plantings and vegetation to a height not more than 3 and 1/2 ft above the Stak set and then in zone C which is the pink area at the North and and at the South uh we'll maintain all plantings vegetation starting at Zone B and moving downward to a height of not more than 3 and a half ft diminishing to a height at the westernmost facade of the proposed dwelling the new home not more than one foot above the Stak elevation along the southerly line Zone c will remain at a level elevation not more than 1T foot above that height finally we would ask that of course as as is true of any condition that you impose that it would maintain uh it would be in effect absent review by the board for the future which we don't expect to request uh with that condition uh the town and the neighborhood have a significant Improvement in views and Vistas the other criteria compatibility of use it's a residential use Town Water Town sewer the chair will read a letter from the health agent indicating that uh the septic system needs to be reviewed it does we already have in place a five-bedroom restriction uh the new system will be engine has been engineered and will be submitted to the Board of Health assuming approval there are no issues there traffic flow and safety is not significantly an issue and I would ordinarily say no change however I will admit that this is and always has been a draw for photographers and we cannot guarantee you if you approve the special perm that there won't be people taking pictures of what youve approved in fact I hope that does occur uh so the question is as you know whether preserving the historic Windmill and the classic salt box to be relocated to enhance the Shore Road and neighborhood streetscape with construction of a new home at the rear and largely below sight lines is substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood Tom and Michelle purchased the house next door at 154 sh Road almost 10 years ago and they showed their dedication to the neighborhood and its preservation by their success in preser in preserving and restoring 154 like most of us they long admired sir sir mayor or the Weller property and when it became available uh they made a commitment to continue their efforts unlike some buyers they never gave a second's thought to demolishing either of the historic structur as Tom has indicated preserving them was a goal from the start Shore Road residents care deeply about their neighborhood we all care about our neighborhoods but they are not shy about opposing changes they find inappropriate as some of you will recall from prior hearings here Tom and Michelle worked extensively with their neighbors and their design team over the course of a couple of years to develop those plans which I think you can find are sensitive to the site uh which serve their needs Tom and Michelle's needs but also those in the neighborhood that there is strong neighborhood support and the chair will read letters speak to their success in developing appropriate plans and to the importance of this project uh coverage in height are below the limit the non-conformities are decreased rather than increased the main house is essentially without impact on the streetscape there's nothing detrimental and certainly not substantially so but I think those considerations I think you can find that they pale uh before the positive the gains for the neighborhood the town and the public in general from moving and preserving the antique house and the windmill uh coupled with the condition mandating the preservation of the sight lines and the views of of chadam Harbor U the bylaws purpose as the chair often refers to the purpose of the bylaw and she knows this the bylaws purpose is to encourage those qualities which distinguish shadam as a desirable community and specifically preserving for the present and future inhabitants of chadam of the natural architecture Ural and historic assets of the Comm natural architectural and historic assets of the community granting the special perit does all three of those things views of chadam Harbor are a natural asset and they will be enhanced the architectural Grace and style of the Joshua bur house will be preserved and the historic importance of the windmill uh will be preserved all of those goals are served by this proposal so in light of the Criterion the plans I think you can prove these special permit find that it is not at all detrimental and is instead a positive Improvement for the community we'd be happy to answer any questions thank you very much is there anybody here or on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application please raise your hand if so seeing none I have seven letters to read first one received on July 17th from Irwin Stockwell no stle he lives at uh 157 Shore Road directly across the street from 162 Shore Road he wants to thank the partitioner for reaching out to his family and neighborhood at large and agreeing to condition to a condition to improve the existing streetcape and enhance public and neighborhood views and vistas of chadam Harbor the historic softbox and windmill are as a condition of the special permit with this condition in place our family is in full support of the proposed Redevelopment of the property and the issuance of the requested special permit next we have a letter from our health agent Judith Giorgio dated 7:16 2024 she's reviewed the plan to add um a renovate and relocate parts of the dwelling and adjacent structures the property was approved for five bedrooms by the Board of Health in 2006 and is deed restricted the windmill is approved as a home office Studio only the plan does not appear to add any additional septic flow however the dwelling in pool area encroached on the existing tanks a plan must be submitted to the health department locating the new tank a permit must be issued prior to construction next we have a letter dated July 9th 2024 from the Conservation Commission and they tell us that as to 162 Road um the applicant submitted a notice of intent that was heard on October 4th 2023 and 118 20123 the project was continued to August 7th 2024 to allow time for the applicant to apply to Historic and zba for approval of the project the project will be revised and conditioned to meet the performance standards of the wetlands protection act next we have a letter from Christina Basset from the um the let's see historical commission dated June 24th 2024 and that says that the commission found the home historically significant but the changes do not materially diminish its historical significance so therefore they did not impose a demolition delay next we have a letter from Tamara basil from July 15 2024 she writes that um we own the property at 146 sh Road adjacent to 162 we are writing in support of the application of our neighbors Michelle and Tom Jennings to preserve and enhance the antique soft boox house and move the windmill while building a new home at 162 Shore Road we think the project is sensitive to the location to our neighborhood and to the need to preserve the salt boox and windmill we are also pleased the salt boox will be clearly visible from Shore Road and that the windmill and water will be more VIs visible from the street as they are currently blocked by a hedge