We're live. >> The chair knows the time is 6:02 p.m. and I am calling the meeting of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals to order. My name is Everro Henry, chair of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals. I want to welcome everyone to this meeting. We will begin with the roll
call of the ZBA members. Mrs. Slovder, >> present. >> Mr. Meadows, >> present. >> Mr. White, >> present. >> Mr. off >> present. >> The chair knows that the quorum is present. Also present tonight is Mr.
Cinta Williams, planner for the town of Amherst. Pursuant to chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 and extended through June 30th, 2027, the ability of public bodies to meet in a fully remote or hybrid manner.
This meeting will be conducted via remote means. Members of the public who wish to access this meeting may do so via Zoom or by telephone. No inperson attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the
proceedings in real time via technological means. The zoning board of appeals is a quasa judicial body that operates under the authority of chapter 48 of the general laws of the commonwealth for the purpose of promoting the health, safety,
convenience, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the town of Amherst. One of the most important elements of the Amherst zoning bylaw is section 10.38. Specific findings from this section must be made for all of her decisions.
Statutoily for a special permit. The board has 90 days from the close of a hearing to file a decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the sitting board members and is filed in the town clerk's office. Once that decision is filed with
the town clerk, there is a 20-day appeal period from the grief party to contest that decision with the relevant judicial body in the superior court. After the appeal period, the permit must be recorded at the registry of deeds to take effect.
In tonight's agenda, we will review and approve the minutes from October 23rd, 2025. We have public [clears throat] hearings on the ZBA FY2026-6 24 North Pleasant Street or Mac Murphy's
Inc. request a special permit under sections 3.52.3 which is a food and drink establishment over 200 5.041 outdoor dining and 5.042 live or pre-recorded entertainment to operate a
tavern at their new location. The said property is located on map parcel 14A-337 general business zoning district. The other public hearing will be ZBA FY2026-0365
High Street. Request a special permit under section 3.3241 converted dwelling to convert an open porch to a bedroom in one of the dwelling units. Additionally, the applicant requests modifications under section 7.90
to have more than 50% of the parking spaces be compact parking spaces allowed by section 7.104 104 for property located on map parcel 14B/90 general residents zoning districts. This meeting has been continued from
September 11, 2025 and October 23rd, 2025. We will also have the general discussion, a general public comment period, any other business not anticipated within the last 48 hours, and if there are no other agenda items,
we will adjourn. So, let's get started. The first order of business tonight is approval of the minutes from October 23rd, 2025. Has everyone had a chance to review the minutes for the meeting?
Is he heads nodding? Um, are there any corrections to be made or any updates to be made? No comments. Are there any comments or revisions to the minutes? Okay. In that event, I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes for
October 23rd, 2025 as submitted. Is there a second? >> So moved and seconded, whichever is >> been moved in second. Yeah. >> Whoever was first there. [laughter] >> It has been moved and second. This vote this vote requires a roll call vote. Mr.
Slovder. >> Mr. Offeld. Hi. >> Mr. White >> I. >> Mr. Meadows >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The motion to approve the minutes from October 23rd,
2025 has been passed um by unanimous consent. Our second agenda item is ZBA FY2026-06 24 North Pleasant Street, McMurfers, Inc. Before we open the public hearing, does anyone on the panel have anything
to declare or disclose? I see no affirmative responses. I will therefore open the public hearing and begin by reading into the record the applicant submissions for consideration for tonight's petition. There is a long list, I believe, that I
I went through. Um >> I'm I'm here. >> That's okay. Um, Mr. Stall, we will get to you in a few moments. I'm just >> Okay. Sorry. >> That's okay. >> Sorry. >> So, there are some numbered items 7352
and 7353 with which which are images of White Lion sign dated November 6, 2025. Um 7354, it's an image of Mac Murphy's Uptown Tavern sign dated 11:06, 2025. There of course is the crowd control
certification. There are five. Um there is McMurphy site plan. Um the crowd certifications I believe are uploaded on 128. The site plan on 116. And of course we have the application um dated 11:06 2025.
Um Miss Williams, did I miss anything? >> Did you read in the site plan? >> I did. Yes, I mentioned the site plan. >> Okay. And I think you've gotten everything. >> Thank you. There was a site visit um that took place and
um we had Mr. White, myself and Miss Williams was also there and of [clears throat] course we had Mr. Casey. Um there and Mr. I can chime in but the site plans the site plan was relatively straight the site visa rather was
relatively straightforward. Um nothing was being done to the existing structure that was there. It is literally my understanding is that um Mc Murphy's their building is about to be converted to um I believe residences and so they
are moving across the street. Um there is a very large industrial kitchen but the understanding is that that kitchen will not be used. Um Mc Murphy's is maintaining status as a tavern um with no food. Um and the structure that is
there other than you know personalizing it with Mcury's memorabilia and things like that there is no construction that's going to be done inside or outside. There is nothing proposed to change within the existing structure. Um, Mr. White, did I miss anything?
>> Uh, no, Mr. Chair. I think that was a pretty comprehensive uh summary. I have nothing to add. >> Thank you. So, with that, I'd like to invite the applicants or the applicants representatives to present their petition to the board at this time. And I do see Mr. Brian Stall um from Mc
Murphy's. So, Mr. stall. Can you just introduce yourself and provide your address for the record and tell us what you're asking of the ZBA? >> Uh, hi everyone. Uh, my name is Brian Stall. Uh, [clears throat] my address is actually 10 Athetherton Lane, Belertown,
Massachusetts 010007. That's where I reside. Um, so exactly what the chair just said, we are um, uh, the building at 37 North Pleasant Street, uh, which Barry Roberts own, is planned to, um, be
demolished and come down. Um, yeah, I believe they're building, uh, uh, apartments. It's still going to be a two-story building, uh, apartments above and, uh, commercial space on the bottom. And we are just looking to move, literally pick up and move across the
street. Um, just like the chair said, there is a large kitchen there. We are not applying for a restaurant license. We are not going to be cooking food or using it. Um, we'll be staying as a tavern with snacks and basically doing the same thing at Mc Murphy's at uh that
we've been doing for 28 years um at the new location. >> Thank you, Mr. Stall. Um we'll now open the floor to questions from the board members to the applicant. Does anyone have any questions? I do not see any responses. So I do have
one um Mr. Stall. So it is a very large kitchen and um I believe one of the things I was is there no I mean you you will have it available to you but again right now I
understand there is no plans to um do anything different but is there any contemplation that maybe in the future you actually turn this into a restaurant? how you going to maintain said space?
>> Uh maintaining said space, it's it's uh really clean right now. Um we plan to keep it clean and all the equipment um that's there and if if it's in working operation to just maintain, you know, we we won't be using it, but we won't be letting like uh things build up on it or
anything. um that's actually in our lease is to maintain uh whatever equipment is in there the same level it is now. Um in the future I I really don't know. Um you know it's it's a big move for us. Uh it's something new. Um I
think we'll get a better grasp of um how not just our business is but also how Ammerst is you know over the next year or so. Um, Ammeris is always very interesting when it comes to business. >> The the other question is you're now
moving to um having an outdoor patio cuz it does exist and >> correct. >> What is the plan to manage drinking on the patio? I mean, this is a Friday night college town, >> right? Right.
>> Yes. Trust me, I've thought about that many of times. Um the plan right this minute is um there's a good chance the patio will only be used on some of the slower nights. Um
once once again it's one of those as we're moving across the street. Um um obviously the patio won't be used at all in the winter time. Um it'll uh um as we go we'll get a feel for it and see how
we can manage it. Um, no matter what, we'd have staff out there the entire time any um, uh, customers would be out there, of course. Um, it wouldn't be a, uh, um, I don't even know what the words for it, an un I guess you call it like
an unmanned area. Um, there would always be unstaffed, that would be a better way of putting it, unstaffed area. There would always be staff out there if if we were um um, having customers out there. And and by staff you mean staff other
than weight staff? >> Uh the same floor all we have is floor staff and bartenders. >> Would there not would wouldn't there be someone out there like for crowd control? >> Correct. That's that's what I'm talking about. Yeah. >> Okay. So your weight stop and your crowd
control essentially are one of the same. >> Yeah. Yeah. We we don't um I guess when you think of restaurant terms, you call it weight staff. Um I I call it door staff. Uh door and floor, you know, floor staff. >> Okay. >> But yes. Yes, it's it's uh moving
forward, it's it's definitely like when we did the walkth through um where the customers coming in, it's kind of in the same area. So, it's one of those that you couldn't have it uh with just, you know, an unstaffed
area. Um, it would have to be staffed. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, the chair recognizes Mr. Offeld and then Mr. Slovder. >> Just had a few questions. I'm looking at the floor plan. Um, how does the uh is there any communication that is uh could
a customer move between the Drake and the and your establishment? I see some stairs in the back. >> There's no um uh those stairs in the back are uh emergency exits. >> Okay. Okay. Another question. Um, you I
I can see where DPO is on the on the site plan I'm looking at at my on my screen here. And to the left of that or I guess to the south, there's a whole bunch of little rooms back there. And I guess they're unrelated to your
>> I Yeah, it um when >> your facility >> it Yeah, when it switched over from um Oh my goodness. High horse. Sorry. uh when it switched over from high horse uh to White Lion, they um
uh put up walls. >> Uh so the stuff that you're seeing, I'm assuming um the rooms to the left, I guess. Yeah, the left you would say. Um those are all DPO. I don't I don't know what he has in there. Storage, cooking.
>> Okay. Okay. And one last one is >> is there any thought to um lock or otherwise uh prevent u patrons from entering the kitchen area? >> They can't enter it. >> They cannot enter it. Okay, great.
>> Yeah. >> Oh, I have one more. What is tip certified mean for bartenders? This is just my curiosity. >> Oh, so so tip certified is alcohol training. >> Okay. Yeah, it's it um so uh some of the
companies just actually call it alcohol training and then some companies call um I can't even think of the company uh Serve Safe um which originally was one of the only companies that did it. Um they just named it TIPS. I forget what it stands for, but it's just alcohol
awareness uh training. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> You're welcome. Yep. Mr. Ser, >> uh, I was not able to attend the site visit, so I didn't go through the building with you, but
>> the only difference that I see from your current operation to your proposed new location is the outdoor seating area. Otherwise, nothing seems to be different. >> So, >> correct. So the chair brought up the outdoor seating area which was I was
going to mention also. Um is there any consideration of simply not using it? As I look at the diagram, it doesn't appear to me that it would be difficult to isolate that space.
>> Yep. m maintain it so that obviously it doesn't collect trash from that gets blown in by the wind. But it looks like it would be easy to uh to restrict access to the outdoor
what is labeled here outdoor dining and and uh it would not interfere with the entrance to the rest to the new location. So is there any
consideration to simply keep that off limits in which case there really is no change to your operation? >> Uh oh. Do do you mean like um so are you saying like literally shut it off and never be allowed to use it? Is is that
what you mean? >> I'm asking I'm not suggesting. I'm just say right the addition >> when I first looked at this application it appeared >> oh yeah oh just since it just >> right there
>> they either there or or straight across >> there. Yeah. Either way. >> When I first looked at this application I thought wow this is about as easy an application as has come before us. the
the operation is identical. You're not expanding. You're not changing the nature. You're not adding a restaurant function to it. You're simply >> moving from a building that won't be there for very long to a building that's
likely to be there longer. >> Correct. >> So, you're just relocating. It's the outdoor space that potentially changes some aspect of your function because if people can sit out there in spring
weather, >> right, >> and have all of those tables there um filled with people, that changes the effect of your operation on Pleasant Street. If if that's off
limits and it's simply there because it's already there but you don't use it, then the the sound and potential public nuisance that a bunch
of people sitting out there drinking would would be avoided. And I'm just wondering, are you is is it a consideration to simply not even use the outdoor space in which case there really is no change in your operation?
