[Music] [Music] [Music]
All right. Good morning everybody. Good morning. Uh Frank Msina. Uh this is welcome to the May 6, 2025 meeting of the Chattam Historical Commission. Before we begin, we have a couple of announcements which we have to
make. Uh please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly hereafter for scheduled and on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the meeting, please notify the chairman. Pursuant to Governor Healey's
March 28, 2025 signing of a chapter two of acts of 2025 extending certain provision certain measures certain COVID 19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law general law 3820
until June 30th, 2027. This meeting of the Cadam Select Board. Well, I think that's a mistake. This meeting of the Chattam Historical Commission, unless I was promoted, and I didn't know that, okay,
is being conducted in person and via remote participation. You guys are trying to trick me, right? Okay. See, I do read it. Every effort will be made to ensure the public can adequately address the proceedings as provided for in the order. A reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in
progress may do so by calling the phone number 508945410 conference ID [Music] 42066475 hash hashtag or join the meeting via Microsoft teams through the
link on the posted agenda while every while this is a live broadcast and simal cast on chattam xfinity chatam 1072. Despite our p best efforts, we may not be able to do in real time access. Okay.
Um the first item that we have to attend to is a roll call. Uh Bob Leer here. Nancy Bar here. Stephanie Hamilton here. Sandy Porter here. Janet Tennyson here. Robert Stevens here. Robert Wilson here. And
the chair is here. So we have all members are present and uh one alternate Robert Wilson. Robert, we have a full full contingent of members. So you will participate but not participate in the actual voting. Okay. Uh the next item on
the agenda quickly is our minutes. We have minutes from April 1st, 2025. Everybody has had the minutes have chance to look at them. Any comments, corrections,
deletions? Seeing none, a motion to approve. I move we accept the minutes as written. A second. Second. Thank you very much. Okay. Quick roll call. Bob, yes. Nancy, I'm gonna abstain. I wasn't here. Right.
Okay. Steph, yes. Sandy, I'm abstain. Janet, listen here. Yes. Robert, I wasn't here. Abstain. Votes. Yes. Robert wasn't here. Okay. All right. Nancy, you were not three of us weren't here. Oh, right.
Okay. Sorry about that, guys. All right. Okay. We're We're good on that. We have um three hearings u and a couple of business items that we have to discuss under all business and
u so it should be a relatively straightforward meeting. So why don't we just proceed direct to the hearing. The first application is 25 007. We heard in accordance with chapter
158 45 crows pawn road. William R. Riley Esquire presenting. It's William F. Riley. What was that? It's William F. Riley,
what did I say? S. You said R. R. Okay. Sorry about that, kid. That's quite all right. Right. So, um, you know, this first part of this building was built in 1910. Uh
but the the current owner uh it's it's a really small version of the of a Greek revival and the uh the way it's been added on to it doesn't lend itself uh in
my client's eyes uh to being modernized. So he wishes to remove it and build a new house. Uh I'm not aware of any, you know, historical personages who live there. And I would say that while
it's a small version of a Greek revival, there's nothing remarkable about the design. There are plenty of Greek revivals here in town. So I would suggest that you could find that the building's not historically significant.
That's it. Okay. uh this uh property and this building according to the form B members of the public and just remind
members of the board what a form B is is when our paid professional uh in this case it was Eric Dre uh did a survey of the town. We look at
all the homes that more than 50 years old. In fact, those which are approaching 100. And this obviously uh met that criteria. There is some documentation that may even be older than the 1906 and dates of construction. So,
there is a form B on the property, right, Mr. Riley? I know. And the form B goes into the details of the design of the building. And you're right when you say it's not Queen Anne or Queen or etc,
etc. And what the uh preservation consultant designated is what we call a style form vernacular which means it's neither there nor there. It's in between, you know, a combination of other other activities. But as he notes in the form bees, this was typical of
the homes that were built around in the 1900, the turn of the century. So you're right, George Washington didn't sleep there. Neither did William Nickerson. But in my opinion, you know, the property does have some historical integrity in terms of architectural
detail of the properties built around that time. you know, Chattam is undergoing a lot of destruction of of homes of various times and and this is probably a good example. You know, our our process under Chapter 158, a demolition
delay bylaw, is very simple to try and speak with the applicant to see if we can have a discussion on potentially saving the house or incorporating it into some kind of activity. Uh, in this case, we're not dealing with an
applicant. We're dealing with the developer who's buying it, you know, wants to put up another house, and that that's where we are, right? Well, that doesn't mean he didn't he he initially considered, you know, trying to incorporate the house into a new
design, but he he felt that the existing structure is simply too small to really be incorporated in an in a way that is, you know, uh, handsome architecturally. Do you think we could have that
discussion with him? I'm I'm creeping up, Bill, to the concept of a demolition delay. Yeah. Where rather than taking it down tomorrow, then there is no discussion. It's gone. Uh and you know, we we we go
through under our bylaw and the intent of the bylaw is to encourage discussion, you know, and that's why we don't say no, we can't say no, but we can delay it to encourage that discussion. And as you're very well aware of, if we have a discussion and it's like, um, no, I
don't I can't, you know, I don't want to do it. I want to take it down. I have other plans for the property. I mean, obviously, it's a big piece of property behind it and he may have other other thoughts in mind. Uh, but we're not having that discussion. And you know, in fact, we modified the bylaw, which
you're well aware of, to say that the person, you know, we were trying to stop real estate people from doing this, from just buying properties, tearing down homes, and not giving us a chance to talk of it. And that's why we have that bylaw, which requires that the person
submitting the application has to be the current owner at the time. But if we go ahead and allow this to be demolished, we're not going to deal with the current owner. We're going to deal with, you know, Mr. uh Sherbone. But well, in the first place, David Parish, that's where I'm
coming. David Parish owns the property. He's the owner of the property. And he's and he's he's Sherbone. Sherborn LLC. It's an LLC that he uses for his building company. But he's the he's the current owner of the property. Yeah. I
don't know why you say he's not the owner, but No, I didn't say the first question you're supposed to re answer is whether the building is is historically significant. I feel it is as in my opinion, we're going to talk to everybody else because we wouldn't have
a form B. We wouldn't have had the preservation consultant do a form B on the property. The form B is, you know, where we where we de go through the details of the design of the property and the architecture of the property. And I'll be honest with you, Bill, if there was no form B on this property, if
we didn't have the preservation consultant say it's something we should stop and look at, it probably would be a slam dunk. But there is a form B. And it does show that there is certain architectural details which are probably worthy of being preserved if we can do it. If we can't, we can't. We know that.