along Shore Road we support the request and encourage you to approve the proposal next we have a letter dated July 12th 2024 from Michael Baker 166 Shore Road a budding home owner he says that he's a longtime owner of the property located at 166 Shore Road quotations the sandbox and he is an AB to 162 Tom and Michelle Jenner have shared their plans with me and I very much support what they are proposing I watched several years ago as Tom and Michelle purchased restored and modestly expanded the home at 154 after it had been abandoned for a decade the genst did a wonderful thoughtful considerate job on that restoration and I believe they will do the same to the abiding property at 162 as their plans clearly indicate the property now in question 162 had been in the same family 100 years and had unfortunately been neglected over recent decades it was a virtual ruin when Tom and Michelle bought it a year or two ago and quite frankly I think they might be the only people in the state who would go to the trouble to preserve move and restore the original softbox and windmill house now on the property anyone else most certainly any developer would tear these two structures down and likely build a monstrosity in their place instead the Jenis plan will restore the structures worth preserving and improving while building a modestly sized low to theeg ground new home that fits perfectly into the existing landscape in short the jennis plans are more than the best I could hope for as in a butter and the town will also be well served by approving the jous plans as presented next we have a letter from Greg Brown um he says that he resides at 132 Shore Road this is Anna and Greg Brown and our close abouts they've seen their the plans to move the existing house and Windmill and move and build a new home and they write in support of the application Michelle and Tom's willingness to take the extra care in preserving The Windmill and original portion of the existing house is to be commended and their plans reflect a sensitivity to our neighborhood we support this request and which is not at all detrimental to our neighborhood and and encourage the board of appeals to approve the special permit that concludes the letters is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that has a question or wishes to speak against this application if so please indicate seeing none questions from the board Lee I I don't have any questions everything's been covered very well very good uh Steve um just a couple of questions and mostly uh pertaining to the studio are there any changes being made to the studio other than just moving it uh there well as Tom indicated I'll let Mr mcneel join me as Tom indicated the the blades are being reconfigured there is an addition on the end of it and I don't think we're going to be well you can come up and and speak because they're your plans yeah so there's a um there's an addition that that's on the original Windmill and what we're doing is we're just shifting or modifying a window a door onto that on that section of the windmill um we're also adding some windows uh into the authentic the original part of the windmill um so they better match uh historic windmills in the town that's our hope so we wanted to look more authentic and and we did have discussions with the historical commission about those replacement windows and they approved of them and um are there utilities being brought to the windmill uh it currently has utilities it has power and so forth but there's not going to be there's no bathroom in there there that's a half bath there's a half bath there's a half bath and that will be retained it'll be largely a pool high is what it's going to become or not largely but to a degree yeah all right but it's not going to be able to support any sort of habitation AB absolutely not a bedroom we the the jenningses understand that this is a three a five bedroom property period okay uh they knew that when they bought it four years ago and they're they're going to honor that they have no choice right thank you that's it thank you David Nixon questions no questions and Ed Acton uh no questions David v no it's the only thing I'm you know looking at the renderings and things and I I wasn't paying close enough attention to this but the is the proposal to um there's an existing driveway on the property it's a proposal to shift that driveway that that driveway doesn't stay does that stay for the Jing property oddly enough the the property driveway is not on the property not on their property the property itself the current driveway is a right of way on property which Tom and Michelle happened to own that belongs to 154 right uh so 154 will well the Jennings still own it but they may not own forever that will have its own driveway we will have a I think it's portrayed as as Cog shells driveway on the property a little further to a little further to the north from where it is now so there's you're going to have actually a couple of driveways also providing view part of as part of the view quarter that is correct yeah as shown to the left of the cursor of the driveway is coming in there right in addition to the um restrictions on plantings as cor and things to it help enhance the view yeah okay that's that's all I have thanks so I just was wondering if they're hooked up to the SE they still limited to the five bedrooms uh this will be uh hooked up to sewer When Sarah's unborn grandchildren are senior citizens uh having having said that uh the nitrogen loading regulations do not apply to properties on Municipal sewer but this is not anytime even in the predicted future okay like your enthusiasm all right so um now uh Dave yeah I'll um move to uh close the hearing and and move into deliberations Dave nion I second that and vote Yes and V votes yes and um St I vote Yes and Lee I vote Yes as do I so deliberations I think I'll do the same thing that with Lee again okay um well this is a beautiful spot it's um uh I think it's going to be a great project it's a big project I really commend the Jennings for even taking this on um I really appreciate the fact that they are preserving and celebrating the history of the salt box and moving it to the road um I am always in favor of um you know kind of celebrating the historical structures in town um I think the lot is large enough so uh meets criteria number one for sure it's to accommodate all three of the structures and um I also like the view of the house through the water I appreciate the um you know the reducing the mass kind of um minimizing the scale I think it's going to look uh great from both the street and the water and um certainly not substantially more detrimental so I will approve this one okay very good Steve U well I agree with everything that Lee just said I I most um appreciate the fact that you're going to be restoring or maintaining the original house and uh I think it's a great project and um you know thank you for sharing your your gem with the rest of Chad okay thank you Dave Nixon hi most impressed by the thoughtfulness of your client Mr litfield uh not only from the the views of the windmill the water and the whole nine yards it's uh when I went out there I didn't realize that I was just kind of looking at how these