>> Sure. >> Uh so where uh Jinta just made it uh kind of blue the blue line. >> Yeah. >> So if if you see those those four tables to the left >> Yeah. >> not to there's like a round one and
three squares. Yeah, >> there you go. Right there. Thank you. Um, so those ones are actually broken and being removed. >> There there won't be there won't be anyone actually there. >> Um, that will mo more than likely if you see the swinging gate. Um, that's um
>> Yeah, right. right kind of right where the cursor is [snorts] or where it was. There's like a gate. Yep, there you go. That that will more than likely be the actual entrance. um when we did the walkth through um they'd be entering there and coming into
the building. That leaves us with the exit coming out along the building and up the ramp that you see kind of in the middle, >> right? >> So it keeps a nice flow because you you know for entrance and exit you want to have a nice flow. Um so that part on the on the left there with those kind of
four table those tables are actually already destroyed. They weren't upkeep. It was that they're all they're all gone. well, will be gone um once we're done fixing things. And um the only part of the patio that actually would be used is the tables that are covered under the
awning, >> right? >> And while I do say, you know, uh it's the only thing that would change. Um we would like to still have that option if if you've ever been uptown when it was
um a a nice place in the summertime. um on the on the slower nights and and people can just sit out there, relax, and have a beer. Um which obviously it's been like that for I mean I don't even know when the ABC opened well over 20 years. Um it is a nice a nice option to
have. Well, it it is a nice option to have and I will plead guilty to having sat at those tables and [laughter] and had and had dinner and but it is
not I'm not [snorts] trying to depict anything here or >> Oh, no, no, no. That's okay. It's okay. It is different. It is different to have tables um with people of many ages,
including old people like me and Mr. Meadows sitting there having a beer and dinner is different than than that space being filled with UMass students
on a on a lovely Thursday, Friday or Saturday night before they go screaming down Lincoln Avenue to get back to where they live. [laughter] >> So I'm It's a It's a different It's a different thing. And I'm I'm ra I'm I'm
just I'm raising the question here >> because if when when this application while this application appears to have really no change at all this outdoor patio filled
with 21 year olds who with no food by the way you've already said there's no food. So if if this thing is filled with a bunch of 21 year olds drinking and
fine, bar snacks, fine. But when I sat there having dinner with me and a bunch of old and young people, >> no. Yeah. Yeah. >> Um it wasn't loud. It wasn't intrusive.
It didn't have any kind of a negative effect on on the on Pleasant Street. So, my only concern is this outdoor space, >> which is a change in your operation.
>> Yeah. Uh-huh. So, uh just to let you know where we're coming from, that space will not be packed with, uh students. Um, if you see there's I want to say four tables of four and uh three tables of two, that's how many people will be
sitting out there. >> Okay. >> Um, and if if people are being loud, uh, rude, obnoxious, they'll be asked to leave immediately. We take it very seriously. We've been in business for 28
years. Uh we've worked fantastic with the town in different times where there's been different issues in the town and they've asked uh what can we do to help what can we do to help mitigate some of the daytime stuff. We went we worked with them with that. Um we take
it very seriously. We are not um some of the people who have come from out of town recently over the past you know 8 nine years and have opened up and really haven't listened to the town and don't really care about the town. Um, we take
a lot of pride in that. And if the patio, um, I call it the patio, call it the outdoor seating, at any time becomes too much of a problem and we see it as a problem, then just like you said, we
we'll shut it down if we if we have to. Um, we would like to have the opportunity to use it and hopefully in a calm manner where people can sit, enjoy themselves, talk
um, and and enjoy a nice outdoor patio on a nice day. >> Fine. I'm I'm not I'm not suggesting that that can't happen. I'm this is a this is a change and a potential issue
and if you're you have a proven track record in the town and I'm not inferring in any way that you don't take it seriously or that uh you're new to the town and don't understand it. I just want I just want to make sure that that
this does not become an issue. If it was closed off, it couldn't become an issue, >> right? >> If it's if it's open, it could and you need to be prepared to deal with it. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> We are on when when we did the walk through when we did the walkthrough, we talked about this as well >> and I explained the same thing of we're not just uh throwing 50 college kids out there to be doing whatever they want to. It's it's that would cause a problem. It
would cause a problem with the town which would then bring it to us and that's the last thing we ever want. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Slover. The chair recognizes Mr. Meadows. >> I I [clears throat] I must say that I
think this is a non-issue. It it it's been like this ever since the ABC opened. I've never heard of any problems there. Maybe there's a danger of a car coming off of North Pleasant Street and going through there, but I don't think there's a problem with anything else.
It's just a non-issue, David. >> Okay. >> And I must ever since McB the since Dave Steedman and the Knights of Columbus owned your your building prior to you guys, >> they did. Yeah. Um, I I don't ever remember any problems
there. And uh myself and the the others at the Yellow Sun when we when we had the dining air the uh dining car, there were never any problems.
And that was 50 years ago. Thank you, Mr. Meadows. If there are no additional questions from members of the board at this time, I will take comments from any members [clears throat] of the public. If Miss Williams, is there anyone in the
public for any comments? >> I'm sorry. You said no. >> That's correct. There are no members of the public wishing to comment. Given that there are no members from the public who wishes to comment unless there's any further questions or any
comments from the applicant, I would entertain a motion to move to the public meeting while keeping the public hearing open so that we can discuss the conditions and the findings we have to make and have any discussions on the disposition of the board towards this application. Do I have such a
motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Um, is there any discussion on the motion? There is no discussion. The vote occurs on the motion to move into a public meeting while keeping the public hearing
open. Mr. Slovder >> I. >> Mr. Offeld. >> Mr. White >> I. >> Mr. Meadows >> I. >> The chair votes I. >> The vote is unanimous. will now move
into the public meeting while keeping the public hearing open for ZBA FY2026-06 24 North Pleasant Street in McA Murphy's. So I um if I may go first um I am inclined to support this. Actually I
will support this but I I I did think about what Mr. Meadows was saying. Um I I happen to have um dual roles here because I see things in you know with the police and the courts
on a Monday morning what will happen over the weekend and primarily when it comes to drunken disorderly it usually happens on North Pleasant Street not necessarily from people who goes to um Mc Murphy's but you know there is a
spoke down the way and that is that is the strip that people go to. So, and now that Veraric Crisana has moved to 104 North Pleasant Street um with outdoor patio seedings, there is more now um you know expectation that there's going to
be lively and more rowdy crowd and um the goal here is not to hinder or prevent you from striving as business is to find a balancing act. And I like what you said um about you gave us specifically as to the number of tables
and how many seats out there. So I am inclined to support this um with the condition that we ask that um there's there's no standing out there. If if the the tables cannot accommodate
people um then that's the that's capacity. It's seated it's seated capacity um only. Yeah. So, I I will support it with that condition and that's um that is my comment and I will have the other board
members weigh in. >> Mr. Offel, >> if we're if we're going ahead to talk about the conditions, I I had two questions. Um, and maybe this one may just be my lack of knowledge about this, but condition 14, the proposed condition 14,
deliveries to the site shall be made between 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. And I don't know if that is u an ownorous requirement to Mr. Stall or is that business routine? I don't I'd like to hear about that.
>> Maybe a day thing. >> I have no idea. say that that might be a relic from the previous conditions. That's not necessarily applicable. So, we can strike that if necessary. I think it's just a typo.
>> Okay. And then the very last one 17 that this permit shall expire on change of ownership or management. And I guess I didn't quite understand what change in management might mean because there is the potential to have different managers
with the same owner. So it's not entirely clear what triggers a need for or what what triggers an expiration of the special permit. >> Perhaps um you say rather than management, you do a management plan,
>> right? I mean, you'd have to revise the management plan. Where was that? >> I think it's more like change in ownership. >> Yeah. I I could we strike or management >> in number 17. Could we strike the the
part or management? >> I did. >> I think I don't think you're seeing it, Mr. Ael. But >> Oh, you did. I'm sorry. Yes. I'm looking at I'm looking at the old one here. Great. Okay. All right. Those are my two comments. Thanks. Are there any other
input from members um of the board? Mrs. Ser, >> you want inputs or comments? I don't have in I I I concur with what the chair said and I have no problem supporting this.
>> Well, I will >> that was it. >> Okay. I will take either input or comments. This is the >> just >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Sloer. So, given that there are no further comments from the panel, um next we have
to make findings. There are specific findings we have to make under section 10.38 and we will go through those one by one with the permission of the board. I would like to skip those that are not applicable to this permit to this permit.
So let me get to I should also point out before we go into the findings, as I was reviewing this, Miss Williams, there was a note from the health inspector. Um, was that resolved? >> Um, you'd have to check with the
applicant on that. >> Yes, I I spoke with Susan. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, Mrs. Stall. >> So, I can update bear with me. Okay. So, we shall start with um section
3.33 the use classification and standards. Um section 3.352-1 um food and drink establishments bar with no food served. Um, >> we are here
>> screen is very small. So, I'm trying to >> bear with me one second. Okay. Specific findings. Um we we can skip those Miss Williams and go to specific findings. 10.38 and 31.
So 10.38 and 31. The proposal is suitably located in the neighborhood in which it is proposed and or the total town as deemed appropriate by the special permit granting authority. The proposal is compatible with existing uses
and other uses permitted by the right in the same district. Mc Murphy's Tavern. I'd like to make a finding that Mc Murphy's Tavern is staying in the downtown Ammeris. It is relocated to the space across the street formerly occupied by the White Lion Brewing Company. It is almost it is most
suitably located in the neighborhood and compatible with existing and other uses permitted by Wright in the same zoning district at this time. 10 38283 and 385 and 387.
The proposal would not constitute a nuisance due to air and water pollution, flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration, lights, or visually offensive structures or sight features. The proposal would not be a substantial inconvenience or hazard of butters, vehicles, or
pedestrians. The proposal reasonably protects the adjoining premises against detrimental or offensive uses on the site including air and water pollution, flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration, lights, or visually offensive structures or site features. The proposal provides
convenient and safe vehicular pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to adjacent streets, property or improvements. I'd like to make a finding that the proposal does not cost you a nuisance and is not a hazard or butters.
The applicant has made the following provisions for sound in their sound management plan. The sound management plan stated that the average tavern produces 75 dB of sound while the average nightclub can produce 100 dB of sound. To give an example, a backfired
exhaust is 140 dB, a car horn 110, a screaming baby 80, a normal conservation 60, and a whisper 30. The standard thickness for soundproof walls is 5 to 7 in depending on the material. Our buildings composed of 6 to 10 in brick
and cement. And along with what we also have sound dampening boards installed throughout the building to help absorb the sound. And given that we are talking about sound, I'd like to just while I find that um the applicant has made provisions for sound, we just just put
on the record that we've discussed the patio um as potentially um a noise issue. Um there is no on premises parking for customers or employees. All parking is in town lots or spaces. 10.384.