So that's where I'm coming from. So, I mean, I gave my piece and why don't we see what the other members of the commission will start at this end. Robert, do you have any thoughts on the matter? Yep. You're Robert. He's
Bob. Thank you, Frank. Yes. Uh, I'm I'm looking at the front page here and uh I do feel that this property has uh historic appeal uh both in the appearance of it. It's a modest building, but it's It's got the the
character of uh many of the other buildings like it in Chattam and uh that are built in that time frame. Also on the very front page, item 13 and 14 may not may or may not be correct. It says it's uh the building is on the National
Register of Historic Places. No, it's not. No. Okay. So, that's incorrect. Okay. That's item 13. Okay. Could I could I respond to that? Sure. Absolutely, Bill. Okay. So,
uh, so Robert's statement was accurate except it didn't deal with the question of historical significance. In other words, the the the uh the design is was very common
place. Uh, as Eric said, you know, it's a not a particularly good example even of a Greek revival. And the uh and you know there are as Robert just mentioned there are
many other Greek revivals from this time frame in Chadam as well. So what is the historical significance of this building? So I mean that's that's really the first
question you have to answer. Got it. Yes. Yep. I just want to respond with one more point and that is that uh in the in the document here it explains that the Nickerson family did convey the house back in the very early days before
the turn of the century I believe or might be early 1900s. Uh so the Nickersons presumably live there. Uh, no they didn't. They just owned it and didn't live there. Oh, because they identify who built the house in the in the form B.
And it was not they I think when it was conveyed by the Nickersons, it was still pro. It was property, but there was no structures listed on the deed. Yeah, the Nickerson probably owned the land. Included the owners with no reference to buildings in the form B.
Well, when I read it, it said it conveyed the property that included the building. Yes, that's correct. The property the building was there. It says a 9 acre parcel of land that included this property with no reference to
buildings. Oh, it says no reference to build. Yeah. Or you say no reference? No, no, it says a 9 acre parcel of land that included this property. You mean that part of it? English. Let me know when you're going to talk. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you.
The most historically significant part about this property is that Charlie Shepard owned part of it later. That's true. We probably should do what Nantucket did. We should make the entire town of Chattam a national register site. I couldn't agree more. Okay.
Because I then we wouldn't be having this discussion. I don't have enough to do. So you would be very rich. All right. Everything else, Bob? Well, I I do think that there is some historical significance here. Um, but
it's as it's more of a stretch than many of our other properties. It it certainly, as Mr. Riley mentioned, doesn't include the additional standard criteria of some person in the cultural, economic, or social, political history of the Commonwealth. question then
becomes does it possess archite architectural value or significance in terms of period and style from from the regulations right and looking at it from one point of view it's a common form of house that was
built in Chadam in the mid 19th to early 20th century does the fact that it's common and doesn't stand out as a fantastic example of Greek revival is that good for the town of Hadup Chattam to have common houses that don't quite fit a mold. I think so. I mean, I I
don't care if it's a really flashy one of two Greek revivals in town. Houses like this are what reflect what Chattam was, the polyglot kind of different things 75 years ago. So, I I'm inclined to think it has some historical
significance. Thank you, Nancy. I call on you. Thank you. Apologize for speaking out of turn. Um, I would say that um, just to extend what my fellow commissioners have said,
I believe that a modest Greek revival built by a fisherman who didn't have all the money to do all the bells and whistles to be a perfect example of the architectural style of the day is actually significant potentially to the
history of our town. And this house is significantly over our 75- year cutoff in its age. And therefore, I think that as a modest Greek revival built by a fisherman in a fishing town, it is it
could be considered significant historically. Yes. Go ahead. Yes. I'm sorry. Well, uh, I agree with everything that's been said by my colleagues here to force. So, I do
believe that it is a representative of the, uh, history of Chadam, the design that existed, um, 150 years ago or whenever. Um, so I think it does have historical significance. Thank you,
Steph. Yes, I feel it does have historical um well, whatever you want to say. I I feel that um it's a good example of what was existing, as Nancy said, when it was a fishing town only.
