##VIDEO ID:bwCanlPglBE## e e e [Music] [Music] y [Music] good afternoon everyone this is the November 7th 2024 meeting of the chadam zoning board of appeals pursuant to Governor Healey's March 29th 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 being conducted in person and via remote participation every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings provided for in the order and reminder persons who'd like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling 1508 945 4410 conference ID 187 767 579 pound or join the meeting via the link on the posted agenda while this is a live broadcast and simoc cast on chadam TV despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide for realtime access we will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible in accordance with Town policy the public may speak to any issue hearing our business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair the meetings are conducted as follows first we'll start with a roll call of all board members um saying that they approve of this method of meetings starting on that end and we'll just go around yeah uh David H vich and I approve Ed Acton I approve David S Nixon I approve PA C SLE I approve Steven D deor I approve Virginia Fenwick I approve and Randy podes I approve as well um if anybody is participating via the call um please state your name and your last four digits of the phone number for identification purpos purposes when and if recognized um first next the hearing notice will be read by staff Sarah clock on my right and then you will present or your representative will PR present the appeal or application anyone in favor will have an opportunity to respond for up to five minutes and then I will read any and all correspondences then anybody that has a question or would like to speak against the appeal or application we'll have an opportunity to do do that and those are limited to 5 minutes for people in favor or people against and there'll be a clock um up there fair for everybody um let's see then the applicant will have a chance to rebut anything that they've heard that they disagree with board members will ask questions um we'll also then close the public hearing and move into deliberations at the end of the deliberations we will will usually vote on the application and then um all votes will be taken by roll call and at the end of the meeting we'll close via verbal confirmation and note the time of adjournment with that we have one set of minutes uh Paul yes I'll move to approve the uh minutes of October 10 2024 for as uh published uh dve seconds in votes yes I vote Yes Paul votes yes Jenny votes yes and I vote Yes as well um for our first application um one of our associate members um will be recusing himself Steve dor because it is his property and he will be leaving the room uh ask that I be uh recused from the 24-14 here you're recused and excused see you on the other side whenever Sarah is ready she will read the posted um application application number 24114 Steven and Donna dor care of Theodore striber 15 Linden Tree Lane chatam Mass 02633 owners of property located at 178 George Ryder Road South also shown on the town of chadam assessors map 7D block 42 lot M11 the applicant seeks to extend enlarge extend or change conforming dwelling on a non-conform ing lot via the construction of an addition the existing dwelling and proposed addition will comply with all bulk and dimensional 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 1,449 ft 10.8% and the proposed building coverage is 1,665 Ft 12.4% where 15% is the maximum allowed the LW is non-conforming and that it contains 13,44 ft where 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw okay so um before we get to you Mr shriber I'm going to um make an announcement and that announcement includes a letter from our building um commissioner and he reviewed he's sitting actually right here Jay Briggs he reviewed this applic and under the circumstances as it turns out it doesn't actually need a special permit because it's a very small one car garage and that is accepted from the law and now I'm going to read this um letter and it says Dear zba members um on November 6 2024 I have reviewed the zba application for the above referenced address including all submitted documents the application was filed under Section V B of the protective bylaw I believe the applicant filed his application out of an abundance of caution and so there was complete transparency case law specifically J bjorland versus zoning board of appeals of Norwell determined that certain small scale alterations on non-conforming Lots would not constitute an intensification thus not requiring a special permit one of the listed small scale scale alterations includes the addition of a one-story garage for no more than two vehicles the applicant is proposing to add a one-story garage to his existing garage to make it a two-car garage whereas the work proposed does not require a special permit under Borland and can be done by right with a building permit I believe it would be prudent to suggest that the applicant withdraw the application without prejudice would is it okay if we do that for you sir um when we uh turn the the documents into the uh the permanent coordinator Sarah Clark she advised us that uh that one-story garage for one car uh were were accepted from the legislation I conferred with my client and he he pref preferred to have from a um transparency have have it open yes he he did he he knows about this though and he he would like to withdraw it so I went back and I uh uh handed the application in and since then haven't had much conversation about what what would happen but I knew that it would either be there was be some technicality about it and so I just wanted to make sure that in the interest of transparency you know it it came before you yes and U so we're perfectly happy to withdraw without prejudice thank you and we'll have Paul make that motion I will uh accept a motion to withdraw without prejudice and uh move that uh for the consideration of the board uh Dave seconds and votes yes I vote Yes Paul votes yes Jenny votes yes as do I thank you very much thank you see you next time all right right we're going to wait till Steve sits down he is going to rejoin the meeting St five against okay we're going to go to 322 Pleasant Street application number 24111 Raul and apara Kahana care of William F Riley Esquire PO Box 707 chattam Mass 02633 owners of property located at 322 Pleasant Street also shown in the town of chadam assessors map 2A block 76 lot b45 the applicant proposes to change alter expand a non-conforming dwelling and a non-conforming lot via the construction of an addition of additions in decks the existing dwelling is non-conforming and then is located 14 .4 ft from the southern leab butter where a 15t setback is required the proposed additions and decks will comply with all bulk and dimensional requirements of the bylaw but is considered a substantial alteration and under the second accept Clause of section six of Master General Law chapter 40a such substantial alteration requires the grant of special permit the existing building coverage is 1,317 s ft 9.1% and the proposed building coverage is 2,176 ft 15% where 15% is the maximum allowed the lot is non-conforming and then it contains 14,505 squ feet of buildable Upland where 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protected bylaw attorney Riley uh good afternoon Bill Riley on behalf of R Conor who was uh here online uh and as is Karen Kempton our architect and this is a project where do you have one yeah uh the Conor family purchased the property uh this year and wanted to add excuse me a garage they retain the services of Karen Kempton to do that design the uh uh and so Caren will do that presentation I do want to mention at the outset that apparently there was some confusion between the contractor and the U building code they didn't realize he needed a building permit for a lot of work uh that's all been squared away I'm told with uh the building department finally but I did want to acknowledge that at the outset but none of the work involved in this application uh was started without a building permit in fact none's been started because we don't have the permit but I just wanted to let you know that so what i' ask first is for Karen to go through the design uh and then we'll talk about the circumstances sure welcome Karen you're muted can you hear me now no now we can yeah okay uh Sarah if you could bring up the site plan um I'm Karen Kempton architect for uh the conas who I met this summer to discuss plans for their new addition um the three main goals of the addition uh were number one to create a two-car garage where none existed uh to the existing house and number two create a primary Suite on the main floor level um and number three to improve the entry and look of the front elevation uh so as you can see on the site plan it made sense to add the garage on the west side of the existing house the addition is not visible from Pleasant Street uh and even the house is not visible from Pleasant Street if you've been out there uh it's down a long driveway the addition is 47 feet away from salt spray Lane um which is a private way and is heavily treed in that area the main increase in coverage is due to the garage and the St access up to the main level and this is 695 Square ft so if we can go to the existing plans um so as you can see if uh you went out there uh the main entrance Door um is actually to the lower level and enters through a family room um so you can see in the elevation right there where the door is and there's a small Portico and then that side door goes into um a bedroom area um and if we go to the existing floor plan you see when you come in through the front door you sort of walk through um a family room to get to the staircase which is in the upper leftand corner um so the um on the existing plans you enter into this lower level and the main living area of the house is on actually a second floor and I I'll call that the main level at this point um that's where the existing kitchen and living room is and there are two bedrooms which we are combining into one bedroom uh the pro proposed plan if we can go to that now um creates a separate foyer area with the adjacent stairs going up to the main level so uh We've removed the um existing entrance door and put it in the center of the house now um so that you enter in a into a foyer uh with the stairs going