Um, adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation of the proposed use. I'll make a finding that adequate and appropriate facilities are available for the proper operation of the proposed used. 10.386. The proposal ensures that it is in conformance with the parking sign and
regulations which is articles 7 and 8 respectively of this bylaw. Um, [clears throat] I'd like to make a finding that does not apply and I'll skip those. Um, in terms of parking, 10.387, there is no on premises parking for
customers or employees. All parking is in town lots or spaces. 10.38 The proposal ensures adequate space for the off- streetet loading and unloading of vehicles, goods, products, materials and equipment incidental to incidental
to the normal operation. Off streetet loading and unloading of vehicles, goods, products, etc. will continue in the same manner as it takes place for all businesses in downtown Amherst. In terms of trash and recycling, 10.389 all trash and recycling will be picked
up by USA Waste. The trash will be placed in bins behind the building in the designated trash area for the building. Pickup days are Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. I will skip to 10.393.
The proposal provides protection of adjacent properties by minimizing the intrusion of lighting including parking lots and exterior lighting through use of cut off luminaries, light shields, lowered heights of light poles, screening or similar solutions. I propose to make a finding that there
will be one set of outdoor string lights on the patio and one hallogen light illuminating the front side of the building. Both lights are pre-existing and there will be no new lights added. 10.396. The proposal provides screening for
storage areas, loading docks, dumpsters, rooftop equipment, utility buildings, and similar features. Trash and recycling receptacles are located in the back of the building and are not visible from the public right of way. 10.398
The proposal is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this bylaw and the goals of the master plan. I propose we make a finding that the proposal is in keeping with the general purpose and intent of the bylaw and advances the goals of the town's master
plan by way of infill development. So I have gone through um the findings. I would now entertain a motion unless there is any discussion on the findings. I will entertain a motion that we
approve the findings um for 24 North Pleasant Street. Is there a such a motion? >> Mr. Chair, I have a a comment first. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I did not see your hand. Um >> sorry,
>> this would be back on uh 103 10.382. the sound and uh Miss Williams had um typed something and it went by so fast I wanted to make sure that it was
Yeah. Could we add to So I'm looking at the ZBA hearing finding. So the applicant has made provisions for sound for the indoor activities. The patio was discussed and the could we say that the and I think it's true that
the applicant has assured us that steps will be taken to manage sound in the patio area something like that. I have no objection to that. Do any of the members of the board have any objections or any language want want to
add? [clears throat] I can't see hands um seeing Miss Williams screen. So if anyone has your hand up um openly speak I will take the silence as no additional comments to add.
Thank you, Mr. Areld. >> Yep. >> Great. Okay. >> Okay. [clears throat] >> So, seeing that there are no further discussions regarding the findings, I would entertain a motion that we approve the findings. Is there such a motion?
>> So, moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Is there any discussion on the motion? There are no discussions. The vote
occurs on the motion. Mr. Slovder, >> I. >> Mr. Offeld, >> I. >> Mr. White, >> I. >> Mr. Meadows. >> Craig, you're on mute. >> All right.
Thank you, Miss Meadows. And the chair votes I. Um the findings have been adopted um unanimously. I'd like to review the proposed conditions as drafted in the project application report. Um so far, I know we've had small discussions on the
conditions, but now is the opportunity for us to um dive deeper and if anyone has any proposed conditions other than what's there, this is where we can discuss them openly. >> [clears throat] >> So the
condition number one um I didn't understand condition number one. I I understand the need for the crowd control certifications to be um you know fixed there. But the project shall be built, maintained, and managed according
to the approved plans and application package. Okay. Um I I think the listing was throwing me off, but now I I I'm following. Okay. So essentially,
Mc Murphy's needs to operate as approved by this special permit. Is that the heart of number one, Miss Williams? >> Yes, it is, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. and any changes shall be reviewed by the building commissioner to determine if the changes are significant enough to require a formal modification
of the permit and or condition and if deemed significant submission to the ZBA as necessary. Okay. And we talked about this the approved use is um a bar with no food
served. Is that everyone's understanding? >> Yes. >> Okay. with a capacity of not more than 200 patrons and the operation shall be as described in the management plan and Murphy's um management plan addendum.
There shall be at least one certified crowd and control manager um crowd control. There's a typo on number three says crown versus crowd controls manager on duty at all times. And given that we're talking about um
crowd control, I'd like to add under number three that use of the patio is limited to seating only. All bartenders shall be tip certified. The the use of advanced ID system or
other approved electronic ID verification equipment shall be in use at all times. All alcoholic beverages must be consumed on the premises. The minimum food requirement must be met as required by the board of licency. Do we need that given that there is no
food? >> Um yes we do. Just to make sure that it's written into the special permit that they're in compliance. >> Okay. Outdoor music shall not impede normal conversation of people on the patio and in no case exceed 70 dB at the property
line. There shall be an on-site manager at all times and the manager's name shall be on file in this office. By this office, you mean the planning department's office? >> Sure. Yes. >> Okay.
The general max capacity shall not exceed 205 which includes the outdoor seating area or the allowable maximum capacity as determined by the amorous inspection services department. The hours of operation are those
standard hours or there or are they is a request for non-standard hours? >> Those are their standard hours. So we're just putting that into the special permit as well. >> Okay, >> that's correct. Right. Mr. Stall, >> uh, our permit, uh, license is 11:00
a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Is is that what you see? >> Yes. >> Okay. and all alcohol service shall end at 12:45 a.m. [clears throat] There shall be no products or byproducts of a tavern stored outside the establishment except for trash and
recycling as shown on the approved site plan and Matt Murphy site plan prepared by Riddle Architects and furniture and furnishings that are not permanently fixed related to outdoor dining shall not be stored outside establishments during winter months if not being used if not being used
regularly. There shall be no disposable glasses, china or silverware used on the patio. Reusable table wear shall be used for outdoor table service. All areas to be cleaned daily and left in a clean condition by the end of normal business hours by staff.
Deliveries to the site shall be made between 7 and 11:00 a.m. Is that standard? I >> think we're taking that out. >> Okay, thank you. Mhm. >> Garbage and trash. shall be disposed of as described in the
management plan and Murphy's management plan dated November 4, 2025. Um, Miss Williams garbage and trash as Yeah, I think you can take out the AS. Any change in signage or lighting shall
be reviewed by the design review board and the zoning board of appeals prior to installation. And this permit shall expire on the change of ownership of Mac Murphy's. I think we agreed on that discussed that change. Is that correct?
>> Yeah. >> Are there any additional conditions anyone wish to propose or amend the existing conditions? >> Mr. Chair, Mr. White. Um [clears throat] Mr. Stall, I wanted to touch base on something um and just kind of get a
little clarity when we were referring to the tip certification for the bartenders and I'm looking condition number four. Um is that linked is that like a proprietary training for just one company because I know we talked about serve safe and other you know different
companies. Is that just kind of what one company calls their certification? >> Uh it's a good question. Serve safe calls it tips and I think I'm well well yeah because I >> I'll tell you why why I'm uh asking this
question. Uh my concern is >> You mean because it should say because it should say alcohol awareness. >> Yeah. So my concern is if that if that certification is in any way proprietary to one company and some point >> right I gotcha. So, you know what?
Everyone in the industry has always called it that. So, it's probably written into every single I I see what you're saying. Um because in our insurance, when we file for the insurance, it says that bartenders must take an alcohol
awareness class. >> Yeah. So, that's my concern. I wouldn't want you to have to come back before the ZBA if you were just switching to an analogous and also of the same quality alcohol certification for your bartenders. I don't think that's a good use of your time or ours. Um, so I would
>> ask for that we change number four in some way to reflect that, you know, something that's analogous to the tip certification or if we want to change the wording to alcohol certification training program or whatever it is, I think that might be a better use for that condition.
But thank you, Mr. Chair. >> You're very welcome, Mr. White. Um, can we take out the word shall and put must and I'm I'm comfortable if we put um if
if it's industry standard where tip is the common language, I'm comfortable putting tip in parenthesis at the end of that. Thank you, Miss Williams. Are there any other discussions on the conditions?
Do we want to certify a number or I not certify specify a number for the seating area? Mr. Stall, is there like a max capacity max seating capacity for the dining area? >> I I think there is already one on there.
>> Okay. >> On the plan. So that is the intent is that um only so you said I believe you said some tables can accommodate four or two. So if you know once the tables are full being seated then you're at
capacity on the patio. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I gotcha. >> You're okay with the wording? >> Seating only. Yeah. Yeah. >> I'm sorry. I didn't know if you were asking me. Sorry. >> That's okay. >> It's okay.
Are there any more comments and or discussion on the conditions? Seeing that there are no further discussion or changes to the conditions, I would now entertain a motion that we approve the conditions 1 through 17 as
amended. Um, is there such a motion? >> So moved. Second. >> It has been moved and second. Are there any discussion? The vote occurs on the motion. Mr. Slovener, >> yes. >> Mr. Offeld,
>> I. >> Mr. White, >> I. >> Mr. Meadows, >> I. >> Yeah. And the chair votes I. The vote is unanimous. The conditions are approved. We have approved the findings and the
conditions. And now I would now entertain a motion that we approve the special permit and close the public hearing. Do I have such a motion? >> So move. >> It has been moved and second. Any
discussion? No discussion. The vote on the motion. Mr. Slovder >> I. >> Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Mr. White >> I. >> Mr. Meadows >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The vote is
unanimous. The motion passes and the special permit is granted. And with the issuance of the special permit, the public hearing is also closed. Congratulations, Mr. Stall, and good luck with your new location. Thank you. I appreciate it everyone. Appreciate
your time. >> Good night. >> All right. See you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our third order of business tonight is ZBA FY2026-03 65 High Street. request a special permit
under section 3.3241 converted dwelling to convert an open porch to a bedroom in one of the following in one of the dwelling units. This meeting has been continued um at the request of the applicant um a couple
times. I do want to refer to um any new submissions. Um but while I pull up the application report, I'll invite Miss Williams if you can just add the petitioners to join us. So just for the record, um the
application and the documentation that I have are the application management plan going back to October, continuence request going back to October, um continued hearing responses going back to October, lease agreement going back
to October, a management plan addendum going back to October, Um I saw a document asking about an update going back to October. Um the application and management plan and then there was I believe the most recent was a public comment from Dix Mccomomas and forgive
me if I'm butchering the last name. Um Miss Williams, did I list everything um correctly that we have? >> Yes. >> Thank you. And I do see Mr. Buren who
represents 65 um present. So um Attorney Buren, we have continued this. Um the intent here tonight is to come to a resolution. Um the floor is yours. Please state your name and
address for the record. >> Uh thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you, board, for uh for having us here tonight. Um I will uh say just before I get rolling, um we do have two other people who might be in attendance. um that should also be added. That would be Jeff Brooks um from Solid State
Construction and Kheim Adelman um who was our proposed property manager. So I just wanted to make sure that they also got included before I uh before I started. Um so uh David Buren here from Legacy Counselors PC. Um a uh an attorney uh
working for a firm uh with offices in Ammerst. Um here tonight representing 65 High Street LLC who is the owner of the property located at 65 High Street. uh with me tonight um as has as he's been here for for most of our hearings um Alec Roitz who is the manager of that
LLC um Jeff Brooks who is from Solid State Construction our general contractor and then Kleman who is our proposed property manager for this project um just very briefly um I'm going to just really quickly just run through
the previous submissions in the proposed application um bear with me I'm going to try to share my screen and which one am I sharing? I think this is the right screen. Okay, I think are you guys seeing the uh
the PowerPoint? >> Yes. 65 High Street special permit. Yes. >> Perfect. Thank you. Um so as you recall uh we are here tonight as as the chair succinctly uh stated uh seeking a special permit under section 3.3241
uh for a converted dwelling. Um this property has been um used as a multifamily uh for quite a long time now. Um and it has essentially um had a a convoluted ownership history with
respect to its status. Um, and part of the reason that we are seeking this special permit is because we feel that it's more appropriate that this property be permitted as a converted dwelling as it was a single family home that had been converted into a two family as opposed to a duplex a duplex which is uh
traditionally something that's built as a multifamily structure. Um, additionally, as part of our application, um, and you can see our proposed site plans, uh, we are proposing five parking spaces, uh, three in the driveway, or sorry, four in the
driveway, uh, three along the, um, the southern portion of the driveway, uh, one along the, um, one within the garage structure on the left of the garage structure, and then one parked in front of the the garage structure. Um as was
noted um our application we are specifically seeking permission to have more than 50% of those spaces to be compact spaces. Um that primarily because uh three of those spaces will be 1 ft shorter than the required 8 uh 9 ft. So instead of these spaces being 9
by8 uh we are proposing 8 ft by 20 foot spaces. Um, additionally, as part of our application, we were also seeking um to um encapsulate the existing porch um located [clears throat] on the structure. Um the intent is to close in um both the upper and bottom floor, the
bottom floor to be converted into a new uh a new bedroom and the top floor primarily being encapsulated just to um secure the space below it. Um but it will essentially be additional storage space for all intents of purposes. Um, person, I'm sorry. Your presentation's
not moving. I'm not sure if you um >> Oh, you're you're just on the cover page. Yeah. >> My goodness. I think I shared the wrong screen. Hold on. Sorry about that. >> It's okay. >> Okay.
