e e e e e e e e e e e e e e [Music] yeah [Music] welcome everyone to the March 28 202 2024 all set y welcome everybody to the March 28th 2024 meeting of the chadam zoning board of appeals pursuant to Governor Healey's March 28 29 9 2023 signing of the acts of 2023 extending certain covid measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law this meeting of the chadam zoning board of appeals is conducted in person and via remote participation every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the order a reminder that persons who'd like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling 1508 9454 410 conference ID 697 679 645 pound or join the meeting online via Microsoft teams through the link in the posted agenda while this is a live broadcast and simoc cast on chatam TV despite our best effort we may not be able to provide for realtime access we will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible in accordance with the town policy the public can speak to any issue or hearing a business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair um to um authorize this form of meeting we're going to start with a roll call vote of all members Virginia Fenwick uh Virginia Fenwick approves Steve Steve Doris president Lee Lee H approves PA all see sample approves Dave David as nexton approves uh Ed Acton approves and David David hvv I approve and Randy Poes I approve as well um we ask if any citizens or n board members participating in the call via the phone only for their name and the last four digits or their phone number for identification purposes um so the way the meeting is run is that we hear the uh notice uh read by staff um Sarah Clark on my right and then um you are your representative will um make your presentation after that anyone in favor of the appeal or application may speak for 5 minute time limit and then I'm going to read or summarize all the letters received by the board relative to your application anyone against the appeal or application may speak or ask a question after that also a five minute time limit the applicant May then reut testimony board members may direct questions to anyone present the board hears any further information closes the public hearing deliberates and votes on the appeal are application in most cases um all votes are taken by roll call and at the end of the meeting we'll close the meeting with a verbal confirmation and no time of adjournment so we have a busy day today so we're going to get started with the first application do you have some minutes minutes we have minutes today approval of minutes so first we have the executive session held on March 30th 202 3 does anyone have any corrections I I do um it says I was present that day but I believe I was not okay thank you anybody else so we'll take a roll call vote on approval of the March 30th 2023 executive session minutes uh Jenny uh Jenny approves and um Paul Paul approves Dave yes Dave Nick I mean Dave V uh Dave and I approve as well as well next we have approval of the minutes the executive session held on July 13th 2023 anybody have any comments on those minutes no okay so we'll take a roll call vote on that oh no motion oh we need a motion Paul I I'll move to approve both the March 30th and July 13 2023 executive session M Dave each seconds both all right vote on that Jenny Jenny approves Paul Paul approves Dave yes each approves and I approve as well okay just one more um if no one has a comment on the minutes for the meeting held on February 22nd 2024 I'll have a motion I'll move to approve the uh minutes of February 22nd 2024 and dve V seconds very good and we'll take a roll call on that Jenny Jenny approves uh all approves yeah I approve yeah yeah I approve Dave I approve Dave V approves and I approve it as well all right now whenever a s is ready we'll get to the first application application number 24-16 Elizabeth narian care of James abnor cross Esquire peel box 707 chadam Mass 02633 owner of property located at 128 Pine null Avenue also shown on the town of chadam town of chadam assessors map 5c block 45 La s39 the applicant seeks dimensional variance from the allowable percent of building coverage for a single family dwelling the proposed dwelling will cover 18.3% 1,290 ft where 15% is the maximum allowed the property contains 7,45 ft within the R20 zoning District a dimensional variance is required under Mass General Law chapter 48 section 10 and Section 8 d2c of the chadam protective bylaw under application number 24 4- 017 the applicant seeks to enlarge extend or change a conforming dwelling on a non-conforming lot via the demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of a new dwelling the proposed dwelling will comply with the setback and Building height requirements of the bylaw but is considered a substantial alteration and under the second accept Clause of section six of Mass General Law chapter 4A such substantial alteration requires the grant of special permit the existing building coverage is 983 ft 13.9% and the proposed building coverage is 1,290 Ft 18.3% where 15% is the maximum allowed the law is non-conforming and that it contains 7,45 ft where 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under M General Law chapter 4A section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw before you get started Mr Norcross I'm just going to um announce who's voting today sure um the regular members Virginia Fenwick Paul simple David Nixon David V and myself great thank you so welcome and please go ahead thank you good afternoon Jamie Norcross representing Steven Liz n jarien uh Steven Liz our president in the audience today uh traveled up from Connecticut this morning um as Sarah read we are applying today for the dreaded v-word variant along with the special permit so we have a double dip for your first application this afternoon um but just to give you a little bit of background so Steven Liz first purchased this property in 1998 uh and their plan is in the not too distant future they're going to retire uh and move to chadam the Pine n a property on a full-time basis to make it their primary and principal residence and so they started looking at ways to add some living space to the existing house which as you seen is quite small it's a little over 900 square feet essentially a cottage that was built in 1950 so initially uh as Steve explained to me they looked at well can they add a story on to the addition to the existing structure and Steve who is a uh engineer by trade said the uh uh but we were over the 15% coverage uh currently where we're just under at 13.9% and so we're increasing by about 160 square feet over the 15% that's allowed and so the question was was to me was is that a big deal I had to throw the cold water on everyone and say yeah it is um in in Massachusetts in general and chattam and spec uh in particular a variance is a very difficult um burden request at a very difficult burden to me and fuel are rarely given so my clients chewed on that for a while and then ultimately decided they wanted to push forward with the request for the design that you see today for the variance request even though it would require this additional hurdle and a significant Hurdle from this board because they think that this design and the additional area on that first floor is really integral to them and their use of the property again for the next 20 years as their primary residence it gives them the room in the first floor they think that they need moving mov forward so that again their their their next forever home is the way that they feel they need it and want it so they asked me to push forward with the requests and that's why we're here today um to go through the design and then the variants and if I uh if um the board is so inclined we'd move forward with a special permit request after that um going through some of the background on the property and the existing and proposed house so this lot was created as part of a 1950 subdivision so that's prior to the the enactment of the chadam zoning bylaw so this lot and most of the Lots in this area off of sound view AV and pine are less than 10,000 square feet um once this area was designated as an R20 zoning district with 20,000 square feet required this lot and not all but most of the Lots in this area became pre-existing non-conforming um this lot uh you can't really see from this photograph in particular from the site plan but it's located at the intersection or close to the intersection of sound View Road and Pine Avenue which creates a lot which you can see here that's about 15 ft shorter on the west lot line and the East lot line resulting in a shape I call it a parallelogram uh my father-in-law's retired math teacher so probably tell me that's wrong but I think it's close enough to give you the idea what we're talking about here so it's not a square the uh the existing property as I mentioned was built in 1950 according to the Assessor's record uh it's an existing three-bedroom dwelling the lot is nonconforming it has just over 7,000 square ft where 20,000 ft is required um Sarah if you wouldn't mind pulling up the the map that I sent you this afternoon so uh Dave Clark was kind enough to put this together for me and I think it's helpful in our discussion today somewhat so in 1974 the town did a taking of sound View Avenue and Pine Avenue and uh in most instances when a town does a taking of a road they take an easement in the road in this particular case they took a fee they took the fee ownership of the road and land budding the road and um you go through the taking document and it references each lot in the subdivision along Pine null Avenue and sound View Avenue it says how much land was taken and initially it said 3,000 square feet was taken from this lot I said oh you know we can argue it's the town's fault that we're not conforming we'd be well under 15% however most of the taking as Dave Clark explained to me is the area in red which was actually the um fee ownership each lot when you bought a roadway in general there's exceptions to the rule but you own to the middle line of the road so that's shown in red but he did explain to me the area in purple uh along the South along Pine that was actually taken from the buildable Upland of this LW in 1974 it's a little over 500 just around 530 square feet and Dave said it's not exact he didn't have a chance to do a calculation down of the square foot but it's roughly that size so that doesn't put us at uh 15% even if you put that back in the calculation but it does get us closer um um I'd also Point uh reference this Photograph to point out that you can especially see the area with the purple so when the town did the taking um these lots that were already existence for 25 plus years people were using the area out to the uh traveled surface as part of the property and you can see that if you go out there you see all the lawn area the driveway area goes right out to the traveled surface even though that's not technically not part of the uh the lot that owned by the property owner you can see the stairs here that go into the area that taking if you go on the North you can see there's actually a shed that's over the property line because if you go out to the site and walk around and drive around these areas look like it's part of the Lots not just in the Jan's lot but each of the um lots for the most part in this neighborhood and so I mentioned this by way of saying even if there's a number on the paper that's 7,000 square fet but visually the Lots look a little bit bigger because visually when you go out to the site everyone's using additional lawn area that's past the point of the road layout so so when you go around you don't know exactly where the lot line is this is where the property begins and ends so a visual perspective any increase is mitigated somewhat by the fact that the Lots out here are really extended again not on paper not from a legal perspective but as it relates to a visual perspective when you're actually in the neighborhood um in terms of non-conformities the existing house is non-conforming it's uh 14.6 feet from the East lot line where 15% is required the shed as you see is also located over the lot line into the road layout on sound View Avenue uh the proposed structure we are going to meet all dimensional setbacks um and that includes having two Road layouts in the North and South so we're able to meet two 25 foot setbacks which again is a bit of a challenge um however as I've mentioned our building coverage is uh over the 15% Allowed by the bylaw as we're at 18.3% when you're dealing with lots this small I think percentages can be a little bit um deceiving in terms of how much we're actually increasing so um um the 3.3% increase equates to an increase of building footprint of 233 squ ft which essentially is the area that you see uh at the bottom of the site plane in front of you um in the section of the house that's closest to Pine uh to pinol Avenue um in order to meet this 15% requirement the footprint can be increased by only 74 Square F feet and therefore what we're proposing today is 160t increase over what is permitted by the zoning bylaw and to give you an idea how big are small as 74 ft the shed that you see on the top left that's 64 ft so that's roughly what a 74t increase would look like in terms of square footage again there could be different dimensions but not very much uh wiggle room is allowed in order to meet the 15% requirement of the zoning bylaw um Madam chair just before uh going on to the variants I my clients asked if they could come up and just say a couple words to the board um sure thank you hi good afternoon I'm Steve nerian this is my wife Liz we're the property owners um we just wanted to sort of re restate the reasons the reason why we want to uh present you guys with his variance request um you know we've owned that house for almost 30 years uh we bought it when the kids were young and basically raised them there and now now they're expanding and growing and now we have grandkids and you know we are we have a a real strong attachment to that neighborhood and that area and we want to keep that um as Jamie mentioned you know we're you know I'm 65 we pretty soon retiring you know whenever she lets me you know um but we realize we need the we need to we we need to live a retirement on a single level um I have by hip replacement and while it's good now I don't know in 15 20 years what it's going to be um God forb you know God God bless right um so we really we really want the the one level living that's very important to us um you you have the copies of the letters our neighbors are very happy with our request um they just don't agree they're very happy because we we tried to design something you know being being um homeowners in the cape for years we understand the um Aesthetics and the desire to keep the Aesthetics of the neighborhood and the style of the cape structures and we're very sensitive to that and I think our neighbors appreciated that um and the house that we're asking for really is a is a 2300 square foot it's very moderate in size and um uh it it is we're not developers trying to to develop something and flip it we want to do do this for for our future our retirement um and uh as Jamie mentioned you know the existing Cottage you know how they built them in the 50s it's you know they find wood on the way down and they you know build a wall and the foundation is not adequate I'm a uh professional engineer in Massachusetts and um it's just un unreinforced block you can't build another story on top of it so you really need to do a a a rebuild so um that being said I you know we hope you look at our fance requests favorably and I just wanted to um reemphasize uh the portion of the one level living um being a nurse of uh 42 years I'm especially aware of the need to plan for aging and you know have the one level living in the future so thank you thank you um in terms of uh process would you like me to go through the variant standard first and then board can discuss that request before we going on to the special permit conditions or criteria if we don't Grant the variance are you going to still ask for a special permit no we can't no I just I just wanted to announce that so basically you might as well go with the variant and then see how we do and go yeah okay so these criteria as you've heard before uh there's a three uh step process in order to receive approval of a variance the first is unique conditions affecting the shape topography or soil conditions of the land or building as I mentioned in the introductory uh discussion the property is located near the section of near the intersection excuse me of sound View Road and pinol Avenue which results in a lot uh with a West lot line that is significantly shorter than the East lot line uh while this is not the only lot in the subdivision with this particular shape I would say that this particular shape does not affect generally this zoning District uh which is what the bot looks at in order to determine uniqueness so that what I mean by that very not very well phrased sentence is that I don't think it has to be the only lot in the subdivision in order for it to be considered unique it it just has to be that in general most of the lots are more of a square shape again there's there's some abing lots of this one that have some of that parallelogram I'll call it shape but it's more of the exception than the norm in this case to have this type of lot shape which I again I think does create a uniqueness to the lot shape number two a literal enforcement of the BW would create a substantial hardship Financial or otherwise uh as I mentioned the applicant intends to build a home on the property and make chat on their full-time residents as they move into retirement having sufficient first floor area to allow for a master bedroom and all other necessities of daily living is important to the applicants as they Envision needing to utilize one floor living as they move into later years as they just described to you themselves um again could they shrink it up sure but they strongly believe that that smaller size is not going to be adequate for what they need for their one floor living moving forward uh by restricting the ability to increase the square footage to only 74 square feet it is a hardship for the applicant applicants in their use of the property moving forward uh I think I mentioned this last time when I was here for a variance and a generator and not sure anybody was listening to what I was saying on that particular case but there is um in zoning circles there are a couple cases cited uh in the Commonwealth cases that are cited to for the proposition that when it's a dimens variance that's required as opposed to a use variance a lesser standard of uh a lesser hardship is required because with a use variance you're introducing a use that may be inconsistent with the property so if we're going to put a restaurant here it's a higher standard if we're again here for dimensional variance the standard of hardship is a lesser standard at least according in those cases number three uh the variance will not substantially harm the public good or derate from the purpose of the bylaw uh I'd suggest the variance in this