up on the right hand side closer to the foyer without having to walk through that family room uh it also helps us connect to the new garage uh so that uh we don't have to access the garage through a bedroom which would be a code violation anyway um the primary Suite is located over the garage if you go to the main floor plan which is the second floor plan um it is a one and a half story Edition and we have combined the two small front bedrooms into a one on sweet bedroom to get get the bedroom count to remain at four uh it was important to the conest to have their bedroom on this level rather than climbing up another set of stairs to the existing primary Suite on basically the attic level um as the garage Edition is only one and a half stories if we go to the front elevation uh the the height of the addition is only 24t from the top of foundation and is actually 6 feet lower than the existing Main Ridge because the garage is uh slab on grade there is no increase in basement area uh so that doesn't affect or increase the gross floor area calculations uh by adding a basement so the existing gross floor area uh is uh 30 850 Square ft and the proposed buros floor area is 5415 Square ft as you know the garage and the new foyer add about 800 square feet uh to this number even though there is only 220 Square F feet of actual living space that's added to that lower level uh the addition of the new bedroom above the garage adds 665 Square ft of finished living space which again is is minimal and 700 ft of gross floor area so if we go uh to the second floor and then go to um the attic area you can see that on the attic yeah there you go on the attic area there's the existing bedroom that's there we're not doing any work there nor are we having any additional finished space above our addition um the um so we have worked hard to keep the uh building coverage below 15% um it is actually at 14.8% um even though I believe it was advertised at 15% and that 14.8% includes the corner boards uh so if we go back to the front elevation um we hope that you agree that this is an attractive uh addition to the house that answers uh the owner's needs uh while improving the look of the house and be by creating a more welcoming entry here for questions when you have them thank you Karen the um just run through the criteria adequacy of the size of the site in terms of the size of the proposed use uh we believe that the site is adequate the the uh with the proposed addition we are increasing our coverage uh as Karen said to 14.8% uh where 15% is allowed the compatibility the size of the proposed structure I have a third page that compares and and our building as proposed is uh one of the larger there's one at 335 is is a little bit bigger in terms of gross floor area but the uh when looking at the comparison numbers I'd ask you to keep in mind that a lot of the buildings that we're comparing ourselves to have no garage and so the the uh a lot of them were built back in the 50s when of course they only came down in the summertime and why would you need a garage in the summertime so uh that's why many of the buildings are are somewhat smaller the um almost all the buildings in the neighborhood are story and a half or two stories so in that respect um our building is is compatible uh with the neighboring properties so the increase in nonconforming nature here is the uh increase in the living area uh not only you know not only we adding a two-car garage but we're putting living space above it and so that requires so outside the Safe Harbor in the buin case the uh suitability of the site including but not limited to impact on neighboring properties on the natural environment including slopes vegetation Wetlands groundwater water bodies and storm water runoff the site is suitable for the proposed construction uh as you bend there you you know is a very level site uh there no Wetlands or water bodies close by um storm water runoff is not going to be an issue uh because not only is it level it's also very Sandy if you if you've been there so we don't think that we think the site is suitable for the proposed construction impact of scale sighting a mass on neighborhood visual character including views Vistas and Street scapes um Although our building is taller than most of the buildings around it since the original building is 29.8 feet tall or something like that according to Tom Stell site plan uh the fact is as Karen mentioned you can't see it from Pleasant Street now if you drive around on the long road you can kind of see it through the trees the homes on salt spray Lane uh are also kind of looking at it through the trees but the you know I I don't think that from their point of view uh because of the distance the house is from from their properties in terms of scale and sighting we don't think this property uh is a detriment to the neighborhood uh certainly not a substantial detriment into the neighborhood because of its location the U and also point out if you're driven around the neighborhood as Paul probably has done many times the uh a lot of the homes there uh are taller because they want to get a view of the water so they put uh decks up on the roofs and uh so although we're close to the maximum height on on the main building you know the the proposed addition which is what you're considering is as Karen said significantly below uh that's that Ridge and is only 25 fet in height so I think that um in terms of scale sighting and Mass on a neighborhood visual character because of it's location away from the street uh by a significant distance and the fact that the property surrounded by treed Lots uh and is a a 6 foot solid fence between the property and Long Road uh we think that uh the visual impact of the property um is not substantially more detrimental uh than the existing structure when you start with the existing structure at 29 ft you know our addition is small uh in comparison and I think Karen's design uh is attractive comparability of the proposed use with neighboring uses it's against a single family residence in a single family neighborhood so it is compatible method of sewage disposal source of water and drainage uh the septic system does have to be uh shifted over uh so We Believe there'll be an improvement in that respect uh we think there'll be no negative impact on traffic flow and safety our only access is the you know the small driveway out on on Pleasant Street uh again because of the location of the property we don't think there's a an issue regarding noise and litter uh and the adequate the utilities and other public services are adequate that'll be our presentation Madam chair oh thank you is there anybody here or Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application if so please indicate is there anybody that likes to speak in favor no okay um I will read the correspondence then I thought there was somebody that's why I was curious I thought your client wanted to speak in favor am I wrong uh because now is the time yeah R if you want to speak in favor uh please indicate yes absolutely okay thank you ton Riley this is this is Rahul Kaa um I think uh Karen and attorney R did a tremendous job in summarizing our objectives um we purchased this property um in early earlier this year in April time frame um and given the young family we have um I think one of the main constraint was um there kind of wasn't one floor that would give us all um two bedroom plus a living space where we can all uh come and and live we our primary residence is in Western uh Western not as western w um and we will be visiting here primarily during weekends and and and Holiday days so we were looking for one floor uh that will give us enough space with enough bedrooms um and um lack of garage was a shortfall um so I think this uh definitely uh accomplishes what we were looking for uh we went through the diligence of making sure it meets all the zoning requirements all the bylaws um and uh I thank atony Riley as well as Karen for a tremendous job um in in the plan thank you thank you okay so now I will read the correspondences there are three first one is from what is that noise if you please yeah do I have to say anymore shut it off um on 115 2024 we have a letter from Judith Georgio saying I have reviewed the plan to renovate and add an addition to this property the property is approved for four bedrooms the proposed layout maintains for four bedrooms the new addition will not encroach on the existing septic system modifications to the septic system uh proposed though um plans and permit application to modify the system must be submitted to the health department for our approval next we have a note from Christine McCarthy um from November 5th 2024 good afternoon you will find that there is a parcel balance for application 24-11 322 Pleasant Street rul and Arana kaana the first half real estate and personal property taxes are outstanding due 111 2024 and they also have a pass due water bill I would like to thank you in advance for your assistance on this matter and then I do have the balances for that but I don't really feel the need to read it and we'll let you talk about that on rebuttal time if you could okay um next we have a note from Cindy and Steve C Cher 14 no 14 salt spray Lane property abing 322 that was received on November let's see November 4th 2024 we have reviewed the plans proposed by the Conor application we have the following concerns if this project is approved one work has already begun on this house prior to any approval a large purple dumpster arrived shortly after the house was purchased a building crew showed up and started to work on the deck and inside the house that was followed by a request to put the new driveway entrance to their home off Sal salt spray Lane salt spray Lane is a private road and the homeowners agreed that we do not want the new driveway off of our private Street two shortly after the dumpster arrived the crew began piling up debris from the existing existing decks outside and inside the home each day they set this debris on fire I reached out to Raul to tell him he needed a permit and no burning was allowed he did not respond to the email which is located below right on this correspondence um to tell him he needed a permit no burning was allowed he did not respond but the fire seemed to get smaller for a few weeks then they started a huge fire on August 22 and we cont acted the fire department the fire department was at the house for a long time and all the fires and building outside the