Thank you, Sandy. The nice thing about being at the end is I don't have to create anything to say. I just get to agree with what went before me. I agree. I don't want to see it torn down. Thank you, Robert. Well,
you know, Chadam is kind of u dying by a death of a thousand cuts. Every time we lose a house, uh the value for everybody in the town goes down. And while this while I'm struggling to see something that's maybe historically significant
about the house, I do agree that because of its age and its consistency with the rest of the town that I would find it historically significant. Now, there's um I'm sure Bill knows there's an advantage to this is that if it's historical significant, you correct me
if I'm wrong, that opens up about 125% leeway on setbacks and other parts of the property. So, it doesn't appear from the application that anybody spent any serious time at trying to figure out
what the uh core house was and if that core house could be lifted and expanded in a similar style that would not uh result in just another big modern house uh built here. So, uh I don't know if
property is a is a big issue here, whether uh you know, uh 125% on setbacks would make a difference in the uh uh in the development. But I'd sure like to see a preservation architect look at
this and um uh really seriously consider because I think there's a market for these kinds of homes. I don't think everybody wants just big modern homes with air strips in the back and tennis courts and you know that kind of thing. So, um I I know that my conversation
maybe didn't take us anywhere, but I just hope that that the owner uh would consider spending some time to really see if the courthouse could be lifted and expanded and be consistent with the town rather than just bulldozing it down
and taking the easy way out. Thank you, Wilson. enough. Yeah. Could I respond to that briefly? Surely. All right. So, the uh back in 1977, there was a Greek
revival farmhouse was across the street from Pate Restaurant and it was main house was similar in size to that and there was a wing on it. Uh, and then there was a they had a summer
kitchen, you know, in a small addition in the back. Uh, and so I moved that house. I moved it up to Stepping Stones Road and I lived in it for over 20 years. And so when you talk
about adding something to a Greek revival design, the the only way to add something to it without overwhelming it is to have a similar L that goes off to the
side. And you know that's not a it's not a large addition. You know, my family grew up there. We had a wonderful time. But you know the idea that oh they should be able to add something to it. Well if
they add something that would reflect the value of the property which is part of the problem we have here. Uh it would completely overwhelm what's here. And so I I appreciate the concern.
I'm just I'm just telling you sort of the practicalities of it. That's all. Thank you. Um I I like the fact that you you're also becoming an architect in addition to I'm not an architect. I lived in one of these houses for 20
years. I understand. All right. Yes, Steph. I just want to say it's it's not necessary necessarily that an addition is going to be put on. There are other things that could happen like a house could be moved. Yeah. All right. I think I think we have a concern. Well, that's true. I've done it myself. Excuse me. I
also would like to say that sounds like just to put a point on something that has come up is that most of us I believe are talking about the Greek revival main portion of the house and not the existing
onetory L and the garage and and if we were talking about saving the main part and the other part I think we might have a different reaction. This is the issue of having a discussion with the owner at some particular time. I I think we got to take this in two steps and we'll kind of close this off. I think first let's
just deal with the issue of historical integrity. Bob, uh, can you give us a motion? I guess your comments earlier relative to architecture are probably valid. I think so. Um, I move the Chattam Historical Commission.
I move that the Chattam Historical Commission finds that the building located at 45 Cors Pond Road is historically significant because it is in whole or in part 75 years old or more and possesses architectural value or significance in terms of period and
style. Okay, we have a second. Second. Thank you very much. Any other comments, questions? Okay, roll call. Bob, yes. Nancy, yes. Steph, yes. Sandy, yes. Janet, yes. Robert, yes. Chair Vess, you know, the
issue of demolition delay. I mean, I don't I I you know, I'll ask you to make a motion, Bob, but but I don't know how people feel. We could make it a year, you know, and and give us more than sufficient time. And I always give the same speech any particular time you want
to come back. you know my you know my number uh and you know we'll be happy to discuss it and see if we could and if it's not going to happen it's not going to happen but I think we owe it to the town we owe it to the bylaw to give it a shot to give it a chance I agree and and
I I support the concept absolutely right you know part of the difficulty like as Stephanie mentioned well the house could be moved that's true but when you call the house mover you know it's a $100,000 before So they, you know, you
got to find a place to move it. It's too tall. You have to cut the roof off. You know, I mean, these are the problems. That's all. You got a quick one? I just wanted to make a suggestion. Uh, one of the uh houses that came before us um probably three years ago or four years
ago. It's on the corner of Sam Ryder Road and Old Queen Anne Road Extension. And um it was an 1880 uh home. very very bad disrepair. Long story short, the um
developer ended up buying it for a song and saved the major part of the house and then put an extension on and it's turned out beautiful. It just and it looks very very similar to the original style. Okay, I agree. I represented him.
Bob, did we decide on a length of demolition delay? You mentioned a year. That's I mentioned a year and I just, you know, I threw it up to see who would stick to the wall. I lost my pent up. But, uh, you know, we could, why don't we pass this? I giving I'm putting out a year.
Can I have a kind of a head headshake? Yes. No. Maybe feeling about it. Well, rather than the 18 months. Okay. That's what I'm saying. I'm just, you know, it's not my decision. I just had one comment and I really what
Robert Stevens said resonated with me. Let's have uh if possible feasible preservation specialist take a look at it and that would help in the interim time a recommendation to the owner. Okay. Well, you know, fortunately or
unfortunately, we don't have a preservationist, you know, as part of the town and we kind of encourage the applicant to reach out like that. I know where Robert's coming from. There happens to be an organization that he
has some association with vaguely you know that occasionally has you know provided that you know and and I guess we could reach out to that organization to see if they are interested in that. But I happen also to know that organization is head over heels and
things they're doing. So uh you know Bob do you think it's worthy to ask you know that organization whether they are interested and more importantly you know whether the applicant is even interested in in discussing it with that it's up to you uh m well the
uh the last time I agreed on behalf of a client to allow yes preservationist to go through it I agree I was deeply disappointed yes in the lack of objectivity he used because if from his
point of view everything was worth saving. everything. Uh the subfloor was worth saving and uh you know it's just he's not that guy wasn't living in the real world you know. So I
I happen to agree with you this is not we're not dealing with a you know 1700 home but you know I'd like to leave it at this particular point leave it back to the applicant and whether or not they want to take it to the next step. Yeah. know and if I'll I'll discuss it with my client and I'll point out the advantages
of of doing that. Okay, Bob, consensus. I think we got a consensus or close to it. Okay. Chadam Historical Commission also finds that the proposed work to be done as as a full demolition will materially diminish the historic
significance of the building. Therefore, the commission imposes demolition delay in the amount of 365 days. I second that. Okay. Any other comments, questions, changes? Yes, sir. With the condition with the condition that he can
that the uh owner or developer can come back to us at our very next meeting. Yes. So, yeah, we kind of leave that open. Okay. And knowing that it's tradition within the commission and they know that they could come back in any Yeah. I just don't want them to feel that they have to sit on their hands for
a year. No, it's it's it's an issue of, you know, we don't require them to come back to us. We just encourage them to come back to us. Oh, and clients of mine have come back. So, yes, they have. I'm familiar with the process. It's worked. We don't get 100% but it has worked.