things are going to be H firsted around and all that but with your explanation and also the gentleman you brought with you uh it's this is uh this is beyond expectations and I hope it's something that others want to emulate very good and Ed Acton deliberations yeah uh I'll be brief I'm not voting today uh but I think it's uh very well thought out um I I like the fact that it preserves some of the history of chadam it opens up the views and um certainly meets all of our criteria and David Beach yeah I agree with all the previous really an extraordinary job um and I was um as I recall Bill wasn't there a time when the previous owners of the property actually considered replacing the uh the old house and they were convinced to see I have I'm not supposed to speak but you asked my question I have in my file in case I need it what was proposed 20 years ago to make us look extraordinarily good yeah yes yes so that was that was it was great to see the house saved at that point um and then I was much saddened to see the Hedge uh put up there I kind of felt like the whole town lost something at that point so I very much commend um the the Jennings for um rectifying that situation and putting the old salt box up there where it's more prominent I'm sure they'll I forgot to ask some questions about the restoration I'm sure they'll do a very good job with the restoration of the house as well uh given I mean look like the windows were probably all replaced at some point and some of them in maybe not the the best way but I'm sure they'll do a good job with all of that and and so I'm I'm I'm very enthusiastically supporting this I think it's it it really this this is a response that this property deserves and thank you thank you so I will support it and I would just I agree with all my colleagues and I just think that the owners are humble and kind I mean they're not even putting the the large house to Showcase and show off you know you can't even see it so I I I'm touched by that and uh I think it's the best project I've seen since I've been on the board so uh thank you for your presentation and uh thank you Dave so uh well I guess then with the question about I mean we about conditions uh Bill any what's your input on as far as yeah thank you if I could M chairman we obviously wanted the condition we proposed in terms of the so-called usual conditions Tom and Michelle don't want to bother their neighbors uh so we would accept a June 30th Labor Day no exterior construction sometimes and and Mr Simple usually reads it yeah is there a an hourly limit in the off seon as part of the standard I didn't think so no they they those tend to fall when the standard ones fall between June 30th and Li and and we could we could accept that uh but there won't be any exterior construction during the summer months we'd like however in order to get it buttoned up by June 30th to probably start at you know 5:00 a.m. and work till 5:00 P pm. the I think the nearest butter on a year round basis lives in New York uh the basil live in Atlanta uh no there's nobody else in the N well Tom and Michelle live in Welsley but there's nobody else in the neighborhood so but but during be during the summer season we usually have the hourly but in the rest rest of the season they follow whatever the town guidelines are yeah I I just about to say excuse me that the town guidelines are not going to support a 5 a.m stat I I understand that I I understand that it was an overstatement so um I will um um um move approval of application number 24 uh- 071 uh as presented um by the applicant uh with the conditions that um all construction activity and vehicles should be contained on site or at a neighboring property with a permission of the property owner and that between June 30th and Labor Day no no exterior construction will be allowed no work will be permitted on the weekends and construction activity between 8: a.m. and 5 p.m. only in addition to that uh we would incorporate the conditions that bill read and suggested which all of us have seen and read and agreed to uh so I will make that motion very good um I would suggest that we not burden these folks with our usual conditions the extent that they have gone to I think it gives them a pass they're not going to do these things to bother their neighbors they're just not going to do it and I honestly think we only need the conditions that were laid out by Mr lville that the rest of them we should just leave alone well you know Dave I agree with you on that actually I mean really this they've certainly demonstrated enough concern that we don't need to to so I will withdraw the my um that part of my motion okay and we will just go with the conditions as proposed by and I just like to check like I've learn from the the best does anybody else have a problem with that are you okay with that Ed I'm fine with that yeah and Steve I'm fine we I I personally like the summer conditions yeah and I don't so sorry okay we'll go for it oh so I I will reiterate the motion to um um approve application number 24- 071 um as presented with the um uh conditions the list of conditions that um Bill lill read and and we have all seen and and agree to okay I second that and vote Yes and Dave each votes yes and Steve Steve the board votes yes I vote Yes as do I thank you very much and that was unanimous for the record okay moving along to 230 barcliffe Avenue Robin and Dena young and uh that's GNA be Mr norros after Sarah reads the advertisement application number 24- 069 Robert and Dena young car of James of North Cross Esquire PO Box 707 chadam Mass 02633 owners of property located at 230 barcliff Avenue also shown in the town of chadam assessors map 14g block 71 Lot 10 the applicant proposed to change alter expand a conforming dwelling on a non-conforming in non-conforming garage on a non-conforming lot be the demolition of the existing dwelling and garage and the construction of a new dwelling and garage the proposed dwelling and garage will comply with all bul and dimensional requirements of the bylaw but is considered a substantial alteration and under the second except Clause of section six of Mass General Law chapter 40a such substantial alteration requires the grant of a special permit the existing building coverage is 1,698 Square ft and the proposed building coverage is 2767 ft where 2,900 ft is the maximum allowed the LW is non-conforming and that it contains 23,25 squ ft where 40,000 ft is required in the R40 zoning District a special permit is required in Mass General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protected bylaw Mr nor attorney Norcross and I presume that's Robert Young yes yes ma'am okay good afternoon uh Jamie Norcross represent name Bob and Bob's wife Donna is with us today in the red and white shirt in the audience um the Young's purchased this property about a year and a half ago but they've owned properties in chadam going back almost 25 years now and um they have two uh adult children uh with the prospects of uh an expanding family in the not too distant future is their hope and so a couple years ago they started looking for a property in town that they could really create uh more of a Homestead Property where all the family could come and stay and Bob and