house ended but the debris and dumpster remain a neighbor sent an email to Raul about the mess in the Yad this week November 2 he has the crew here cleaning up removing staircase and maybe he will empty the dumpster now that it's full three since our concerns are cented on this homeowner process of starting things without approvals our ask would be that the inspectors take a look at what has already been done that may not be on the plans and check out the property on a regular basis to make sure whatever is approved is actually what is being built four Landscaping does not come into play on this property since it's not in a conservation land but we would like to go on the record stating if that if the trees on salt spray Lane that they should not be trimmed or taken down the surveyor has done a nice job making out property lines marking out property lines five in conclusion we are fine with the house plans as long it is built to spec provided the the specs that is provided in the application and then he also provides email August 8th to homeowner hi Raul we live on salt spray lane behind your new home there is a lot going on over there for summer usually building noise is kept to a minimum in the summer now the is a fire all day every day and we no longer can open our windows can you please ask your Builders to stop burning not sure they even know they need a permit and it's for January to may we have an infant and small grandchildren so we are running our air conditioner 247 I think that concludes y it does now is there anybody here our Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this applic or has a specific question uh Daniel D pompe has his hand raised hello sir if you'd like to speak you have five minutes you have to unmute yourself Daniel would you like to speak in favor I mean against the application or do you have a specific question if so please unmute okay I just I just unmuted I had two different un mute so I apologize no worries my can you hear me okay my name is d d Pompei I'm at 350 Pleasant Street uh I just like to State uh I agree with u the letter from the residents on salt spray Lane uh I own the abing property just to the south of this and uh I reported uh uh the construction work to the fire department a couple of times this summer because they were openly burning construction waste uh in in the backyard I know the fire department came over but it didn't seem to have corrected anything now that being said um I'd like to say that I think the house plans are fine I think the biggest difficulty is is going to be in in executing the construction the only access to this lot is is the approximately 12 foot wide 150 foot long driveway uh they do not have access from salt spray Lane that was going to be one of my comments uh also unless those people Grant special permission uh but it seems as if they have not granted special permission so all of the construction um um equipment uh all of the deliveries uh anybody involved in this house uh is going to have a basically a 12T wide 150t long u driveway to go through um plus um uh I'm not certain there's sufficient room on the property to put the number of construction vehicles now because uh what Frontage it has the 12 foot Frontage is on Pleasant Street uh Pleasant Street uh is also um uh very busy during the summer months from June through September with Walkers uh going back to the public beach um and um as I'm sure the members of the committee know uh there's no parking either on or off of Pleasant Street uh day or night so my my biggest concern is just uh how they're going to manage uh access for all of the construction materials and work that goes on my second biggest concern is the noise because they a lot of this work is going to be high up uh including the decks uh that I'm happy to see they've changed the plans on the on the decks but uh all of that work generates a lot of noise um and most of the smaller houses in this area are rental houses and it's it's very disruptive to those of us that own the rental houses um that completes my remarks unless you have any questions for me no thank you very much is there anybody else here or on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against or has a specific question ma'am please when you get up to the microphone next to that attorney I watch out for the attorney uh my name is Mary McGinley my husband Kevin and I own the property at six salt spray Lane which is adjacent to the property at 322 Pleasant Street um we're not opposed to the audition but my concern is that um saltspray Lane is privately owned by the four homeowners who have homes there and there's 10 ft of wooded area between the our street and the um property at 322 Pleasant Street and which is also owned by the homeowners on salt spray and my concern is that um I don't want any construction vehicles on salt spray Lane it's a very narrow Street we all have grandchildren who play in the street and it is private um also uh during the construction I don't want people cutting through that area because we're concerned that the shrubs and trees will be damaged we don't want any of the any of that to happen we um we value our our Landscaping there uh also we do not want the the driveway from 322 Pleasant Street to be extended onto salt spray we have already told the property owners there that we do not want that um um and I'm also concerned about the construction materials being burned which they were in the past and we would like them to be disposed of in a timely manner so that that um so that we're not looking at a huge mess and I was wondering also if construction if there are certain regulations about construction during the summer months or weekends or what the hours are the construction is um allowed we can um address that at the end and we do that all the time and it sounds like we're going to take care of what you're concerned about okay that that's it thank you thank you okay anybody else wish to speak against or has a specific question anywhere seeing none attorney Riley time to rebut uh well there's really not much to rebut I mean the uh Mr Conor uh has acknowledged that his construction guys uh shouldn't have been burning the material they're no longer U doing that uh they're going to use dumpsters to get rid of the material as as they're supposed to I would suggest uh the concern of the folks on salt spray during construction uh could be uh handled if one of the requirements of a special permit which I hope you'll Grant would be the uh placement of a temporary construction fence you know those orange plastic fences along the property line between the Conor property and Sal spre Lane that would prevent the workers of going through that area happy to have that as a condition happy to have the standard summertime limitation no no exterior construction from you know June 30th through Labor Day if they are working there inside no work before 8:00 no work after 5:00 and no work on weekends and all construction vehicles have to be kept on the property the driveway is narrow but there's plenty of room on the property itself if you've driven in there uh there's plenty of room there for uh work Vehicles so uh I'm confident that uh this can be constructed in a manner that minimizes the disturbance uh to the neighbors uh with regard to the taxes I'd only point out that of course the taxes were due November 1st and so we're not really late yet but I did notify uh Mr Conor that uh before this permit could be issued uh that bill will have to be paid and proof is sent over to uh staff here that the bill has been paid again as I say that we think that the addition actually improves uh the look of the building uh right now the western side of the building it's just a tall vertical wall uh not particularly attractive and and placing the addition there which is really just a story and a half really softens that and really brings the whole thing together so that'll be our presentation man thank you very much um questions from the board Jenny couple questions Mr Riley grow floor area your chart that you have in the back um you're you're indicating that the current gross floor area of 320 to on your sheet is 3850 but on our um on our paperwork it says it's 476 the reason I'm asking is because when you when you show it to us like this which is very helpful it's showing the gross proposed gross floor area as um you know there's only one house out of 11 that's larger than that right um well the um the number I got for that was the the original building plan which is attached uh provided the gross floor area and that's the number I used I didn't actually attempt to calculate that have U the sheet A1 of the original plan shows gross floor area 3850 so I don't know if uh I I didn't check it okay um see um this is a kind of a well I I wasn't clear either on the you show that plan Sarah thank you I'm sorry Jenny it's A1 there you go so in the center there it says existing gross Flor area includes basement um bill I don't believe and Karen can correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe it included the attic finished area which was 866 okay so that accounts for the difference um okay so I just I just wanted to confirm which one we were looking at the one you have shown on this comparison page it still would be the third you there only three houses that are larger out of 11 but at the current or or the confirmed gross floor area 4700 it's um it there's only one larger um quick question about the height um what what exactly is changing on the height because the height of the garage is 24 ft but the proposed height of the building on the paperwork showing it a little bit taller than what's existing so what what is that referencing why why is it showing that change well I'm not certain the where it says existing building computation is that the that's the existing Ridge of of the existing house I yeah no I know that's that I'm again I'm looking at I'm just trying to understand the what's changing with the height doesn't look like anything's changing with existing uh Helm height that's correct okay and then it's the garage at 24t right okay so there isn't a change to the house height but that's what it looks like when you're looking at our paperwork a Building Commissioner has uh offered to help with that sorry to interrupt so the the difference is the grade planes changed with the addition of the garage we measure grade plane 20 ft around the perimeter of the structure okay so with that expansion now the grade plane has changed but it's