Okay, we're going to do a roll call. Bob, yes. Nancy, yes. Steph, yes. Sandy, yes. Janet, yes. Robert, yes. The chair votes. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, don't go far. Uh the next
application is uh seven lane. This is uh also to be heard in accordance with chapter 158. And this is for a partial demolition or actually a change
For those of us who uh made the site visit yesterday on a very pleasant street with a beautiful cherry tree in the front
yard. It's quite a interesting home. So, uh okay. There's no there's no form B for this property. I guess the property I'm looking for the age of it. So it's in the 40s, 1940s, I think. Yeah. So it's kind of one of these properties
that kind of squeezes into it and and really it's something that we often have to talk over the issue of historical significant when there was in fact a survey done and there was no form B on the property. And and I just for
information because we don't who's controlling the screen, can we put the picture back up? Yeah. I just want to make one point before let go. You know Bob, you know if you look at the summary which Christina provides we asked the question is there a form B?
No. There you go. Perfect. Uh is it listed on a national register? No. On the t the status of the town survey. It's on the no list which means our preservation consultant looked at it and
said no. So just like in the previous one we had where the preservation looked at it and said yes in this case he is agreeing upfront. Now I'm sorry Bill just a quick aside what what this commission needs to do at some
particular point just was as we've done to try and speed things along with the administrative review process. This is decision which can't be made according to the current bylaw by anyone else other than the commission. Is it historically significant and uh we need
to find a way and that's like grabbing a grease pig. I don't know how we're going to do it but it's something to think about on how we could make it a little bit more user friendly to the to the applicant to the people in the in the town on on how we do it. So we don't
have every application of every home 75 years of old coming before the commission. So it's just it's I know I don't know how to grab it but it's just an issue and I just want to make you know agree with you Bill that we're aware we're aware of the the issue and the problem. Okay. The reason I
asked Annie to put the picture up is because the the house itself is remaining as it is. It's just the breezeway roof and the garage are being removed and replaced. So the house to whatever extent it's
got you know architectural interest is going to remain. So just so you know okay uh it's rather straightforward relative to what the applicant's trying to do and I guess the really the big issue is how do we feel
about historical significance. So uh I'll start at this end Robert. So, our first issue is to determine if it's historically significant. Yes. Okay. Um I believe that it isn't. Okay. And I
was there at the site visit yesterday. I thought the owner had uh considered all kinds of options so he could get some additional space and uh I think what he's doing is uh uh is just fine. Really
good. Okay. Sandy, I was not at the site visit. However, I did go by the house and um I don't see any signific I don't see any historical significance. Thank you.
Hey, I don't see any historical uh significance, especially after I heard that the house was built in 1949. Is that right? Yeah. Yeah. So even year-wise, I don't see anything.
Okay, Nancy. Well, I I think that um there sorry, it's historically significant only by virtue of age, but the changes it's just a nice Cape Cod house that is not going to be altered significantly by the
changes being proposed by the owner. And I think that's a good idea to go ahead with this. I have no problem with it. Okay, I agree. I have no problem in terms of significance or in terms of the work that's being proposed,
Robert. I have no problems with it. I have no problems with it. I think it's not historically significant as well. Okay. All right. And it and I I agree, I guess, with the consensus of the of the members. So, uh very straightforward.
will take a motion relative to the historical significance. Bob. Okay. I move that Chattam Historical Commission finds that the building located at 7 Suriri Lane is not historically significant because it does not meet any of the definitional criteria in section
158-2 A, B, or C of the bylaw. Therefore, the commission does not impose a demolition delay. Okay. Second. Any discussion? Any member of the public wish to speak? Nope. Okay.
I'm sorry. All right. Well, I apologize. They're banging on the window because you're not on the on the on the microphone, but I will convey that the applicant is indicating that his grandchildren are happy. I guess they're going to have a
place to play video games. Okay. All right. Here we go. Bob, yes. Nancy, yes. Steph, yes. Sandy, yes. Janet, yes. Robert, yes. And the chair votes yes. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. And
good luck. Thank you. Take care of that cherry tree. It needs a pruning. Yeah, needs a pruning. Okay. Uh, last application. Is there somebody online with this one? Yes. uh
25009 heard in chapter 15 158. It's intent to uh 91 Gillis Road. It says a full demolition, but really what it is is a move and uh and I think most of us who made the site visit were
pleased in looking at that wonderful site. So, uh who do we have here? I know it's not Bernardet. It is. Say again. Bernardet, I believe, is presenting. Bernardet, you're here.
I thought you were on vacation. She was in Florida, right? This is Tom Gillis's daughter. I think Bernardet's having audio problems. She's in Savannah on vacation. Can you Can you speak up? Get your audio working. Can
you can you speak up and introduce yourself slowly? Sure. This is Tom Gillis's daughter. My name is Kate Shell. Hold on one second. Can we Can we improve that in any way? Sounds good to me.