instance will not harm the good nor derogate from the purpose of the bylaw the implementation of building coverage and dimensional setbacks is incorporated into the zoning bylaw to ensure development that is in keeping with the neighborhood and to avoid massing that is detrimental to the neighborhood in this case we meet all the required setbacks and while the building coverage is not being met the extent of the increase is so minor I'd suggest that it's in that it will not create unnecessary massing or other issues that negatively impact the neighborhood so uh I don't think by allowing this this project we are derating from the intent and purpose of the bylaw to limit sizes of homes I think again while we're over the size this is still in keeping with the neighborhood and the surrounding homes so that would be our presentation on the variant Madam chair and happy to answer any questions and we're always listening just to always listen so um is there anybody here or on Microsoft teams that would like to speak in favor of this application if so please make it known seeing none I will go to the letters okay first one is um on March the 14th from Judith Georgio the health agent she says I have reviewed the plan to demo and build a new dwelling at this location the applicant is proposing a new three-bedroom dwelling to replace the existing dwelling the existing existing septic system will be used for the new construction and must maintain the required setbacks to the dwelling floor plans of the existing dwelling must be submitted as part of the building permit process to confirm the existing bedroom number next we have a letter from uh David Whiting um on March 26 2024 I am writing in my Ru as Trustee of the RNs Family Trust owners of 115 sound view AB the nextdoor neighbor of this project Whoever has that noise that keeps going off if you could please shut the phone all the way off that would be great thank you okay the current stake so we do not object to the project as designed but do object to the stake placement defining their lot the current staking of the lot is on our property the original permanent cement markers with the drill marks are the true corners of the lot and need to be honored the current project Stakes continue to be placed on our lot and our objection will continue until the lot lines defined by the original lot makers are respected this project should not move forward at the expense of our loss of land anyone else let's see anyone else would object to the same respectfully David a Whiting 41 Mayflower Road Plimpton Mass okay next we have another letter from David whiting on Wednesday March 22nd 7th after receiving a phone call from attorney Norcross he explained that the lot line for this project has been revised and will be the original lot lines as defined by the permanent markers and denoted on a revised plan thank you David a Whiting next we have a letter from Al Alexia and John tax laros uh we are reaching out today on this is on uh October 8th 2023 in support of our neighbors variance request we have been fortunate to live in chadam for 9 years and our home is located directly in the rar of that of the narian they have been respectful responsible Community focused neighbors for their entire duration of our home ownership Mr and Mrs narian have updated us on their desire to upgrade their family home um to be a residents for them and their family for generations to come we have reviewed their proposal for the new house construction at the architect and the architectural drawings we are in complete support of their proposed variant and they wrote that in bold we understand that this is a minimal increase and building footprint while staying within all the town man mandated setbacks my husband and I are planning on owning our home on sound view for many years um um full-time in the next 10 years we believe this investment will continue to improve the value of our neighborhood while still maintaining the commitment to preserving our natural habitat um diversity and charm of our special Street we hope you'll consider a letter and approve the variance next we have a letter from Todd Summers 136 Pine a on October 5th 2023 I am writing to express my approval and support of the variance request by my neighbors Liz and Steve I have known them for over 20 years my property directly AB buts um theirs after reviewing the drawings I feel that their request to slightly increase the footprint beyond the allowable is very minimal and will not adversely affect the Aesthetics of the proposed house and neighborhood this is especially true since the proposed new house is within all the setbacks in my opinion this new house will be architecturally um consistent and in keeping with the neighborhood style and size I appreciate consideration to help you improve the variance request next we have a letter from Mark and Josie V leic we have um on November 10th 2023 they WR we have been made a aware of stepen Liz naran's uh home renovation plans and in need of a variance request after vacationing in chadam for over 20 years we purchased purchased our home in 2017 it was a dream come true for myself and my children we enjoy the quietness and beauty of our neighborhood their home is across the street from us they've always been quiet and respectful we totally support the request to upgrade upgrade and renovate the home for more full-time use we understand the request for a modest increase in building footprint we do not believe the renovations will change our neighborhood it will only enhance it we look forward to spending more time in chatam in the years to come and we hope you will support their request for a variance anybody here or in Microsoft teams wishes to speak against the application please make yourself known or has a question nope seeing none questions from the board dich I don't think I have any questions relative to this to the yes uh no questions Mr Nigerian if I may address a question to you please please step up to the mic sir yes sir so let's talk about your foundation yeah you know part of U what Jamie said and you did was that the foundation is not suitable for a second story did I understand that correct that's correct so what is just tell us was it that poorly constructed or yeah I mean there it's it's just stacked it's stacked six and 8 inch block unreinforced some of it's not even on a strip footing and some of it is been slightly excavated adjacent to it so it's not you know bu doesn't have the frost depth that's required so from a load bearing point of view another floor would not be possible I see yeah I'm sure you've considered replacing the foundation um we well yeah I mean that's that's always a possibility uh then but then the next question is the existing framing of the first floor that's a little bit suspect too because we've I've done a renovation you know I've taken down the walls in there unfortunately myself a couple times and the framing is a little bit halfhazard it's not consistent it's at best 2x4s um you know without insulation and in some cases they're not even 16 inches on Center and they don't wouldn't meet today's code at all either you know so I I would I would not want to land another floor on top of the ex in addition to the foundation on top of the first floor you know wall framing so in the perfect world which none of us live in but you know suppose we did um wouldn't you rather tear the structure down and start from scratch and have something that was that you had confidence in oh absolutely and that's one of the in addition to needing some extra first floor living space that's a big concern of mine especially being a structural engineer that's what I do for a living um you know I want something sound I want something that's permanent I want you know I'll probably we'll probably Overkill it you know that's just the way the way I am but um you're right and and going beyond that it's a lot of old electrical in there there's a you know there's a lot of old everything in there you know that kind of want to get rid of okay you know thank you very much you're welcome no other questions okay Paul questions uh just a uh to start a a point of clarification Jamie uh the uh gross floor area comparison that you provided uh with other houses lists the lot size for 128 H at 7,663 but the application talks about 7,045 Square ft I noticed that uh this afternoon Paul and so I was going through the assessor records and so that's 7,600 figures actually from the assessor records so that's incorrect that's on the it's incorrect the assessors have it Incorrect and it's incorrect on my sheet So the plan is the 7,45 is the correct number all right so when we're talking about the percentage of coverage it makes a significant difference it makes a significant difference it does y So based on the assessors would be pretty good shape but not on the uh reality on the ground and do I understand that the proposal is to construct a new building uh but enlarge the footprint correct um the alternative I suppose to avoid a variance would be to construct a new building that was within the percentage requirements correct we could within the existing footprint or we could add up to 74 square feet to the existing footprint would be our um the extent of our increase to keep it at 15% okay I have no other questions Lee no questions and Steve I have no questions and Jenny just one quick question that chart that you put together for us very helpful um it showed a street called Britain street that you reference two houses on yeah but I didn't see that on there it's unnamed so if you go to do you have the um the assessor map that I I think I sent along oh let me send so I'll just uh oh that one okay it's the see I was going to pull it up for you it's the left of Whitman AV it's uh maybe I do have it a sir you have to either talk at the mic or not talk one or the other so it's oh it's right there it's right there yeah all right um thank you so I have a question sure um when you went out to the architect and you told them what you wanted for a house did you tell them what the amount of space you had legally you know if Within the 15% I well I wasn't part of that convers but do you think that was done I don't think Steve and Liz were aware of the the Restriction I don't I I I don't want to speak for them but I don't believe they were aware of that restriction when they were speaking to their architect about the design and I'm just wonder I I'm just assuming that Architects know that before they make a plan they have to know like what are the bounds you know they can't just think they're going to make you know a palace on a potion stamp you'd be surprised what yeah people do and do not think of when they're because I think that's somewhat troubling for me anyway yeah I think they were under instructions this what we're looking at I think they were looking at setback mostly right and not thinking of cover and they hit that and I think you know a couple years ago if that shed was bigger too we would be over 15% under the old interpretation because it used to count sheds as coverage if it was over a certain size but so I don't know if that's what they were thinking of as well in terms of calculating that number as part of our uh percentage but I can't answer that I don't know what was going on in their thought process um but I know steveen Liz weren't aware that whatever they were designing was going to be impacted by I don't blame them at all I just think anybody that puts together a plan ought don't know like what they're working with so that that sticks out to me so maybe I'm it just does all right so um Paul I'll move to uh close the hearing and move into deliberations Dave each seconds okay Dave approve I approve and Ed I approve oh y Ed's not a voter um I approve okay Paul and Jenny I approve as do I okay deliberations Paul well uh I certainly can understand uh the applicant's uh desire to uh be able to live on one floor um and make Renovations um and U I appreciate the uh U approach by uh Jamie and trying to be uh creative and and come up with a basis on which to seek of variance the difficulty I have is that um I don't see this property this lot as being unique um I mean there's practically almost every lot in that area has the kind of uh in effect parallelogram or non-p parallelogram um uh look and um it just uh it seems to me that there should be a way to accomplish what you'd like to do in terms of one floor living without exceeding the app the the requirement with respect to coverage um and I don't see it as unique that would satisfy a variance request Jenny deliberations uh yeah and uh I agree with Paul you've been very your presentation was excellent as you know the criteria is very difficult for the for the variance um I don't see the lot as unique either the hardship you could maybe make a case for that um you know given the the comments that the homeowner made I I'm struggling a little bit actually with the third one as well because um you know not substantially harm public good or dagate from the purpose of the bylaw your chart that you sent us which I do have a copy of that it was in the included in what you shared um we got that ahead of time and I I you listed 46 properties this is why I asked for the the street because I didn't see it on there there only two on that but 17 on Pine null 19 on sound view eight on Whitman two on Brit 46 properties only five out of 46 are larger um than the uh gross floor area than the 3515 that's what you were listing here for for the lot size and you were even including a larger lot size here which is even smaller right and um of those five um oh and I'm sorry there were only five uh lot properties that are larger than that gross Square uh floor area and all five of those lots are larger I mean I'm sure you looked at this too all all the so really it's it is defying I mean when I tie back to like the B it just is it sets a bad uh precedent to approve that when there's no basis in that neighborhood for in and that that's how I was looking at and my struggling with the third one I'm not sure that design is going to overpower the neighborhood of the lot I mean the the 3,000 and change number obviously includes the basement as does what I tried to provide for I don't disagree about design and to be honest I mean that wasn't even what I was looking into just with respect to the you know we're as much as I empathize and I like Paul was saying with the appreciate the desire to have more space and and very smart to move towards you know the um single level living it it just uh we they're very strict guidelines for the variance and I just don't um as much as I'd like to allow that it it's I just don't see one and three okay okay Dave Nixon deliberations thank you madam chair yeah the uh as was brought out by Miss Fenwick the lot argument I don't think works but more importantly to me is the hardship and this is a self-generated hardship this home I believe you said was purchased by your clients 30 years ago almost something like that 25 to 30 years so it's hard for me to agree that a hardship is now something that you should consider when they've owned it that long and as Mr Nigerian was kind enough to say um maybe there's some aspects of this house that ought to be replaced so if we circle around and go back to where I usually come from on a variance there are needs and wants this is not a need this is a want and as such I do not believe it qualifies for a variance um dve well there certainly as much a part of me would like to be able to accommodate the narian um I I have to as a as a cting board member I have to agree with what all my previous colleagues have pointed out um this um it isn't unique the lot isn't unique really um and I also noted as Jenny had about the lot sizes for the other gross flare areas exceeding this one um and um you know unfortunately through a combination of um and over time and and combination of different interpretations of the laws the H decision and things like that that that um bring us to where we are here today but where we are is that the there is a home there um they'd like you'd like to be able to increase the first floor area and I certainly understand that but in order to do that you're seeking a variance and I don't feel that it meets unfortunately doesn't meet the criteria for the variance either the the hardship criteria or the um uniqueness criteria I mean I in a in a in a Ideal World I guess um maybe we could say well hey you know I I agree with the various arguments and um we can we Grant this and and in theory and in truth no decision that we make sets a precedent however I I don't see I mean I see numerous other properties in this neighborhood that could ask us for the same thing and and I just don't feel that it be fair to them to Grant this and then perhaps subsequently not do it for someone else so I I can't support it I'm sorry Ed what are your thoughts if you were voting yeah I'm not voting so it makes it much easier for me to um sort of discuss this but I agree with my colleagues um in addition once you we if we were to approve the variance and we're we're over the 15% at some point you know down in the future that's an additional encroachment that's been approved that someone could come back to the board and perhaps say you know increase it further unless it was deed restricted or something to that effect so we also have to think about the future and again the argument with the neighbors that you know there could be more requests like this so um I agree with my colleagues okay Steve deliberations if you were voting if I were voting um well I agree with everything that's that's been said uh previous um I you know I can sympathize with with wanting to to um have uh living space on one floor trying to do that myself um uh but I think there might be other ways of going about it and um you know that the rules for variance are just so so you know fine-tuned that I I think it's it's it's difficult to to hit that criteria so I sort of agree with with what everybody else has said and I think there might be other ways of um you know accommodating trying to build a new house there and Le um yeah this is a shame but I have to agree with my colleagues as well um originally I was hoping to be the softy but I I can't really do that um I agree with Steve I it would be great if you could find another way maybe to find that first floor living space um because I certainly appreciate that um Good Luck so uh uh based on that Madam shair we I would ask if we could withdraw without prejudice okay uh Paul I'll move to Grant the requested withdrawal without prejudice Dave seconds and how do you vote Dave each Dave each votes yes Dave Nixon yes well all votes yes Jenny Jenny votes yes as do I we'll see you when you come back I to withdraw the special perit you withdraw the special permit as well uh yes we'd also ask to withdraw the special permit um without prejudice please I'll move to Grant the requested withdrawal without prejudice of the special permit Dave V seconds and Dave how do you vote V votes yes yes Paul all votes yes votes yes as do I thank you all right we do okay so whenever SAR is ready we're going to go to the next application if anyone has a cell phone on please shut it all the way off