Donna had previously owned in this neighborhood on the other side of old Harbor really loved this neighborhood and so when this property came on the market they were excited to be able to uh purchase it and um Bob and Donna who own a construction business in New York are very familiar with the process so they uh quickly got to work at looking at um how they could create additional living area at the property whether through a renovation addition or a um or a full rebuild and so um for a number of reasons which Bob can explain as well the um the rebuild uh became the better option for them and for their family and so the proposal is to demolish the existing four-bedroom house and the rear uh detach garage and replace it with a new four-bedroom house and a new um detach garage also at the rear of the property they like that style with the separate garage they thought that had to maintain a nice look in terms of some of the historic character of the property it's similar to a lot of the other properties in this area that have a a separate structure on the property and as a as a helpful byproduct it also uh helps in assisting uh excuse me assists in reducing the mass of the of the project as well by having the separate garage structure at the back that's behind the proposed um single family house um before going into the numbers um I was going to ask Bob to to run through um his uh thought process on the design and some of the architectural features uh thank you very much for allowing us to present today uh we're excited about the uh location of uh this property for us and our family um and if I can go through uh we purposfully uh designed the house to to limit its scale uh in particular the main Ridge is is set two feet lower than what's uh allowed on the on current zoning um also uh the right side Gable a little bit hard to see in this uh two-dimensional model but uh that Gable on the right hand side is approximately uh two to three feet lower than the ridge y there's multiple copies there's multiple cop I'm sorry there's just a one if you don't mind passing those around pict is worth a thousand words do I have uh so you can see in the three-dimensional Model A little bit better uh where the uh the main Ridge uh again is two feet lower than what's allowed and the right hand Gable is approximately 2 feet uh 3 feet lower than uh the main Ridge and set back uh from the front elevation of the house in addition the left side Gable is approximately four to 5T low within the main Ridge also reducing the scale of the um of the house as you uh from the front uh from barcliffe um uh we purposely um uh created the uh shed dormers on the on the sides um of the of the Gable to again to give it more character more sight lines and to reduce the overall scale the uh first floor elevation of the uh ceilings is 9t second floors are 8 foot uh thereby allowing us to keep the height of the house uh a little bit lower and although the house is um um about approximately a th000 square fet uh larger than the previous house some of that uh as required in the calculation is to uh include areas uh such as the front porch uh the overhangs so the actual physical uh size of the house is is not indicative of the 1,62 square feet larger than than uh than the previous home we we do like the idea of keeping the I don't like driving down streets and seeing garages in the front uh especially in this in this location so we uh we like the idea of having the garage and the doors are also facing on the side uh that um uh on the side of the garage uh where the current garage is Al the doors are facing barcliff so it really gives the impression that that there's an old barn back there [Music] um uh open for questions we'll get to that great great thank you Bob um just to touch on some of the numbers uh it's a it's a fairly large lot for this area it's over 23,000 Square ft uh it is non-conforming because this is an R40 zoning District um we also have over 100 ft of Frontage um but 150 fet is required so we are a bit shy uh in terms of conforming with regard to Frontage uh the existing garage is non-conforming as it's located 13 and 1 12 ft from the north lot line and 19.8 ft from the uh East lot line where 25 foot setbacks is required um the proposed house and garage uh will meet all dimensional setbacks um it's going to be below the maximum building coverage and will be below uh the height requirement in terms of building coverage um it is a fairly substantial increase we're going from 7.3% to 11.9% um that is still below the 12.5% uh maximum allowed for this uh zoning district and includes both the um the house and the detached garage in that calculation our proposed setback is 40 A5 fet so we comply with the 40ft setback required in our 40 Zone which is I think a bit unusual for this neighborhood when many are in fact closer than the 40 ft um and then in terms of our height uh the existing height is 232 fet and the proposed height will be 28.2 feet uh so moving along to the criteria number one adequacy of the site in terms of size for the proposed use as I mentioned this is one of the larger Lots in the neighborhood with over 23,000 ft of area um the proposed house and garage will meet all dimensional setbacks and will be below the 12 1 12 maximum building cover allowed for the property uh compatibility of the size of the proposed structure with neighboring properties um the neighborhood as you drive through you'll see is a real mixture of differ Siz homes and different Siz Lots uh I provided a comparison of gross floor area numbers for the project and I think it demonstrates that the overall size is actually consistent with a number of properties along barcliffe Avenue uh in particular those properties that are located closer to Old Harbor Road um this is a location where I think it's a bit hard to determine the neighborhood as you're going through and doing that gross floor area analysis CU you can go really four directions so I kind of went from Dairy Street over to Old Harbor and I thought as you drive down that's really the neighborhood in my opinion at least for this property and so we included some numbers for properties that AB but on COD Lane which are are smaller but as you get closer to Old Harbor I think our numbers are actually pretty consistent with some especially those at the end and we have a larger lot than most of those properties um I'd also point out that in terms of our G gross floor are number almost 2,000 ft comprises the basement and the detached garage uh and finally by m maintaining a separate structure that is located behind the main house at least as viewed from barcliffe it further reduces the impact of that additional square footage on the um it wasn't on the version of the gross floor area analysis that I emailed to Sarah yesterday but on the version I handed out I added today was going through and looking up the number of stories as listed by the assessor for all those properties as we have essentially a two-story and you'll see as I discovered there's a number of two-story properties uh that are included in this area ones that are considered 1.9 1.95 which I would say is essentially 2 1.85 so again I think by adding the Second Story we're still consistent with uh the neighborhood