only changed one/ tenth of a foot okay and so the highest point on the structure is still the existing Ridge okay that's what I want to confirm thank you thank you Steve questions um I think one of the concerns of one of the neighbors was um the lack of any sort of landscaping is there is there anything planned between Salt Pond I guess it is and salt spray salt spray in the back of this house that might act as a buffer between that neighborhood and the house I think what they've indicated uh in this the neighbor over here where the plan go there's an existing 10- foot strip go back to this uh this the site plan so you see you can see the pavement is outlined here's the pavement that that line is the pavement okay and so then you have this area here which was a concern of the neighbors that they not go through that so that provides uh a visual barrier uh I don't know if uh Rahul wants to talk about what his plans are for uh Landscaping in the property I mean we haven't talked about it because it's just the garage if you could wait till you recognized by the chair sir um we're going to let attorney R finish his thought and then you raise your hand and then I'll likely recognize you right so again U if rul has some plans for landscaping I'd ask him to explain to the board what they are okay Raul go ahead yes good afternoon again um I'm Rahul Kenna owner of 322 um uh three things I would like to mention um starting with the Landscaping PL um we do plan um not to disturb the existing um woods around the house on salt spray um uh but in addition to that once the construction is complete uh we do have plans to actually increase some green hedging by planting Arbor whes or some um appropriate um green trees that won't grow Too Tall because I do appreciate that neighbors don't want uh tall trees there that would block their view to the water um so definitely it's it's a little bit earlier to come up with an exact Landscaping plan uh but uh we we would be installing some kind of an uh green hedging that goes all the way across um um between salt spray and and the property line uh that's one uh second uh I do want to uh go back to some of the neighbors concern on on burning wood um during summer I had some medical emergency and I was out uh for a few weeks uh hospitalized uh so I did not get uh um timely email from one of the neighbor regarding uh wood burning uh but as soon as I learned about contractor um doing good burning um I immediately stopped him and I apologize for any inconvenience that must have caed to the neighbors I do undertake um that all the construction will be done in compliant all the residual material coming from the site uh will be disposed of in the correct Manner and won't be burned um on on on on site uh and third thing I do want to mention about the taxes um attorney Riley emailed to me today morning uh regarding some outstanding dues uh the property has still not been transferred in our name it's still showing under the previous owner name uh so I was waiting for that to Beed okay okay that's all very very helpful thank you um okay nonetheless I did pay all the taxes today morning 562 yeah no no worries thank you very much very helpful thank you attorney Riley back to you anym no we're we're done right now okay uh well one more thing there's a rather large good sized oak tree that looks like it's going to be taken down because of the garage is there any sort of mitigation plan for that or is what are you doing for that anything at all um nothing that I'm aware of I mean I think what's going to happen is once the construction's complete the Conor family is going to landscape the entire property uh but the unfortunately the oak Tre is directly in front of the proposed door to the garage so it's going to have to be removed and there's a a rather large parking area that goes well beyond the garage it kind of looks like there was something there now it might have been Shell at one time that's been overgrown but is this parking area really going to go all the way to the to the rear of their of their of their property it says the existing shell parking um is that going to be maintained um I don't know we haven't I haven't discussed that with the Conor family the um as you can see by this aial Photograph I mean uh that particular portion of uh the property is surrounded by significant Woods I mean I don't know that it uh I suppose we could ask Mr Connor whether he plans on reducing the size of the parking area uh once he has the garage constructed rul did you hear the question I did and we haven't thought about it I think two car garage it does give us um enough room um for our uh to park our cars um so uh we haven't thought about it but nonetheless I don't foresee us using additional parking space at the property okay thank you Steve you you come no that's it thank you w questions um Bill maybe you can give me a little history on this uh because it it seems as if we're taking decks off that were perhaps not in compliance with uh zoning uh setback requirements that had been constructed and and was that that was prior to this owner uh no no the the uh that was while this owner was not around they constructed decks which uh didn't comply with the the zoning bylaw it's my understanding that those have been removed so that anything that currently exists on the property does comply with the zoning setbacks when you say when the owner was not around do you mean before he owned the property no he just he just testified been in court too often I I understand his discussion he just said he was away for a while okay so what happened was that the contractor did some deck construction uh without any approved plans that's correct and uh those were then what prompted those to be uh uh changed well Tom Stell uh did a site plan that showed the violations and so Karen and I and Tom Stell brought these to the attention of uh Mr cona and how important it was that a things these things are supposed to be done with a building permit according to the building code and to ex that they were uh Vi at that point uh shown on Tom's plan as being in violation of the setback they had to be removed or reduced in size that's my understanding and perhaps Jay can answer more fully it's my understanding that they have been brought into compliance and that uh a building permit has been either issued or has been applied for uh for the decks Jay is GNA uh respond to that so the building department became aware of the situation when we got a call from the fire department that said they had made a second run out to the site for illegal burning and they were very concerned so we went out to the site to do our own inspection and we saw brand new deck construction without a building permit so we put a stop work order on the site and and you know we asked for a site plan because we had no site plan to determin you know we couldn't tell at that time whether or not there was a violation other than the fact they were working without a permit so we started this whole process of getting a site plan um they have applied for the new decks so that the decks comply with the setback that permit hasn't been issued yet we're still waiting for additional information they also have a permit for interior work on the existing structure which I don't know if that's actually been uh I don't know if that's been issued yet or not it may have been issued I don't if you can check that Sarah but we have concern structural concerns inside the structure as well that we want to make sure we get to see before anything gets covered up so um it's in our it's on our plate to maintain close contact with this property but that really those items are kind of not really tied to the application today with the addition who who is the contractor that's doing the work I don't recall the name of the contractor CP construction and carpentry company c c c as in I do not know how to pronounce his first name c l o d o m i r o is um Jay in uh in the work that you've done out there uh is this a contractor who is familiar with um our ordinances on the occasions that I went to the site there were no contractors on site okay um were the Decks that were constructed uh constructed in accordance with some plans not that I'm aware of we never received any plans at that time and the burning that was going on site was that what was being burned I didn't see the material the fire department said it was like construction debris and household items okay um is any none of the work is going to affect I noticed that we're at 29.8 FT in terms of the height none of the work that's being done at this point is going to affect that issue of compliance with the 30 foot Max height restrictions correct okay um and uh bill is is it uh I was a little confused by the answer uh earlier is there a stretch of land uh opposite salt spray that is owned by the uh owner of this property or is that simply a RightWay area want put the S plan up again Sarah so I can make sure I understand F question okay so the solid line is the property line yep so so this area is owned by the owners of salt spray okay and so we have no Authority or ability to do any work in this area without their permission their permission is not going to be requested as I indicated earlier we're willing to put a temporary construction fence that orange plastic stuff along this property line to ensure that uh none of the contractors or employees attempt to cross over uh through the salt spray property onto salt spray Lane and that their only access will be through the through the driveway here and presumably none of them could park on salt spray or on Long's Lane that's correct so the only access is is from Pleasant Street to come up there right away that's correct but as Steve pointed out we do have a large parking area that already exists on the site yeah uh it's a pretty narrow one I mean I scraped the car driving up there with the branches I know but you know you get a big car that's probably it huh I'm sure it's nothing compared to what might be necessary to do that construction on the garage well you know that's the access I mean the house was the house it's there was built using that access so presumably you know uh you know perhaps what they should do is Mark the lines of the of the uh of the axis and trim the trees back so they have the full width clear because we don't want you to get scratches on your car thank you I appreciate that um am I correct in thinking that the existing plants that are offered are not plans that were prepared by Karen