and try to refrain from conversation if you can it's distracting okay thank you application number 24-19 46 scattery Road realy trust care William F Riley Esquire PO Box 707 chattam Mass 02633 owner of property located at 46 scattery Road also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 16i Block 33 lot wa3 the applicant seeks to enlarge extend or change a non-conforming dwelling and a non-conforming lot via the demolition of the existing dwelling in the construction of a new dwelling the existing dwelling is non-conforming and then it is located 7.5 ft from the Wester leab butter and 7 ft from the coastal Conservancy District the proposed dwelling will be non-conforming and that it will be located 11.5 ft from the Westerly AB butter where a 25t setback is required and 7.1 ft from the coastal Conservancy District where a 50ft setback is required the existing building coverage is 995 ft 10.4% and the proposed building coverage is 1,300 1,431 ft 14.9% where 15% is the maximum allowed the LW is non-conforming and then it contains zero feet of Frontage where 150 ft is required and contains 9,572 ft of buildable Upland where 20,000 ft is required in the r is is required the property contains 43736 ft in the R40 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 4A section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw Mr Ry interrup oh Mr rile oh good for you that my microphone was off um so uh good afternoon Bill Riley on behalf of Carol McDonald who seated in the back row with uh Steve Nicholson or Builder uh so this is a this is a property M McDonald pointed out to me I I said it was they've been in the family for a hundred years she pointed out I was incorrect it's been in the family for 200 years wow so uh in any event the uh uh it was formerly lived in by it was built in the 30s uh Miss McDonald's mother had lived in it for quite a while it's been vacant for a while and uh so they like to update things with modern construction and modern conveniences so they thought they would remove the building and construct a new one the uh they selected as an architect U another Nickerson Kenny Nickerson who's with us from uh Vancouver and so I'd like Kenny to describe the design process he went through with Carolyn Kenny you there here I come am I there yes speak up yes can you hear me okay yes well we went through several iterations of design format to to come up with this scheme uh you know a variety of uh influences we had the garage on the high on the lot and then well speak up Kenny you got you gota there you go is that better I'll lean right in um uh anyway um I just want to add that uh it was my grandfather and my great uncle built the place so um it's with due respect that we're we're working on this place uh uh the um we had garage up on Carolyn insisted that we we stay with keeper garage and so one scheme was the garage high on the lot and with all the uh bedrooms in the under the uh main building basically and then uh she pointed out that that was the where the best view was so she didn't really want to have a garage where her view was where her Prime View was where her parents had sat out on the lawn and enjoyed the view of old Harbor for years uh so we put the garage back down where had it originally had been in the house down in the basement and and uh put bedrooms where the garage had been but before that we had kind of Twisted and turned with we had the building more horizontally located on the lot we had another scheme with uh kind of with everything uh tucked into a little bit smaller uh floor area in the main house um anyway we went through it took us a lot of of head scratching to get to this point and it's a very tight site very confining we've tried to respect the uh improve on all the setback over the existing and in in uh at the northwest corner of the building we tried to uh um stay within the the uh current setbacks so uh and of course we are um confined by the fact that we're so close to the top of the Coastal Bank that uh with new structural depths and new requirements for ceiling height uh code required uh we are a much taller building and uh so now we're doing a lot more retaining around the building to to uh take care of the higher grades um I'm open to questions all right thank you very much so the the uh changes that uh Carolyn and and and Kenny came up with they they take they took the basic footprint of the building uh and put the main part of the new structure uh in that location uh they moved it uh several feet to the east so to increase the setback to the Westerly sideline uh so where previously it was 7 and2 fet to the westle sideline now it's 11 and 1/2 ft uh to the Wesley sideline then they took the uh the new bedroom uh that we talking about and put it at the North End of the building uh on on a single floor so the main house has a has a second floor but the addition on the North side is only a single floor so the the so that the um so the property uh sort of honors the the original building uh they had to go through the Conservation Commission um and so there was a concern about um storm water runoff so the driveway uh consists of permeable pavers that will allow water to pass through them and the bottom driveway is going to be a gravel driveway then as a part of our application we included uh the plant from Blue flax design in which the entire Coastal Bank uh from where it says limit of work down to the Wetland uh 12,000 over 12,000 square feet is going to be completely cleared of invasives uh which cover it now and completely replanted with Native vegetation and so the thought is that uh any uh runoff storm water rain water that uh leaves the upper portion of the property would be mostly absorbed in the new plantings as I say 12,000 square feet down to the uh edge of the Wetland so um well there is an increase in in building coverage uh I think if you look at the third page of my U handout you'll see that uh the size of the structure even with it even with the addition is still very modest in comparison to many of the homes in the neighborhood so I think the um we have Kenny who can answer questions uh Teresa spra a blue flax design supposed to join join us I don't think she's here now online so if you have any questions for her the uh Dave little who's the engineer was also supposed to join us I don't know if he's online or not these people take vacations I don't understand it but the U in any event uh so in a neighborhood of ter is here Teresa is online oh okay all right so the um so if you have any questions oh the hands is up that do they want to speak then no we're g to wait until there's any questions for um we're assuming that you're going to go through the criteria I am it's not your first rodeo so right so adequacy of the size of the site in terms of the size of the proposed use uh technically our our lot size is over 40,000 square feet if you've been to the site you know most of it's a steep Bank in the par that's not a steep Bank as an actual Wetland at the bottom of the hill so we have uh just a little over 7,000 square feet of buildable Upland uh the so but what we've done is we still uh we move the building so there's greater distance of from the Westerly line and the addition on the North side doesn't in fact meet the uh current setback requirements so in terms of the size of the site considering the modest increase in in coverage uh we think is suitable uh for the project compatibility of the size of the proposed structure with neighboring properties again I you know we have this third page so the properties that I selected because it's a busy neighbor are the properties so if you drive down old Warf Road you could look up and see this house so I I took other properties on Old Warf road that are on the same side of the street uh and the uh as you can see uh most of them are substantially larger by a factor of two or three over over our proposed house and did the same thing on scatter rad so the properties on the on the south side of scatter uh I selected 34 through 66 showing our our existing gross floor area is 1844 square feet and we're going to 35 86 still uh you know very modest in this neighborhood so we think that the uh our building is very much compatible in the neighborhood in fact people going to go on what's that small house done in this neighborhood but in any event the extended proposed use in the non-conforming nature of the structure so the the principal increase here is the uh increase in living area as we know from the Bransford decision and the and the buland decision uh when you increase uh a living area on a non-conforming lot and here we're noncon forming because we don't have 20,000 Square ft of buildable Upland uh you're increasing the N is an intensity intensification of the non-conformity the suitability of the site including but not limited to impact on neighboring properties on the natural environment so uh we had uh three meetings uh with the Conservation Commission where we work through uh their concerns uh regarding the changes to the property and that's why we ended up with permeable pavers in the driveway initially we wanted asphalt uh we gravel at the bottom again to sow down any any any rainwater and we are doing the 12,000 over 12,000 Square F feet of replanting on the bank so uh you'll see the correspondents from the commission that uh they're going to issue an order conditions uh that meets their regulations so we believe that given the conditions from the Conservation Commission we do believe the site is suitable uh for the work impact of scale sighting a mass on the neighborhood visual character so to get a little lyrical you know the applicant fames own the property for 200 years uh she retained Kenny Nickerson as the architect and his brother Steve as the Builder their family's been there for about the same length of time uh uh they were born and raised less than 100 yards from this site and so both the applicant and her team have a real Devotion to the neighborhood and so they they wanted to make sure the design was something that would be suitable and I I think they succeeded compatibility propos use with neighboring uses to single family residence and single family neighborhood method of SE disposal there will be a new uh septic system uh drainage control by dve Wells from the roof the driveways uh permeable pavers and gravel and the proposed planting will absorb a substantial portion of any storm water that reaches it then with no impact on traffic flow and safety no impact on noise and litter uh the utilities are adequate and 11 and 12 are not applicable so that'll be our presentation thank you Mr Riley um is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application if so please make it known seeing none I will read the three correspondents from town officials in chadam first one from Judith Georgio the health agent on March 13 2024 I I have reviewed the plan to demolish the existing dwelling and rebuilding new dwelling floor plans of the existing dwelling are required to confirm the existing dwelling layout and bedroom number a new septic is proposed and will require approval from the health department next we have a letter from Christina Basset of the historical commission um and that was on uh March 7th 2024 the historical commission found the home at 46 scattery not to be historically significant and did not impose a demolition delay next we have a letter from the Conservation Commission on March 7th 2024 um the proposed project was continued to April 3rd when it'll be issued in order of conditions that's in 2024 the project as proposed will be conditioned to meet the performance standard under the applicable laws that is it is there anybody here are in Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this application or has a specific question yes and yes we do James James saely I believe please go ahead sir yeah hi um my name is James I live at 44 sat so directly to the um in the north and adjacent to the um proposed building site I guess um I guess my question is to the board you know if it's a non-conforming lot why would an exception be granted to make it even more non-conforming the whole wing on the North side that's a new addition to the property um I am concerned about just taking up more space on the small lot obviously bought my view that I have from4 scattery and another question I have is what's the use for the property I know this McDonald lives in a large house you know across the street fromet it's across my driveway from it and I'm just curious is it going to be a rental property because I know she initially were as looking for parking spaces for somebody up to six or eight vehicles or something so I'm just curious like what the intent of the proper is going to be well they're making a larger footprint okay so I'm going to let attorney Riley if he would U respond to that question um and I will say that as far as the intent of the property um that's not one of our criteria um so he doesn't have to respond to that necessarily well the the uh my understanding from Carolyn is it's going to be used for uh either uh other family members who wish to use it or perhaps rented year round but would not be used any other way I really didn't get the first question I couldn't he wanted to know why you can increase the non-conformity no you have the authority uh to Grant an increase in non-conformity if you find that the proposed increase is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing structure and I suppose I should have stated my opinion that I believe this proposal is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood thank you sir um yeah I guess I just that and say that I think it is more detrimental to the neighborhood certainly me in my view because that the northwing addition where you say it's one level that if you look at the roof pitch and the height of the roof it's it's really going up like two stories even though it might be one level you know underneath but it looks like it must be having a high ceiling or something but in the renderings that you have it looks pretty large and um and and higher than I would do as one level so that's what I'm really concerned about that you know that footprint on the North side which is I think you know again increasing the nonconformity of it of the existing structure um I just don't see how that makes sense or why it's actually necessary thank you sir and you you may find that some of the comments during deliberations will um address some of your comments so well if I could respond briefly okay to that one minute yeah okay so most of us are familiar with the kener case uh decision by our Supreme Judicial Court that indicated that U when coming to views and vistors that's a neighborhood View and visitors not the view of an individual property and so um we still believe they're not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood thank you thank you Council so um at this point is there anybody else that would like to ask a question or speak against this application please indicate if so no okay so questions from the board uh dve I have no questions Ed no questions Dave Nixon well I do uh from your presentation I understand it's been on this lady's family for a 100 years 200 years oh okay um so and I understand certain things about rebuilding homes and all that but I would think the family history would be such that you'd want to make do with that house keeping it and maybe expanding it or whatnot as opposed to ripping it down starting all over again I uh I I'm no uh well I guess I am I am a preservationist and uh it it troubles me that that doesn't seem to be part of the conversation as to what's the matter with it why can't we keep it I'll be happy to explain great all right so the um uh the home for conservationist preservationist in this town is the historic commission and so uh we had a couple of hearings with the con with the pardon me with the historic Commission uh and we pointed out that despite the fact that the building was built by previous generations of the nasin it was built in the early 30s sort of in in the depression the level of construction candidly is not what I would call high quality and uh they wanted to have a structure that's going to live on for the next several generations and so they felt uh that rather than doing uh you know interior changes to the structure to update it they prefer to have a building that they know is going to last for the next several generations and so the design of the building uh mimics the previous design and fits in with the neighborhood uh although it's a lot smaller than most of the other houses but you can't rebuild memories you start you know it's it's it's to me um so unfortunate well the the historic commission found that it was not historically significant so we we know about the historical uh Paul questions um my my question is really a curiosity do you know how the configuration of this lot was created it's a it's an unusual uh setup and are they attempting were they attempting to get Frontage on the old Warf Road no no the uh what happened back one generation is that um the uh Miss McDonald's well her mother had a brother so they divided the property so that uh Miss McDonald's mother would have a lot to build the house on or her branch of the family would have a lot to build a house on uh the rest of the family would continue to use uh the house that was on the main section of the lot so so the division was done years ago uh and really had nothing to do with Frontage John old war Road I mean so that's the I mean it's only 40 7 ft of Frontage on Old W road so it's really a panhandle lot it's got 20 ft of Frontage on scattery and that's why the address is off scattery okay I have no other questions Lee questions um my question has to do with the Mechanicals um the air conditioner two AC's and a generator um so close to the Coastal Bank I guess I would like to I mean if that is what is what I'm looking at I guess I would ask if that's that's okay maybe Mr Briggs you could speak to that exterior Mechanicals only have to meet the abutters setback okay right okay thank you Steve questions I have no questions and J questions I mine is just a technical one Mr Riley um and you kind of just answered it the frontage is 47 feet need needs to be 150 according to the the I was just surprised that the advertisement you know that that goes out that says that there was Zero um Frontage so is that an issue I think there's well zero Frontage on scattery so when you in chat them under our zoning bylaw uh you can have what we call a panhandle lot okay where they have uh a minimum Frontage would be 20 feet it's like a driveway yeah uh so when they divided this property uh back in the 70s or 80s whenever they did it uh they used the uh front an old Warf okay has that Panhandle the uh the access is on scatter that's from scattery and the address is scattery that's correct why okay I just wanted to reconcile that because the site plan does say 47 ft okay that was all I had so I have a question about um gross floor area I'm not calling you out um Mr Riley um I was going to say this at the beginning of the meeting um so our rules provide in Section 3 C3 that all application should have the gross floor area existing in proposed right on the