extent of the proposed increase in non-conforming nature of the structure or use um the lot is non-conforming and therefore the increase in living area does constitute an increase in the non-conforming nature of the structure however there's no other non-conformities proposed by this project and we're actually removing two current dimensional non-conformities suitability of the site um site is suitable for the project and the rebuild it'll have no negative impact on neighboring Properties or in the natural environment impact of scale setting and Mass on neighborhood visual character uh we'd suggest the project will not have a negative impact on neighborhood visual character um the size of the home is is undoubtedly increasing uh but I think this is mitigated by several factors uh first as I mentioned the home will be set back over 40 ft from barcliff Avenue which I think alleviates concerns relative to the structure overwhelming the streetscape this is also a situation where it's about a 10 to 15ot difference between the traveled surface and the lot line so as as you drive by it's probably closer to 50 55 feet setback from barcliffe Avenue uh and and the setback at 40 feet as measured from the lot line I think is as you drive around there seems to be further away than many of the other other homes uh and as mentioned by Bob the design utilizes the Dormers to further reduce the mass in while allowing for the increased area on the second story so again even though it is larger uh we think it is still compatible with neighboring properties and does it negatively impact on fuse and Vistas uh number six it's a residential use in a residential neighborhood number seven we have adequate water and drainage uh a new septic system will be installed as part of the project uh 8 n no impact negative impact on traffic flow and safety there'll be no no noise and litter uh have adequate utilities and 11 and 12 12 are not applicable in this case uh so just briefly to sum up uh again it's a change but we think it's a change that's compatible with the neighborhood um I think it's consistent with a lot of the projects that have taken place in the area and we certainly don't think it's substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood thank you thank you is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application if so please raise your hand seeing none I will read the two correspondences one is from Judith Georgio dated 7:16 2024 she reviewed the proposed plan for the property the existing property has five bedrooms and the proposed dwelling will maintain the five-bedroom layout a new septic system is proposed plans for the new septic system must be submitted and permit issued prior to the construction of the proposed property then we have a note from Christina Basset from the um historical commit they found the house to be historically significant and that the changes do materially diminish the home's historic significance they imposed an 18month demolition delay in July of 2023 that is set to expire January 18th 2025 and we received that on July 16th 2024 um is there anybody here on Microsoft team seems that wishes to speak against the application or has a specific question seeing none would you like to respond to that um 18month delay or um I can touch on it briefly um once Bob and Donna determined that the the um the rebuild was the Avenue they're going to pursue we filed the demolition for the Dem demolition Delay about a year ago maybe a little bit more before they had plans done and the um based on the age and it was on had a Form B so the historical commission um determined it was historically significant and imposed the demo delay so um they haven't seen these plans we didn't think it would necessarily change their um as it's a demolition as opposed to a remodel I don't think it was really going to change their determination um so we did not go back to them with the revised plans okay or or the plans in general it was just uh we just went to them uh saying we're planning to demolish without because we didn't have plans yet and that's where they issued the so they almost had no choice but to say pretty much okay I was right good enough um questions from the board Dave um yeah so I just preface the my questions are I'm I'm just curious um and then because it's not really zoning related but I'm just curious about the the trees some of the trees on the property that look like they're they're going to be lost uh in the process and I wondered if he'd given thought to finding ways to do things that you you weren't going to eliminate and it's one of those trees there uh thank you for bring bringing that up uh there is a large uh Beach tree in the front yard yeah that we're going to talk with their our civil engineer to see if we could uh remove the septic system and my wife and I decided that let's see if we could do with this turnaround whether or not we could move it or eliminate it and save that beat street that was my question that would be great if you could do that that's a gorgeous tree yeah that one beat tree is important I think and then there is another Beach tree in the back but it looks like that's too close to the proposed house uh there's another Maple far back but I think that's outside the back of the um the garage yeah I I just kind of wanted to showed the new garage being kind of close to that Maple back there but um you know again this isn't a Zone in consideration but I I just I I happen to be out there on one of these really hot days I went you know shade is is important is an important consideration uh that's all I have to than and I had it sorry just real quick I had a chance to talk to Thad before in the hallway and he said he's confident they can put the septic on a different location so I think that would be a great thing to do obviously what about the driveway um uh Mr Young said they we're we'll we'll do something with that turnaround or eliminate it if we have to go back to thank you uh questions Ed Aon sure um I'm just curious the uh the bathroom off of the garage I'm just wondering what the purpose of that is or what thought is you know when you come home and you parking in your detach garage and you gotta go you gotta go it just makes it that much quicker um uh good enough thank you okay now we'll go to Dave Nixon thank you I have no questions Steve questions um just one is there any uh living quarters planned for above the garage or no no no okay that a consideration one point but again when they're trying to sort of uh tailor things a bit they they um decided just to use that purely for G I think there's attic space above but no living space okay that's it thank you um my question was about the tree as well because it's beautiful so I'm happy to hear that you're going to try to save it and work around it thank you and you know I was concerned about the tree too and I'm hoping that we're going to condition it that you save that tree would that work for you no problem and I do see we're also we're also special attached to beach trees for other reasons personal reasons but uh that treason as of today when I went there because I hadn't seen it since the last time we were here it uh it it looks very healthy it does because I do see that as part of