So, hopefully you're seeing a site plan. >> We I am now. Yes. >> Okay, great. Thank you for letting me know. I would have just kept going. Um, so as I mentioned, we are additionally seeking permission uh to encapsulate um the existing porch on the property. Um,
so there's a uh it's a twostory porch, so to speak. Um, the bottom floor unit we're looking to encapsulate and turn that into an additional bedroom. Um, the top of the um of the Porsche will essentially be encapsulated to protect the below structure u, but will also be used for additional um common space
essentially for the the second floor unit. Um, that being said, um, if it's okay with this board, I'm going to skip past these floor plans, um, just so we can get to the new items that have been submitted. Um, so just moving forward here.
Um, so we've we've uh made some additional changes to this application since we last saw this board. Um, so for instance, um, you may recall the last time we were here, we were proposing to have the property manager handle all of the maintenance for snow as well as landscaping. Um, and at the board's
suggestion, which I think was a wise one, uh, my client did end up um, reaching out to and contracting with Four Seasons Property Maintenance um, to handle both the um, the yard maintenance as far as the the mowing uh, during the spring and summer seasons. They would be mowing weekly and or bi-weekly uh
depending on need as well as snow plowing services during the winter month which would include both um plowing of the driveway, salting the driveway as well as hand shoveling and salting the um other common walkway areas. Um, [clears throat] additionally, as part of our um, updated submissions, um, there
had been a bunch of, um, concerns and questions about how we're going to select a resident manager, what the process would look like, what the roles of that resident manager would look like relative to the property manager. Uh, and we believe we've done a nice job, um, you know, addressing those concerns.
So, uh, right off the bat, um, the, um, primary location for for seeking these, um, resident managers would be through community resources. So, um, our property manager, who can likely [clears throat] speak more to this, um, shortly, um, is, uh, located or is
affiliated with the, um, the UMass Hell. He has a a number of contacts, uh, within the community. Um, and he would be one of the primary sources for us, um, seeking resident managers for, uh, when the, um, the owner is, um, out of the area on business. So, as you may
recall there, um part of the um the issues that my client has with this property is that um although [clears throat] he does live here primarily, his job often requires that he be out of the area from anywhere [clears throat] from 6 months to more than a year um is my understanding. Um
and part of the concern or part of what he's hoping to do is have somebody there keeping an eye on the place while he's gone. Um you know, whether or not uh this application or this special permit is is approved. um unfortunately his job is what it is and he will be required to
to effectively leave. So um from his standpoint it makes sense to both have a property manager um who's maintaining the property as well as the resident manager who's there to monitor uh on site. Um so that being said the primary role of the property manager is one of monitoring um I'm sorry property I said
property manager I meant resident manager. primary role that resident manager will be a essentially for monitoring sake uh making sure that that there's any maintenance that the property manager or the owner is aware of it um if there are issues for instance with people who are parking there who shouldn't be notifying the
property manager as well as the owner if that's the case um primarily not um supposed to be involved specifically not going to be involved in for instance tenant disputes um those are things that would be outside of the scope of that resident manager's position um they would be there on site though if there
was a need for first responders or emergency personnel um that we'd have somebody we know is there um to address and to handle those types of situations. Um that being said um we have provided as well a lease addendum um as to what the resident manager's um essentially
responsibilities would look like and what they're agreeing to. Um and additionally we've also provided the application that a proposed resident manager would effectively have to fill out and complete in order to be you know selected for this role. Um so you'll note from our submissions that there is
significantly more clarity and transparency between what the resident manager does and what the property manager does. Uh but additionally as part of the selection process for that resident manager, um part of the process will involve having the the existing tenants um weigh in on the selection.
So, not only would there be a essentially a meeting with the owner and the tenants prior to selecting a a resident manager, allowing them to provide suggestions if they have an alternative candidate that they'd like to propose. Uh, but also to see if there's going to be issues with compatibility um with that individual as
well as the tenants themselves. Um, that resident manager will be submitting somewhat regular reports to the property manager. Um and the property manager will similarly be submitting reports to the owner uh on the status of the property if need be. Uh additionally, you'll see that we also
included some additional information with respect to how the parking enforcement will work. Uh we provided a lease addendum um that effectively requires that the existing tenants to uh agree on which uh what vehicles will be allowed to park on site. Um each unit
will be entitled to have two vehicles with one additional spot in the parking area for guest vehicles. Um stickers will be provided um for those authorized vehicles. Uh there's time frames within which people will have to provide um updated vehicle information if they get new vehicles so that new stickers can be
provided. Uh and we have some um some straightforward um proposals for parking enforcement as well. So, if there's a a one violation, there'd be a warning. A second violation may require some additional potentially
towing or potentially um somebody could potentially also be in violation of their lease um because of this uh parking addendum that we're including. Uh, additionally, um, not only will the, uh, resident manager be monitoring, um, but additionally, the property manager will monitor and the owner will also
have additional security cameras that are located at the parking area. Uh, so if there are issues with parking, um, we will be informed of that fact. And, um, the owner of the property already has a relationship with Ernie's Towing um, specifically to uh, enforce these types
of infractions. Um that being said, there's also some additional information provided in the uh tenants lease addendum. Um if there are requests for additional vehicles or if the parking situation is untenable, uh the landlord is willing to um get an additional
off-site parking spot for those units at the uh University of Massachusetts. Uh and then u additionally as far as additional updates um I also wanted to confirm that we did get confirmation from the Ammeris Fire Department. Um you may recall at
the last meeting uh Dave Wkevitz was kind enough to uh go out of his way to speak with the fire department um specifically about this issue for us. um and they were able to confirm for me once again that this is something that is um not primarily a concern for them because this has been utilized uh in
this capacity um for as long as it has been. Um so they did not have issues with our proposed parking plan. Uh we did initially have a concern that there was a possibility they may want us to move the the parking spots maybe from one side of the driveway to the other side of the driveway. Um but they uh
they seem to think that this is appropriate that our proposal is is acceptable to them. Um additionally um um I do have uh Jeff Brooks here because I did want him to speak a little bit more um on the garage itself. I know
that there were some concerns about how we were going to secure that structure um the unsafe portion of it. Um, so I'd like to turn it over to Jeff right now so he can uh touch base with this board and uh give you guys an update on what he's proposing. >> Okay. So, uh, >> Mr. Brooks, Mr. Brooks, just please
state your name and address for the record, please. >> I am, uh, Jeff Brooks. My address is 59 Jule Hill Road in Ashurnham. I, uh, I'm the owner of Solid State Construction. So, um, with the, uh, the garage, I
believe our current dis discussion is to, uh, to seal it up and, um, and not allow access to it, right? So, we had, uh, uh, it's it's a really unconventional structure, um, built quite a long time ago. And there's these uh beams that run across that uh that at
some point must have started failing because they've created this suspension system where there's like these threaded rods that run down through the two beams and try to support them upwards. But at any rate, um we want to at some point evaluate how to make it a safe structure
for parking, but at this point we don't feel it is >> Bur is um your presentation. >> Um that's primarily it. I would also add that in addition to just you know there will be locks on that structure. It will not be accessible. Uh there will be signs on that structure notifying people
that they are not allowed entry into the garage. Uh so it will be very clear that the right portion of the garage where no cars are allowed to park will not be accessible. It won't be used for storage. Um nobody nobody will physically be able to enter that space.
I I do have one question before I turn it over to the board members. I I I think in the the couple times that we can we were here. Is is there a time frame as to make a decision on the garage? I think that was one of the questions I had
asked the last time we were here. >> Yeah. My understanding at this point is that there's, you know, while they ultimately would like to fix the garage structure, um I think there is a concern with the expense and the timing of that. Um so for instance, this structure um my
understanding is a um technically part of the um the historical [clears throat] mass Massachusetts Historical Commission. This entire building is so for instance, it's not a simple process even to just remove this structure necessarily. it would require additional approvals uh through the historical
commission. Um so I think ultimately the the hope would be to revive that portion so that parking could occur in there. Um but as of right now I don't think there's a clear answer or or knowledge as to what the you know the actual ultimate expense would be for something like that. Um as well as a potential
time frame for it. Um, that being said, I mean, ultimately, it's certainly to our best interest to have that fixed sooner than later, if only because we could potentially have an additional parking space on this lot as opposed to offering tenants the, you know, the possibility having having an off-site
paid for parking space, uh, which would, you know, obviously be ideal for our purposes. Thank you. Um, I'll now open the floor to questions from board members. um to the applicant.
Um the so there's been a ser a series of leases submitted in the over the various submissions and I just want to make sure that the one submitted in December we just got a few last week I guess is the operative one
>> that's correct >> and is that the lease that would be used for all tenants or just the resident manager >> that would be just for the resident manager. Um the previous submission in
October um had a um I believe that had the other leases, the standard lease agreement. >> Okay. >> So this was specifically for the the onebedroom effectively. >> Okay. >> Um and does the uh is it is it your
expectation that the resident manager would live in one of the units? that is uh is there a is there a bedroom or unit that is sort of specified for the resident manager? >> So I I believe I mean Alan you can correct me if I'm wrong but my
understanding is that the what will be the new bedroom um in that first floor unit would be effectively the the resident manager unit. >> Attorney Bar um there's something going on with your audio. You >> that's that's better now.
>> Okay. Can you repeat your answer? >> Sure, of course. Um, so the I believe the intent is for the new proposed bedroom on that first floor um to be the resident manager andor the owner's unit. >> So the resident manager would then I
guess uh potentially share that unit with three other tenants. >> That's correct. And that was the the idea behind having the um you know the resident manager selection process specifically include a compatibility meeting between the proposed tenants and
that individual before it becomes official. Um you know making sure that everybody understands a this is you know another tenant of yours but b they are not your you know they're not in charge they're not your boss they're their role is primarily there for monitoring um and
oversight. Um, so it's not a person to go to specifically because you've got complaints, you know, about another tenant. Um, you know, that's something that you can take up with your prop the property manager and or the owner. Um, but it's not the type of situation we specifically want the resident manager to be in. You know, we we'd much rather
have that person be somebody living there, but who's got their eye on the property and the property manager and the owner being the ones who actually enforce things um on site. >> Mr. off if you play with me for if you let me just ask the follow-up question if here.