application so again I'm not calling you out but in the future for you and for anybody else that comes before us we really would like to see that and in this one we did get the existing floor area of 1844 but we didn't get the proposed gross floor area with the application so that's correct I apologize for that that's okay I'm just yeah so do you know what it is proposed gr La yeah it's on it's on page three my application sorry okay okay yeah we I think I subsequently provided it to Sarah but okay you you probably did I I just it's 35 3500 okay thank you very much basically but in the future if it could go on the application for you and anybody else listening that would be great yes um so um Paul and do we have someone that's Stills to speak um Mr AB butter I'm sorry that you've already had your opportunity and we've already um you know gone on with the hearing so um I apologize Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations Dave each seconds um and how do you vote each votes yes yes all votes yes Jenny Jenny yes as do I okay deliberations uh Ed what do you think um I'm not voting today but if I was um I believe this particular properly is going to fit in well for that spot um I think it isn't going to be substantially detrimental to the neighborhood it looks to be well thought out I applaud you for having that many family members get along and agree on on all of it um and uh I wish you the best of luck okay uh Steve uh I think it's a nice project um I I think it U would fit in nicely over there you you've done a good job of staying within the uh the setbacks which is something we always look for and uh one uh slightly increased and two of them maybe decreased but they're still within range so I I think it's a nice project and if I were voting for it I would support it and Lee um I agree with my colleagues I think it's a great project um it meets all the criteria I would urge you though to if there's any anything Charming or cool about the old house maybe use it in the new build okay uh Dave each yeah I agree with uh with all the previous um it's uh certainly not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood um I did note when I was out there the proximity of the neighbor's house and um I guess I'm not surprised to hear uh that he has some problems but as Mr Ry noted the um um kener decision is pretty clear about neighborhood views and Vistas and not those of an individual property owner uh and I think that um this and even that said I don't see this the addition on this as substantially um um impinging on the views from that house up the hill okay Paul what do you think uh it's interesting because I I found that I approached the property from scatter re Road and uh and then ended up uh going around and coming up old Warf and you actually can see the house from old Warf which uh in a way you sort of get wrapped around the the the axle there uh given the wetlands and given the other action that's going on there at 19 old Warf there's an awful lot of work going on that we've we've already been through uh but I think it's not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and I I will vote to approve it and Jenny yeah I um I I I I'm a preservationist too and so it does sadden me to see a that cute house it's adorable and the location is amazing but I do appreciate that that there's interest in evolving U for the next generation and making improvements to the home I I was hoping it could maybe be renovated I I don't know that I agree totally that all with all due respect to the the builders building construction actually was very good in you know the older they had better wood they had so so Renovations are challenging because of all the new things that folks uh want today but um but with respect to the criteria that we're looking at um you know it is going almost to the max of the building coverage and it is a constrained lot at less than 10,000 square feet but it's got all that property around it so so and that's that's even it's not buildable it's it's part of the the property and then the the view the Vista particularly to to Paul's point from the sea that's where you see the house you don't see the house at all from scattery um so it's a constrained lot I do recognize and I appreciate that you've improved the setbacks I I want to acknowledge the neighbors's concern about the non-conformities going more non-conforming um in this case you're actually improving the Western a butter setback pretty significantly actually from not by inches but but by feet um you did not make CCD worse which oftentimes is is the case um and you meet all the other neighbor setbacks the height I appreciate that the height isn't going to the maximum it's it's staying at um 28 uh 28t it's going up it's going up by three feet yeah um wait what did you say I think it's going up by three feet no it's gone to 284 but it's still within right it's a it's a relatively modest house uh height for houses in that neighborhood for sure um historic did not um and we do listen to and regard what they say and they did say it was not historically significant um and I do think that the conservation plan I know we didn't hear from Teresa but it's very impressive and um that that's important because of that location and we're talking about the building lot is 9,000 square feet and the rest of it is a lot of it is in conservation and so this is very important to that property and I'm this almost actually is what kind of really made helped make the decision for me because I think it's there's a substantial Improvement in this plan um to all of that land that is really an important part of that property and and the neighboring property so that's Dave Nixon thank you thank you madam chair uh well as I stated um I'm sorry to see you go I really am but you know frankly it's none of my business it really isn't when I look at our criteria I can find it is in no way substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood okay criteria Paul what do you think um conditions I always call I would think that uh our normal conditions could apply do you see any reasons why they should not Bill well since since the property is not visible from scattery and only visible from old dwarf and uh the adjacent property owner is the applicant there's plenty of room for construction vehicles uh so I I don't think they should apply in this case mhm so let's see what the members think uh what do you think Jenny about conditions um I I actually agree with Mr Riley I think that that property I drove it again yesterday and it's got a lot of um it's not driveway but it's lawn that's been you know I think it's been it can serve as a driveway I think there's enough space there so no conditions um just the uh timing I think just the timing it's scattery and old Harbor they're not they're not uh busy they're not close to town that close to town they're not that busy I I I think just the time what do you think Steve um probably the same it's probably enough room there to park vehicles and things but um I I think we should retain the timing because there is at least one neighbor that's relatively close but not the time of year restrictions um you think yeah yeah just the the the the time of day and the months of the year okay and that is that what you me want to Jenny the time of day and months of the year I was thinking just the time of the day yep right okay time of day and flee I think we need to take into account the summer months you do okay Dave Nixon time of day and the days of the week okay Ed what do you think I live off scatter tree being further away there there is a lot of foot traffic in the summertime um there seems to be room for off-site parking for for this project though I would just uh probably just hours of a day just so not the time not the not the summer hours I mean not the summer months you're good with that correct and Dav each um I'm a little bit torn because the it seems there's an easement to the access part of the access this property is over an easement um but I guess if they have enough um space to park on the adjacent lot and and and all um then I think it's probably the best is to is to do uh timing but not um not to con not to constrain exterior construction during the summer months and I agree with that Paul oh all right neighbor's hand is up again uh I I'll acknowledge it uh but I'm again going to stand by what I said before this isn't a the hearing is already closed so um I know it's just relative to the E you're talking now and I have not recognized you as a matter of fact I I specifically didn't recognize you so um that that is my ruling so to speak Paul well I'll try to desend I I think where we're at is that we're moving to approve the application as submitted with the condition that um all Construction activity and vehicles be contained on site or at a neighboring property with the permission of the property owner and that uh between June 30th and Labor Day uh no work would be permitted on weekends and construction activity would be between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm only right okay Dave each seconds okay and how do you vote Dave each each votes yes Dave Nixon yes well all votes yes Jenny Jenny votes yes as to I it's unanimous congratulations thank you very much thank you you we're going to take a five minute break um so please uh stand by e e e e e e e e e e e yeah yes welcome back this is uh part two of the um zba hearing and we are going to go to the next application whenever Sarah is ready 1369 Main Street application number 24-20 three story on Main realy trust care of Kim alquest 776 Main Street austerville Mass 02655 owner of property located at 1369 Main Street also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 10e Block 14 Lot D2 the applicant seeks to enlarge extend or change a conforming dwelling on a non-conforming lot be the demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of a new dwelling the proposed dwelling will comply with all bulk and dimensional requirements of the bylaw but is considered a substantial alteration and under the second except Clause of section six of Mass General Law chapter 48 such substantial alteration requires the grant of a special permit the existing building coverage is 1,366 Ft 11% and the proposed building coverage is 1,332 Ft 10.8% or 15% is the maximum allowed the lot is non-conforming and that it contains 12,370 ft or 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under master Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw uh good afternoon Madame chairman members of the board uh I rep I'm George uh gas GS Design Group we The Architects representing um a main realy trust welcome so go ahead with your application um so we're basically have a a tear down and we're we're rebuilding with a new structure uh as mentioned were on the uh on the building coverage were slightly smaller on the uh interior space we're slightly bigger the existing um structure is uh 2,654 Square ft grow gross and the proposed is uh 3,422 it's about 768 uh additional Square F feet um we've uh do you have a copy of the um criteria by any chance uh I don't you don't um we going if you come on over here yeah you provide you with one and did your dog eat the criteria okay y yeah take your time I'll help you through it if you need it but you know essentially we think the new proposed building is is not more um detrimental uh to the neighborhood um that's one thing I'm sure that's on your list it's actually not on our list that's the final uh decision that needs to be made but all those criteria they don't all apply but um certainly one through five do and uh six so definitely you know speak about those yep make your case so essentially uh the ex we're we're we're building the exact same footprint so we're not uh um changing uh the building footprint anymore um it's uh an existing structure so uh we have a new septic system we're putting in to accommodate the additional bedroom we're adding to the property um so look at number two for a second compatibility of the size of the proposed structure with neighboring properties yeah um um well we've done a three threedimensional sketch which shows the existing and proposed now the site is is unusual in the sense that uh it has a very large kind of divot to it it really sinks in and so uh what we're proposing is kind of to correct that and and to give the the main body of the house the proper um uh scale and size to the to the to the grade now it's a three itional perspective it's a you know it's a little the the Landscaping is a little interpretive it's not exactly too um what the uh site plan shows it's much more uh definitive showing the uh tearing down of the scaling of what we're changing in the topography so so look at number five impact is scale sighting and Mass on neighborhood visual character y including views Vistas and Street Scapes so that one really compares the house you want to build to other houses in that neighborhood yep uh so we had several uh presentations with historic uh committee and uh basically was approved we went through a whole process of showing uh uh neighboring houses Gambrell Styles uh finishes we went through the the whole list and so they have different criteria and just so you know most of us listen to all the meetings that relate to O so we probably at least some of us um know about what's been said but remember that we we really talk about the specific neighborhood where they're the whole you know historic business district so so focus on the neighborhood yeah so also uh in the neighborhood it's a it's a it's a two-story residence there's multiple two-story residence in the neighborhood um this particular site is this is probably the only real angle that you can take a picture of the property to see it the way I've presented it uh you really can't see it from uh Main Street um there's a lot of uh uh foliage there and it's not really pronounced you could probably drive right by it the street itself going past it however is uh um it's you know it's more visible Vis you know more substantially expressed on that street so again this this this is taken from a corner view which like the the street is actually o over here so I'm into the road a little bit so most most of the the public for instance is not going to really see this view or get a glimpse of it but you know on on the neighborhood yes when you drive by you you'll see it but as as we mentioned um the existing house is basically has you know two-car garage yes it's a it's a kind of a you know shed roof something there it's not it's not not a pure Gable end and um you know if if we you know took that existing house and and and placed it where this house it wouldn't be much of a difference in height uh the existing height we have is below the 30 foot height restriction what is the existing height oh we can wait we can wait and ask you that you you do your thing sorry yeah so I mean we we've kind of uh uh nestled the home into to it's again the existing house is in the very Corner part of the property and we' put it in the exact same spot we've created a a a landscape and Earth to to kind of uh mediate that uh size and and and and look of the house I mean like I said the existing house you it doesn't have a front I mean it does have a front door but it's not used and it it doesn't suit the house was built in 74 it's not really a a a historic relevance it's not really a a good layout um there was you know there was fire damage and a very unfortunate that I'm not quite sure but I heard there was a very unfortunate event that occurred at the home and it's you know a little unnerving to to know that that something like that could have happened so my clients wants to build new essentially so okay so is that your presentation would you like to add anything else um those are really the the big the two big things I mean the the three-dimensional sketch really shows it uh the heights that you had mentioned well we can wait for that if you want for questions but um be prepared to to answer that sure um is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this um application please indicate seeing none okay questions from no correspondences three letters from town officials essentially on uh January 23rd 2024 we have a letter from Judith Georgio the health agent I reviewed the plan to demo reconstruct the property the property is connected to the town sewer system it is approved for three bedrooms additional flow must be applied for at the sewer department I have no objection to this application and then we have a letter from um let's see Christina McCarthy um on March 13 2024 and um she says attach you'll find the projected balance sheet for 1369 who will Who who will be appearing before the zoning board on March 28th 2024 they currently have an outstanding balance on their first half real estate tax I would like to thank you in advance for your time and assistance on this matter have a nice day and that was uh on uh March 13 2024 and that balance looks like um $1,571 let's see this historic commission um voted in favor 4 to one and that was on January 4th 2024 on December 20th actually um 2023 they had a meeting and met and rendered the following decision with regard to your application the commission voted for uh in favor one in opposition and zero abstaining with those conditions with the conditions of the window shall be white the applicant shall return for approval of hardscaping and Landscaping and that concludes the uh correspondence is there anybody here or Microsoft teams that has a question or would like to speak against the application if so please go to the podium sir you are recognized just so you know you have five minutes okay thank you thank you ladies and gentlemen I'm Steve killoy I live at 30 VAV diing across the street from this piece of property could you bring that up the property up on the screen the front view and the side view of it please the Uh I that I'm diing across from where the the side view of the the house is sure and I was looking at the he was the gentleman was saying how the landscape was a little bit exaggerated that's very exaggerated compared to what is actually there and the garage is almost even there and it looks like it's like dug down so that it's the houses I can't believe how high the house is and I can't believe that more of my neighbors on here okay so I used are you um asking a question at all or are you speaking against I'm just well I'm speaking against the the the whole piece of property the building because it it's oversized tremendously it's the the gentleman was making a a big point and it was almost like he was trying to sell the property that it was not obtrusive to the traffic driving up and down Main Street well it is for us coming up and down our street our neighborhood this is like the introduction this oversized building is the introduction to our quaint little dead end street with all mod sized homes capes and just a low keed as you're all aware I'm sure of the street lowy neighborhood and area it just is so big and it would just take away from the quaintness that we have in the neighborhood and our houses a moderate sized and it's just it's I and I'm not really good at public speaking so you have to be great job we we get the