Can Can I try again? Can you hear me now? Not Not well. No, we can't hear you well. Are you speaking on your phone or a computer? No, I'm on a computer. All right. Well, that's better. Use your use your theater voice. I'm getting closer to the
microphone. How does this All right. Is it better? All right. One more time for this person who's hard of hearing. Could you introduce yourself again? My name is Kate Shell. It looks like Cajil. And I am the daughter of Tom
Gillis who is the owner of record on 91 Gillis Road. Well, you have the street named after yourself. That's pretty neat. It is really neat. There's a lot of very cool history on Gillis Road, right? Well,
it's a beautiful, beautiful site and um I live close to K Cove Marsh and uh so I I'm it's close to my heart here. All right. So, why don't you just give us a couple of a quick introduction to what you're planning to do?
Sure. So, the cottage that's on Gillis uh 91 Gillis Road right now um was built in 1924, I think 26, 25 right there. Um and it's a Sears and Robot catalog cottage.
My grandfather built it and my family has summerred there for many years. It's very dear to us. So instead of tearing it down, we would like to move it across the street so that we participant is now
joining. Okay. Is that you, Bernardet? Yeah, I'm here. All right. Well, let's one at a time, please. All right, I'll finish and then I'll let you chime in. Bernardet, unknown participant is now exiting.
Okay. Uh any rate, we are looking to move the cottage across Gillis Road so that we could then build a new home on that spot that would be winterized. But our desire is that we
maintain and preserve as much as the original integrity of the cottage as we can. Okay. Uh, now you're moving. You want to move the cottage. Does that include the bathtub?
[Laughter] I want to make the bathtub into a planter. Okay. Uh, unknown participant is now joining. Okay. Um, let me say a couple of words. Bernardet, do you wish to to add
something to this? Um, not not really unless you feel it's important. Okay, let me just summarize it because it the the connection is not not too good if you don't mind and just kind of correct me.
So we have a situation of a home a property that's uh you know well meets or 75 years old and um although it's hold on one second I'm correcting myself looking at the form B on the on
the particular cottage I think it really uh adds a significant and technically it's it's delineated in terms of the architecture as a craftsman style uh did not get a chance to go inside but I assume the same detail from a
craftsman period of that time is carried in in back from the early 1920s. So it is a lovely host and I think from our perspective uh when you read the form B on the property in terms of talking about how it's it's designed and and its
location, I think we're we're very pleased as a commission that you're you're going to save the house and move it across the street. uh so you can build a new house uh on that particular property. So uh if I understand also you you're planning to put a a small
addition on the cottage after you move it. Correct. Yes. Okay. And I guess from looking at the drawings, Annie, why don't you put the drawings up at least the uh There you go. I think as as the
members of the commission and the public can see that uh there's really no real demolition other than the skirt which surrounds the foundation of the property which is going to uh which is going to
uh be be removed on the other side. And and you can see if you go down to the next drawing, couple drawings. There you go. You can see there's a small addition on the side of the property that's being added. So from my perspective, and we might have
consensus with the commission that we I think we feel strongly a agreeing with the form B, this house is historically significant. We can deal with that first and then deal with the issue of a demolition delay. Does anybody else wish to comment relative to the historical significant?
I just want to say that I'm very happy that it's being saved that much. Thank you, Robert. You okay with it? Uh yes, I'm uh I'm totally okay with I'm just uh thrilled that they're going to save it. And in the process of saving it, uh they're certainly not going to
just move it across the street and dump it there. They're going to rehab this thing to bring it back to its former life, which means it won't come back to this committee during any of our lives. So, I'm in favor of it. Very good.
Okay. Janet, you have anything you add? Oh, Sandy. Um, I'm in favor of Thank you. move. I'm in favor. I'm delighted they're going to save it. Nancy, I I completely
agree. And um my only question is um when you add the addition um it looks like there's like four windows that are original that are in decent shape. I'm not an expert, but are you going to try to reuse those in any way? We're going to try to, but we aren't
sure if they're rotten or not. Okay. Thank you. Robic. Um I'm in favor of what we've been discussing for a while. Um how to save pieces of a gone cottage colony once
once all the almost all the cottages are gone. So this stops that loop. It's great. Thank you. From my perspective, I'm also delighted they're saving it. The passion of the owners of the Gillis family is clear to try to maintain this
building which was a Sears cottage. And I'm particularly uh I'm going to commend them for keeping the chimney. Yes, it's fantastic because a chimney means that you probably had to heat your house with wood or coal, which is, you know, dates
it way back when oil and gas weren't so prevalent. Couldn't have said it better. Thank you very much. Okay. And I I agree also. So why don't we just dispense quickly with a motion for historical significance. Okay. Uh I move Cadam Historical
Commission finds that the structure located at 91 Gillis Road is historically significant because it is in whole or in part 75 years old or more and is associated with some historical persons in the town and
possesses architectural value or significance of period and style in conjunction with other uh properties that were there as part of a colony. Thank you very much. Second. Second. Thank you. Any other comments,
questions? All right. Uh Bob, yes. Nancy, yes. Steph, yes. Sandy, yes. Janet, yes. Robert, yes. And the chair votes yes. Okay. Uh
Bob, we one other motion for no. Oh yeah, sorry. Chad Historical Commission also fine. Oh sorry. Chattam Historical Commission also finds the proposed work to be done
dated this dated uh April 4th, 2025 will not materially diminish the historic significance of the building and therefore the commission does not impose a demolition delay. Okay, second. Second. Thank you very much. Any other comments? Okay, roll call. Bob, yes.
Nancy, yes. Steph, yes. Sandy, yes. Janet, yes. Robert. Yes. And the chair vote. Yes. I have one very important question. What's going to be the address? Will it also be Gillis Road? Sure.
