e e e e e e e e e e e e n [Music] m [Music] [Music] good afternoon everyone and welcome to the town of chadam zoning board of appeals meeting it's May 30th 2024 pursuant to Governor Hy's March 29th 2023 signing of the acts of 23 extending certain covid measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law until March 31 2025 this meeting of the chadam zoning board 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 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 945 4410 conference ID number 312565 320 pound or join the meeting via the link on the town's website while this is a live broadcast and simoc cast on chadam TV despite our best efforts we may not be able to provide for real-time access we will provide a uh post of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible in accordance with Town policy the public can speak to any issue hearing our business item on the agenda during the meeting when recognized by the chair to authorize this form of meeting we will um go through a roll call vote uh Jen uh Virginia V approves Steve dbor approves Lee Hy approves FY simple approves David S nion approves uh Ed Acton approves uh David H Fe approves and Randy podes approves as well uh the procedural steps in this hearing are as follows and this is pursuant to our rules which are also posted on the town website we do a roll call of all board members we ask if any citizens on non-board members participating in the call uh that they give their last four digits of their phone number for identification purposes the hearing notice is read by staff Sarah clar on my right you are your representative presents the appeal application anyone in favor of the appeal or application may speak there's a five minute time limit and then I will read the um the letters received by the board if there are any anyone against the appeal or app or has a specific question we'll have an opportunity to to do that applicant May rebut testimony board members may direct questions to anyone present the board he any further information closes the public hearing deliberates and sometimes votes usually votes but not every single time all votes are taken by roll call and at the end of the meeting we will close it with a verbal confirmation and note the time of adjournment uh voting today will be Virginia Fenwick um Paul simple David Nixon and uh David V and myself except for one of the applications there'll be a recusal at that point Ed Acton will be voting and uh with that um see we don't have any minutes today so Sarah one of you ready first application application number 24-50 barcliff Properties LLC care Rick Howard 405 queenan Road harch Mass 02645 owner of property located at 172 barcliff Avenue also shown on the town of chadam assessors map 15g block 23 lock K1 the applicant seeks to enlarge extend or change and nonconforming dwelling on a non-conforming lot via the demolition of the existing detached garage installation of a new foundation and construction of additions the existing dwelling is non-conforming and that is located 19.4 ft from bar barcliff Avenue and 24.1 ft from mous hole Lane the existing garage is non-conforming and that is located 31.4 ft from mousehole Lane the proposed addition will be non-conforming in that it will be located 23.8 ft from mousehole Lane where a 40ft setback is required the existing building coverage is 2,50 square ft and the proposed building coverage is 2469 squ ft where 3,000 ft is the maximum allowed the LW is non-conforming and that it contains 27354 ft where 40,000 ft is required in the R40 zoning District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the protective bylaw good afternoon attorney nocross good afternoon uh Jamie Norcross representing uh Martin McDonald who is the owner of uh the property uh I am here today asking for a continuent uh we are trying to work out um some issues with the neighbors who have concerns relative to the project I came into this somewhat late and attorney Lichfield has just been retained by the neighbors and I think we're hopeful between the two of us we might be able to work out a resolution that'll be acceptable to all parties uh and speaking of Sarah I understand it would be August 8th would be the next excuse me August 9th I guess would be the next 8th 8th I'm would be the next available date so at the board's um permission we would ask for a continuing until that date should give us plenty of time to do any revisions if there need to be to the plans that that sounds like a good idea and does anybody have any comments or discussion or should we just go with a motion from Paul I'll move to Grant the requested continuance to August 8th 2024 uh Dave V seconds and B chess yes Jenny yes and Paul yes as do I it's unanimous thank you very much thank you very much and our next um application is going to be uh out of the order that was advertised however um we just felt like it was is uh important to get this one done first and it will be 24-54 application number 24- 054 Canard Family realy Trust care of Spencer Canard 49 Gillis Road South chattam Mass 02659 owner of property located at 49 Gillis Road also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 4C block 13 lot cg1 the applicant proposes to alter to change alter or expand a non-conforming dwelling and a non-conforming lot via the construction of a deck the existing dwelling is non-conforming and that is located within the 50ft buffer to the coastal Conservancy District top of Bank the proposed deck will be non-conforming and that it will be located within the coastal Conservancy District where a 50-ft setback is required the law is non-conforming in that it contains 16769 ft 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 protective bylaw Mr Canard I presume yes good afternoon my name is Spencer Canard I'm here with my wife Elizabeth uh we live at 49 Gillis Road South chadam and we would like to put a deck on our family home that was built in 19 in the 1950s we understand that our house is on a non-existing pre-existing non-conforming lot sorry about that uh the Dex site plans are from 2023 and show it as a wraparound deck connected from the front of our Porch Street side to the back of it facing the mil Creek Marsh the back is 12 ft outward and 18 ft wide that becomes 6 ft wide running the length of the porch the deck side is approximately 485 Square ft the impact on the neighborhood is minimal our neighbors are in favor of our project the Conservation Commission has given us their approval with provisions on mitigation and Landscaping which we will abide by I have