gist of what you're saying I I overheard you well you had said that the windows were supposed to be white but they're black and in the picture here but they they're required to make them white uh to be in compliance with their order from the historic business district okay and the height of the building you had mentioned we're going to we're going to get to that later questions all but it's just the the house is awfully big and in my opinion not being offensive but ungodly for us to look at coming around the corner and uh so I oppose the construction of it at this type of house mhm the height of it and uh and all that so it's thank you all that's all I can just toose it without we heard you for sure okay thank you very much Y is there anybody else either here or on Microsoft teams that has a question or wishes to speak against the application if so please indicate seeing no others um at this point questions from oh we're going to give you a rebuttal time go ahead um if you go back to the threedimensional drawing would be great okay so uh I understand the the the neighbor's concern and I just wanted to address that sir uh right now that that massing model was done uh on a in this program that kind of you know does heavy lines and makes it look really what what it's not going to look like in reality if you lift up a little higher or lower the the image of the one below yeah outside of the the black window uh this is in uh traditional bleaching oil um uh shingles the size is it's it's deceptive and it's deceptive for a couple of reasons only because the Gamel uh roof is is basically a a larger kind of facade than uh regular Gable like the the house that's there now you go back to the 3D I do want to emphasize that uh the way the the Massie model is portrayed and that's the one you were really referring to the line weight the line thickness and just that whole look is is making the building look a lot more dense or larger than it really would be and you know back I went to uh uh architecture school where I didn't do a computer we used to draw perspectives with pencils and t-squares and and if I had done that with this particular View it this the the the density and just the line weight would would just like melt away I mean this is a a a photo montage using that that that photograph to to to show what would essentially look like but I I want you to just if I could just walk up to the screen real quick I just want to you have to stay at the microphone if you're going to talk so this this kind of scale right here was probably right to about here so there's a this peak is is probably a little bit higher um I didn't do the calculations on what the actual difference is but you know getting back to the the building height we are um uh per code for the for the building height itself so okay thank you um okay so now we are at questions from the board I believe um Steve and Steve may look familiar to you but he is now on our our board he's been for a bit and um he's not voting today but he is going to think about our criteria versus what the criteria were at the other panel that he was on okay so I think one of the earlier questions mic sorry I think one of the earlier questions were was the the the height of the structure and from what the what I calculate it looks like it's about 29.6 um um which is only about about a half an inch of fudge fudge factor and I think some of that is because you've got 10- foot ceilings on the first floor and I'm just wondering that if you were to make them even 9 foot ceilings or 8ot ceilings that would that would decrease the massing of the house and and how tall it looks and how big it looks as you come around the corner I I I sorry that is that a question Steve the 10 feet I gotta look at my drawings that might be uh floor to floor I mean uh I have to roll out my drawings and take a peek um but if if if it were 10 foot ceilings on the first floor we'd make it nine if we got approved um okay so you're basically saying you're flexible in terms of the height of the building yeah but but outside of that one little bit there's not much more you can do the the fact that the style of a Gamel house has that little triangular piece your second floor is essentially in the the roof okay so we're just going to stick to that specific question and uh any other questions no jie I'm sorry one more thing there was a uh a retaining wall on the side of the um of the driveway um I guess it would be on the south side of the driveway do you know about how tall that is uh we did a calculation on that because it's considered a building structure if it's within the setback so um if you go to that 3D perspective we kind of you know drew a concept of what that would look like um okay over on behind the trees well that looks like it comes almost to the top of the the garage door so it would be probably seven or eight feet high correct okay okay thank you okay questions Paul uh I I think I have a handle on the on the facts um I did view the uh historic business uh or historic district uh meeting in December uh so I'm familiar with the uh questions and issues that they had I think frankly I have some of the same issues um and uh I think the questions that they asked were answered that you provided uh give me a feel for where we're at here I don't think I have any additional questions Lee no questions while we're on this side of the room Jenny okay I watched the hbdc the last hearing actually just last night for refresher and I'm not going to say this officially because I'm not an architect or whatever but I do recall hearing that it was floor to floor the 10 ft yeah which means that the height of the ceiling is 9 ft I think that's what they said so would you be you were eager to go if it you know from 10 to 9 would you be eager to go from 9 to 8 I would go to8 four and a half that's basically an 8ot stud with a double plate and a single plate on the bottom okay I just wanted to clarify I mean you can double check it in your paperwork I don't want to be yeah no no I think does that does that that's familiar because we would not do a 10-ft ceiling in a small house like that yeah I think it actually was Sam that said um they well keep in mind it's not 10 ft they read it the same way that that this gentleman did so so um couple questions uh one the Board of Health re uh Madam chair that you read about allowed for three bedrooms is that what you said yes okay you have you have a a on on a A1 Z you have floor plans for four bedrooms correct so it it's connected to town Su oh so that wouldn't that wouldn't matter we have to go to them next all right so you have four and and okay so that was one question um I'd really like to know what the existing Ridge is um the the current house as as it is stated is within in of the max in chatam and that's for that neighborhood I so the proposed height is within inches of the allow allowable height per code so uh that the board can and this is a building department question they ask for an ASU they're going to want it a a shot taken at the top of the ridge to make sure it's conforming that that's not my question my question is how much taller is the new proposed building from the existing it's hard to tell because uh uh I mean can I interject for just a second yeah yes so uh based on the information that I can see on the drawings you've given us number one Jenny that it is subfloor to subfloor that 10 foot plus or minus is what it's shown and I it's a little bit tough to read the number on the existing but it looks to me like the proposed Ridge new Ridge is um elevation 64.0 5 and the existing Ridge shows to be about 6.62 so plus or minus 4 feet above the existing Ridge is what the new Ridge is proposed to be and then there's a Copa sh on top of that okay four feet yeah okay sounds right um I went to the property I don't remember that there being Stakes there or was the property staked and I just didn't I don't know I couldn't tell you unless we know I have no idea because that that's isn't that required it's helpful to us to see it's required well it it proposes in the exact same spot it's still required no I know but it's it's just it is still just helpful for us to see uh I just want to make sure I wasn't missing the stakes this three-dimensional sketch was the the the most uh uh telling to have you understand that it's it's the whole building's kind of being raised up a little bit but as I mentioned I I know I understand that's required uh but we were essentially building in the same footprint so okay it's not hard to imagine okay one one last question the traditional bleaching oil treatment is that what prevents the cedar from aging like it typically does no what it does is it allows the wood shingles to age uniformally so a lot of people people put the untreated uh shingles on the North side's going to turn one color and then the other's going to look new and the you know so that's basically why we use it what you're referring to is like an opaque stain uh where it's like like not paint it's still a stain but it you know it has to be it's solid so okay so it it will Aid the cedar will age like blend okay that's all I have questions Dave Nixon uh I really don't have any questions I have lots of opinions but I'll say those all right dve questions um no I don't think so I think I I I think I can read these numbers well not the as the clarification I have fored about Heights and things um okay so almost set thanks thank you Ed questions uh no um no questions that they've been clarified I can I can see what's going on here very good Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations d v seconds and how do you vote and votes yes yes all votes yes did yes as do I so deliberations um see Lee well well um I am struggling with this one um I'm struggling with the math especially from Vineyard look looking at the facade of the garage it goes up three stories I I don't think it fits in with the neighborhood um I I do think it would be substantially detrimental um if if it could be reworked to maybe maybe not that make that garage section not as um it's just opposing or uh I'm not sure the word I'm looking for but it just is it's it's it's a lot of mass um I also don't love the Copa I think it makes it looks even taller than it actually is um I'm not voting today but those are my thoughts okay Paul deliberations well I uh uh I agree with the neighbor who came in and spoke with respect to uh the uh application it seems to me that and I agree with with what Le has said the mass of this building is substantial uh compared with what is also in the neighborhood and given the view from um Vineyard Avenue uh it is in Hollow versus uh the view from Main Street but uh it's also Rising by uh 4 feet approximately uh plus the coupa and uh the uh the perspective that you provided the 3D perspective showing the Landscaping um shows to me um uh substantial change in the topography versus what is actually there um when I uh look at all of that that uh and consider the uh uh the size of the ceiling uh in the first floor and the fact that you're within U uh 35 hundreds of the maximum allowed to me is just out of proportion and uh it does not uh follow the impact of scale sighting and mass in the neighborhood uh which would be appro so U I would oppose the application okay Dave Nixon deliberations thank you madam chair yeah this to me the massing is really just too much uh when I first saw the this view of looking at the front of the house with the Koopa as Lee said the Koopa just makes it worse you know it it to me it's just too much of a house just too much the I think um you know I'm I'm trying to Envision I mean again looking at the drawings it show basically shows the the garage L if you will it's proposed is being about the same site same same elevation of as the existing Upper Ridge so you're going up that much and then about four feet higher to get to the main Ridge it's I mean certainly I I wish that I kind of wish I'd watched the hbdc earings but I hadn't um in terms of apparent massing you know to it's it's quite a bit I I you know gambrells aren't my favorite thing but I don't I don't act against them just because I don't they're not my favorite but this is you know coming from what's there which is not the greatest architectural statement uh to to make to go from there to this to the Gamble is a it's quite a stretch and I think it's just maybe it's a little too far perhaps I don't know and we talked about you know if could bring the ceilings down to use an 8ft stud you know 8 foot four and a or four and a half uh and maybe second floor bring it down let maybe it can drop a little bit I I I agree I don't think in this case the Koopa adds is enhanced in a way that's positive in my view so um I I don't think it's it's the style necessarily but it's a combination of height uh and and massing in in comparison to where we're coming from you know I think it's I think it could use some more and Ed I do like anells um but unfortunately um they do contribute to the massing a little bit from an Aesthetics point of view uh you know 9-t ceilings are are typical in a new house these days you know that's what people want um but you could probably lower the the building height and then uh on the second floor uh perhaps uh clip the ceiling to get you know get the height there and bring it down a little bit I I think um if you could perhaps bring the height down a little bit again I I like the gambell but uh it would be sort of the first one in that in that area so it uh I don't think it's substantially detrimental but I think you could probably find a design that might fit in a little bit better and Jenny uh yeah I um I think it's the height um you know it it is not a historic house but it is in a historic district and so I was I was was uh I think criteria two in particular compatibility of size but five the impact of scale and mass in the neighborhood streetscape this is in a historic district if there was ever importance of the streetscape it's this one so um I think that yeah if you could scale it back um in particular the height I think that when you look around the neighboring properties not just the neighborhood on Vineyard which the neighbors here and appreciate his comments um there really isn't anything that high and that tall in that neighborhood I understand you're saying the code in in chadam is 30 but the reason you're here is because we have you know there's discretion in with respect to non-conforming properties and I think you can hear that we all think it's too too tall and Steve yeah I think well you know the the massing I think is just sort of the nature of of a Gam um roof there's a lot of wall and from Vineyard um you not only see the massing of the of the garage and the and the area above it but you also see the side of the main house um which makes it even worse I think so I think just the massing the style of this house may be not the the right one for the for that for that lot um and the fact that it is up on a little bit of a hill uh maybe not because there's a hill but because there is a A divid in the in the front yard it just makes it seem higher um so although it's a very nice looking house I I just don't think it's it's right for that neighborhood I just think it's too big so s you'd have to get four out of five votes um just just you understand that could I respond to a couple of the questions at all we didn't really have any question so well you can respond when you come back with another plan perhaps that would be a way to respond okay let's let's do that you heard what we said and so I think you should think of it as instructive and if you're interested to what I think um I think I really agree with what Steve just said and certainly with what Dave said um you might say well I can build a 34 house if I want to because the town allows it but like like Jenny told you um not necessarily yeah so you can ask but you may not receive um so what would you like to do now would you like a vote we don't would like extend it an extension so you'd have to withdraw the application withdraw with withoute prejudice do it yeah that would be the best thing I just want to say you know the house is part of Main Street and if you look at that as being your guide versus some of the lower stre no we're actually allowed to look at the guide as the rules provide which is 300 feed essentially you know the ab butter and the neighborhood and that street that we are considering so we are certainly within our right to consider the the neighborhood which we are doing so um so you do you wish to withdraw yep without pre yes correct okay Paul I'll move to Grant the requested uh motion to withdraw without prejudice uh dve Second and how do you vote and votes yes Dave yes PA yes y yes as do I it's unanimous um thank you sir thank you all right we have one more application and When Sarah's ready we'll hear it application number 24-22 infinite monkey Ventures Inc car of Mitchell Rogers 66 the cornfield chadam Mass 02633 owner of property located at 456 Main Street also shown on the town of chadam accessories map 15 b d block 49 lot 90 the applicant seeks dimensional variances from the required Road and a butter setback for the construction of a deck installation of an exterior mechanical system Appliance freezer and the installation of an 8ft tall fence the deck was constructed 3.1 ft from the Wester butter and 9.1 ft from an unnamed way the proposed freezer will be located 3.1 feet from the Wester Leia butter the proposed 8ot fence will be located 16 fet from the unnamed way dimensional variances are required under Mass General Law chapter 4A section 10 and Section 8 d2c of the chat protective bylaw under application number 24- 023 the applicant seeks to enlarge extender change a non-conforming commercial structure under a non-conforming lot via the construction of a deck installation of an exterior mechanical system Appliance freezer and the installation of an 8ft tall fence the deck was constructed 3.1 ft from the westera butter where a 15t setback is required and 9.1 ft from an unnamed way where a 25t setback is required the proposed freezer will be non-conforming and that it will be located 3.1 ft from the westera butter where a 15t setback is required the property contains 5,654 Square ft within the gb2 zoning District a special permit is required under master Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protected bylaw Madam chair uh s I'm on the um I'm on the abutters list for this property so uh and thus am uh considered to have a financial interest in this matter so I will be recusing okay have a nice day and uh so voting on this would be Lee I believe yes so um okay thank you welcome Council please state your name I will um good afternoon Madam chair members of the board for the record my name is Eliza Cox I'm an attorney at Nutter mclennen and fish in hyanis and I'm here this afternoon on behalf of the applicant uh joining me to my right is Mitch Rogers who is the principal of the entity that owns the property and you'll you'll hear from Mitch in just a moment um thank you Sarah for reading in the notice we're here uh this afternoon seeking both a special permit and a variance um specifically we're seeking relief to alter and extend a pre-existing