71. Well, good luck and thank you very much. And as Bob indicated, uh, Mr. Lear, you know, the issue of cottage communities, especially in South Chattam, is an issue close to my heart and and one that we
kind of wrestle with. uh how do we try to maintain some of the cottages and uh and the time in Chadam when it was 12 125 years ago and this is how people visited and and enjoyed Chadam. Well again thank you very much. Okay. Thank
you and thanks to Christina and Annie for shephering me through the process and Bernardet. You're very welcome. You're quite welcome. Thank you. Okay. Uh unknown participant is now exiting.
I keep hearing things. Okay, someone's just in. Uh we have a couple of items that we need to talk about and um the first item under old business require little
clarification and that's uh the housing development at uh the West Chatam housing development on 15 is it 1563 1533.
Okay. What's going on there? Just for the commission, just for clarification, uh, as you're aware, the, uh, the applicant, the Penrose development, came to the historical commission and he went to the planning board and they went to
the HBDC and they presented a preliminary plans and it was kind of like a handshake, get to know us kind of thing. We had some preliminary comments and they went away and the other boards and commission had some preliminary comments
and they went away. Uh we as a commission responded to mass historical commission when they asked for comments relative to the historical integrity of the site and when the impact upon it. Mass Historic made a determination that
they felt there was no significant impact to the historic district. Well, that's fine. Okay. Now, the process is one that the next step in the process for this development to go forward because this is what's called the
40B. We as a commission a historical commission don't have any authority technically. all our authority and the planning board's authority and the HBD's authority gets rolled into one comprehensive permit before the ZBA. So
the ZBA, the zoning board of adjustment effectively becomes the, you know, the ruling authority for the town of Chattam. The way the reason that the state law did that is they didn't want properties which are trying to build
affordable housing to be bogged down in multiple different boards and commissions. So now there's just one board which is the ZBA. Now the applicant uh Penrose has submitted an application which is called a comprehensive permit
to the ZBA. Big deal. Okay. you know, it's I don't know, it's about three or 4 hundred pages. Okay, I did email it to you guys, but reading that stuff in the email is Good luck on that. Luckily, we
did get a copy, a hard copy. Uh, which yeah, the chairs of other the other boards, just the chairs got the copies. Just the chairs. So, well, that's nice. I guess they didn't want to kill too many trees. So, but now at some particular point because the ZBA is
acting as the overall permitting authority, they do want our input. In other words, we can't vote on it, but they do want to know what do you think. Okay? So, it's a it's a big deal. It's a very complicated process. Now, the ZBA on Thursday at 2:00 is going to begin
the process. There is they have x number of days to start the process. So, they're starting it. So, at 2 o'clock uh right here uh on Thursday, they will open up the hearing. It's the beginning of the hearing. That hearing can take
180 days or longer. So, it's it's a long process. There's an awful lot for the zoning board of edition commission. Uh ZBA is it commission? Appeal. Yeah. CBA. What's the A? Appeal. Appeal. Appeals. Zoning board of appeals. Thank you very
much. What would I do without you guys? Anyway, uh, so we have to give formal comments. Now, at first I thought I had to do it by Thursday. Well, they said, "Thank goodness Sarah Clark said, no, the Thursday meeting is just an
introduction." Okay, that they're going to segment the application and there'll be one day, we don't know when, that they're going to talk about historical, another day they're going to talk about traffic. In other words, that's that's my understanding and luckily Christine is shaking her head in the positive
direction and agreeing with me. So I need to prepare some additional comments from the historical commission. Okay. And I would like to form a consensus uh and not to be just Frank Msina's opinion but our opinion. uh when we did it the
last time I think there was consensus that we were not too happy with the cookie cutter approach of the design and you know and the density we had questions in traffic but I'd like to begin the process again and spend at least 15 minutes or so and to look at
some of the detail again and and just get your thoughts. So what I did is I asked Annie to effectively put put it on the screen. So what you have there is the overall development. You know what it's going to look like. I guess that's
30 years from now when the trees all grow. Okay. So that's what the development looks like. And and down below there are one, two, three, four uh different designs. So effectively they're putting up I don't know how many
buildings. Quite a lot. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, but 12 houses with four different designs. That's my first problem. Okay, guys, you know, could you vary it a little bit, you know, so it doesn't look like a
development. Okay. And and my problem, and I'm giving you my opinion, you guys pipe in here, they they kind of all look the same, and there's not sufficient variety. So, it doesn't look like they were all built at the same time. and the same design. And I know in conversation
with them, they they one meeting they said, "Well, they're going to vary the design." And what they did is they said, "We're going to paint the doors a different color." And I go, "Uh, you know, that's not it." So, I'm hoping, at least from my perspective, and hopefully there's some concurrence with the rest of the commission. We would like to
encourage them to vary the design. I'm not saying they gotta, you know, do a 1776 design, but do something to try and to vary design. The other issue, if you notice, these buildings, a couple of
these buildings are 35 ft high, three stories, and with a town in which we have a 30 foot Yeah. Right. Exactly. And why did they do that? they did that in my opinion is because they were able to stick a couple of apartments in the third the third floor. So they're really
trying to shoehorn a lot of stuff in. Okay. And that bothers me a bit especially from historical significance. So the third item is the for my persp
uh the fourth design. If you notice there's three basically there's three different design. The fourth design over to the right is in fact not a not a residence. That's the community center. I know I had questioned it. Why
do we need a community center? you know, there is a community center and they have good reasons why they want to do it, but you know, and I I know the HBDC, specifically Dan Dan Silver, he had a real objection to it, significant
objection to the need for a community center in Chadam when we have a community center and you know, you you're wasting a lot of space. So, that that's a comment. Uh if you could go forward uh about two sheets,
I guess. Can you enlarge that? Uh well, that's that's close enough. Okay. And you could see what's happening. And this is this is the common design element. you know, these these two gables and and and if you keep
going to the next one and you can see and then to the next one and and I guess that's my point. I don't know about you, but they all look the same, you know, they have the same similar, you know, and and so that's
that's kind of where I feel, at least from an historical commission perspective, what we could add comments to. So, I'm going to be quiet now and let you guys pipe in how you feel about it. And yes, Rob, yeah, I had a quick
question on the community center so-called, which I guess was half for the staff. two staff members to live in as I recall. Uh I don't know if they're living there. No, they're not going to be living there. Commute and stay there
all day. No, it's they're not living there. It's just their office. I got I that's what I was just saying. Commute and then work all day. Okay. It's their office in their workplace. But I'm getting my point which my question which was earlier we talked about that and and it was sort of right in your face as you
as you first approached it. Yeah. And it's still there. And do they look at moving it somewhere? It's still there. It's still there. Yeah. Would that be another comment that we could? Yeah, we could. You know, we could It's, you know, it's a square thing here. And Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
Anybody else? Bob, you want to pipe in or No, I I agree. It's it's sort of what I was talking about earlier in terms of Chattam is made up of bunch of different things and not all one of the same, which is what they're offering to us.