addressed and I sure you have copies of the applicable criteria and we can discuss them as you wish uh we try to be good stewards to our surroundings as this is our home passed on to us and we will pass on to our children Elizabeth and I hope you will support this project oh thank you very much and we did receive your your um criteria as written and um all the reasons why you feel it meets the criteria we appreciate that um is there anybody here or our Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this project please uh let us know seeing none I have um seven letters to read and I will let's see six so the first one is from Judith Georgio our health agent who has no concerns regarding the construction of the deck at this property as proposed written on May 29th 20 24 then we have um a note from the Conservation Commission um May 9th 2024 the uh applicant submitted a request for determination on April 13th and was issued a negative3 determination the project as approved meets the performance standards of the wetlands protection act and um all the the Wetland uh chapters of of Mass General law as prolongated therein then we have a a letter from Edwin mcland on May 30th 2024 we are a bus to the canads and strongly support their application to add to the proposed deck they have been great stewards of the environment in the location it'll only enhance the use and enjoyment of the property and they live at 154 mil Creek Road in South chadam then we have a note from Christopher and Margaret Walker of 31 Gillis Road from October 18th 201 23 we write in support of the application we believe based on the description of the application that we are the north eastly AB butter located at 31 Gillis from our perspective the construction of the deck will have no negative impact on our enjoyment of our home and property to the contrary we believe the new deck will improve the overall quality of the surrounding of the neighborhood and we urge the town to approve the application thanks for the opportunity to provide input then we have a note from Thomas Gillis on 517 2024 in regards to the application um 24-54 that Spencer Canad and is requesting to be allowed to add steps in a porch to his home on Gillis Road I have no objection to this Mr Canad has been a neighbor for over 20 years has always kept up his property and has been a very good addition to Gillis Road as you can see by the name this was my father who brought the land almost hundred years ago that is now known as Gillis road so I am very familiar with that with what goes on there and we have a note from Jack Gillis from May 14 2024 as an immediate butter to both sides of the property located at 49 Gillis Road I wholeheartedly support the application Spencer and Elizabeth Canard have designed a deck that is both in keeping with the local and is has very little of any impact to the Flora and FAA okay he's at 198 and 184 mil Creek Road and that concludes the correspondence is there anyone here or Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this application or has a specific question please make it known seeing none um questions from the board davich I have no questions Ed uh no questions I have none J no questions Steve I have no questions no questions I I do have a question what do you plan to do between the posts on the uh deck you going to run wires there glass what's the uh if I can on the very front part the 12T part um I'm sorry the 18t part that goes out I would do wire the rest would be wooden posts so but it depending on the cost it may all be wood okay thank you so my question is what's a fauna if you know fauna was that a typo or no no no I didn't it's like vegetation vegetation all right very good very good sounds like uh sounds like a good project and uh Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations d v seconds and vote Yes yes yes all vot yes as do I so deliberations Paul uh well I had a nice conversation with uh Elizabeth Mrs Canard when I was out there I got to see the orchard uh which looks uh very nice I heard about the bus trips back in the day with Barbara kahone starting way over on the other side of chattam um but all of that is probably irrelevant to this um what is relevant is it is certainly is a nice project it's not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and I will vote in favor of it and Lee I agree with Paul I think it's going to be a great project and a nice Improvement thank you Steve deliberations um the same as everyone else has said yeah I think it's a nice project and Jenny I uh agree with my colleagues very nice Project D as do I it's a nice project and we'll support it yeah I certainly support it as as to my colleagues and Dave Nixon deliberations and meet to all our criteria very good Paul um I'll move to approve the application as submitted um when do you plan to do the construction um well I think I have to wait for building permit I think there's a waiting period between disapproval and case anybody objects or whatever down the road I'm not sure if that's true but hopefully the summer I mean okay well you've got a fairly narrow location there in terms of the road going by the the prop proper on the top are you able to keep construction vehicles off site or a neighboring property with permission yes okay um I think probably the only uh condition I would suggest is that all construction activity and vehicles be contained on site or at a neighboring property with the permission of the property owner does does everybody agree with that anybody have anything to add no okay then I'll move approval on that basis yeah Dave V seconds and votes yes Dave nion I vote Yes yes all all votes yes as to why it's unanimous congratulations thank you very much all right well moving along now this next one is stage Island reality trust and um U Madam chair I I would like to recuse myself because I am an a mother to the cottage I own just down the street okay do you feel like you need to leave the room or no I don't okay very good do you want to participate in deliberation no none of that all right very good so whenever you're ready Sarah 24-5 no I'm sorry yeah 24- 051 application number 24- 051 stage Island realy trust care of William G litfield Esquire 330 Orleans Road North chat Mass 02650 owner of property located at 230 stage Island Road also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 13 A1 block 5 lot d27 the applicant seeks a special permit to allow for a deck which was reconstruct which was reconstructed to be located 19 ft from the coastal Conservancy District where a 50ft setback