non-conforming structure known as Buffy's ice cream um with the construction of a wooden platform that's on the ground right now to the rear of the structure um upon which a proposed freezer unit uh will um is proposed to be situated like uh the existing Buffy building uh the deck intrudes into the sidey yard set back along the easterly side of the subject property although it's not quite as close as the existing building is to that setback in addition the deck also intrudes into the setback from the way that's to the north of the property and so relief is also needed from that setback um as indicated in the notice the proposed freezer unit that is proposed to be situated on the deck as shown on the plan to my left um under your zoning bylaw that's classified as an exterior mechanical system system under the bylaw and the bylaw prescribes that exterior mechanical systems are subject to the abutters setback which is 15 feet so the proposed freezer unit also requires relief from that easterly sidey yard setback but does not require relief from the setback to the way to the north it's about 16.6 feet um from the that way to the north um one housekeeping notice before I turn uh it over to Mitch to sort of walk through the property and why this is so critically important to his business operation in the notice um it also referenced that relief was being sought for a proposed 8 foot fence um after uh the notice was published and as the plans were refined uh the fence is proposed at six feet and so that does not require under the zoning bylaw relief from any setback requirement so I did want to make note of that so I think what I'd like to do now is turn it over to Mitch who's going to uh to the property probably all very familiar with it um and then also talk a little bit about the proposal and uh and the operations at Buffy thanks Eliza um good afternoon thank you for uh to the board for hearing our request to add the uh storage platform and exterior freezer at Buffy um thanks to the Community Development Office for your uh guidance through the process to date much appreciated very um helpful in um guiding through the the uh the navigations to get here um so there is some in this room uh I recognize um from seeing you at Buffy's uh I won't name names um I hope your service was delightful and the portions were generous um I will say a few words about buffies but I want to preface that with uh the following things to keep in mind throughout the discussion and this is um all uh sprinkled throughout um the packets that you received um due to the agent condition of the refrigeration at Buffy um it it needs to be replaced that's pure and simple um the business cannot operate with the existing um equipment um number two within the context of the current real estate and commodity prices uh Refrigeration capacity um needs to be increased in order for this business to survive and uh thus um replacement units cannot be placed inside of Buffy because the interior of Buffy cannot hold larger units um number three the irregular shape of the lot provides um no viable placement for the platform and exterior mechanical Appliance um that will not affect walking paths and sight lines and thus um will likely not be acceptable to hbdc uh even if it were um and even if they did accept a placement within the setbacks um there is no place where it would not displace heavily used outside customer seating and this would significantly um impact peak season business this is heavily used um space we have picnic tables there Etc um and um the other thing I wanted to say is that um is that this request I believe is not only uh not substantially derogating to the purpose um uh in intent of the bylaws I would argue that it furthers the principles outlined in section 1B in a variety of ways um I'll attempt to out ultimately that's your decision um and finally the Y butting neighbors are in uh are in support of this project I submitted um some supplemental materials uh from both um the owner at the tale of the Cod and brick block um stating their support for the project so I wanted to share some context about Buffy and the footprint on which um we operate the business um and I have a a few things to say and I promise it'll all come back um around to the the actual zoning request so I bought buff in the spring of 2022 um as I'm sure you all know the history of Buffy extends uh well back uh beyond that um Buffy has been employing uh Summer Staff in creating generational memories for um seasonal visitors part-time residents and yearound residents uh in their families for over 28 years I'm still floored by the effusiveness um and uh ongoing frequency of um the Gratitude expressed by so many of our patrons that come in um uh expressing the gratitude for keeping Buffy to be largely what it has been prior to my purchasing it but the history of 456 million goes way goes back way further than that um longtime chat ofit will recall yogurt overall Pat's Home Bakery Town records um we're still looking for evidence of the seafood Mark Market Circa 1934 through 1957 if anybody has any intel on that please send it my way um we've been working with the atw museum as well was a handful of local contributors um to create an homage of the history of the building which we're going to uh commemorate on a panel inside of the ice cream shop um and I'm hopeful this work can be a template for other business owners in the downtown area some of you may know chadam ice cream bars a brand I started prior to purchasing Buffy um to say that chadam ice cream bars uh has in short order become a beloved chadum brand um might be a a minor understatement um and and the reason I purchased bu um uh primarily was to grow this brand and we now have a wholesale business that has helped us stay open year round um which in turn has helped us establish a small coffee and bakery business those of you that live in chatam and drink coffee realize that it's not the easiest thing in the town of chadam in the offseason to get a cup of coffee so we're we're delighted to be able to uh provide that service for those of you that are coffee drinkers um so and I also believe that Buffy is one of the smallest Footprints if not the smallest uh to operate year round on Main Street um it's also one of the few original Main Street buildings which presents um an the original uh Street face fully in the vernacular of the day um which is a half timbered uh tutor style my colleague um Chris in the rear of the room has done a lot of work on the history of the building um and finally is while there's always more to do it's cord our mission to support local businesses and charities and I'm very proud that our our first Wholesale customer has capabilities um we have an ice cream bar that was built in uh cooperation with their team we also support the chadam food pantry Family Table collaborative chadam Anglers uh we're sponsoring a uh a dinner for the players this summer um we were at the taste of chadam last year hope to be there again this year and uh for those of you available on June 6th there's a an event at Pates for the lower Cape Outreach Council um that we're contributing to and so here are how these items that I've been speaking about are relevant for the zoning request um Buffy is more than just a business it's an important part of historic downtown chadam um it's a treasured part of the chadam experience um we're enthusiastic neighbors community members supporters of the Town um and in me as and as anyone who has been into Bubbies in the last two years will surely attest in my amazing year- round team um chadam has a steward for this iconic business that cares deeply about its history its reputation the great pleasure it brings to um full-time staff yearound staff seasonal staff and guests and with that stewardship comes um responsibility which is why I bring this request today forward um to this board I'm doing what I can to preserve Buffy um and as an ongoing U concern in a financial environment um as you can imagine it's more challenging than ever um with that with that said as as as um delighted as I am and have been to to do that work I also have a fiduciary responsibility to the business and without a solution to the current problem I can't see how buff Buffy's um can survive um and although it's just two years um and a blink of an eye since I purchased Buffy uh it's it's brutal to think about uh that as an outcome but it's a reality um so thank you for your p patience and listening to that and I'll close with this um I make this request for the dimensional variant with the knowledge and respect um for our zoning bylaws I also will um will present AIA kalpa for um some missteps I made early on in the process um and uh since I've been working with the Community Development Department I am um uh happy to embrace the process and I understand it certainly more than I ever did um and to love chatam and Cape Cod is to respect the need for controls of unfettered development um as I hope you can see however this uh is is quite this request is quite fettered um I'm not changing the use of the property not making a request that is unique to the uh historic business district in that um there are exterior mechanical appliances um we're not asking for something that is any way detrimental to the neighborhood in fact the proposed modernized um equip equipment reduces noise improves the quality of the electrical load on the downtown grid which is tenuous at times for sure um and will result in an improved aesthetic for the lot um that did have the enthusiastic support of the hbdc and also the support of my immediate abutters um so I think um um that's all I have to say I'm excited to um go into some further discussion thanks Mitch um what I'd like to do is first start with the variance and and I'll walk through the variance criteria if that's okay with the board uh so the first prong of the variance as you know is that there has to be a showing of unique circumstances related to the so soil shape or Topography of the land or structure and I submit that that is present here um you can see the lot and actually if you have your packages too there were uh some handouts that were included uh which also depict how the unique shape of the lot impacts uh the buildable setback areas and thank you Sarah for putting that up so the property is unique in it fronts on two ways it fronts on Main Street and then the sort of unnamed way that dead ends on the back of the lot and then in addition the shape of this lot is quite irregular if you look at the Northerly property line as you can see on the graphic it is not perpendicular but rather it is angled South um and when you factor in the setbacks from that angled South Line it really minimizes the buildable area outside of the setbacks on the lot in addition if you look at the Westerly property line you can see there's a jog in the Westerly property line by about 15 feet which is pretty significant given the size of this lot um and again when that jog is factored in uh with the 15t setback the abutter setback it again creates a very small area um because of those unique shapes that are actually outside of uh the setback zones in addition I would suggest there are uniquely shaped buildings on this lot the lot has two structures which are long and narrow and extend back from Main Street uh The Buffy building is just 2.9 fet from uh the that easterly property line and in addition the interior of the building is such that the front of the Buffy building is where C customers come in the back is of course the back of house operations of the building and what's proposed is a back of house uh amenity that's very necessary uh that needs to be located towards the back of the building um the second prong is that a literal enforcement of the bylaw represents a substantial hardship to the petitioner and again I would submit um and the graphic that Sarah had up again I think was helpful that as a result of these unique uh shape conditions um and the the model graphic shows it well you can see how a compliance with the setbacks is a significant hardship really the only location where the freezer could go and compliance with the setback is either inside the building or in the Park seating area uh that Mitch described between the two buildings and either of those locations represents a substantial hardship first within the building these are larger more modern freezers that are required it would take up an extremely large amount of space within the existing building which would handicap and substantially hardship his ability to do the production that's needed uh within that uh very tight space it's already as I mentioned a long narrow building that exists locating the freezer um out within the setback um in the area shown here thank you Sarah um would result in loss of um really important outdoor space and seating that also financially is important to support the operation in addition it would require um Hardscape reconstruction moving pedestrian Pathways and I think there's also a significant concern that um would be much more visible in this location um as Mitch mentioned he did go before the historic business district commission which approved it in the proposed location but here this would be very V visible from Main Street um to the extent it could pass the test and get through historic business I think we would anticipate there'd have to be additional structure constructed around it to really screen it which obviously is an a significant additional Financial expense and then finally um the third criteria that desirable relief can be granted without substantial detriment or derogation um as Mitch mentioned hopefully you've seen in your packets uh the most impacted a butter to the uh directly to the east of the site um has issued a letter of no objection uh to this proposal in addition uh it's visually screened with the proposed fencing um as Mitch mentioned this is a much more efficient and quieter unit than what exists now um with respect to the setback uh it maintains the existing setback and actually is slightly further away from the existing setback on the east side than the building is uh right now so there's no increase and actually it's as I said pulled away a little bit further um and the freezer it would comply with the abutter set back to the way to the north um with respect to the platform which does encroach into the uh setback to the way to the north um you know building setbacks are awfully often intended to prevent large massings right up against a property line where there's a street here this is an ETG grade platform it is um like a patio only it's uh wooden um and this is a way that uh dead ends at at this site so um again I think those are mitigating uh factors relative to uh the proposed decking the deck also it's um in the handout that was uh included with the submitt materials but will enhance delivery and loading functions which we think is an enhancement on the site um and intrusion into setbacks along Main Street are are very common if you you know go up and down Main Street um there are many properties that are uh constructed within the setback and as MIT Mitch mentioned we actually think this advances many of the intents and purposes of the bylaw um as we've also outlined in the materials so maybe I'll pause on the variance happy to answer any questions if the board has it and then I can go into the special permit if that's okay with you madam shair I'm not sure that we should go into the special permit um if the variance is allowed then agreed and also I see two issues with the variants and they might may be bipoc because we have the the existing deck and then we have the freezer and people may you know members may have different opinions on each one sure um so when we go through I want to keep that in mind okay um okay so at this point does anybody here or on Microsoft teams wish to speak in favor of the application if so please indicate seeing none um and now I'm going to read the correspondence and there are about so because we have the special permit and the variant um we'll read all of them the planning board only applies to the special permit not the variance because they don't comment on variances okay so first from Judith Georgio on March for 14th 2024 the installation of an exterior walk-in cooler at this property is acceptable however plans and spe specifications for the equipment must be submitted to the health department for a review I have no concerns regarding the fence and then we have um Lewis Amato um about the specs for the freezer on March 27th 2024 um he says thank you for sending that it appears that all we need to be we have all we need to begin the review process I will reach out if there's any questions then we have a letter from the planning board and as Sarah indicated um that is really just for the special permit uh the planning board has not received an application for this property so okay certificate of appropriateness from the historical business district on July 19th 2023 the historic business district Commission met and rendered the following decision with regard to your application the commission voted 5 z um and Zer abstaining to approve with conditions and the condition is the proposed natural cedar fence shall have a flat cap then we have a letter from h ah Chang of um k&p realy trust 4068 Main Street about the outdoor freezer installation at 456 Main Street as a bues uh to Buffy Buffy's ice cream we have no objection to the outdoor placement of a freezer within the property lines Mitch Rogers has met with me and shown me the location of the freezer placement at the rear of his building we are supportive of Mitch pursuing this project and understand how difficult it is to operate in such a compact and seasonal location he has to have product storage to move as I I have uh I have a couple of questions one is um what is the what is the size of the existing freezer that's in the building now um the existing uh so in the interior when I purchased buffies there was a in a walk-in refrigerator walk-in freezer um they were each approximately um 8 by8 and uh is there a reason why you can't uh replace those in kind yes um they were in addition to being um 20 years old uh they were too small to sustain the business the volume of these these units were put in place 20 uh in in 2001 I believe and um the volume of the business has changed significantly since then as of the economics of owning a business um on Main Street in chadam so uh I I could tell you that we could replace them and we would be able to sustain the business you know that had led up to that point but at this point we need um there there's uh we need more space need more storage space to sustain the business uh when I was out at the state site I noticed the uh uh platform it's at the ground level uh there are a number of uh items that are there covered with blue tarps what what is there uh that is the freezer that will be constructed um which will be the 11 foot by 14ot freezer so those are parts of what will become the freezer that's correct I see yep all right and um what can we expect with respect to noise related to the freezer um it's modern equipment uh the equipment that was in place um uh it has been in place um is the new equipment's