that that's correct [Applause] okay you mean the plans for the existing house yes yeah no not by Karen they were done by uh Tom Moore um in Brewster yeah anything else yeah I think those are the only questions I had all right David Nixon questions I have no questions thank you ad acting questions no questions and David Beach I have no questions no and um I just want to comment that you know seems like they've been off to a rough start but am I correct in assuming that there remorse and uh fences so to speak will be mended you know that's what that's my question everything's going to be fine now I believe so I mean the the um I think what happened was we don't I don't know who the contractors were but they were unsupervised which is unfortunate yeah but I I I think the important thing to keep in mind is that Karen's design for the addition is modest and attractive and the neighbors all the neighbors have spoken in favor of it right y thank you all right so well I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations dve seconds I vote Yes and votes yes all votes yes J votes yes as do I all right now deliberations Dave V well I think we've I think you you summed it up pretty well um I mean I I've heard positive comments from Neighbors Etc all with respect to this plan the plan that Karen has shown and the plan that they're asking us to approve um and I think that um um I can support that I can support it and the past problems don't really bear on this necessarily those were problems of of of in the nature of execution and not with respect to this plan and going forward I think if we do our um you know conditioning and and um I'm sure that the building department will be keeping an eye on on them and so um I I'm keeping my um focus on the plan which I think is a good one and um I don't think it's substantially more detrimental in the neighborhood um and I think that it it meets our criteria and I'll support it and Ed what do you think I guess I do have a quick question um Mr Ry do you know uh if the owners have retained the same construction company to um to do the addition to do the garage I don't know Mr is on the line rul U have you identified a contractor to do the construction on the addition uh we have not I think once the plans have been approved um I will be floating the RFP and request uh some bids from the local contracting company is it is it safe to say that you're not going to use the original contractors that did this other work um well they will be part of the bidding process as well um but we haven't decided on uh which Contracting Company would be executing on that nonetheless I think the concerns are noted um okay I guess my to follow up on that would um would Karen um be uh doing any inspections or or monitoring the project at all Cameron did you hear the question is that part of your contract I did usually I'm called out to the project site to verify beams and resize beams as necessary so I do visit the site um especially if there are questions during construction okay um the neighbors seem to be happy with the with the project um there is uh the addition is about looks to be you know a few feet lower than the existing height um you are getting up there to the the maximum coverage but I'm glad to see it's 14.8 but not 15 but um uh I guess I could support the project and Dave Nixon your thoughts well Mr Riley couple of things and you analysis you point out on number two the house is already somewhat larger than the houses around it it's very tall that's for sure and that's not going anywhere that's going to stay the same isn't it but what you're doing is you're going from less than 10% coverage up to the max so what's this doing if you add that to extremely tall house now to my mind that makes it not compatible with their neighboring properties there's nothing around it that's even vaguely like it and you're when you when you put the height of this house with a house that's built to the max this puts it over the edge for me and it makes it substantially more detrimental likewise number five which is impact of scale siding and Mass on the neighborhood you point out Although our building is taller than most around it and larger it won't have much of an impact I disagree as you say it is larger again it's going to have a big a big change on the visual character the homes around it the one beside it yeah that when you look over that fence oh man all those decks are going to go there the folks behind it um I just cannot see that this isn't anything but substantially more to the neighborhood and detrimental to the neighborhood and that's the way I'll be voting well David David can I just make one comment that the I think and this why I believe why the neighbors support it is that locating the addition against that tall vertical wall that faces salt spray is going to make the the view from that property more attractive if you recall the extensive debate we had on the property at 1369 Main Street where the worry was you know looking at the side view we have the same situation here only we're going to improve the side view okay PA deliberations well uh I guess that uh I have some of the same concerns that uh Dave Nixon has in terms of the impact but I and I think the impact is really on salts spry not so much on Pleasant Street because you can't see it from Pleasant Street it's the are area on salt spray and towards Longs Lane uh where there's more of a an impact um I'm having difficulty in looking at the diagrams of that have been presented to give us a feel for uh how this is actually going to look the the the vegetation between this property in salt spray is pretty minimal um and I understand that uh there's some concern I guess from uh your clients that they don't want to block a view towards the water I'm not quite sure what that view is uh by putting Arbor VII in um but I'm wondering if they could uh uh bolster our information with respect to the question of how the plantings would go in this area Landscaping so that we had a better feel for how it impacts the neighborhood well I think the what I would suggest would be a condition that uh that any plantings along the salt spray line uh be limited in height to 8 feet so that if there are views and and most of the houses there if you if you look around as you know in your neighborhood you know the people build these decks they get up on once a year and look out at the water uh so and I'm not certain uh what the views might be from salt spray but we're happy to have a limit on uh the height of any plantings um done on the Locust you know that that so that they wouldn't they can't possibly block anybody's view well as I say I don't know whether there are any views there or not to tell you the truth but and I don't know whether 8 foot's appropriate or whether you know we shouldn't be messing with that at all but uh it it certainly doesn't seem as if there's much of a a buffer looking from the property where it is right now across that salt spray I mean the the the tree line there is minimal well I agree and I think that's that's one reason why uh Mr khor is planning on planning a a buffer strip of green vegetation uh whether it's arrai or Eastern red Cedars or you know some other appropriate planting in that area mhm mhm well as I say I think we're operating without maybe much information uh in connection with that uh it wasn't something I was focusing on um okay that gives me the information that I'm looking for thank you Steve deliberations um well I think it's it's a very nice looking addition um the house that now is very tall but I think the additions the addition of the additions uh tend to uh draw that down a little bit um but it still is very very tall um I guess my biggest um concern is is the amount of coverage you're adding 2/3 it's going from 9% to 15% and you're adding 2/3 of the existing house and maxing it out um um you know and it it I I'm I'm looking at the at the information that you provided with the square footages of some of these houses and it's going to be nearly twice the size or three times the size of some of these other houses in the neighborhood and I'm just I'm worried that it's going to be somewhat detrimental to the neighborhood well I think the I think one of the things to keep in mind is that uh like for instance 350 the gentleman who spoke earlier it's a very small modest house you can't see this the con property from that house and and you can't see that house from the con property so the part of the problem with comparing numbers is what can you actually see because there supposed to be scale sighting and M on the visual character well if you can't see it you're not affecting the visual character from the neighbor's point of view over on salt spray uh the addition is actually going to soften uh the way the property looks and I guess it's always a mystery to me why if we have a 15% lot coverage used to be 25 Believe It or Not uh why when we come in close to it that somehow that's a bad thing I mean it's you know if we have that number in there presumably you can build to that number and I guess it's you know I notwithstanding Mr Nixon's concerns you know you know the the uh I think one of the most important things is you know does the house fit on the the lot we meet all the setbacks we have room for re septic system we have room for a parking lot that probably should be reduced I mean so in other words it's you know uh I don't think that the fact that it's going to 14.8% uh is really a bad thing I think it improves the property and you know at least from the neighbor's perspective it improves the property and you know so therefore you know and something else to keep in mind okay as J Briggs as as J Briggs pointed out if we didn't have living quarters above the garage we don't have we don't need a special permit to add the garage so really all you're voting on is can we have living quarters above the garage okay thank you thank you okay Jenny last but not least well um I agree with lot of my colleagues comments um it it's it's not just the max coverage it's the co Max coverage almost plus the almost Max height plus the 27 foot added length to the house um and so I I think the combination of those three make it um criteria too for me um also I don't agree that you can't see the house you said in your own summary on number five that you can see it through the woods we were there and leaves are falling now so we were there and I saw six houses just standing in the middle of the subject property and I think you can