is required and the installation of an exterior mechanical system Appliance generator 17.5 ft from the Northerly of butter where a 25t setback is required in the alternative the applicant seeks to modify special permit number 2 2- 064 granted on August 11th 2022 to allow for the modifications listed above the property is located in the R40 zoning District a special permit is required under master Law chapter 4A sections 6 and 14 and sections 5B and 82b of the protective bylaw attorney Lichfield welcome thank you madam chairman members of the board Bill Lichfield here in behalf of Deborah and Peter Nelson who was trustees own the house at 230 stage Island Road you may remember that we were before you two years ago for some fairly small modifications some additional living space on the lower level and some other changes including a a deck on the rear uh when the Nelsons went forward with their project uh thank you and that's that's the original and reconstructed deck uh it might actually be useful Sarah if you'd bring up that small one that I that I sent to you because we're really seeking only a modification it's a very minor thing as shown there on the left hand side uh there is a proposal now to add a generator to two existing and legally pre-existing nonconforming um air conditioning con condensers that have been there since before the 2012 bylaw change when the Nelson decided that they wanted to have a generator which frankly they didn't think about when they came before you two years ago uh they realized that to assuage the concerns of conservation they'd have to reduce some coverage conservation has a different definition of cover coverage from that which this board has anything within conservation's jurisdiction is is coverage so in order to get room for the generator they needed to reconfigure the deck so they cut off 80 odd square feet on the lower left side of that picture and they squared off the deck at the very bottom of it for net net reduction to allow for the generator they went to conservation got that approved and they realized that they had made a mistake that they didn't come to the zoning Board of Appeals and we apologize for that at the time that that happened which was almost a year ago uh they did talk to the building department they advised them that an error had been made the building department appropriately said come in front of you there were some delays in getting here not through the fall of the Nelsons but plans and so forth but we are now here seeking as you prefer either a modification of that which was granted in 2022 which was appeal number 22064 or a new special permit 24- 051 but the sum changes are the squared off portion of the deck the reduced portion of the deck to the left of that which we've eliminated and the addition of the generator so I'll go through the criteria as I assume you would like me to do but I will try to be brief in light of the Simplicity of the project uh we currently have nonconformities as read by Sarah which are by no means unique to this neighborhood the site I think you can find remains adequate for the modified deck and placement of the generator adjacent to the existing compressors there no change in coverage living area gross floor area and a minimal change in proximity to the coastal conserv District by virtue of the angle of the line of the top of the Coastal Bank as to compatibility of the size uh I did include the third page the comparison of sizes but it really isn't relevant there's no change in the size of the house and the deck itself is actually minimally smaller than that previously approved as to the extent of increase in non-conformity as I indicated squaring off of the deck results in a slight uh increase in proximity to the top of the Coastal Bank but again conservation has already approved it the generator of course has to be adjacent to the existing air conditioning compressors as the suitability of site it's already been reviewed and approved by the Conservation Commission there will be native vegetation excuse me to surround the generator uh and there's extensive mitigation already required the chair will later read a letter from the conservation uh commission staff which is actually in error it says that we have not yet filed the last page of your handout uh is a copy of a letter from the conservation administrator uh acknowledging the what they refer to as a field change and they've already approved it so that's been taken care of as scale sighting mass and view views and Vistas there's no impact on the scale or the street escape from the squared off but smaller deck in the rear and none from the generator although the abutter who is closest to it has written in support of it no change in compatibility of use water sewer traffic flow safety so the issue is whether the proposed modification and slight reduction of the deck and the addition of the emergency generator are substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current non-conforming structure and a nonconforming lot aspects of course which apply to almost every house in the neighborhood Cottage in the neighborhood uh failure to include the generator in the initial request was an error it was inadvertent rather and adding it necessitated as I explained the reconfiguration of the deck to reduce coverage within the ndz that change was approved by conservation and it was a genuinely innocent oversight not coming back to you until now we apologize for that but we still seek your support there's no change in coverage of the size of the house itself none of the aspects today are visible from the street and again conservation has already approved it so based on the criteria and the plans I think that you can find the proposed changes are not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood be happy to answer any questions oh thank you is there anybody here on are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this application please make it known seeing none I will read the correspondence there are just a couple the first one was from a health a agent on May 29th who says she has no problem with the construction at this property and that's Judith Georgio then we have the updated although it was from 1012 2023 letter from conservation um maybe I don't know why it's 1012 2023 it's updated but in any event conservation has uh let's see they were the field changes were improve were approved D on 1012 2023 fill change request letter dated 9:18 2023 um proposed changes uh was stamped on 64 2023 additional conditions native planting shall be planted