>> So, attorney B, I think we had this conversation a couple times where there was that concern that we're asking potential tenants to interact with a complete stranger that they may not relate to sharing the same space and we had concerns as to how that would work.
I I I don't think your answer just now clarified that. >> And what's the additional concern? I think from our standpoint, they'd already be living with the owner of the property who would not be part of their, you know, whatever group of individuals
they were when they joined the place. Um, the idea behind the, you know, the compatibility meeting before a resident manager is chosen is specifically to give them an opportunity to object if they do have issues with that individual. Um, you know, if they have problems, um, then that will absolutely
be taken into consideration. We're we're not looking to put somebody in there who's going to cause more problems on site. >> So, if I'm understanding correctly, the resident manager would also be a different lease holder. >> That's correct. That's correct. So, the
resident manager would be a tenant um unlike the property manager who is not a resident of the property but is a local who would be managing the you know the enforcement of the rules and regulations under the lease. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Offeld. Um, you can continue with your questions.
>> Actually, I was all done. I think all said, >> thank you, Mrs. Slovener. >> Well, I continue to have a number of questions and issues with the resident manager thing and some and al
there are references to the owner's presence in the building that you I believe I want to make sure I hear you correctly. the bedroom, the porch that will be enclosed in your
proposal and will be a bedroom will I believe you just said be occupied by the resident manager and the owner or the owner something like that. So there have been a number of references to the
presence of the owner in this building. Is is this building currently the owner's primary residence? >> Yes. But there was also a reference to the
necessity of the owner made necessary by his job to be not in the building, not living there and out of town for quite extended periods of time. So does that mean that when the
owner leaves town for let's say 3 months that that is when the resident manager moves into that unit into that bedroom? be because otherwise it are they sharing are they sharing a a bedroom and then
the owner leaves? How can the owner and the resident manager both occupy that bedroom? >> We we would not be sharing >> chair point of point of order. I think Mr. Roitz is joining our conversation
and of course we welcome that but I doesn't he need to introduce himself and >> you you thank you Mr. Ael Mr. Roitz can you introduce yourself for the record please and state your address >> yes I apologize and apologies for the no video I'm lacking a little bandwidth at
the moment um my name is Alec Roitz I'm the owner of 65 High Street and 65 High Street is my primary address >> thank you Mr. Um to answer that question though uh Mr. Slovener that is that that is correct. They would not be occupying this the space at the same time.
>> So how how would this how would this work when Mr. Roitz leaves for 3 months? Do you then find another resident manager to move in for those three months? And then that manager leaves at
the end of three months when Mr. Roitz returns to Ammerst. >> I think so. It would probably be specific to the assignment that he's called away on. So, for instance, if it's expected to be a six-monthl long assignment, they can enter into a lease agreement for those six months. Um, and
[clears throat] that would be the, you know, the the resident manager space for that period of time. Um, at the end of that period of time, um, the lease would expire and he would move back into the unit. [sighs and gasps] I I could just share
some color into the selection process and how we or how I plan to create a continuum around the the resident manager selection. So, I've been in constant contact with the school and several organizations. Um, and I
continue to check in at regular intervals. Every 3 to four months, I plan on checking in with these organizations and having a pool of candidates who would likely serve as a resident manager on standby in
anticipation for a potential departure. my work gives me somewhat of a notice and so I can semiplan around it in terms of an academic calendar and so if I were to need to leave I would have a pool of
candidates ready to interview and to undertake that resident manager selection process to replace my role at the residence. So will this be a job for the person as well? >> Um it it won't be a job but in I guess
compensation for undertaking this uh I will provide a a rent discount for the responsibilities undertaken by the resident manager and I believe that is highlighted in the lease that has been shared with you all. So the the resident manager which s
which sounds like it could be a bit of a revolving door. It could be every 3 months or every six months or something. >> I would so just to attenuate that concern. The way my work works is I would never be gone for a small duration
of time such as 90 days. I would be gone at a minimum six-month intervals. And so I would structure this process around the academic calendar. So there isn't a revolving door. And so during one tenency if I am leaving for let's just
call it the second semester there is a resident manager in place for the duration of that semester. Okay. Um, another So, the resident manager is I'm stating this to make sure I
understand what you're proposing because so many aspects of this are so unusual and strike me as so such a potential for problems. The resident manager is
essentially going to be hired by a committee that includes the other tenants who become tenants of the property, not through a selection process as much as they need a place to live, they're willing to pay the rent,
and they choose to live there. So, there's going to be some sort of a committee, for lack of a different term, that's going to interview or consider
a potential resident manager to be to essentially become their roommate for the six-month period. >> Is that correct? Is that correct? >> Correct. So included in our application
materials, we provide a resident manager selection form and an addendum for the other tenants as well. So we would be screening candidates. I would be communicating with the property manager to make sure that the candidates meet a
specific criteria that we're both looking for as someone who will be our first point of contact should I leave. And then my ultimate goal again is to make sure that people live homogeneously within the property. Um given that this is a third party, you know, students
have lived in dorms with resident managers just fine. And not to say that this I'm sorry, um yeah, like RAS, resident assistances, and not to say that this role is of an RA, but it's supposed to be someone that everyone is
comfortable living with. And so a final decision is not going to just be made around they're willing to pay the rent and they're willing to do the responsibilities. I'm looking to strategically find someone so there are no problems. And that's what I think the
continuous search and touch points that I've created within the community serve to do. Well, I'm I'm much more concerned about what seems to me to be the lack of
distance between the resident manager and the fulfillment of his role from the other tenants in the unit and in in the building. So the resident man you you have two different units which
are separated by a staircase. So the if the resident manager is living on the first level, he's also supervising the second level. But in that case, he has distance from the residents of the upstairs.
But one of the things that I expressed at a previous meeting about this is that there is it the resident manager is not living in a unit that is in any way separated from the other people on the first floor. So, he's supposed to be
observing and supervising in some manner, presumably including the behavior of the other people in on that floor and and the upstairs, but there's no separation. They're essentially roommates. >> So,
>> so we approved we approved, hold on a minute, please. We approved uh this board approved a an arrangement uh that was being changed from owner occupied to non-owner occupied I believe
it was on Mlelen and they there was a separate unit separate it was much smaller but it had a separate entrance separate kitchen facilities and bathroom and the manager was not living actually
with the people he's supposed to be supervising. And it's it's that blurring of the role that is very unusual. I've never heard of it. When I was in uh in living in
dorms a 100red years ago at least, there was a resident manager or res an RA and they there was a clear role involving
discip involving maintaining discipline and maintaining the the behavior on the floor. and this person lives separately. And I don't quite
grasp how this person living in the room that you're not living in for 6 months and sharing kitchen and bathroom and everything is supposed to be a um if necessary a restraining influence on the
other residents of that unit. So this is something that Kahim and I have actually discussed at length. The the role of the resident manager is not about entering units or monitoring private behavior. It's about observing
shared and exterior areas, coordinating maintenance, reporting issues through a defined process. Those responsibilities can be fully and effectively carried out without access to private units. Importantly, the resident manager is not a decision maker. All enforcement would
remain with the property manager. He observes equally for both units and has no discretion or favor or disadvantage from one household over the other. And and the the addendum that all of the tenants would sign it. It would be from
both units. And you know something that we had discussed is we think it's as simple as just checking in on all of all of the tenants two three times a week. just walking through the units. Hey guys, just checking in. Any issues?
Stuff of that nature. I I don't think this is about playing police officer in the units. And I think the resident manager though isolated to one of the units can serve that that function as the liaison between PM and and owner. So
the net result of this is changing it from an owneroccupied building to a non-owner occupied building just to a non-owner owner occupied um two unit apartment building. Is that
accurate? >> Well, this is when I'm not traveling for work, I I intend to reside in in Ammeris. So this is just about creating rules and structure for when when I'm not there,
>> right? Which is which seems that you're indicating would be at least 50% of the time. >> I not necessarily 50% of the time. Me stating 6 months is arbitrary. Uh in 18 months now from now I I could be told I
need to travel for 6 months. Um there is no consistent cadence to it. This is more or less a contingency for when I have to leave the property. >> Right. But you said you're not leaving the property for for 90 day for periods as short as 90 days. You're leaving it
for considerably longer periods during which this would not be an owner occupied building. >> I I'm not familiar with the definition. >> That's correct. Yes, that is correct, Mr. Sloder. Um and the and from our
standpoint, I think the reality of the situation is um Mr. Roitz will have to do this traveling. Um that's that is the reality of the situation. This is going to be when he's not traveling his primary residence. Um that's unfortunately the
the reality he's faced with. Um and our hope is to is to put something in place so that we know that there is a structure in there um if something were to happen while he's not while he's not present. >> You know whether >> you know we we believe that this is um
the the most effective way to make sure that there is somebody on site who's who knows that they have to keep an eye on things. Uh having a property manager who's locally managing the property um if maintenance or other issues do crop up um while Mr. Roitz is not present. Um
because from our standpoint, the alternative is is significantly worse. >> Thank you. >> So, and I'm going to ask a potentially um ridiculous question. Um I'm not sure if
I heard this anywhere, but Mr. Rovitz, if if this is meant to be your primary residence and um is your unit being rented out to other people? Are you in that unit by yourself
or is that unit available to be rented as well? >> Um I think that would be at my discretion and ultimately an economic decision on my part. I I guess just to speak very frankly to you all, I I was
poorly guided when I purchased this property and I I was unaware of the conditions that were placed on the property and I did spend a considerable sum of money purchasing the property and I I am simply looking to almost
attenuate my lack of diligence um and and not force myself to sell the property because because Ammerst is a place that I call home and So, I guess I can't predict the future. I I don't know how my finances are going to affect me
renting the unit that I'm living in um in the future, but I I would like to leave the optionality for me to rent that unit as well. >> So, thank you for that. But the heart of my question was if if this is a owner
occupied um if you're saying that this is your residence which under the bylaws would make it you know owner occupied I'm just trying to understand why it's so complicated so convoluted if this is
your primary residence and yes I get it that you travel for work most people do at times um isn't the complication here just you trying to rent your unit as opposed to okay, you live there, one
unit is rented, but it's still owner occupied. I'm I'm just trying to That's correct. It's I I don't want to face economic hardship if if I can correctly rent my unit out to to make sure I cover my expenses for the property.