see it too on that Google Earth shot that Sarah showed earlier um so just kind of looking I could see so it is in the even though it's down the long driveway it's in the middle of this complex and you can I counted six houses that I could see and most of them were smaller and and your summary here shows that it actually even without the changes it's the second um there's only one house in out of 11 that's larger so it's a large house and I think that the fact that you can see it um I I think it doesn't meet two and five well I think the what I said earlier was you can't see it from Pleasant Street you which you cannot and you know the the height of the building is not going to change it's been there since uh the building was built and having having this addition is actually going to improve the look of the building so well I I I do think it's I do agree with you Mr Riley it's a very attractive design um but I think it's just this combination you're also adding a deck it doesn't have a dimension on it but it I estimated to be you know 15 ft out from the house on that side 27 feet of the garage you're adding to the height it it the combination of it makes it just it it's kind of an old Cottage community so you do have smaller homes there for the most part more than just these 11 okay so what do you think you want to do Mr Riley um if it's any consolation I was going to vote in favor but I'm very upset about this fire situation and I do think it matters because the purpose and intent of the bylaw is involves the health welfare and quality of life safety from fire flood and dangers I think the neighbors have been in tremendously patient with all this if it was me I would not have been so patient not be able to open your windows in the summer that is unacceptable so there's an issue of trust here so that's all I'm going to say the um I'd ask that we U be allowed to withdraw without without prejudice thank you okay Paul I'll move to Grant the requested withdrawal without prejudice dve second and votes yes I vote Yes Paul votes yes Jenny votes yes as do I thank you we're going to take a five minute break and we will be back e e e e e e e e e e e e okay we are back we're back on the hearing and uh we're going to go to our next application which let's see 2 222 scattery Road attorney litfield When Sarah's ready application number 24 -115 scattery LLC care of William G litfield Esquire 330 Orleans Road north trat of mass 02650 owners of property located at 229 scattery Road also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 17j block 2 lot 11 the applicant seeks to extend special permit number 22- 081 for one year the current expiration date is November 29th 2024 the proposed expiration date is November 17th 2025 special permit number 22- 81 allowed for the applicant to demolish the existing dwelling and construct a new dwelling soak pool and construction of a new driveway a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 4A sections 6 and 14 and sections 5B and 82b of the check protective bylaw attorney Lichfield please thank you thank good afternoon Madam chairman members of the board Bill Lichfield here in behalf of 229 scattery Road LLC which in reality is a gentleman named Ron Ferris and his family uh as Sarah indicated two years ago you uh granted a special permit for uh construction of a new home designed by Patrick aarn and at the time you found that it met all of the criteria uh as to compatibility without any impact on neighboring properties neighborhood visual character Etc uh we are seeking a oneyear extension which will be co-terminus with the conservation order nothing has changed in terms of the plans the Hearn plan is what's proposed to be built uh but there were some changes of basically three Natures or three sorts which uh is the reason that we're here first Mr Ferris made some interior changes not to floor plans or anything like that not the number of bedrooms but for Energy Efficiency and that took some time uh to get the design more importantly and more tellingly uh he suffered the the death of a family member which put a crimp in his plans uh so we are simply seeking a one-year extension when we filed this request uh couple of months ago I don't know exactly when it was we did not yet have a building permit a building permit has now been issued but we wanted to get the extension anyway as a show of good faith uh and we will continue assuming you grant it we will once construction actually starts uh go forward continuously or expeditiously or whatever the language is so it's a fairly simple request a one-year extension which by the way will be coterminous with the Conservation Commission order okay um is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this extension um please make it known seeing none I will read the two correspondences that we have one is from Judith Giorgio received on November 5th 2024 I have no issues with the request to extend the special permit for this property next we have a from the Conservation Commission uh received on October 31 2024 the applicant was issued in order of conditions on November 2 2022 the project was revised in condition to meet the performance standard of the Wetland protection act um this order of conditions is set to expire on November 7th 2025 is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this or has a specific question seeing none questions from the board does anybody have any no David Nixon uh Mr litfield I'm as I think you know I'm not much in favor of long extension so a year is a year okay but um I don't think I'd want to see you back here in another year no I I thank you Mr Mr Nixon I appreciate that uh the once my understanding of the both the statute and the interpretation is that once we start we have to move forward we don't necessarily have to finish within a year no uh but we will go forward uh it's not continuously expeditiously what's the word in the decision Sarah as continuously and expeditiously as possible oh it's both words as continuously and expeditiously as possible and we will do that you know uh when I was walking around the house um it doesn't have any protection in the way of revetments or sand dones or or anything now it's true the barrier Beach is out there and you can see what's left of it um and I thought to myself H if I had purchased this house maybe I'm getting cold feet so not yeah I mean so what right but uh maybe uh so I have this 1100 day thing in the back of my brain which is three years and now Mr Ferris does have plans to go forward and as Mr Briggs knows the building permit was finally issued and we've uh we have been in cooperation with the town we have been a re receiv receiver of dredged sand uh so that area may be uh more not protected but last longer than it might otherwise well it's nice for children to build themselves a little fort yeah that's right okay well okay if does anybody else don't be shy you know I just thought I would do it that way this okay Paul I'll move to Grant the requested relief to extend the building to extend the special per we have to go through the deliberations and the whole n yards so how about just close the hearing and move to deliberations I'll move to close the hearing and move to deliberations Dave be second is vote Yes I vote Yes Paul votes yes yes and I vote Yes as well okay now we'll do deliberations Jenny um I understand that things come up and um I think a one-year extension is fine okay Steve I have no issues with the extension of time and Paul no issues David Nixon I made my point you did David I mean uh Ed Aton just just one question the the uh construction activity um I'm reading it here all construction activity and vehicles to be contained on site or at neighboring property um and then between June 30th and labor day so no no construction between June 30th the conditions would continue on yeah yeah no further questions thanks David Beach I'm I have no question so the I I'd say that the request as reasonable as it must for us to allow it so Paul I'll move to Grant the requested relief on the same conditions uh that contained in the original application uh which we approved Dave V second and votes yes vote Yes all votes yes J votes yes as do I it's unanimous congrat thank you very much our first yes of the day yeah and uh our next application is going to be 73 Kent Road application 24-12 Jessica goo and Philip Chu application number 24-12 Jessica goo and Philip chw care of William F Esquire PE box 707 chadam Mass 02633 owner of property located at 73 Kent Road also shown on the town of chadam assessors map 12j block 26 lot G4 the applicant seeks to reconstruct a pre-existing non-conforming private residential Pier the existing Pier is non-conforming and that it is 89 ft long and is 6.3 ft wide the proposed reconstructed perer will be non-conforming and that it will be 889 ft long where 80 ft is the maximum allowed and 6.3 ft wide where 4T is the maximum allowed the property is located in the R40 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 4A section 6 and 9 and sections 5B and 8D 2B of the protective bylaw welcome back attorney Riley uh good afternoon Bill Riley on behalf of Jessica and Phillip the uh this is simply replacing an existing doc the uh com with of Massachusetts and the Corp of Engineers issued permits for this dock back in 1981 uh so it's been in place since that time and they simply uh so it's 40 some years old and they just felt it's time to U you know rebuild it with new materials so and it's gone through the conservation Comm Mission I can talk longer if you want no that that's great thank you so much uh anybody here on Microsoft teams that wish to speak in favor of this application please indicate seeing none I will read the correspondences there are four first we have a note from Christine McCarthy and she writes on November 5th 20124 good afternoon attach you'll find aost balance for application 24-12 7 73 Kent Road the first half real estate and personal property taxes are outstanding um and they also have passed due water bill I would like to thank you in advance for your assistance on this matter and I will not read any of the details in terms of the amount next we have a note from the um natural resources department um Conservation Commission October 16 2024 they tell us that the applicant has submitted a notice of intent that was heard by uh the commission on October 9th 2024 the project is scheduled for an order of conditions on November 13th it it re it meets the um performance standards of all the applicable