around the generator and that's from Paul Whitman are you you satisfied with that no I am satisfied with that that's actually what I handed out there had been a letter in the file dated May 9 saying that we hadn't applied but we'd already been approved I'm not going to read that one okay going to ignore that one all right so on October 6 2023 we got a letter from Kathleen and Edward scopus uh the owners of the adjacent property at 214 uh stage Island Road wrote to support the modification request for the special permit previously approved for the renovations of Peter and Debbie Nelson's home at 2:30 stage Allen row we understand the Nelson have requested a modification to place a generator adjacent to the location where the AC compresses are located we understand and support the need to place the generator at this location and respectfully request that the board of appeals approve the modification um and that concludes the correspondence is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wish to speak against this application has or has a specific question seeing none questions from the board Jenny uh I have no questions just going to go right down the Steve has no questions no questions no questions no questions and I have no questions and nor do I Paul move to close the hearing and move into deliberations um Dave V seconds and votes yes Ed Ed Acton votes yes Jenn yes Paul Paul Roes as do I okay deliberations Jenny uh Mr litfield you did a nice job with your summary and I had um an opportunity to speak to Mr Nelson when I did the site visit um I think it meets all of our criteria and i would support it thank you and Steve what do you think um you know I'm I'm glad to see you writing the wrong and and documenting what was done so um I have no other no other issues and wee agree with my colleagues Paul certainly not more substantially detrimental Ed yes I agree and the neighbor that's most effective is uh pledged his support so no no issues here Dave yeah I and I agree with all PR yes and the Mrs Nelson actually showed me around and explained everything perfectly so that really made life easy and uh at this point Paul I'll move to approve the application as submitted I don't see a need for conditions and David seconds question are we approving this as a separate special permit or a modification to uh what do does anybody want to comment on that what do you think Jenny I I think it was written as a separate spe uh defer to Sarah s um so it was advertised as a new special permit but in the alternative you could always modify the existing special permit it's basically the same thing what would you like us to do whatever is easier for Sarah because she has to type it all right so um I would do it as a new special permit okay done um I will move to approve the application as submitted on 24- 051 Dave V seconds and votes and votes yes and Ed Ed Acton votes yes Jenny Jenny votes yes pa pa votes yes as do I it's unanimous thank you very much thank you very much all right see next we have application 23- 052 739 crawl Road and whenever Sarah's ready she will read that advertisement application yeah application number 24- 052 ghw realy trust care of James M Northcross Esquire PO Box 707 chadam Mass 02633 owners of property located at 739 croll Road also shown on the town of chadam assessor map 12i block 6 lot 1A the applicant seeks to enlarge extender change a non-conforming dwelling on a non-conforming lot via the demolition of the existing dwelling and detached barn and the construction of a new dwelling and detached accessory structure the exis existing dwelling is non-conforming and that is located 23.9 ft from the road where a 40ft setback is required and 20 ft from the Norther Leo butter where a 25t setback is required the existing Barn is non-conforming and it is located 19.4 ft from the southern Leo butter the proposed dwelling will conform to Road and a butter setback requirements the proposed accessory structure will be non-conforming and it it will be located 20 ft from the southernly a butter where a 25t setback is required the existing building cover is 2,942 ft and the proposed building coverage is 3,119 Ft where 2850 ft is the maximum allowed the lot is non-conforming and that it contains 123.0 4 ft of Frontage where 150 ft is required and contains 43,5 39 Square ft where 60,000 ft is required in the r60 zoning District a special permit is required under master under Law chapter 48 section 6 and section 5B of the chat and protective bylaw Mr Norcross and Company welcome good afternoon Jamie Norcross representing Damon wanan Damon is here today in the audience in the blue shirt uh helping on our presentation today is Sally Deon uh the architect for the project and Thad Eldridge um in preparing for the hearing this week uh I saw that we were here way back in September Believe It or Not which time flies I guess when you're having fun but um and so um we were here with a much different proposal back in September um at that time um The Proposal was essentially taking that there's two buildings on the existing uh property you have the main house and there's a detached barn and the idea at that time was basically to take the the square footage from the two structures combine it into one structure that was going to be cited essentially in the middle of the lot it was going to run from one sideline setback it's right there and in all its glory and uh it was going to run from one sideline setback to the other sideline set back and it was going to be a Gambrell design and um I guess it goes without saying it was not very well received by this board and so we withdrew without prejudice and um some of the concerns that were mentioned by the board concerns and criticisms I guess I would say at that time were the mass of what uh we were proposing at that point um specifically the height um that proposal had a building height of 29.8 Ft so essentially call it 30 feet was a a concern raised by the members um and the architectural style uh the Gambrell that you see uh members Express their opinion that that style is not really compatible with this neighborhood and so um toward the end of the hearing as Damon and I were licking our wounds from all this um there was a little bit of back and forth in members about some suggestions that uh folks had about certain um design characteristics that we could take back on our redesign in terms of trying to come up with something that perhaps would be viewed more favorably uh by this board for and one of the aspects that that I've talked about with Damon quite a bit