So essentially, you're saying that um when you're not there, you would intend to rent out your unit. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Okay. [clears throat] >> Are there Mr. Offeld? >> Just to follow up on that, Mr. Robbitz,
when you are there, you would not rent out your unit. Is that right? >> Um I don't this past year I didn't um but I think it really depends on my economic situation. If I had to I I certainly would. Um I I think it all
depends. >> And I I apologize for the answer. That's not so clear. It's it's a very fickle financial situation I feel that I put myself in. Uh >> well, I appreciate that. But uh there is a regulation of which you may
may not be familiar with that limits the number of nonrelated residents in a rental unit to four people. So, if you've already got three tenants in the lower unit under this scenario,
uh oh, I'm sorry. The current situation is you don't you have only three bedrooms downstairs. >> Correct. So, that's that's a different situation. But if you had four bedrooms, um, you could only have four people in that
unit. Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. >> But, but Okay. So, I'm I'm a little I have to say I'm a little bit confused now if this is an owner occupied request or a non-owner occupied request,
but we can get to that. >> Did you recognize Mr. Moss? Sorry, >> you're muted, Mr. Minnows. >> Sorry. Uh, it it seems to me that Mr. Roitz needs to do some math
that he he probably should look at this and determine if he is not there and does not rent out his unit, then can he make this work or not?
because it's better to have the three tenants downstairs than to have no tenants downstairs other than himself in a owner occupied situation. He,
you know, as it is, the complexity of this has gotten beyond anything we've seen in the past. And I if it is an owner occupied, he has every right to just he doesn't have to
come to the ZBA. If it is non-owner occupied, he's got a problem because I see the complexity, the wishful thinking that I hope this works out right as something that is going to
be difficult for him to get through the board. That's my perspective. >> It recognizes Mr. White. I'm sorry, Mr. [clears throat] Did you have anything else? I just got to say I agree with with the sentiments that I hear expressed from Mr. Slovener.
>> Thank you, Mr. White. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so I just have a few concerns. Uh and what I would like to do is actually just kind of go through them all at once. Um and then we can kind of address them if need be. So,
the applicant has mentioned uh having an interaction, you know, revolving around the academic calendar, these sort of things uh with the resident manager. Um I'm a little confused looking at the documentation and the various conversations that we've had over the several meetings. If we're in a period
where it's on the academic calendar, summertime, it's a break, there's something else, and the applicant is somewhere for work. at that point, who's the resident manager? Um, secondly,
we, you know, we get we're getting this six-month figure that I've, you know, myself heard and then several other members of the board have heard, um, from the applicant itself. My question is, if the applicant is away for work [clears throat]
and this is six months, nine months at a time, it's not an owner occupied space at that point. I mean, these are my kind of chief concerns. I I'm just confused and I
really would like some further clarity. Thank you, Mr. Chin. >> Thank you, Mr. White. Um, Attorney Barson. >> Thank you. Um so I think just the the reason that we've approached this application the way we have um after discussion with the um the planning
department um was we were seeking specifically a permit for this as a converted dwelling um because the converted dwelling subsection of the bylaw allows for non-owner [clears throat] occupancy with a resident manager and a property manager. Um, so we have been seeking this
application specifically as a non-ownero occupied application. The caveat to that being that it's not actually non-owner occupied for the majority of the time. Um, [clears throat] that's I think that is kind of driving some of the potential
confusion here. >> Mr. Gerson, can I interrupt you real quick? Um, based off of everything that's been stated on the record by the applicant, if they are away for on average six months at a time with just one assignment a year, then they're not in the unit for the majority of the
time, >> right? >> With one removal, they're there half of the time. >> With more than one uh, you know, period of being away, just just to correct that on the record, it's not a matter of they're there majority of the time. At at best, at minimum, they're there 50%
of the time. >> Mr. White I I the cadence of my travel is actually not yearly. Um it's just it's sporadic. So for instance, for the past two and a half years, I haven't had an assignment that has required travel. This is for the contingency that I do
need to travel. >> Yes. But based off your own statements, if you do have to travel one time per year, then you're not in the in that calendar year, you're not in the unit for the majority of the time. it would still be, you know, just from a a
technical standpoint, um, if, for instance, and I'm just saying, let's say that this this remains a a three-bedroom unit with a four-bedroom unit upstairs. This is just a hypothetical scenario. Three-bedroom unit on the bottom floor.
Mr. Roitz is living in one of the bedrooms, and he is elected to rent out two of the bedrooms in his downstairs unit. So it's three people living in the b the downstairs and there's three people living or four people living upstairs and that's something he'd be allowed to do just as the you know
technically it's owner occupied if he were to leave for a 6 month 9month assignment it's technically still owner occupied because he that is still his primary residence. You know he's living in a hotel for 6 months or nine months doesn't make that
no longer his primary residence. The only difference in that scenario would be there's no oversight. There's no resident manager. There's no property manager. It's just it is what it is. Um you know that's part part why partly why we're here is because we're we're
looking for a mechanism so that when that scenario does happen um we know that there's oversight of this property in place. Um we know that there is you know somebody keeping an eye on things. Um and I you know I think from our standpoint the um you know the reality
is yes it's possible he may be gone for six months but that does not change the fact that it is still his primary residence >> and I'm agreeing with you attorney Benson the the principal residence that is a definition he can be gone forever in a day if you know that is his
principal residence but I think what your application is complicated because he wants the option to rent out his unit when he's not there and the scenario that he's proposing as to how to go through that that's just making things complicated
because as Mr. Mid said if things stay the way they are you guys do not need to be here at all because it is an owner occupied property that is his residence um you know he has a property manager when he's not there but as you heard from Mr. himself. He
wants the option to rent his unit um when he's there or when he's not there. And and that and there in lies the complication. Um and and so going back to um what everyone's concern is,
it's it's very convoluted to say, but um go ahead. >> No, that that's that's okay. you can keep going. >> So, if [snorts] are there any other um I actually I I do um have a couple
questions. So, one of the submissions that we received were call logs from APD and I just want to you know there are some noise complaints there and they were actually from my review they were earlier this
season rather. um if I'm looking at this correctly this month um and some in September. Mr. Rovis, were you there um in those months? >> Um I I had left the property at the tail
end of October um to travel to Manhattan to HSS for a shoulder surgery. Um >> so one of the complaints is dated October 5th, October 4th, um September 11th. Um, and there was also um a liquor
law violation in August, all of this year. >> I I was not made aware of anything. I do know when I was absent from the property, um I I had been in constant contact with tenants at least once a
day, I had been notified of a noise complaint and it was almost immediately attenuated. So, there were three noise complaints and the liquor law violation. Um, but I again I don't think you're answering my question. Um, were you there on October
4th, 5th, 911, and 8:28 of this year? >> I would have to revert back to I believe in early October. I was um I I don't know if I was present at the property at the time of a violation. Um I I don't know
my exact whereabouts on those dates, but I >> am >> But you're saying that you also were not made aware of those noise complaints. >> I I was not no one had routed that through any channel to communicate that with me. Um, I I had one text message
from a neighbor. Um, and I had immediately called the tenants to basically tell them that you guys are being too noisy and that was that. >> And and just to refresh my recollection, do you have an existing property
manager? >> No. That that's the reason for this application to put rules in place and to create a tried andrue system like a professional housing system with defined rules, monitoring written rules, and pre-planned remedies rather than relying
on informal oversight or tenant discretion. Do any members of the board have any other questions or comments for the applicant or for attorney? I see no affirmative response. And with
that, I will go to public comments. >> I'm sorry. Was there someone? >> Uh, no, that was me. Yeah, I was I was just going to make one more comment, but I'll I'll wait till after public comment. >> Um, if there are any members of the public who wish to comment on this application, this is your opportunity to
do so. Each member is allowed a maximum speaking time of 3 minutes. If you are appearing via Zoom, please utilize the raise hand function. If you're appearing over the telephone, I believe you press star 9 to be recognized. There aren't any members of the public
here tonight. >> Thank you, Miss Williams. >> So, given that >> them all away, [laughter] >> um given that there are no public comments, are there any further um comments from the applicants before I
move this public hearing to a public meeting? Um I I was going to make one initial comment um just in response to something you had said um earlier, Mr. Chair, which is that I think we'd still um you know, if the intent were for him to to be there and and never leave on
his work projects or attempt to rent out his room when that was the case or his unit when that was the case, um I think we'd still be here before this board um seeking essentially we'd have to get permission to um add that additional bedroom regardless. um the you know
primarily because the number of units was specified in previous special permits. So I think we would we'd be required to do that regardless. Um but I would also just like to add and first I'd like to thank the board for for having us here um for um entertaining this application. We we really do appreciate all the comments we've
received. Um you can tell I'm sure that um your feedback has in a in a very large and real way uh informed how this um application has taken shape. Um we've certainly tried to be mindful of your concerns and address them to the best of our abilities. Um and we truly believe
that um you know this is a a better alternative to to what's currently there on site. Um you know the um proposal of having a um resident manager on site when the owner is not present. Um but more importantly also having a property manager involved um conditions related
to landscaping and snow maintenance. Um I think that there's a lot um of benefit to granting a special permit on this application um by way of the conditions that you have the ability to impose on it. Um and we hope that you uh um seriously consider what we are proposing
um because once again we we feel that this is the the best alternative um to a potentially untenable situation for um both Mr. Roitz as well as the current tenants and the neighbors potentially.
So, thank you. >> Thank you, Attorney. [clears throat] >> May Yeah. May I say a few words? >> Yes. >> Um, first off, I I just want to thank all of you for your attention to this application. If anything, it it really
has made me understand that I need a plan. I need structure. and I kind of got myself in a sticky situation by being guided poorly when I purchased this property. That said, uh I really truly do believe that the materials set
forth put forth a professional housing system and and structure with defined roles. Um my goal is not to have a nuisance house when I'm not there. My goal is to be a member of the community and I am just
definitely afraid of getting myself into financial hardship if there is no place or process forget the extra room the fourth room for me to be able to rent the unit while I'm not
there. I I would like to increase the full the the footprint and the livability of of my residence, which is henceforth why we, you know, wanted to we we went through the process of trying to add the bedroom and enclosing the
porch. I I think besides the livability, Jeff could attest that's also a structural issue and we're really wanting to enclose that porch. It's structurally unsound and there are weatherization issues. Um, and I I hope
that as convoluted as this application was, you could just hear where I'm coming from. That I I don't want to be forced to sell the house if, you know, god forbid I have to travel for work. Um, and I want a plan in place. I I want to
be a member of this community. And I I don't want issues. And I'm a little upset that no one had called me during the complaints or when there were issues. Um, but you know, this application serves to put process and structure around that.
I I have another question. What is the timeline to if if this permit gets granted, what is the timeline to convert that portion into a bedroom and to actually have people in that space?
Um, I don't necessarily know that it would be rented right away. I I think the whole process that we undertook was merely a function of Jeff's ability to to work, material cost, and the ballooning cost of this
application and project. It was kind of in the really moved by my financial situation more than anything. Um, I I'll let Jeff chime in. >> Before Jeff chimes in, so you're you're asking for two things. The first one is
to convert the portion to a bedroom. >> Um, and then the ability to rent out the space when you're not there. So, understanding your answer just now to say you don't know when it'll be rented. Let's assume for
the first part um about the conversion the actual work itself. >> Sure. >> Is there is there a projected timeline to get this work completed? >> Um I still have to defer to Jeff. Um I
think there are building implications that Jeff could speak to. >> He's got his hand raised. So let's let's let Jeff answer that question. >> Brooks, >> thank you guys. Appreciate that. So, um, the, uh, so what I can speak to, of course, is the building side of this, right? I I don't, as far as the zoning
and owner occupancy side of it, that's not really my my ball of wax. But the, um, that porch, the first when Alec first had me look at it, I, you know, I walked on it and it's very bouncy and I I looked underneath and everything on that porch is overspanned. The deck
boards are over spanned, the joists are overspanned, the beams over spann, the footings are overspanned. there there's nothing that's really in compliance with with any any code that's been around for the last 30 or 40 years. So, um it should be rebuilt period. And the um you
know, and then so then in discussion of hey, feasibility wise, you know, if we're going to rebuild this porch, um the difference between rebuilding it, rebuilding it as a bedroom is pretty minimal. Um so that's kind of what what I was looking at from the building side. And as far as the time to build, we are
in the winter now. So that does present some challenges as far as um getting proper footings in the ground. I think really from let's say approval to so let's let's say from my end from breaking ground until when that structure is complete, we're probably
looking at something like four to six weeks from when we actually start work till when we can we can deliver a completed, you know, room or or porch regardless of which way it goes. Thank you. So again, thank you, Attorney Pearson,
Mr. Rubitz, and Mr. Brooks for being here. And unless there are any further questions or any comments from applicants, I would entered a motion to move the public um hearing to a public meeting while keeping the public hearing open. Again,
being mindful that the public meeting is not where the applicants get to add anything else. Um it's just for the board to discuss um the merits of this application. Um, do I have such a motion to move the public hearing to a public
meeting? I see Mr. Meadows saying so moved. Um, [laughter] it >> it has been moved and second. Is there any discussion on the motion? With no discussion, um, the vote occurs.