laws next we have a note from Jason Holm Harbor Master from let's see what the date is uh October 16th 2024 I reviewed the application for the proposed Pier on 73 K Road on R in rers coov and found that the Reconstruction of the pre-existing non-conforming 89 for peer will not interfere with navigation or pose any public safety issues the peer would also not interfere with any existing Moorings within the area and then we have a note from Jennifer Jackman um from October 24th 2024 my name is Jennifer Jackman and I am writing to express my support for this application from my husband and myself uh our address is 15 Sabin Lane we believe it will be a great use of that space and wholeheartedly support it and um that concludes the correspondence say um next I will ask if there's anybody here or Microsoft teams that wish to speak against this application or has a specific question seeing none do you want to talk about anything that I've read or you good uh I'm disappointed that Red Sox didn't make any moves but other than that okay now let's see questions from the board Jenny just a question about the float and the um the ramp those have to come out every year is that um uh well they don't have to but they do but they do okay thank you Steve I have no questions Paul I'm sure the Red Sox are waiting for your input bill but uh we we really don't need it thank you okay and David Nixon questions I understood you're going to buy the Celtics for five billion congratulations sounds like a deal and Ed Aton anything not related to sports uh no questions okay I have no questions each okay and uh so um I don't have any questions either Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into liberations Dave each seconds and votes yes yes all votes yes Jenny votes yes as do I okay deliberations we'll start with J again um I think that it's uh necessary to replace these things to keep them you want to keep them they're very valuable um I would support it anded I'm sorry Steve I have no issues especially if it's a reconstruction of an existing um okay structure well I think as long as it meets with a harbor Master's approval I have no problem with it and David Nixon I couldn't come up with any reason not to support it and uh no issues with me it's just a replace of like kind so yeah and I I agree with all previous make and I I'll just make a comment that it's uh improving because uh now it's back to what was licensed in terms of the um some portion of it correct no it's all been licensed it's always been licensed I know but I mean the S what was it the um uh the original chapter 91 the float was a 8 by 12 on David's plan I believe the one that had been installed um I don't know for how many years was 8 by 14 right that's so it's an improvement is what I'm saying positive well they're bringing into into compliance was done years ago right right right all right so with all that Paul I'll move to approve the application as submitted with the condition that the ramp and Float shall be removed during the offseason November 15th through April 15th dve V seconds and vot yes yes all vot yes okay and uh Jen Jenny votes yes and I vote Yes as well did you already vote Yes okay so that's unanimous and uh he disappeared but congratulations still there on the back all right uh next we have um application 24-1 121 Jillian Sanderson and um whenever a s is ready application um number 24-1 121 Jillian Sanderson 28 Nutley Road Brewster Mass 02631 agreed L see of property located at 216b Orleans Road also shown in the town of chadam assessors map 14h block 64 lot X 216b the applicant proposes to operate a business children's play space with caregiver involvement under Section 1 C of the Chad and protective bylaw which allows a use not specifically enumerated in a district to be authorized by special permit the lot contains 2.1 acres in the SB and R40 zoning districts a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 4A section 9 and Section 8 d2b of the protective bylaw welcome if you could each just state your name hi I'm Jillian Sanderson and I'm Jennifer Hart all right very good and uh you can proceed sure so um I am a daughter mom and a teacher here at the mono district and one of the things I noticed when raising my two children Henry and Nora who's four and three um in the off season we really are looking for a space for children to be able to be be themselves um we know that there are um a lot of studies deeply rooted in Neuroscience that show that play is essential for childhood development um which is why uh we are opening Seaside play um we were able to find um our space which is small yes but it'll be perfect for about 5 to eight children um it has a bathroom with an egress it also has a front door so there's two access points um it was found acceptable with the health division um it meets health and safety requirements of building and fire code um there will be no changes to the traffic flow or safety in the area um in fact I I believe that people will drive even slower through that parking lot um thinking about the children uh there will be no impact on the neighborhood visual character there will be no current changes to the current sewer or septic uh there will be no change to the current utilities and um in regard to noise we are obviously There Will Be Joyful Noise of course laughter and fun um and children can be noisy but we are prepared for that uh we do have noise d dampening flooring that we've already installed for half of the space and we will continue um all the way across and then we also ordered noise dampening wall panels so those will be placed um in intervals along so that way it will absorb they're made of a really um high quality felt which actually absorbs 80% of high frequency cell waves um so we are thinking about our neighbors uh because we know that it is a quiet complex we are we will also only operate within the um noise ordinance hours I think it's 800 to 5: Yes um so we will not run classes and we will not be open after 5:00 um and we will not def we will not be open for 8 a.m. um um I believe that this is going to be a really exciting thing for our town I think it's going to be a wonderful support for our community um the mothers and um chadam okay great thank you is there anybody here or on Microsoft team that wishes to speak in favor of this application if so please indicate seeing none do we have any correspond yep now I will we have one yeah oh very good very good somebody online wish asle Ashley do you wish to speak in favor yes yes I'm sorry I hope you can hear me okay yes I'm actually driving to pick up my child from daycare um I did submit a letter to in support of Jill and her and her business that she's planning to open um my name is Ashley Hallen I'm a local chadam resident I have a one-year-old um my mom and I co-operate a business called handsome Business Solutions we're actually located at 210 Orleans Road so we're in the same complex and my mom is on the trustees and I've met several of the trustees and owners over the years that we've owned a unit there we are so excited about the potential that this business could bring to the area um I know when I met with Jill back in the spring when this was kind of more just an idea that she was really putting together she had mentioned potentially having some resources for moms as well like whether it's a lactation consultant come in and guest speak which is something that we just don't really have on the lower cave I do bookkeeping for two local nonprofit it's one being monoy community services and one being NS youth Alliance and Brewster and I just know the challenges that young families and moms face with child care and activities for children so I really really hope that people will consider this change of use um because it's something that chadam definitely is lacking or not just Trum but the lower keep in general because we have to drive quite far distances to get some of the programming that Jill is hoping to put forth okay do you miss Kil um Ashley would you like me to still would you like me to still read your letter um I'm happy to do that because it looks like there might be some other information in there are do you not want me to read it no please do okay we'll do CU very good now um is there anybody else that wishes to speak in favor of this application anywhere seeing none I will now read the three correspondences Judith Georgio our health agent tells us on 115 2024 that the use of the noted property as a child's place base for commercial purposes is acceptable with the health Division if the space meets all the health and safety requirements of the building and fire code detailed plans of the space include egress bathroom availability followed by a safety inspection would be required there is no notable increase in septic flow from this business um then we have a note from Annie Hayes uh received on uh October 24th 2024 good morning the planning board will hear an application for a change of use at this property on the November 25th 2024 meeting thank you then back to um Ashley killgallen she uh tells us that she is in support I'll just go through and say anything that we didn't just hear um they have a baby boy named Jack and being a full-time resident at chadam they're very P her and her husband are very passionate passionate about the future of the town as a new mom who also happens to be a bookkeeper for two local Services um um she she just learned how challenging it is to to uh find care for anant and tolers but also finding programming uh for this age demographic um there's no child care for less than twoy olds on 2 to n months in the entire town of chadam but every mom group I am part of on social media seems to recommend programming for infants and toddlers in the mid to Upper Cape regions it seems that there's an extremely Li limited amount of programs for the exact age demographic that Jill is looking to serve in the lower Cape area having a place where I can take my child to play and meet other moms with children around the same age is crucial to both my son and me I can speak highly enough of Jill that about what she will bring to this community she was one of the sweetest humans you could ever meet at 16 years old uh when I drove her to high school every day and since we both moved back to the cape I can say that she is just as sweet today and really cares about children with Barbara being a trustee of Nickerson corners I have gotten the chance to person personally speak to a couple of condo owners regarding