since that was the idea of it's a an art versus a science right and by science I mean previously we designed for a box and and we met the setbacks we met the height we met the building coverage and so that's the science we could do that but there's more of an art form to it I think is what the board expressed and you needed to look at a more thoughtful approach in terms of coming up with a design that is more appropriate for the property and more appropriate for the neighborhood um um one of the aspects that was discussed by board members was well there's two buildings now is there a way to incorporate two structures into your new design as that might reduce uh the impact of any massing and lastly one of the topics discussed was because we were we were touting to the board hey we're meeting the setbacks you know we're meeting the coverage and some of the comments were well maybe you're better off spreading out a little bit more and that would help reduce the mass as opposed to trying to condense it into one space which actually has a more of a negative impact in this particular case than spreading out what you're trying to build on the property and so uh Sally and Damon have spent a lot of time doing a complete reset as you can see from the plans today and um Sally's been and she's going to explain her process to you shortly because she's going to be much more eloquent and describing it than I will be um but coming to the property visiting the neighborhood really canvasing the area to get an understanding of what she could do with a design that would be appropriate for this property and appropriate for the neighborhood and uh again while it's we're trying to take more thoughtful uh artistic approach a couple numbers that I would like to express to you um before I turn it over to Sally that I think is important as I mentioned the the prior design the building height was 29.8 feet so call it 30 feet um this design the main house that we propos is 27.6 uh the barn the second structure is 27.2 so it's an over two foot reduction and what we previously proposed to you uh back in September and it's two feet and it's also a a design utilized ing Dormers as opposed to a full two-story Gambrell so I think that two feet is an even greater reduction visually because we're using the Dormers to create the living space on the second floor as opposed to the Gambrell style that folks um you know um told us was really not appropriate for this neighborhood based on that hearing um in terms of setbacks from coll Road the existing structure is setback uh 24 fet from CW Road the proposed the very front section is going to be set back 42 and 1/2 ft so that's about 17 ft further back from croll road than the existing structure I would also point out the garage that you see there on the very top of the uh Thad site plan that's going to be set back over 88 feet from uh croll Road and the barn which is at the very bottom of Thad site plan is going to be set back over 90 feet from croll road so in addition to reducing the height we've also pushed a majority or a large portion of the structure significantly further back than the prior proposal back in September as a way to alleviate any concerns uh relative to massing so with that I'd ask Sally to please run through her her design and her process and we'll go from there absolutely hi uh thank you and um I'm not sure I will be as eloquent as you were um but I will say that I've been working with Damon for years and years on other projects um and I appreciated your feedback on the first one because it was not my favorite either for this property and for this area um so I welcomed the chance to propose a structure that I thought was much more in keeping with some of the homes in the neighborhood and I'll say neighborhood because what we did in that first um sort of neighborhood study you had it up with some photos was look at the houses that were in existence when this house was built so not really focusing on the smaller capes or ranches but some of the older homes s um and what I'll say I take from these is that you know they're one and a half story there's some two stories they look like they've been added on to over time they've grown with the families who live there um and that's kind of the feel we wanted from this new design uh and for that matter I actually enjo I appreciated the existing house which is kind of a house a little connection and what might have been the original Barn in the back the the garage um so we tried to kind of repeat that we have a house now instead of just a Gable house we have a Gable facing you know a Crossing Gable but it's one and a half stories it's got a little connection that crawls along back to a barn that's almost the identical uh scale and size and proportion of the garage that was there um so we've really tried to keep kind of the the original flavor of this house uh as much as we could with bringing it up to more modern size and needs and functions um the the other thing that's important to us in when we design is just the the scale and proportion of each element so we spend a lot of time making sure that the the the width of the house the height of the house pitch of the roof works well um and so there are a lot of little smaller elements instead of the larger Gambrell one motion um and I think the thing that uh you know we we really enjoy is it feels like a house that may have been there uh at the turn of the century and grew over the years um we even did things like changing up the window pattern the MS on the back portion of the house are two over two a little more a later period than the the front of the house so you you get this feeling that it had been growing um and so for me the exact nuts and bolts of the size the square footage the distances Etc aren't as important as how does the overall package feel does it feel like it had been there for years um and we feel like we've done that this time around so I look forward to your thoughts and reactions thank you um do you want to uh run through the 3D model oh that would be great if we could Sarah bring up the we have a 3D model that Sally and Thad prepared and this is uh taken from a perspective more like as you're a human now he now he's a bird and you can see how there are multiple pieces to the house as if it had been added on to over the years and the detached whatever we want to call that that detached matched building is reduced in size from the original here's where the rear because of the walk out does feel you know taller than the front of the house but um very few