So, it's a key factor. Now, making it look a little bit different. The doors don't quite do it, but maybe some different shapes of the uh gables or whatever. Even having a uh well, they're
the architects, but they know how to make it look different. They just it's easier not to for them. Okay, that's um I I Yeah. Um, not only is it not varied, but it's really not a
very typical look for a Chattam residence. Um, and by having all these connected structures that don't vary very much and don't really look like the houses that people are building even
now. Um, I think it looks very institutional and the combination of the lack of variation, the style that they've chose to repeat. They've they've elongated so like you go from a style which is relatively in scale but then
you stretch it out. Anyways, yeah, I feel like it looks very institutional and I believe that that community building, although I understand their logic for the function, adds to the institutional look of it because it looks like you've got a doctor's office out front or something like that, smack dab in what's supposed to be a
residential area. It's very clearly more of an institutional building than it is a residential building. And I don't and those are my biggest problems with it. Okay, you're up, kid. Well, this is kind of tricky because I know what the uh objective is, and
that's to provide housing for uh people that want to live in and be active in um our community. and um in a in houses that that they can afford to rent or
that aren't four or $5 million, you know. So, I know what they're trying to do here. Uh, but I think they could be a little bit of more imaginative probably with the design. And I do think it's important to have that initial um that
they can make it look more attractive, but that what they're calling the community center. I think it's important to have it there. And um it it provides other it's not just a community center. It's administration and it's helping these people sort things out with that
they need to sort out and it's place where kids can go that can't necessarily get themselves they don't have parents to get themselves to the community center in town. Um I I don't I don't have a problem with the community center. I I think it could look a little
bit more I think it's a misnomer to call it the it's not only a community center but it's a a recreation center and administrative center um but they could be a little bit more com imaginative with the design I think.
Thank you. I am worried about the there's cookie cutter um homes, but the thing I'm worried about the most is the height. It just doesn't fit into our uh territory.
I have a couple of issues. One is the height, and I question the height. How are they going to get around the 30-foot height limit? Well, the the the process is and what I understand is the fact that effectively the the ZBA, the zoning
board of appeals, not that they can give a they can give a variance. Okay. And uh they've done it in the past, not necessarily that height. So, it's up to them. I'm not sure the process. If they give a if they give a uh you know a
variance, then that's it. Then it can be built. Here's a question I have for them. If they give a variance, are they willing to pay for the new fire truck, the ladder truck to go to 35 ft? Fire trucks are not under my jurisdiction. That's a question. That's a question, Frank. When you raise that, and I've
watched it with friends who live in Hyannis. Yeah. You know, look at the hospital. Every time the hospital adds something and makes it taller, the people in Hyannis or Barnstable as it was end up supporting and having to pay
for a new fire truck to support a ladder truck to support the height. So even though it doesn't sound like much, there's an issue about being able to can we with the equipment, fire equipment we have support 35 feet.
That's my first issue. Yeah. Well, that's and secondly, I think they're cookie cutter. They come on, they can do better than that. This is Chadam. They want to be here. They need to put more thought into it. And
third, what about the parking? All these houses eventually these little kids are going to grow up and they're going to drive and there's a parking issue and a and a roadway issue. Well, if you go into this, they have an exhaustive study here relative to parking. And I mean I'm
not I'm just saying it's thank goodness we're not the ZBA. Okay. You are so correct, Robert. Yeah. Well, I agree with everything that's been said here. What this all boils down to, uh everything springs
from density from the we're taking roughly three acres or a little more than three acres and we're trying to uh put a lot of cars, put a lot of people. we want to go up, we want to have a community center. Uh, all these things are fine,
but the density is way off. And the people that did the planning, they either don't own a camera or they've never come to Chadam because this doesn't look like anything that belongs in Chadam. And I'm for this affordable uh housing for worker housing. My
understanding is that these units will be sold. I may have this wrong. No, this is rental. They are going to be rentals. Okay. So that was the controversy when they selected Penrose because the other applicant had a mix of rental and
ownership. Except you see that this is this comes down to dollars and cents here. When the town has the land and they're letting the town they're letting the town use the land, the town will get paid back for the land that they're using. But
this company Penrose is in perpetuity, this is is the rental agent. It makes its money by renting the the apartment. So, it's complicated. Like I said, we're not the ZBA. I want to comment relative to historic preservation, you know, blah blah blah
blah blah. Okay. Well, I still have some more comments. Like I said, I'm for affordable housing. You probably all think that I'm not, but I am. But I'm not for this project. And I want to explain why. Uh these are one, two, and three bedrooms. And based on the number
of people that might live in each unit, I came up with about 110 people for 48 uh parking spots. And of the 48 parking spots, I understand that a couple of them will be reserved for the people that manage the property. And then there'll be some uh electrical charging
stations. So you're probably going to end up with about 1.2 parking spots per person. And uh as Sandy said, when these young people do grow up, they get cars when they turn 16 or the wife gets a car and the son or daughter borrows it. And so I believe
there's going to be a parking problem. I don't know if they're going to park at Job Lot or where they're going to go, but it all comes down to density. So um so I'm for affordable housing. I'm not for this project. Okay. I would just want to say, you
know, I'm going to let I'm going to put something together based upon this conversation, but there are issues that you're you're raising which I think are probably inappropriate for us as a historical commission, but I would encourage you there going to be multiple hearings
and, you know, write a letter and and let them know how you feel and they're supposedly looking for feedback and I have the feeling they're going to get it. Now, whether they do anything about it is another story. Yes. I don't think we can make our decision based on 16 years out if they're going to have
cars and and multiple cars because I don't think they're going to stick around because they're they really aren't that they'll go off to be educated or get jobs or something. I think this is for rentals for people that want to that are working here and they they want to live here and we want
them to live here. So, I mean, come on. I understand. All right. Can I Yes. I'm sorry. Can you make sure I mean I think I heard it from everybody that their point is made that the historical commission members are in favor of affordable housing development in the previous one.