quieter runs more efficiently um that can be demonstr well we don't have any you know decel readings from um the current equipment but um modern equipment even equipment that is carrying a a larger load by its nature runs more quietly and the the loudest parts of the equipment um the compressors are going to be uh uh placed on the existing where the existing compressors are replaced which are um in between the two buildings okay usually when we're looking at exterior mechanical equipment um air conditioning equipment uh generators and so forth we look at the question of noise that may be generated um and we usually have some figures with respect to those numbers um but you don't have anything like that right now correct okay um I can tell you that the um um we had a failure last summer of the the uh the compress the compressor um for the prior equipment so we we used the existing um space and replaced the compressor with the new equipment it's been running since last summer um I don't have measurements I can't tell you it's significantly quieter and we haven't uh certainly have I've spoke with the director butter who is the tail of the Cod um they've come and looked at it with me um he was um supportive but Bill um you know he wanted to make sure he understood because he has tenants in that building above the tail of the Cod so he we went back there and we looked at it and um um he commented that he didn't have a problem with it he felt like it was quieter okay so you have replaced uh at least one compressor uh and then there's another one that's going to be replaced is that the idea yep okay um there's another building on the site and what's the what what what does that consist of so um there's Buffy's ice cream and then there is struna galleries um both buildings are on the property uh that I own um and they're a tenant so um and that is a historic that building has been there for a long time it's been a barber shop it's been a number of different things but they're they're currently a tenant in the there's a tenant longstanding tenant in that building is it is it possible to put the freezer in that building no I have a I have a a cont a lease with that tenant and that's in place for another um approximately two years all right um the uh chattam ice cream bars uh concept uh I understand is very popular um is that uh part of the reason for the need for the freezer um I would say that's part of the reason for the need for the freezer um and um so just to be speak candidly um and I mentioned this in my in my statement um I bought the I bought the business with the intention to grow the chadam ice cream bars brand um when I moved in and we started operating Buffy um I had gone to Buffy but I had no idea um the attachment uh to the town and the historical significance and um you know generations of customers Etc um I had thought that I was going to go in there and kind of turn that into chadam ice cream bars and you know not keep buffies it didn't it didn't make sense from a business perspective and it certainly doesn't make sense for the town um so the answer is yes it has increased the the the capacity needs um and um and that's how I'm running the business and that's the business that I I need to grow and I'm really hopeful that it doesn't result in uh you know having to kind of pivot on that strategy have you have you considered the option of uh devoting a different space to the chadam ice cream bars and continuing to operate Buffy on the level that it's operating on um that was uh for a long time a consideration um financially it's um not something that I could do at this time um at all uh operating with the you know um fiscal constraints that I have just running this business at this point um it certainly could be an option A number of years down the road if um one business uh grows or if you know if we end up buying other ice cream shops but for right now and plus the um as I as I learned in um you know buying buffies and starting to run an ice cream business lot of equipment there is a lot of overhead and a lot of equipment and infrastructure that needs to be in place um to run a a shop where you make ice cream make um you know baked goods brownies cookies cakes all that stuff um store it sell it um it it's certainly an option in a vacuum um but it's not an option for me right now okay I I don't think I have any other questions Lee questions um just a quick question regarding the old Frid the freezer that's inside that will be removed I'm assuming it will be removed yes and what what will go in its place will you have more workspace um we will have much needed workspace so if if we were to be able to replace the freezer in the refrigerator inside even and and if that were to be able to sustain the capacity the workspace I can't believe we did it for almost a whole summer it's say again oh uh Chris can't believe it either um it is um um yes so what will be what will uh take the place of that is additional workspace um uh which will allow us to be kind of more organized I think we do an incredible job kind of from a sanitation and cleanliness standpoint this will certainly help us you know uh keep more things stored in a way that um helps us keep things orderly neat and efficient and be more efficient probably for for sure more efficient yeah yes okay thank you Dave Nixon questions yeah expand a bit on what you said about uh uh Bakery as as opposed to what Buffy had and also the idea of the coffee in the coffee shop I'd be interested to know uh you know how many employees are involved in that and how that fits into this big picture so when I took over Buffy they had a they have always done um cookies um they had an oven I'm not even sure what the size of it is called but it it took these quarter sheets um and so we replaced it with an oven that t half sheets so not that much bigger um three three levels very small footprint and um everything that we do for the for the ice cream bars we do from that um piece of equipment uh we have an incredible staff of um my second family five four full-time uh four year round folks including me a five four in addition to me um year round folks and then in the summertime we hire between 15 and 18 um uh you know kids college kids high school kids a lot of them it's their first job um they have collectively renewed my fa my faith in young people um we've had two incredible Summers and two incredible groups of people but five five including me full-time uh year on staff and percentage wise uh how do you envision the coffee shop and bakery as a percentage of the whole exist we talk in 10% 5% oh boy not yet nope um so we're there we have yearr round wholesale customers for the ice cream bars and um and we want to grow the business I've been able to hire the the four other folks um we have I haven't been able to fully use those folks because I was I was planning on having the additional Refrigeration last year and so the financial uh component of hiring the the team included growing the business which I wasn't able to do over the winter but since there year round um we were able to add we bought an espresso machine um in November of 22 and in the 2023 we sold you know 5,000 coffees um still that was probably making me do some quick math in my head um maybe 4% of the business um we open at 9:00 a.m. uh now Thursday through Sunday and um and we get people that are trickling in people are still starting to figure out that we're open and selling coffee um doing some advertising and just trying to do a great job with the business that we have and so it's a small it's a small portion of it it doesn't drive anything in this project whatsoever it's more um you know keeping us busy providing a service that if you're again if you're I'm a coffee drinker chadam uh the term that was was uh mentioned to me at one point is coffee desert chadam is a coffee desert um it's a coffee desert all winter and it's a coffee desert after 2 o'clock in the summer so that's what that part of the business was for just to kind of fill a hole while there while we're there making the bars so I I think of what when you answered Paul and his questions I got the impression there is no other site where you do any of your making your whatever it might be and so I noticed out back there's sort of a delivery truck is that yours yes and so that's how you deliver the wholesale product um yes so that space I in the back um where that truck is parked is both where we deliver from and receive from okay um there are instances where we have to receive from Main Street um so when we get deliveries and there's double parking on Main Street um being able to finish this project have that platform in place have lighting out back um will improve that and should um either greatly reduce or completely eliminate any deliveries that we have to take from Main Street did you have any conversations with CBI as far as how they're building which houses as you perhaps know managers and that sort of thing um I reviewed some of the videos of the of the meetings here because I was trying to get some examples of variances and um special circumstances and things like that I haven't spoken with them um I I we have a friendly relationship with some of the tenants uh that're there um but I haven't spoken with the owners or any of the management as I was uh wondering how that would impact the you know whether it be the quiet freezer or the trucks coming and going or whatever it might be how that impacts the managers that they put up in that structure um um and I'm assuming you visited the site um I it's it wouldn't impact them any more than if I put it smack Deb in the middle of the lot within the setback okay um so in and again um I I say it that way because right now you'd have to take my word for it that the new equipment's quieter than the old equipment um but again um assuming the hbdc would approve it and we would put it in the middle of the lot where would impact the summer the summer seating it would be the same equipment making the same noise that would be closer to the to the what's the lighting going to be like from U dusk on the lighting from dusk on you mean the lighting that I'm going to install as a part of the project yeah it's just going to be and we went I went over this a little bit with the hbdc they had some suggestions which uh will take but it's just going to be um an improvement over the current lighting there's not great current lighting back there but it will just be gentle um spotlights on the customer area it'll be gentle spotlights on um this will be a huge Improvement for the staff who haul trash um back to the dumpster in the back there in the almost in the complete dark especially late at night after we're closed um we have a friend that uh we see back there all the time his name is Jerry and uh that's a a raccoon that sometimes jumps out of the dumpster at us um so it will improve the safety for the staff it will improve the um you know the visual it's a really nice um throughway to get from Main Street um to the park um a lot of people use that uh and there's a there's a the only public restroom um until the you know new parking lot is built is back in the in the Gould Park so um a lot of people use that and if you're familiar with the archway beautiful privets that flower in the spring we have people back there day and night taking pictures um selfies I'm sure posting on Instagram or whatever is they do um and and being able to preserve that sight line is really critical I answered I'm answering more than the question you that's okay uh how many tenants uh does tail that C it have upstairs and here I presume they're all in the second floor all apartments um I believe so I'm going to guess uh I think it's four to five apartments up there okay and how about the brick building um I'm not sure I don't know how many people live up there yeah it's it's uh that's that's a building that there's a lot of people that we don't know about what's going on there um and Al is a uh delightful um um neighbor who has been a great neighbor but yes the I I don't I'm not sure how many apartments are up there yeah okay all right thank you thank you Ed questions no questions no questions Jenny questions a couple um so I think you mentioned the gentleman's name was Bill who is the owner of tale of the card and he was the one that wrote in was that correct okay and uh and then you answer the question about how many units um without going into a lot a whole lot of legal detail um can you just explain the topography uh reason I mean other than that you don't have it that's sort of see right you don't have the space for this that's sort of the gist of the topography but that's not what you we well I think the unique circumstances here are the the shape of the lot um the topography as far as I know it's a pretty flat lot so I don't think it's a topographic unique circumstance but the lot is I think irregularly shaped and then the building so the variance criteria the first prong talks about shape of the land or the structures and I think both of them exist here you heard Mitch talk about sort of the interior of this long narrow building which is Buffy and how that really impinges on his ability to conduct his operations efficiently but then the lot itself I mean if again I don't know Sarah if you can pull that graphic up but once you factor in sort of the unique shape of the lot with the setbacks it leaves a very irregular uh place where um you would be outside of the setbacks okay so what I think I heard you say was it's it's not just about maintaining the business it's about growing the business to grow the business which I appreciate you being frank about that um is uh hey not an easy thing to do and but that's really what's contributing to this topography issue that's the correlation I'm making I mean in that you need to expand and you don't have the space to expand uh given the Topography of that of the existing layout of everything I I think the the point we're making is that um it would be a significant hardship to have to site this within the setbacks given the shape of the lot the buildings on the lot and how the area that um is outside of setback is used significantly and if you look at the cases on you know hardship um I heard a prior Council talk about when there's dimensional relief being requested the cases have suggested a lesser showing is required of hardship but when you look at like the Joseph's case which is an appeals court case um involving a loading ramp one of the fact factors that the court upheld in terms of finding that there was hardship is loss of usable space and again I I think that's very prevalent here um you know if if um if the freezer had to be inside the building would lose significant space that's really critical towards the preparation of of the ice cream operations so I think this is one of those unique situations where you have you know a unique shape um both as to the buildings themselves but also as to the lot which caused the significant hardship if if I could also add with regards to the the the the topic of the the business and the growth um I was a bit unique um in the when the when the proper was being sold by the by the prior owner in that I had a business um plan and model that could move into the space and improve uh the the the um revenues um which made me at the end um unique in being able to make that transaction work financially so it's not about um being positioned to grow three-fold it's about this is about being positioned to be able to sustain the business at a level um that takes into account mortgage and real estate costs commodity costs um human you know people costs um it's it's it's easier to do that when you own the building and don't have a mortgage um which the prior owner had owned for you know for many years and did an amazing job as a Steward of the business but um for anyone that were to own that business and continue it as Buffy it requires a level of revenues above where the prior business had left it despite it being run very well for a long time sorry one more question um so as you know the variance is very hard to get and the the criteria is and one of the reasons is because the approval of that variance will then carry on it goes with the land so question I have and maybe this is for our Board of attorneys um with if those if the freezers are allowed and the and the platform is allowed to stay what is being requested and future you know in the future does what happens there is it only they're only allowed to keep those Mechanicals or would they then be able to expand the building if this is allowed like any idea about what this would do to the Future any limitations to only Mechanicals would be allowed to be back there of that same size or would it expand the uh the I'm looking at Sarah like she because she usually knows everything so in it would be limited to the mechanical equipment and the ground level deck our bylaw also has another provision in it in the non-conforming section that any increase in height within the setback back requires them coming back to you guys so if there was to be an addition in that location that you've allowed them to be varied it would it would be your variances for the mechanical equipment and the deck yeah okay at the existing height of those Mechanicals and the existing width and all of that solely for those yes yeah for you madam chair I think you could condition that as an explicit condition of any decision should you go there thank you that's all I have and Steve what questions um a comment and a couple of questions I'm glad you cleared up the thing about the the height of the fence um because I was part of that original decision and I was going to challenge you on that so I'm glad that's we didn't have to do that that was a typo yeah apologies um the deck apparently is existing do you know when when it was built and what it was you what it was intended to be used for or was it for this equipment so the deck was built last um spring sir June we have rules about talking out um it was built last uh spring and um I was um provided Council that wasn't that ended up not being um accurate in that how I could go about and do that um and just to be again to be uh candid um the council was if you you build it at ground level if it's not attached to the building and if it's sitting on the um if it's not attached to the ground buried in the ground um which and this is sitting on bricks um then it could be considered a patio we I don't want we I'm not challenging that I'm I'm explaining that that was the advice that I was given so it was built last spring for this purpose um we were always going to have to come and get um the exterior mechanical Appliance um you know uh permit and um go through that process but that's that's the story behind the deck is there anything between I guess it would be the east side of this equipment or where the freezer is going to be and the tail of the cot is there any kind of fence there now it's just open um there's not and there there's no plan to have it there so there's just basically an Alleyway between the your building and there's a there's a small um area between the two buildings uh where there's a a fence and a door that leads to it and um that's where the existing