neighbors hardly seen at that that end that side of the house for for going to get dizzy the only thing missing was the popcorn that well that is a real wizard with that uh technology so it's something else to watch um um moving along anything else Sally no okay so I just jump into the criteria um if I could just interrupt your voice one second I forgot to note at the beginning if anyone has their cell phone on at all please shut them off and if you have a hat on please take that off in the building thank you go ahead uh number one adequacy of the site in terms of size for the proposed use uh we believe the size of the site is adequate for the proposal uh the main house will meet all dimensional setbacks and will be setback over 15t further from croll Road and that's the very front of the house uh from the existing house uh the barn will remain non-conforming to the South setback uh it's just over 19 ft now it'll be set back 20 ft from that lot line but as Sally mentioned the size of that building is decreasing and the condition of that building will certainly be improving um and then the overall building coverage while it is a bigger building uh in terms of building coverage we're only increasing by a total of 177 Square fet uh between the two structures uh number two compatibility of the size of the proposed structure with neighboring properties um the home is in a neighborhood of as Sally mentioned it's a mixture of sizes and style with an several historic homes probably four or five that she found some that I didn't even know existed until I was reading her uh uh her package that sort of hidden back behind vegetation and a number of homes that were built in the 70s 80s and 990s um the home is larger than the homes in the immediate neighborhood but I did a I guess I'd call it a more expansive view of surrounding areas uh and found that there are homes that are comparable in size they don't have a cur Road address but they're actually quite close to this property and that is on the um gross floor area analysis that I provided at the end of um the zoning analysis today um the additional size of the proposed structure I'd suggest is mitigated by the fact that the front part of the structure will largely block the rear portion I seen from coll Road the setbacks that we mentioned the fact that it has staggered setbacks as well I think mitigates the additional massing with 40 feet to the front and then you have over 88 feet to the garage section and over 90 feet to the barn uh number three extent of proposed increase in non-conforming nature of the structural use the only non Conformity that we are increasing is building coverage uh which again is going up by only a total of 177 Square ft uh suitability of the site um including about limited to impact on neighboring Properties or the natural environment uh again we believe the site is suitable for the Demolition and rebuild there will be no negative impact on neighboring Properties or the environment caused by the proposed construction and the project will clean up what has become a deteriorated site that is in need of significant work in several areas number five impact of scale sighting in mass and neighborhood visual character I do not believe the project will have a negative impact on neighborhood visual character uh the goal of the design as Sally mentioned is to replicate the rambling nature of the existing structure and of several historic homes in the neighborhood that were built around the same time frame it's a traditional design that incorporates Dormers to create additional area on the second level while maintaining a building height that is 2 and 1 half ft below the 30 foot maximum uh again as I mentioned a couple times the massing is further reduced by the fact that it's being set back so far from croll Road um as Sally mentioned the structure will look large as as viewed from the back of the property but that area is largely hidden from View and certainly does not impact the streetscape as viewed from croll Road it's sort of a part of it is is a byproduct of the topography anything you're going to build up on this property because it slopes so significantly into the back it's likely going to have a walk out basement so it's going to look bigger on the back no matter what you build obviously ours looks you know significantly bigger from the back and the front but I don't think it's impacting the neighborhood as a whole and certainly not impacting the streetcape at all since it can't be seen from view um number six it's a residential neighborhood excuse me a residential use in a residential neighborhood and therefore we're compatible number seven method of sewers disposal source of water and drainage we have adequate source of water there'll be no issues with drainage and as mentioned in the letter from Judy Georgio that you'll read we are uh proposing a new IA septic system to be installed as part of the project uh no impact on traffic flow and safety no issues with noise and litter we have adequate utilities uh it is not a formula business and we are not in the flood plane um so just briefly to uh to conclude again I think it's significantly different what we proposed before we hope you view it as a significant Improvement uh we certainly think it is and we do not think it is at all substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and are happy to answer any questions well thank you very much um is there anybody here or on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this project if so please make it known seeing none I will read the correspondence there are three first from our health agent Judith Georgio on May 29 2024 she reviewed the plan to demolish the existing dwelling and rebuild a new dwelling the Board of Health has approved the construction of a five-bedroom dwelling at this property as proposed with the use of an IA septic system the property will be deed restricted to five bedrooms next we have a note from the Conservation Commission on let's see May 29th 2024 um from Christina baset the chadam histo oh I'm sorry this is from the historical commission reviewed the they reviewed the application for 739 craw Road in June of 2023 they continued the matter to July of 2023 and ended up imposing a one-month demolition delay that expired on August 17 23 the commission imposed the delay because they thought that the new design did not fit in with the neighborhood and hoped they would reconsider it next we have a note from the patent family at 7:25 crawl Road May 29th 2024 to the members of the town of chadam zoning