I started it off like that reiterate that we are not you know we are in support of it. All of us understand why there needs to be housing there and we're supportive of that but it we believe it could be more in keeping with the historic Well, I appreciate the comments and what I'm going to do was
reach out. thought there was some very eloquent things said here. If you don't mind putting your thoughts in a quick email to me, the chair would love to I wrote I can't write as quickly as you guys were talking, but I but if you have some thoughts that you want to share with me that we can incorporate into
some kind of you know uh comments comments from the historical commission. By the way, the ZBA does this all the time as Christina Christina will get an application that we had heard the the ZBA will write will reach out to me as chair and say does the historical
commission have any comments and generally you know we'll pass back our determination and any comments you know so this is part of the process I mean technically this is like any other ZBA hearing technically. All right, I'm going to move on and uh but if you would
send me some comments, I'd appreciate that. Uh the just quickly on old business and we can probably end this pretty quickly. U review of rules and regulation. We're awaiting a town meeting, a town attorney
decision. Okay, Christina is shaking head. Yes. which means we have generated a request to town council to speak to the issue of administrative review process and the possible delegation of historical historical significant
decision and that's what I was referring to before that we need to we need to understand our our our process uh the good news is in well it's not not super good news yet but in conversation with Holly Herbster in reference to the
William and an Nichson home site. Uh the Mass Historical Commission had 30 days after we submitted our request for determination of eligibility and I think that 30 days ends this week. So hopefully we're going to hear from Mass
Historic that yes, this site is eligible for listing on the National Register. We will then take it the next step and Christine and Christina and uh Katie and I are already working on to assemble the necessary funds to submit the formal
application. Uh speaking about that, you know, in June the uh our friends the Nichson Family Association is going to be having a barn raising. I don't know if you saw that. Uh this is the barn that we we wrestled with when 68 Shell
Drive. Geez, I remembered the address. and you know and it possibly maybe Bill William Nixon may not have built it but it was on the property he lived there on for many years so we'll get some information that it's going to happen in June during historic Cadam's history
month u so anyway that's we hope to hear soon as soon as I know you'll know uh Christina is also working with Eric Dre to try and find the necessary funding and contracting process for Eric to continue do the update of the form A's
and B's in accordance with our direction. Things take time, but we're working it. Demolition by neglect. I haven't heard from her. Is she here? I believe she is in today. Um there was a t time of time of day she was not in
today, but I have not got an update from her. Okay. We're talking about Christine O'Grady, the new principal planner who supposed to be looking into this for us. It's dragging on, but what we're going to do, uh, the Coast Guard boat house, it's still on track for a return and
hopefully, uh, things are going to happen soon with that. Be here before fall 26 before we know it. Uh, that's all I have. Uh, I think the rest is uh, we have nothing new in terms of administrative approvals.
Um, not not to ratify today. No. Uh, that's it. Any questions? Uh, I have a very small minor point. Um, but in the William and Anne Nickerson um section, I think if we're going to keep it on our agenda, we if we're going to put it into quotes, we should put the name that was
actually submitted because I know that was a point of um concern for people. So, I think that if we're going to put it in quotes, let's put the actual name that was submitted. And you mean the William and Anne Nicholson home site on the Warmark Archeological whatever that was? Well, yeah, it's in quotes and
that's not what was submitted. So, either don't put it in quotes. It was It was when I did this three years ago. No, no, that's what I mean. I'm I'm requesting an update to our to our paperwork as the secretary of the board. Okay. Well, as far as the Nickerson's concerned, it's still the Nickerson home
site. Yeah. We won't talk about that. Okay. Only half the ownership. Yeah. All right. Uh I don't have anything else. I think we did enough. Anything else? Motion for adjournment. Oh, excuse me. Before we
go, when's our next meeting? Our next meeting is uh May 20th. May 20th and we have applications. I believe we have one. Okay. All right.
So, just I move May 20th. I know it's that time of year. Excuse me, Nancy. Go ahead. I move we adjourn. I second. All right. Uh Bob, yes. Nancy, yes. Steph, yes. Sandy, yes. Janet, yes. Robert,
yes. Chair votes yes. Thank you very much. What would you ever do? [Music] [Music]