Mecha um Mechanicals are okay the compressors are um and there's also some light storage of rakes and things like that back there okay the the the concern seems to be mostly um centered around the possible noise of this equipment is there any way of you installing it sort of remotely to the freezer maybe in the building um so that there's nothing outside that's making any kind of noise I don't know the answer to that question I would have to ask an electrician um we don't have a lot we don't have any space upstairs in in our attic where that could be done um there's a whole lot of uh you know duct work and we store um all of our you know supplies there that places and how about some sort of like a insulated enclosure um again that's a question that I could ask an electrician okay I'm not aware I I guess I would ask if there's anything in the bylaws that would require that um when you're installing an exterior mechanical Appliance if it were installed within setbacks um but that's I could get an answer that I don't have it for you right now okay it might be something you might want to investig yeah yeah thank you that's it so um I have a couple of uh questions really probably more for the Building Commissioner um I'm I'm uh happy about the I'll just go to the the freezer first I like the fact that um you're going to have more room for your employees inside that whole I'm trying to remember the there's a formal name for that um issue of just people having proper workspace yeah the ergonomics of the workpace will be will be improved for sure well and um I think that you're probably going to meet in my view the um variance on the freezer but not so fast on that deck that you built without a permit um and uh I wanted to ask the Building Commissioner a little bit about that deck and whether or not he thinks it can even stand the weight of a freezer if he knows about that um and also if we don't um Grant a variance on that deck and you have to pull it out what would be his uh alternative without uh a variance so Mitch did apply for a building permit for the deck after the fact but it's still in it's still in Q right now he granted us extension of the 30 days he doesn't have all the necessary documents for me to issue that permit because he needs your approval first so as far as he needs a variance he needs the variance yeah right so as far as can the deck support the freezer that's going there I don't have the information it may be uploaded to the file I haven't looked at it in a while to know what that freezer would require for support to know that the deck was built properly because we not only did we not permit the deck we did not do any inspections on the deck so um the deck's a problem so there that's one and also if he if we don't Grant a variance on that deck um what what could he do to still have the freezer if we granted the variance on the freezer I'm sure the manufacturer has specifications for what is required to support that freezer it's probably commonly used in an outdoor scenario so um I don't think the information will be difficult to discern or identify maybe a patio maybe potentially Madam chair I think actually my client has some um information on that if you're interested um so um the the the platform that was built um will support the uh the freezer that would come you know obviously it would have to go through the um the building the the inspection process um but it was built for that purpose um if we take out the the platform um the unit cannot be placed on uh compacted Stone um that would that would avoid the warranty um we could pour concrete um which would um you know possibly uh you know meet the the criteria of it being a patio in the eyes of some better than the decking the platform does um I don't see how that would be an imp I see that as being something that is more of a a detriment to the neighborhood um in that it is it would be harder to move remove um I don't think aesthetically poort concrete um comes close to the the beautiful platform that's been built to support this deck um I understand where you're coming from I'm just speaking you know I'm just sharing my thought behind building you think people are going to see the that that beautiful deck that you built uh when you stick up you know a big freezer on it I mean well there's deck has functioned so it's a functioning deck uh there are Pathways around the freezer and the refrigerator that will be used by staff um the deck has a better drainage than a um poured concrete wood in the winter time we're open year round um the poured concrete would there would be freezing and it would be a much uh slipperier um scenario less functional than the um than the decking is and that's just stated as a as a fact and that's again that's one of the reasons that I chose the decking over a over Port concrete well I I could see maybe the argument that it's quieter on a on a deck perhaps um but not about the slipperiness because um you know Dex is slippery so um fair enough yeah so all right so um I think when we deliberate we should deliberate on our opinions on the deck and our opinions on the on the freezer separately I mean just say what you what you'd vote perhaps U members separately and uh that might be a good idea to uh to do that so you'll know where we're at can I ask just one question uh Sarah do we have a picture of this freezer when it's completed you know because you see I saw the three piles but it it doesn't tell me a thing about what it's going to look like you know there are pictures in the materials I also have a a 3D rendering of it as well so this is the rendering um showing the two buildings and the freezer unit on top of the deck with the fence and there there are additional views um Sarah in that if you wanted to scroll through that would provide um different perspectives of it so it looks like a big box is that right um yes it's 11 by4 okay 11 by4 yep and half refrigerator half freezer approximately is it white or um I got some guidance from the hbdc on how we're going to finish it um I think they asked for gray gray um you know and again we'll have the the six foot fence that will be there with a cap um so that's what we that's what we have so it's a walk-in freezer yeah correct it's a walk-in freezer and refrigerat yes yeah okay so if no one else has any other questions that will help them with deliberations I'll ask Paul for a motion all right I'll uh I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations uh Jenny can you second that uh Jenny seconds that and how do you vote J oh yeah I vote Yes and Paul I'll vote Yes I vote Yes we vote Yes yes and I vote Yes as well all right we're going to deliberate now um we're going to talk about how we vote on the frezer and how we vote on the deck because they are separate Ed what do you think I guess for fortunately I'm not voting today for the applicant um certainly the deck um is a uh something that was you know built without a permit although I recognized that there was some just you know back and forth or perhaps somebody gave you some bad information um there seems to be a solution for all of this is to uh the rendering that shows where you could meet all the setbacks um so I know it's not a preferred location necessarily but it seems like that works and um therefore it's you know it's hard for me to see the hardship um so I'll leave it at that okay uh Jenny deliberations [Music] um I uh agree with comments that Ed made I I do think though that that moving it over there you you could put it there but there is a hardship in the sense that it's aesthetic it's Main Street you've got that band of grass and picnic tables and then there's of course the patrons I I I could see that being part of the hardship for moving it to the different location um um I do think it's very difficult to operate any business um I think downtown Main Street chadam I can just imagine that challenging the business side of it the financials um and you know Buffy is the ice cream you know it's just like kind of iconic to chadam so I I I like I support that that that business aspect I think that I believe there's de they've demonstrated um the hardship piece of it um I think that the um the topography I wasn't sure and I I I thought you did help explain that and I I think those are the two harder ones so I I I am um I guess I'm leaning in favor on both of oh both yes you know I I think that the concrete is let's just say they were six of one half doz of another which I don't think it is I think the deck is better especially if it's been calibrated I think that was a great question for the weight and the size of this and it's there um and I I do believe that there was no Mal inent in building it and trying to conceal that um and I think the concrete would be I don't know that it's any any any better it's still going to be there as a structure covering an area that it's not supposed to so I think that um I'm okay with with the deck yeah okay Paul what do you think deliberations well this is uh this has been a difficult one I've been looking at it and uh thinking about it a fair amount um it it really seems to me what's driving the uh the request is the uh success of the business um and the the uh uh expansion using the uh ice cream bars um as part of the business model um it's I know there's case law that would say um that maximizing your profit your inability to maximize profit um is not a justification for a variance um so that that presents some problem for me me at the same time um obviously U this is an owner who is dedicated to the town and is uh support for the town as an important uh contributor to the downtown area the uh the lot has some properties to it that are unique and some that aren't U uh the uniqueness may be the jog um and it may be that you could look at the buildings as being being U unique because they're uh uh narrow and adjacent to each other uh but uh the ice cream place operated for 28 years and um successfully operated uh for that time frame I guess the uh the issue right now is that perhaps the economics no longer justify it um so do we Bend U the zoning laws in order to deal with the economics of the ice cream business i' I'd like to hear what everybody else has to say and their thoughts on it and then uh form an opinion okay wee um well I once again like to support businesses in chadam um especially those that have been around for a while and those that you know are generous enough to give to nonprofits um Etc and employ year round people and try to make a work year round um in terms of the the deck I like the deck as opposed to a concrete structure I think it's cleaner it's better looking from a visual perspective um I understand that it was built you know without a permit um but and in terms of the freezer I like the location of it as well well I think to move it within or over I just think visually it would look horrible um so from a visual perspective um I I like the freezer and I like the deck [Music] um from the criteria in the in the um for the variances I I agree with the the lot the building long and narrow um the hardship you know to keep the business going I think that's a factor too so um I I will vote in favor of this okayy Steve what are your thoughts um well I'm a little disappointed that the deck got built without any kind of a permit because that kind of puts us now between a rock and a hard place and having to try to decide what to do about it um I I think I would prefer a deck but I think it is also going to be um behind the fence so you're probably not going to see most of it anyway and if you were to move it so that it were uh outside of the setbacks would probably uh require you to to provide more screening so you couldn't see from Main Street it's going to be pretty prominent looking down between these two buildings um and I don't think anybody wants to see that um it's also going to sort of impede you mentioned that people use this for pedestrian traffic um that's going to be gone um or else they're going to have to walk around it or you're going to have to make some other Pathways to get around it um so I don't think that's a great idea because it I think it would detract from that from that view that you have between the two buildings um so I think that if I were to vote um it is kind of an odd you don't have very many other places to put something the size of this thing um and and to try to hide it and make it invisible so I I think that if I were voting I would probably support this Dave Nixon well number one I'm not in favor of the Dex thing you know constructionwise anything of any weight or what not is put on a footing a concrete footing I'm not talking about concreting the whole thing just a footing the size of that that to me would be acceptable as far as far as the freezer goes if you heard what I said about the first variance request there are wants and needs and I'm convinced this is a need and as such I would be in favor of it so Dave are you in favor of just the freezer Andre not so you want pull out the deck I I would yeah yeah I would did did anybody else that said they would vote in favor want them to pull out the deck Jin you didn't lead in Paul uh want want to hear what I have to say first and then I guess I guess what I would say is that uh if we're going to have the freezer there um I do see some advantage to the drainage going on underneath the deck assuming that the deck would be satisfyed would satisfy the Building Commissioner for uh support and uh uh its construction um I would prefer the deck um so that would be my my view on the deck and I don't like the fact that you put that deck in without asking at all um I almost want you to pull it out but the way I look at it and I had asked staff if we could look at it like this and we can't but it's still the way I look at it is I I see it as one thing one unit and I think they belong together and I I feel that you know we I would vote in favor I think you've met the criteria um and and I also would point out that the purpose and intent of the bylaw um definitely um includes the preservation for Citizens their right to their customary means of earning a living and that's very important and I may or may not go there quite a bit with my two-year-old uh granddaughter and all my nieces and uh I don't eat the ice cream for various reasons but um I can't even imagine you putting that freezer over where we sit and really enjoy those benches so that to me I was offended by the thought of that um I don't want you to do that so um anyway I think uh we can take a vote any conditions and the vote is okay so first we're going to vote on the freezer and then we're going to vote on the deck okay so everybody can express themselves all right so Paul so why don't we take our vote first on the freezer yes all right I'll vote Yes Jenny oh wait a minute so you move we will need a motion all right I'll move to approve the application for the freezer as submitted we can talk about conditions I guess after we take the two votes okay Jen you want to second that I second that and how do you vote I vote Yes well I'll vote Yes uh lee I vote Yes Yes Dave yes and I vote Yes as well okay so that's unanimous on the freezer you got that now we're going to vote on the deck all right um I'll move to approve the deck as constructed provided it satisfies the requirements of the Building Commissioner okay J second that I I do and I I'm sure Jay that the condition of um of you approving it is that the weight like what Dave brought up right now it's on it's on bricks or blocks as long as it doesn't need to be on concrete pilings well it would have to be approved by me because they need a building permit for it so the building permit is still in Q pending the outcome of and that but that's part of what the building permit would look at would be that substructure absolutely okay yes and okay so you second it and you vote Yes yes and Le I vote Yes well all votes yes Dave no and I vote Yes so you have received what you've asked for and uh so I just encourage you to be um use your attorney that you have now when you deal with the Building Commissioner and make sure absolutely yeah we look forward to seeing you this summer let's consider the question of conditions yes because uh when are you planning to do this um so we have to um I believe we do we still have to go before the planning board at this point yes um currently with the planning board we're scheduling for May 20th correct so we'll get that application in ASAP um uh I'll work with Jay on making sure that the proper steps are followed with regards to inspections and building permits um and then it would be the the next day honestly because we're going to be getting ready for summer at that point but it uh it that is to say as quickly as we can do it and while following all the proper procedures so uh I did you mean when you have all the pieces there under the tarp that they're ready to be put together yeah I have to schedule the you know the the um vendor to come in and do that um the electrical work is roughed out and there's a number of things that have to happen projectwise but um the components are all there and and ready to go as soon as the appropriate approvals are in place so how long does it take to put this together and have it done two days two days about two days all right well in that situation I'm not sure I see any need for conditions right does anybody else have a different opinion I'm seeing none all right I'll move to we we've moved and approved as it stands now so we can leave it as it is we can um so now we have to deal with the special permit so Council I would just ask you to request the special special permit and then we'll just go through quickly and that's fine yeah we've outlined um all of the criteria and why we believe this complies and our submitt I can certainly highlight any of it if the board asks um but we are asking because this is a pre-existing non-conforming structure that is being altered in order to allow this work to occur for a special permit uh pursuant to 40a and your bylaw well said so does anybody have any questions I'm just going to look around seeing none uh Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations Jenny Jenny seconds that and you approve I approve yes I vote Yes all vote Yes yes and I vote Yes as well that's unanimous so deliberations does anybody have any deliberating to do I do not see this as substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and it meets all the criteria so um let's have a vote I'll move to approve the application as submitted I second that and you vote I vote Yes I vote Yes all vote Yes yes and I vote Yes as well that's unanimous congratulations you thank you very much all right so if I could just thank um Jay and Sarah they've been terrific throughout this process and we just wanted to acknowledge them and thank them for their help yes very much so thank you could you name an ice cream bar after the zbaa please don't don't uh don't don't test me on that one I might just do that it would taste like cast or oil so uh so motion to um I'll move I'll move to ajour jny Jenny uh second side and you vote and I vote Yes and Lee I vote Yes all votes yes yes and I vote Yes as well what time is it Sarah 5:54 p.m. 554 good night Chad e e e