board of appeals we have been proud chadam homeowners since November 2016 when we purchased the house at 725 craw road we purchased the home originally for seasonal use with our children now use it year round regularly to um and discuss retiring in chadam we have just completed a significant renovation to our home including a complete renovation to the kitchen and the creation of a primary bedroom suite to suit a retirement lifestyle we greatly enjoy our home at the in the neighborhood and we use the home for our personal benefit we do not rent it out the neighboring property at 739 crw Road has been lying vacant since at least the time of our purchase originally 739 included a small store of home and bond that have fallen into abject disrup appear we have despondently watched both the home and barn fall apart literally from our deck in our kitchen bathroom bedroom windows unlike the house the barn had been used as a garage for storage and not for habitation initially we were thrilled to learn the property had been purchased and that the owners were planning to build a home that would bring both new neighbors and a and value to the neighborhood however you can imagine Our concern we learned that developers have proposed to re retrofit the existing decrepit Bond into a separate domicile that could easily accommodate large parties um for summer renters the bond currently sits only yards away from our master bedroom in back deck where we spend our mornings afternoons and nights the developers are proposing to convert the bond into a three floor intrusive structure that could easily accommodate a kitchen and additional bedrooms after after zba approval for rental purposes as the submitted plans a number of bath rooms suggest we can anticipate renters engaging in boisterous activities in this new dwelling well into the night which is out of keeping with our neighborhood we do not oppose the construction on the main house we have loved the Serenity and charm of chadam in our neighborhood and we'd be happy to share that with others who value those attributes however the proposed conversion of the bond into a three-story Guest House looming uncomfortably close over our living areas would greatly affect our Chad lifestyle and have a significant uh detrimental effect on the neighborhood as a whole for those reasons we strongly oppose the retrofitting of the existing bond at 739 uh C Road as into a separate domicile uh thank you for consideration James and Kathleen Patton okay is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this project or has a specific question yes sir welcome yes welcome my name is Peter Farber and I've been retained by uh James Kathleen Patton who are sitting over on that side of the room and they wrote the letter that um the chair has just read um and as stated they own the property that abuts the subject property on the south at 725 Crow Road and I'm going to re be referring to the applicants by the plural um because I did look on the registry of DED there's three owners uh they took title was the ghw reality trust or was trustees uh patents received notice of today's hearings about about two weeks ago um they had not been previously contacted by the applicants um my comments regarding the principal dwelling will take less than a minute um and I as you saw with the wonderful I guess you call it a drone view um this property the the the architect has done quite wonderful job in our opinion in designing a house that is very much the main house in keeping with the neighborhood um we were not aware I certainly wasn't aware and I just consulted with the patents they were not aware of of any previous application uh that was commented on earlier I don't know why but that's what they say so the principal residence is as Mr Norcross has mentioned um has been with brought back further from the street further from the Northerly sideline so that it now complies uh with the zoning bylaw in those respects and the applicants are to be comment are to be commended for that um can I just want to bring to your attention there's a clock so if you want to get to the important part okay um okay so my my client's opposition centers on the Reconstruction of the existing Barn uh which sits 19 .4 ft uh from their property line um as as been represented by the applicants uh the proposal was to demolish that structure um it certainly is dilapidated has been left uh unmaintained for quite a few years it appears um they in the plans that have been filed they continue to refer to this the the reconstructed structure the new structure at that location as a barn now a barn is actually a defined term in the chadam zoning bylaw and it's defined as a structure used or intended to be used for the storage of animals farm equipment and other cadow so this building is again shown on the plans that have been submitted contains a uh a full bath on the lowest level a half bath on the first floor and a master bedroom suite on the second floor which includes another full bath so I've yet to come across an animal that uses a bathroom a toilet a sink and a shower um for its urination defecation and to clean up so this is not a barn it was a barn at one time apparently but what is being proposed is certainly not a barn it's not Al it also is not an accessory structure which is again an defined term under the chadam bylaw in the schedule of uses regulations which is in appendix one a accessory structure is defined using certain examples one of which is a barn a boat house a detached garage a swimming pool and a tenants Court none of which of course or buildings that are used for human habitation so it's not a barn it's not an accessory structure what is it what is this proposed structure that's going to be 20 ft from their lot line and I suggest that just employing a little common sense when reviewing the plans is that this is a guest house it's a house a guest house is defined separately in the bylaw as a subordinate dwelling unit located on the same lot as the principal one family dwelling owned and maintained by the owner of the principal dwelling now guest houses are not permitted as a matter of right in any of the residential districts several conditions apply to guest hous I'm just going to let you know that you have run out of time but I'm going to use my discretion and let you go for another minute would that be all right yes you I'm sorry you're saying you're going to give me a little I'm going to give you an extra 60 seconds 60 seconds you want two minutes please okay okay a guest house is defined in the bylaw and it