our criteria um the impact of skill sighting in Mass on neighborhood visual character um and also um the uh attention to the environment so I do see it as part of it so um okay so at this point we'll close the hearing yeah I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations I second that and say Yes be votes yes Steve votes yes I vote Yes as do I okay deliberations uh Dave Nixon I have no concerns whatsoever about this I I understand your wish to make a more modern bigger home I understand that and this lot can handle it so I have no no concerns okay and Ed Acton deliberations um yeah I you do have one of the larger Lots in the area so um it it certainly seems like um this this design this uh with the detach garage the uh bathroom off the detach garage um maybe that would support a pool later perhaps you know um so uh I have uh I have no problem with with this I think it meets our criteria thank you y Dave Beach yeah I um I was um I I could understand looking at the the house that's there I could understand a desire to replace it and start a new and I think the um the design um honors the house that's there and and it's actually a very nice design um and um I think think that um the the lot can support it um as as others have said it's certainly not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood uh it's an improvement and uh meets of our criteria we'll support it thank you uh Steve uh well I'm I'm glad to see that you um that the uh setbacks are being corrected uh for the most part and it's not over massing the the property um it's a great design thank you for this picture this helps a lot um you know and and it's a nice design that makes it sort of blend into the neighborhood so I think it would be a big asset yes and Le um I agree with my colleagues it's a great project it U meets our criteria and um we'll be a great addition to the neighborhood yeah and I I agree with everything I'm just I'm really um honored that you're willing to save the tree um and uh I'm looking at this property in your hands as a blessing because this could have gone another way way as we all know if it was another person we could have had three or four hearings on this and uh but this was great thank you thank you all right well now let's talk about conditions uh here I mean first so the first thing comes to my mind comes to mind for me is G given the demolition delay that's been imposed on them how what's what are our feelings about you know our our summer work conditions uh and and Jamie I'm up to what your thoughts are or Bob um you know yeah I mean we would again I guess worst case the the demo delay won't be um uh reduced at all so I think we would like to be able to do some work in the summertime I mean it is a very large lot uh certainly plenty of room for the vehicles um it's pretty well screened with vegetation from neighboring properties as well so um I mean that area is tight but I think that particular spot where we are is a little bit more open um than others so if the board would consider that I think we'd like to do again maybe perhaps with restricted hours but but the not but but perhaps allowing exterior construction during that time period but you still have to go to hisor and how long does that take for them to if they what does everybody else think of that what do you think should be summer restrictions um yeah but I'm not sure they can do anything until January oh they can't so will be next year right the next summer next sum next following summer if I may if we if the historic board we go to them or or we wait until January uh we could have our permits our plans ready to go for submission to the building department for approval and I would think that we we could probably get you the uh house constructed you know by by June the whole thing and and well and be able to work inside like you did on the previous application okay well we can still so are you opposed to the summer uh restrictions or or not you'd rather not have them okay let's just we're just going to see what everybody thinks of that because this is not the same neighborhood as the other one so everybody's an individual big big noise digging and you know hammer and nails that kind of stuff you know we suspect we could get you know get the house up by uh by summer Y no sounds good uh Le you want the summer restrictions um uh I normally like them I think this lot is big enough I think if they start in January then they I agree I think they can probably get the exterior done by June but if they don't but if they don't um I don't know I'll wait and hear whatever you wantse what it's okay yeah yeah what everyone else has to think all right to say all right so you want the restrictions Su okay got it Dave I mean Ed Acton your thoughts on that um I feel the lot is is large enough and I feel like we should spread the wealth of construction to everyone not just a summer resonance yeah for sure Dave what do you think yeah I I think in this case um uh that I I I i' like to keep the timing of you know the work timing in summer I'd like to impose condition on that but I try to look for the times the times where we don't need to have the the exterior construction I think this is this is one of them I can go either way if we if if we were to impose it we can certainly revisit it if they if they were if they you know from supply chain issues or something got hung up it could come to us to take it off we can always do that they can always try we can do that I think we should vote on this one because this is barclift and we've heard a lot of War stories about barclift and so this is one of the streets where I think there's a concern and so um why don't we vote who wants full summer restrictions just we'll do do a raise your hande Okay who wants that I can go along with it yeah okay so we're going to do that and and then just clarify with respect to the tree Randy did you want to make oh yes and also that you may you do not uh take down the beach tree I'm not sure how we should phrase that it's the first time I mentioned on this one are there two in the front yard or just one was one beach tree I guess the beach tree in the front of the house I mean as long as we but I think we wouldn't we um sort of qualify that to to that it be determined to be a healthy Tree by an arborist or something I I don't I'm just rather than a blanket I I'm how about unless and until arist said that it's uh on its way out I'm sorry say that again so unless and until an arist opined that it's basically dying a really dying imminent death it looks too healthy it looks very healthy yeah so okay do that so okay so I will um move uh for approval of uh application number 24 d 069 um as presented um with the following conditions um that all construction activity in vehicles be contained on site or at a neighboring property with permission of the property owner um between June 30th and Labor Day no exterior construction will be allowed no work should be permitted on the weekends construction activity between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. only the uh now with respect to the um um Beach tree Beach tree the front Beach tree in the in the front yard that the tree shall remain uh shall remain unless an arborist uh determines