Seaside play from the conversations I've had I can say that everyone has had a chance to speak that I've had a chance to speak to is very excited um about this project and we fully support uh Seaside play adding it um adding um this to the condo complex and the community we love so much um okay so that's that is there anybody here or our Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this application or ask a question no all right questions from the board Dave V I have no questions um I'm just curious questions how many um children do you expect to to have in the facility sure like I said it's a small space um we predict between five and eight okay yeah and um when I was there looking around I I saw like the courtyard and I was like wow that might be a great place for for them to run around and do you have plans for anything outside um not at the moment just because we're we're approaching winter so uh we're thinking about that and then I think as the summer months go we'll um obviously go see the trustees and see if that's appropriate because music sounds better outside yeah sounds good thank you thank you questions Dave Nixon I have one yes uh I'm a little puzzled by and your description children's play space with caregiver involvement so if there wasn't caregiver involvement what would that mean it would be daycare we're not a daycare establishment it's not where you can leave your child and then go to the grocery store so that means that the the um caregiver will need to stay with the child uh that's for insurance purposes that's also for liability for us um it's just to protect us and for social socialization y so moms can meet moms or caregivers can meet caregivers so that's a real Plus for you yes yeah yeah it's great we dummies any questions Paul uh not so much a question I just uh you're putting in soundproofing uh materials I'm wondering if it makes some sense to put in some cushioning material so that you can handle the kids at that age for that time frame that's a very good point very cushy a padded floor exactly yeah that's my only question okay thank you and Steve your thoughts questions uh I'm not sure I have any questions you said the hours were going to be approximately 8 to five is that throughout the so I will still be teaching I currently teach preschool um at harage at harage elementary school so I will be continuing to teach the there um so we'll be looking at the hours from 3: to 5 you know that that that Darkness hour for parents um with potentially some morning programming um but that's that's not ironed out yet and is that throughout the summer as well or just during the school probably just during the school year during the school year okay and the only other thing that you might want to because the planning board might ask you about this is designated parking spaces you know near the entrance to your facility just so that kids aren't wandering around the parking lot or something so they might ask you about that absolutely okay thank you thanks for that good luck thank you questions just a follow up to the number of people you mention or children you mentioned 5 to eight um is what you're expecting yes um is there a requirement that you can't you have to have no more than a certain number that you're aware of no I just think that's what would be safe in the space just from my professional practice as a preschool teacher and just as a mom especially with the p extra padding you know um I think that's what would be safe because not only will the child be there but also the caregiver so adults take up uh more space than the little yeah okay thank you thank you and are you going to be open on weekends at all or oh yes oh you are yes and what about the hours on the week I'm sorry I should have added that I apologize no no um we well um we're looking at opening on Sundays that seems to be the day where um families really need some additional time somewhere to go um so we're looking probably from like 9 to 12: just kind of those morning hours yeah and I think your you your children and and all their relatives will probably you know really benefit from it I I yes just full disclosure I've um been with um Jen and um oh God Jill Jill Jill I knew that yeah um at the uh Library numerous times with my grandchildren and U I mean I would almost vouch for you I mean at this point but I just would say that even if I didn't know you um as a young mother myself I mean I used to look for places like this and I had to go all the way into Boston from PE to find things like this and you know that was a long time time ago and I'm sure there's more now but I just think it's such an incredible benefit for the you know the parents and the kids as well um so that's why I just wanted to um ask if you're going to be open on the weekends and so I asked you that and so Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations dve seconds and votes yes yes all votes yes yes and I vote Yes as well okay deliberations Dave vich well I um clearly I think this meets uh all the criteria that apply it's um not going to be um detrimental to the established or Future character of the neighborhood in the town uh and I think it'll be an asset and I'll support it thank you Ed um I I certainly would support it it it seems very quiet in that that little complex so I think a little noise may may be of benefit thank you and Dave I think it's a great thing thank you thank you and well yes I certainly support it meets the criteria very good and uh fully support it and jny I do too I think um I like this the the setting how it's it's all way away from the road I agree as Ed mentioned it's quiet um and you know I want to thank you for for taking this on I think it's a terrific um Endeavor and good luck thank you thanks excited and I'm excited to bring my two granddaughters there now two yeah two congratulations so uh yeah so I fully support it um PA I'll move to Grant the application as submitted Dave V checkins and votes yes yes all votes yes jny votes yes and I vote Yes as well it's unanimous congratulations and good luck thank you everybody thanks so much y you're welcome all right it was easy last we are going to 103 Kelly Lane um 24-13 application number 24-13 the Kevin L Str trust and Jean R Allen trust care of Rick Roy 123a Queen in Road Harwich Mass 02650 owner of property located at 103 Kelly Lane also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 11d block 10 Lot 12 the applicant seeks to modify special permit number 23119 granted on January 11th 2024 which allowed for the construction of additions stairs and roof deck the applicant now seeks to modify the special permit to allow for the constructed stairs to be located 12.6 ft from the nor of butter where 13.9 ft was approved and 15 ft as required the lot is non-conforming and that it contains 10,7 Square ft where 20,000 ft is required in the R20 zoning District a special permit is required under M General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw attorney Riley you're up again uh good afternoon Bill Riley on behalf of Kevin stro and his wife Jean Allen uh there was a change of contractors uh sort of mid job here uh Rick Roy is taking over the project happily for for um the applicants uh and when they um did the As built they learned that the staircase was 12.6 ft from the property line where 13.9 had been approved so it's a yawning gap of so would ask that you approve the modification so they don't have to completely rebuild the entire staircase okay is there anybody here Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this modification please make it known seeing none I will I would have read The Correspondents but there are not any uh is there anybody here in Microsoft teams that wish to speak against or has a question about this application if so now's your time seeing none questions from the board Jenny no questions Steve no questions PA questions no questions no questions well I'm just curious Bill uh I I mean I I did and I didn't look closely at the approved plan um but I did take a look back at it um and seems that the stairway is it was um proposed to be wider than 3 feet which it is and it appears to be but I'm just curious did did they need more did they need more steps or how or maybe you can't answer how it is that they got closer than uh the plan showed well I think the U I don't know okay all I know is that they told me that uh the previous contractor had built the steps and when they did the As built they found out that's what they learned okay well I mean it given the situation and looking at this plan I would expect that perhaps they had not calculated from The Landing to the deck there maybe it was an ex couple of steps that they didn't figure was going to be there I I guess I'll assume that at this point it's certainly an easy mistake to for thanks very legitimate question like how'd that happen and uh okay Paul well I think we should make a note of the date that Bill said I don't know I I'm sorry I didn't mean that I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberation dve second votes yes Dave Nixon yes I'll vote Yes Vinny yes as do I okay deliberations um Steve and you know I think it's probably an honest mistake it could have been one extra step coming down off the house I I don't don't think it's a big deal sure and Jenny yeah I think the board um well we know from our information that the board approved this in January earlier this year in January and we found the site to be suitable with with no impact on neighboring properties um and the paperwork that was in here that Sarah included showed that five neighbors wrote in support at that time I don't think that this mistake would change what we voted on back then right and Paul I agree I don't think I don't think it affects our original approval Dave Nixon and I agree as well doesn't affect the original approval right and Dave be you agree and I agree as well and and and as do I as we always look at would we have done this in the first place and it sounds like we would have so uh well I'll move to approve the application as submitted and Dave 8 seconds and votes yes yes Paul votes yes do any votes yes as do I it's unanimous congratulations thank you very much thank you well that concludes our zoning Board hearing for tonight and uh have a motion to I will move to a joury Dave V seconds and votes yes Ed vote Yes Jour yeah I guess yeah all right Paul Paul votes yes I support the motion okay yes yes do I and what time is it 4:57 p.m. all right good night chadam w [Music]