Um, Mr. Slovener, >> I. >> Mr. Offeld, >> I. >> Mr. White >> I >> Mr. Meadows >> I >> and the chair votes I with a unanimous consent we are now into the public
meeting while keeping the public hearing open and I I know there was a lot that was said um in our initial discussion as well as over the many um the other meetings that we've had. So, I will give
each member of the board an opportunity to weigh in um as to their thoughts on this petition. >> Mhm. Mr. Meadows, >> I think if we're voting on all of this as a ball of wax, I I would certainly
vote no. Um however I am fine with the structural work that they want to do. I am not fine with it being a two family
without wi with any kind of managers separate. I feel that if they want to do resident managers or local managers, they don't and they have it the building as a
owner occupied building. There's nothing to prohibit them from doing that. They made this entire application far more complex than it needed to be. When the first time Mr. Slover and I
were on site with Mr. wrote it. We suggested to him that he just do this as an owner occupied building. He obviously didn't listen to us and has made this extremely complex,
very wishful thinking as far as the parking is concerned to try and get that number of compact cars on site and require that they only be compact cars is going to be pretty tough.
There are other areas of wishful thinking, particularly in regard to the resident manager, that just don't make any sense to me. So my overall I would say no to the
overall plan, but if we can separate out the uh the construction that they want to do, that's fine as long as they're not renting out that space downstairs.
Thank you, Mr. Meadows. Mr. Ser, >> I'm happy to go next. Uh, well, everything that Mr. Meadows said is absolutely relevant and I agree. I
don't want to appear unsympathetic. I recognize the ambition in trying to make a real estate investment and I'm sorry that Mr.
Roitz received incorrect or questionable information, but it's not our responsibility to approve something in order to fix that problem.
Uh the resident manager issue is central to me on this one. The problem of a nonowner occupied building is not centered around
monitoring landscaping and snow removal. It's generally around tenant behavior when the converted property is in an otherwise residential neighborhood. And we have seen
enough hard evidence that says that converted residential buildings in residential neighborhoods where the owner is not present become nuisance properties. And that's
why we look at all of this the way we do and the process that they are proposing for a resident manager who may not you know even be in residence all the time
doesn't solve the problems. It doesn't it doesn't really address this there. There's no separation as I mentioned before between the proposed resident manager and his or her roommates and this would just
be a two family dwelling in a residential neighborhood. Uh I agree that this that this is overly complicated. it doesn't address the the issues. There are ways of doing this
that are not being uh addressed. Um I I sympathize greatly with Mr. Roitz for the the uh financial difficulty that he's facing, but it's not up to us to
fix that. And um I will I will not vote to approve this. The most I would be willing to do is to allow it to be withdrawn without prejudice so that he could address the
real substance of our concerns and come back in less than two years. Otherwise, I would simply vote no on this. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Sier.
Mr. Offeld, >> thank you. Um, so I'm just going to step through the specific requests. Um, the first was that the uh building be or the site be be defined
as a as a converted dwelling. And in my judgment, it does meet the definition of a converted dwelling. So, I think a special permit issued as a converted dwelling makes sense. That's the easy part. Um,
I didn't have any problem with the parking. I think that that that what has been proposed works fine, is acceptable. Um, adding the bedroom,
uh, I think that's also acceptable. Um, I don't think it substantially changes the character of the building. I think it the design that we've seen as shown in the renderings is uh fits
reasonably well in the neighborhood. But the nub of course is the is the owner occupied or resident manager piece. And again, I I as I said a few minutes ago, I'm confused about whether this is indeed an owner occupied property. And
it sounds like, and Mr. Meadows may said this more clearly perhaps, that what's being proposed here is that it remain owner occupied. And if Mr. Roitz wants to rent out his room and have some
u congenial uh arrangement of how a tenative a temporary a tenant in that in that room um integrates into the rest of the building. That's great. He can he can do that. It's it's it's a
uh it's not but it's not something we have to approve. At least that's my understanding. So, I think I'd be okay with approving a special permit that's converted dwelling parking and the um
um addition the build the new bedroom but uh does not take that but is owner occupied but is owner occupied. >> Thank you, Mr. Offel. Mr. >> I don't know if we can do that tonight. I don't know. I'm not sure how that works, but anyway,
that's where I am. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I apologize for not having my video on. I appear to be having bandwidth issues as well. Um, I won't take a whole lot of everyone's time. Um, I would agree with the statements that have been made by the board. Um, as it stands before me, I
would not be able to vote in the affirmative for this position, this petition or application, excuse me. Thank you, Mr. White. I think together we've had the benefit of having this application for so long
that we've had very clear opportunities to review and consider all the things that we've raised and have discussed here. Um, so it's not as if this came before us tonight like most applications you
usually do and we make a decision in that one hearing, but we've we've taken it away. We've given feedback, we've come back, continued and reviewed documentation materials. And while I do agree that um I I actually do agree that
it it is a converted dwelling and um I agree that if you want to build that additional bedroom, you should be allowed to do so. Um as you heard from your contractor, the deck is unsafe. So that also should be looked at regardless
of what happens here tonight. Um, and you know, but the way it is written, and I know that we're not bound by precedents, but the way it's written, we don't want to set a bad precedent or bad example for future development or future applications. And I think as convoluted
as it sounds, I think supporting this would create um that perception. Um, as you heard from Mr. Meadows, we appreciate your financial concern as you know and hear you saying you're giving
bad advice and yes that happens at times and regardless of what happens with this special permit um you have options and none of those options is so extreme that you have to get rid of your property.
It's just that um the proposal as is creates issues that um we've articulated and made suggestions, but we're still not comfortable with what you're proposing. And that is the heart um of
everything. It is. Um I I I would I can and would support um having the work done, but to have um [clears throat]
approve the ability to have you rent it as you are proposing that is problematic for me. And so I I initially I had a thought about this um full disclosure to the board um is
could we approve um a special permit with um very specific conditions and I believe there are things that we can do um like a check-in period. Now the question is here is that
the application even if we were to vote on something tonight the question will be what what what is it that we would prove because the way the application is because I don't think we're allowed to change application so we can approve something.
So that also in itself creates an issue. Even if we wanted to approve something, we don't have something that we can improve in front of us. So I I do see attorney Pearson's hands raised and Mr. Ro's hands waved. This is a public meeting, so usually not the
opportunity to weigh in. But with the board's permission, if you're comfortable in um taking a couple questions from them or comments um with your permission, I will allow Attorney Burson to ask his question or make his comment
just by raise of hand if you're comfortable with um Okay, Attorney B. [clears throat] >> Thank you very much. I do appreciate it. Um I would just note that the um and and obviously you're you're welcome to take
this information um and and verify yourselves but u my understanding that the application itself um the section 3.3241 for converted dwellings in cap incorporates both an owner occupied situation as well as if there is
non-owner occupancy the resident manager and property manager situation. So, you could approve the changes to the structure um and the special permit as a converted dwelling without approving the owner occupancy request. Um so, just to
put that out there. Um this is the same section of the bylaw which was noticed um you know for all of the the prior meetings. Um so there's no issues with respect to notice um relative to the application. And once again, it since it is the exact same section of the underlying bylaw, um this could
technically still be approved obviously in a different format than than we were proposing. Thank you. >> And I do believe just to add to that um this was approved as a converted dwelling on special permit going back to
1993. >> I I believe um I I'd have to double check the the 1993 permit. I know that there have been a number of permits um some of them treated this as a duplex. Um so I don't want to speak out of turn um and say definitively that it was approved as a converted dwelling. I mean
that was part of why we made this application um was following discussion with the the planning department um was that this is actually more appropriately a converted structure than a duplex. >> Thank you. Thank you. So procedurally this is a very difficult
one. Um [laughter] and so I by my tally um you know Mr. Meadows was a no as is. Um could support something in part. Um
Mr. Silver was a no. Um but would allow withdrawal with our presence to come back. Um Mr. Aeld was an okay with the converted dwelling and the unoccupied and Mr. White was a no.
Um, so by that count, um, I do not believe you have the votes. So unless members of the board have changed their position after hearing from Attorney Benson on the converted dwelling,
um the the votes are the votes are not there to approve anything tonight. >> Mr. Chair, I would uh fully support uh a vote where we're doing this. What was it without Lord? My brain's turned off. It's been a long day. Um, without
prejudice. >> Okay. >> I apologize. >> It's okay. Mr. Svin, I saw your hand. >> Yeah. I'm trying I'm debating with myself whether I should make a suggestion here.
Um the the the chair has clearly stated in the past that we try and work with applicants to make to if it's possible if they if they appropriately address our concerns. We're not here to to be
difficult but we there are certain things that we just that I don't feel we can do in this case. Uh I I I don't have a problem with enclosing the the two porches. That's
that's not the center of the problem here. It has to do with owner occupied and the the complications and as the chair put it wishful thinking or somebody said wishful thinking. I think it was the chair but I'm not sure. Maybe
it was Mr. Meadows. Um whoever said it was brilliant. Okay. So uh the I would suggest in order to give Mr. Roitz one more
opportunity to actually address our concerns which we have raised before and were not adequately addressed. I don't believe in this proposal. We we expressed concerns about
the non-ownero occupied nature of the proposal and they've come back with this complicated resident manager with not who doesn't have authority and is going to monitor the property to make sure the landscaping is done which is not at the
center of any of our concerns. So I would suggest that we allow Mr. provitz and through Mr. Buren or however it's done to withdraw the application without
prejudice and come back with a a proposal that is not nearly as complicated or as difficult to enforce that maintains the owner occupied nature of the
building. And if they want to do that, I can I I would support withdrawal without prejudice so that Mr. Roitz is not locked into a 2-year waiting period before he can come back.
Other than that, I'm I can't be even begin to approve this tonight. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Slovener. And logistically also just to add to that as well, even if we were to consider something in peacemail, which I
don't like the idea, our conditions and our findings we would need to make and Miss Williams, we need to go back and do a lot of rework on this so we can have a clean version to actually put in a special permit. So I am also um leaning
on the withdrawal without prejudice. Mr. Offel Mr. Offeld. >> Yes. I would just uh concur with that sentiment. >> Thank you Mr. Meadows. I saw your hand. >> I have to stop
uh taking the audio offline. I am I am also in agreement with you and Mr. Offeld, Mr. Sloveter uh and I assume Mr. White as far as allowing them to withdraw uh without prejudice so that they can come back
with a very simple owner occupied building that wants to have some structural work. >> Thank you, Mr. Meadows. And Mr. Wson, as a courtesy, I will allow you to um make a comment one last
time um in the public meeting. >> Thank you very much. I do appreciate it and I know that it is not the standard protocol, so it is appreciated. Um once again, I just I wanted to thank everybody uh for your time. Um, but I also um am hoping that um this board
would consider I know that you don't want to do anything peacemail potentially approving at least the structural changes um tonight and uh or at least consider it. If not um I understand but you don't ask you don't get my family used to say.