that it is an imminent uh um stress stress or it's come j sir will go okay uh the beach tree at the front of the property shall be preserved unless an until determined by an arur that it cannot be saved okay yep that's okay with Mr Young all right fair enough um okay so let's vote well oh second Dave Nixon I second that and I vote Yes and Dave and V votes yes Steve Steve deor votes yes I vote Yes as do I it's unanimous congratulations thank you thank you very much his ways next application is going to be 68 Squanto drive when SAR is ready to read the ad the ad application number 24-72 uh Lewis Hosmer Christopher holl Christopher hner and Janice hner Fields car of William G litfield Esquire 330 Orleans Road North cedam Mass 02650 owners of property located at 68 Squanto drive also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 10c block 23 lot E2 the applicant proposes to change alter expand a non-conforming exterior mechanical system Appliance and a non-con on a non-conforming lot via the installation of an additional exterior mechanical system Appliance the existing AC condenser is non-conforming and that it is located 14.1 ft from the Easter Le butter the proposed generator will be non-conforming and that it will be located 12 ft from the Easter Le butter where a 15t setback is required also proposed is the reconfiguration of the existing Coastal stairway the lot is non-conforming and that it contains 15,6 sare ft or 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5 V of the protective bylaw attorney litfield welcome back thank you madam chair in village field here on behalf of uh the holzner family who own 68 Squanto drive when I was passing out paperwork I said sort of s voce that I could get this done in four minutes and one member went like that I don't think it was too v v for victory either uh but this is a very simple request we have existing air conditioning compressors on the east side of the property adjacent to them we would like to locate an emergency generator we looked at all sorts of other locations this is the ideal one the other change is hardly noticeable we want to reconfigure the top of the stairs angle it a little bit closer to the house itself rather than the neighbor's house so with that'll go into the criteria is adequacy of site I think you can find it to be adequate for the minor reconfiguration of the top of the stairs the installation of the emergency generator there's no size at issue for either the generator or the stairs the extent of increase is 2.1 ft uh but as you know from having been out there it's hidden by a hedge and again it's adjacent to the existing compressors and only runs during power outages as to suitability it's been reviewed favorably of the Conservation Commission they already issued an order of conditions which they don't ordinarily do before they hear from you there's no scale sighting Mass uh at issue no change in use which is residential and as to noise except for weekly testing the generator only operates uh during power failures and I actually have the decimal rating here it's very low so I think that you can find that the proposed changes are not substantially detrimental to the neighborhood and that uh the proposal warrants the grant of a special permit thank you is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application if so please make it known seeing none I will read the one correspondence from the conservation commission dated July 9th 2024 let's see um the applicant submitted a notice of intent It Was Heard by the commission on May 1 2024 the project was issued in order conditions on May 22 2024 it was revised and conditioned to meet the performance standards under the Wetland protection act is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wish to speak against this application or has a specific question seeing none are there any questions from the board we'll do this one plenary no no okay we'll have a motion I'll move to um close the hearing and move into deliberations I second that and vote Yes V votes yes I vote Yes I vote Yes as do I okay deliberations Lee um I don't have any issues with this I think that since the AC condensers are still there are already there it's fine I mean to put the generator there there and I think it's a very modest um change to the stairway I I don't see any problems um it is a great spot yes it is uh Steve I don't have any issues I think it's a good plan all right very good DAV uh not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood it meets our criteria will support it very good and head all good with me Dave Nixon our criteria all right I agree with everybody and so um do we need any conditions no okay think we need let just so I I will um find my paper here I will move to um approve the application as submitted the application as submitted very good I second that and vote Yes and V votes yes Steve D votes yes I vote Yes as Dwight's unanimous congratulations thank you very much that was about four minutes I think you best I could you did good all right last but not least we have the treehouse on 19 Nelly's way When Sarah's ready she will read that application application number 24- 073 Paul Angelico care of th Eldridge 1038 Main Street chattam Mass 02633 owner of property located at 19 Nelly's way also shown on the town of chadam assessors map 6E block 39db lot r five the applicant proposes to change alter expand a non-conforming accessory structure and a non-conforming lot via the enclosure of the underside of the Treehouse the accessory structure will remain non-conforming located 5 ft from the Souther leab butter where a 15t setback is required and will remain 22.1 ft tall where 12 ft is the maximum allowed the building coverage will remain non-conforming at 3,51 Square ft where 2900 ft is the maximum allowed the lot contains 23464 ft² in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General law chter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the bylaw Mr Eldridge welcome good afternoon for the record that Eldridge e Southeast the property owners are in the audience Paul and Kelly are in the back here so we have the Treehouse this is one of the most unique structures that we have in town I did add some of the history history on it um and to add a little more history Paul used to own our child's house and now he's bought Kevin McDonald's old house so better watch out Jay he's after your house next so um Paul has things he needs a a little more storage room he'd like to put up a garden shed and rather than putting another structure on the property the idea is to Simply enclose what's below uh that will take away the odd mock tree that's underneath the tangle of structural members and replace it with a solid clapboard Walling couple of Windows and and a couple of doors um so just to share the The Treehouse itself Uh Kevin had built that for his grandchildren um as I lived down the road my son and daughter spent many hours with their with Kevin's grandchildren um sliding down the slide and spraying the hoses and having a bunch of fun up there so this definitely passes the kid test when their grandchildren are old enough they'll have a great time on it the building coverage will increase slightly originally this property was in a split Zone and it was conforming when Kevin built it but it was no longer conforming now as we Chang the R20 zoning dist or change the SB to R20 zoning uh there are no sheds in the immedate area nor are there tree houses so but we are just taking a unique building and making it slightly more unique we're maintaining the same setbacks uh a little bit of increase in the coverage because we would like to enclose below the deck making about 150 square ft of enclosure we really have no views or Vistas to worry about we are proposing Arbor VY and I can say that this site plan was done prior to the applicants planting a number of arities around the property to increase screening so they're not shy about planting vegetation to screen and what they did plant was pretty large um compatibility were're residential the other criteria really do not apply um we have set out with worked with all of the neighbors we've contacted all of the neighbors one letter that was in the file as of Tuesday that was one positive letter from Dan campanero who's to the South we did talk with the West chadam condo early on and the board wanted to remain neutral but they would allow the condominium owners for their own opinions that we're not sure of uh we have proposed Arbor VY screening on both those sides to help protect and block and uh other otherwise we're open to questions okay thank you for your presentation um is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application if so please indicate seeing none um I will read the three correspondences um number one there's a letter from Judith Georgio on July 16th 2024 she's our health agent and she has no concerns about the shed Treehouse structure then we have a note from the tax collector and that was on uh July 1st 2024 attached as apostle balance for to as of today for 19 Nelly's way application 24- 073 Paul Angelico for their outstanding FYI 24 real estate tax thank you in advance for your time and assistance to this matter have a great day next we have um and so there's an amount on there that I don't need to read I know of um and then there is a note from Daniel camp Camp Naro and that was uh on 78 2024 he carefully reviewed the plans for the pros garden tools shed to be built underneath the existing Playhouse proposed by Paul Angelico at 19 Nelly's way in chadam I live adjacent to the angelical property at 12 Nelly's way to the right of the property and facing the playhouse with the propose modification I feel the it will not pose any detriment of any kind I believe the modification will enhance the look of the combined Playhouse with shed structure and that it will enclose the supporting framework and the playhouse consistent with style and architecture consistent with our Nelly's way cesac and that concludes those correspondences and if I may the tax collector's address has been updated the tax bill has paid it just it went elsewhere so good to know um is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wish to speak against the application or has any questions seeing none questions from the board are there any I can go one by one yes Dave Dave Nixon I like the Treehouse the way it is okay and you know particularly the funky stuff underneath and all that wouldn't it be cost effective to figure out to put a shed someplace where I don't know that's my question to you so we could you put the site plan up again Sarah thank you so we looked at in here putting a shed in front of the The Treehouse and that would stick up in front of it um they really don't want one here because that takes away that little bit of lawn otherwise we're [Music] looking over here and that's already that's a nice landscape bed and that's the way to the basement access um there there really was no room on the property that made any sense for for a detached shed we did review it we went through as many options as we could I'm sure you did it just struck me gee it's so much simpler but can't happen oh could just they don't want it to they prefer not to because you know if you put a shed in here now you're looking at if you put it parallel with the building you're getting very close to the paved drive it's a um no they just don't want to how's that okay does anybody else have any questions will they be able to put the kids toys in there they'll be able to put Paul's toys in there what do you mean if they have kids anymore yes they'll be able to put kids toys in there all right very good very good all right so I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations I second that and vote yes and vro yes and Steve Steve votes yes and I vote yes very good and St uh deliberations uh Steve um I guess I was going to ask a question now that I'm just looking at this now um it says the proposed shed is 150 square feet um is that does that run a foul of our square footage for a shed um well it would be an accessory structure rather than a shed that point so um Garden storage sheds get the reduced setback requirement and the exemption for coverage okay when they're 100 square feet or less so this would just be a accessory structure the residential use okay okay uh Le deliberations I I don't have any problem with this I I was looking as to where they might put a shed as well I I don't really see that many um possible places I mean you don't want to take up the grass near The Treehouse cuz that's a fun play area so um I don't really have any problem with this and Dave Nixon deliberations no I asked my question okay very good and Ed no questions no deliberations you would you support it if you were voting if I was Voting uh yes I'd support it it's uh it's Unique yep it is Dave V yeah and and I guess I just commenting that I would just comment that it will I mean it won't be the finished product will not be as unique as the existing structure but it also won't look like a generic shed no so I I think it's a nice I I think it's an improvement to a certain degree or and it's certainly not substantially more detrimental to neighborhood and it meets our criteria and I would say too that it doesn't start a trend of putting sheds in the middle of the street and as a treehouse it's very chadam Mas had a slab of wood on a branch kned in that was my Treehouse so uh yes it's beautiful um all right let's vote did did I move approval okay so I I will move approval of the application uh number 24- 073 and I don't see any need for conditions uh on on it so I second and vote Yes and V votes yes Ste Steve votes yes I vot yes as do it's unanimous congratulations thank you so much and Dave Nixon has an announcement to make before we close yeah I just want everyone to know that um there will be a memorial service for Robert hestler uh the dates jump back and forth several times but Mrs hesler has decided that it can be held on July 30th which is a Tuesday and is going to be held at the Congregational Church on Main Street at The Rotary and it will start at 11 o'clock thank you all right so now we need a motion to oh what time is it we do that first all right we do I I move to adjourn okay Dave second I second then and how do you vote Yes and Ed you get to vote on that yes yeah and vot yes Steve votes yes I vote Yes as do I uh what time is it 4:39 p.m. all right good night [Music] [Music] chadam for