So, I I I don't I mean, you heard from everyone. I don't think we're comfortable doing so tonight. And and again, it's you know, our next meeting is 3 weeks away in January. So, you know, if you come back with something clean,
um you choose a date, but if you come back with something clean, I know time is probably part of your consideration while asking for a vote tonight. um hearing the sentiments and just coming back before us with [sighs and gasps] you have a better chance of getting a yes on that date. Um
because again um logistically and technically there's a lot of things that needs to go into the special permit and we rely on Miss Williams to do a lot of that and the way it is I don't think she can make all those edits and changes to conditions and findings in real time.
I believe Mr. Roitz needs to ask for withdrawal without prejudice. >> Um, if you can if you can just give me one second. I'm just uh I'm communicating with him off offline, so to speak, just to get his Would I be able to I mean, I'm comfort
comfortable asking Jeff here um in front of you all just in the interest of transparency. Would I be able to just ask Jeff a question? It's totally okay with me if you guys all hear the answer. Um >> it is [clears throat] in the public record so if you're comfortable with it being recorded then yes.
>> Yeah. I mean yeah it was pretty transparent today. Um, Jeff, with I guess the pushed timeline, your availability and cost, can can you just let me know if
that's going to balloon things on your end? I'm not really sure how that works, but I would love to just get a good understanding of that because that's central to me at the moment. Yeah, I think Alec somewhat to help what
we we discussed um you know I guess a few days ago the um the big issue right now is going to be getting the ground soft enough to dig the uh proper footings to support whatever we build there right so um so it's going to be that you know um we've got to figure out
how to um I guess essentially um section off the area to keep the weather from keeping the ground frozen so we can get some ground thaw there and get the footings dug. And that's going to be the biggest thing is going to be a time push. Other than that, once we've
got the once we got the footings dug and we can get the concrete set, then the rest of the build still would proceed just as fast as it would have 3 months ago. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Um, we are we are specifically asking
this board's permission to withdraw without prejudice. >> Thank you, Mr. Buren. Um, members of the board, the 65 High Street has officially asked to withdraw without prejudice. I
will take a vote on allowing to do so. Um, Mr. Meadows, >> hi. >> Mr. Arfeld, >> hi. >> Mr. Ser, >> I >> Mr. White, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. >> Can I ask you all a question? I
apologize for interrupting. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Robbitz. I I I will let you communicate with um Attorney Berson, but I I think I don't know what your question is going to be, but I'm going to say some things that may um hopefully give you some timelines.
>> So, um as I said earlier, our next meeting is in January. I believe it's January 8th. Um, and I know that um, new applications, and Miss Williams, I'm going to rely on
you to answer this question. Um, past the deadline to be on that docket given what we've decided here tonight, are we breaking any rules if we put them on for January 8th? >> Yeah, put them on for January 8th. You
would have had to continue to January 8th. which we didn't do. Um, so they have to essentially start all over. They have to >> and that was going to be my question >> about cost and starting over if we could
>> they have to submit a new application. So, I understand that there's going to be a cost to that, but again, that may actually make sense um for because the what we're asking for is something cleaner and simple and that does require
a new application. So, um I I appreciate that there's a cost to that, but I don't think we have any discretion here to wave any of that cost. >> No, no one does. Yeah. >> Not even town staff.
>> Yeah. So, but yes, we we would need something clean that we can actually approve and if that requires a new application, then it should be a new application. So, um we very much appreciate your patience and your understanding. Um again, as you heard from Mr. Meadows, it
is not our intent to say no to people. We help where we can. And despite not getting a yes vote to your petition, I believe that we have helped because again, we are given the opportunity to allow us to support
something that we can say yes on that not only benefits you but protect the town as a whole as well. So, thank you all for your time tonight and um I will entertain a motion to close the public meeting on 65 High Street for tonight.
Um is there such a motion? So moved. >> Mr. Mr. Chair, point of order. Um or procedure, I guess. Um don't I believe you need to announce the actual vote that we took um like what the outcome of it was for the record.
>> I'm sorry. On on the motion to withdraw without prejudice, does unanimous vote allowing the petitioners to withdraw 65 High Street without prejudice? Thank you, Mr. White. >> And now [clears throat] it's to close the hearing, not the public meeting, but we're closing the
So I will enter a motion to close the hearing. Um is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? Second. >> It has been it has been moved and second. Is there any discussion? >> With no discussion, the vote on the
motion. Mr. Meadows >> I. >> Mr. Offeld. >> Mr. Slovder >> I. >> Mr. White >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The hearing on 6 ZBA FY2026-0365
High Street is officially closed. Our next order of business is general public comment on any matters not before the board tonight. Um I do not believe we have any members of the public still here or here. Miss Williams.
>> No, no one is here. It's just us. Seeing that it's just us and there are no public comments. Um are there any other business not anticipated within the last 48 hours? >> Um I think we just need to talk about
the site visit dates and just solidifying them so that everybody's on the same page. Um and I think you know traditionally the bile or the rules and rags say that it's the Tuesday of the
week of the public hearing. Um we've had to adjust those dates sometimes because either members of the board couldn't make that date or the applicant couldn't make the date. So, the stipulation is
I'm going to put the dates into, let me just share this document so everybody knows what I'm referring to. Um, put the dates into this schedule so that applicants know moving forward starting in the new year that they have to set
this date aside. There's no like wishy-washy, I'm not available, blah blah blah. When you submit an application and you secure your public hearing, you're also securing your site visit date. Um, like I like that idea. >> Me, too.
>> I just lost my share. >> One second. >> That's okay. Um, but that would be the main thing. And then to that point, not everyone has responded regarding the
site visit for 485 Pine Street. I think some people are able to join and most have not responded. So >> can you remind us of what that date is again? >> Um it would be ne this coming Tuesday is
when the applicant said they're available. I can always respond to them and let them know that that date doesn't work. January 6th would be the Tuesday, the week of the hearing, which is our traditional
date um as mandated in the rules and rights. So, >> did we did did we already say yes to the applicant for December 16th? >> I didn't give them a definitive answer. I specifically just said the applicant.
I communicated their response to you all, but I didn't tell them that we were we were on for the 16th. I haven't confirmed that date. >> Okay. [clears throat] And given that we're all together, would people prefer given that we're having this policy
implemented January 6th versus the 16th? And I I'm leaning towards January 6. Things will be fresher in our minds then. Mhm. Mrs. Ser,
>> I think this is um a wonderful procedural suggestion on the part of Miss Williams and that I think it makes sense to implement it for for the next time which is January 6. So I I support
what the chair just said. Also, I can't make the 16th. So, if you go ahead, that's fine. It's not doesn't center around me. But this is, I think, generally a very good idea. It also tells us that when we know there's a
meeting on a Thursday, that we should at least be aware that there's a likelihood of a site visit 2 days earlier and to set the time aside. So I I I would support January 6 if since this is such
a good idea, let's just do it. >> I can't take complete credit for it. The chair was the one who kind of nudged me in that direction. So >> take all the credit you you feel [laughter] like. It's okay.
I'm assuming that because you're a woman, it the idea really did come from you and you're just being nice to Emerald here. [laughter] So, >> no comment. >> Yeah. But yes, I I I like that we have
something set. We put applicants on notice and we also put ourselves on notice um that says, "Hey, ZBA meeting this week. Site visit is on Tuesday potentially." Yeah. So I am adding the column. Obviously I'm
not going to add the dates right now. I you know but it will go in and then I will resend this for everyone. Um so that you know that if you can make it you can make it and if you can't then then
you can't. >> Yeah. Right. I think you I think the only time we should potentially change it is if none of us can make it. [laughter] >> Well, that's why I try to be flexible. But, you know, um
>> yeah, it would be interesting to see if they actually we have one day when like, oh, none of us can make it. That'll be that would be like [laughter] >> that'll be the day. >> There may be a day when all of us make it. >> I know. Yeah. If I'm there by myself, well then [laughter]
>> No, we won't do that to you. >> No. Yeah. Um, Mr. A, I saw your hand. >> I was just going to say that January 6 would be my preference, too. I agree with Mr. Sloer all the way on that. >> Yeah. And so I think so far, Miss
Williams, actually, you have four confirmed for January 6. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> So, you won't be alone, Justinta. You're fine. >> Yeah. Okay. Then um I will let the applicant know that it's just it's not doable.
It's too short of notice and um most people can't make it. So >> they'll just have to they'll just have to adapt. >> So So other than January 8th, is there
anything else on the horizon? >> Um not at the moment. Not at the moment. So, we just have the one 485 Pine Street on January 8th, but I was suggesting a possible administrative meeting for maybe the 8th
or January 22nd. >> I would suggest the 22nd. I think it's a good idea. Um, I do want to take an opportunity to see what I can read out of the bylaws to see what the changes are. Um, so I think
longer than shorter um would help me do that. Um, this one this one was also the 65 high street. It it was very complicated. Not the the positions that we were put in
was make made it very complicated. And so I think having a meeting to have that conversation and see if there's any procedures that we can implement or policies that we can implement um just in case something as complicated come
before us again. We don't run through that. But yes, I I I think it's a great idea to have another admin meeting in where we can preempt if we can to the best of our ability certain things. Did anyone else have any other updates?
So, um, unless it's a unless it's a comprehensive permit, um, in the new year, starting after our January meeting, my intent is to have [snorts]
Mr. Meadows chair the meetings so that Mr. Casey can attend the meetings, can be on the board. Um cuz he hasn't served just yet. So um after actually
we I can do that with January 8th. Um so >> I do have I do have a a slight input. Um I think Mr. Meadows won't even be available on January 8th. So >> yeah, I leave on the 28th and get back
on the 13th. >> Okay. So, can we reach out to Mr. Case and Miss Williams and see if he's available? >> Yes, I can do that. >> Okay, >> I can do that. Yes, >> I know. I don't know if he's going to be in town cuz school's not going to be
out, too. But actually, we're Zoom. What the? >> Yes. [laughter] Yeah. >> I [clears throat] mean, he can be like Mr. Meadows and, you know, >> snorkeling right after. [laughter]
>> I I if I were going to Colombia, I I might consider it, but I'm in Bonire and I want to be scuba diving. >> There you go. >> Underwater instead of on top. >> See, but one day you will be able to zoom
from underwater. Won't that be amazing? There's got to be some place where >> I can't wait. [laughter] >> Some some place should remain a refuge. >> Exactly. >> Yes. >> Agreed.
>> Okay. So, I'm going to stop sharing this. >> We are at a lovely 838. Um so unless there is more, thank you all for u your service as always. Happy
holidays. >> Um enjoy your celebrations, friends, family, loved ones and I will entertain a motion to adjourn our meeting for tonight. Is there such a motion?
>> It has been moved second and third. The vote occurs on the motion. Mr. Meadows, >> I. >> Mr. Offeld, >> I. >> Mr. Slovener, >> I. >> Mr. White, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. Again, thank you
all very much. >> Thank you. Happy holiday >> and to all of you.