requires a lot that contains 20,000 additional square feet than what the minimum is in the in the zoning District this lot does not qualify for a guest house so that's first question or our point is that a variance would be needed needed to put a guest house now I expect that the proponent will argue that this there's no kitchen proposed in this structure but there's several rooms if you look at the plan that are large enough for a kitchen and they're labeled hall or whatever on the low lower floor and wreck room on on the middle floor and certainly those rooms were available for anyone to drop in a kitchen at any time and with three bathrooms and a master bedroom suite obviously my clients feel this is going to be used as a rental separate rental a separate dwelling unit putting aside the question of whether a variance is required the the my clients feel that this proposal does not meet the criteria in the bylaw because it affects their neighborhood their structure their home more more than any way else in the neighborhood and not in an in a uh a way that's that is not substantially more detrimental as related in in their letter this will hover over their house and the side of the house that they use predominantly uh and plan to in the future so my time is probably up yes and I thank you very much for the additional time thank you for that and we're going to let obviously we're going to let the applicant um have chance to rebut but first I just want to make sure if there's anybody else here with either a question or wishes to speak against this application either here or in Microsoft teams please make it known I don't think we have anybody else um so Council sure uh thank you madam chair uh just briefly um again I you know we use the term Barn I guess we were uh not correct with that term we're not trying to hide anything the plan show exactly what's in the building um it is a uh accessory structure uh you have had a number of these before you I was uh here myself uh I can't remember the address it was on Morris Island but it was a garage with um living area above it and as long as it doesn't have kitchen facilities it's not considered a guest house it's considered an accessory structure under the bylaw and there are a number of these structures that exist in chadam that have had building permits and special permits issued um so I really don't think uh the variance argument uh has any Merit in that regard um and to assume that someone's going to put a kitchen in after the fact I mean that's uh just I don't I think completely unfair there's no intent to put a kitchen in the intent was again in trying to be a little bit more creative with the design is to use a second structure to add some additional living area to the building to the property we thought it has a barn there we're going to sort of turn that you can call it a accessory structure you can call it a pool house whatever you want to call it um but we would have living area there there could be space for uh people to come in after using the pool there'd be a little additional uh space to entertain as well as a bedroom and that that was uh alleviating some of the massing concerns by using two structures we think it's a nice look with two structures on the property I appreciate the concerns relative to noise because they are the nearest to butter on that side I would point out we are set back uh 20 feet so it's not like it's um right next to the property line at all in that regard and we are proposing uh significant ific screening around Uh I that could probably provide some information on a specific species but uh vegetative screening along the entire perimeter of the property which also would alleviate I think some concerns relative to noise um that the neighbors have and again um my client wants to be a good neighbor he wants to work with folks this is the first we've heard of these particular concerns um so obviously was not incorporated into the design but we don't think well we appreciate the concerns we don't think it really impacts will have an impact at the end of the day on their use of the property and enjoyment thank you very much okay thank you um I read the correspondence yes and uh questions from the board Dave um I'm I don't know F I'm looking at your um site plan here what you get and maybe the neighbors know um how how what's what's the setback can we tell the setback from their house to the sideline that for the record that alridge Southeast architecture Noe it's hiding underne so they're about 21 ft from their sideline okay and um the existing Barn is 19.8 or something like that uh 19 and change y yeah 19 and change um okay uh kind of was in in a way I I think we've been given some of the definitions from the B wish Jay were here there's been a number of terms tossed at us here tonight that I'm I don't think apply guest house and I think Jamie refuted that but um domicile dwelling unit um all kinds of things and I uh um I'm not sure I think you basically Jimmie what you've said to us is that those terms do not apply to this uh this structure that's correct in with respect to the definitions of the bylaw and the uh the plans that have been shown correct in order for it to be a guest house has to have cooking facilities and that this does not and will not have cooking facilities yeah we've encountered that kind of thing in in the past from time to time um okay I don't think I have any questions at this point uh thanks Randy acon questions um in regards to the barn or pool house or um accessory structure typically we see we see it La something like this we'd see labeled you know living space up over a garage G um or a pool house it be labeled as a pool house it it seems like the correct label might be pool house with with a living space yeah that's probably more accurate description you're correct um I really don't I don't have any other questions thanks Dave Nixon questions I have no questions up this time thank you Virginia Fen questions well I had some of the questions that the neighbor uh brought brought up up um if you look at A5 maybe you can just describe a little bit more since the neighbor is here and they brought it up and I had these questions also um what is the on the basement floor plant stair Hall that's a really large space um estimating maybe 20 by 20 or something like that what is stair Hall what is that space it's really just to service the pool so a changing space um it's the washer and dryer is down there um is that what's in the box that was a question yeah under the stair okay um so honestly I you would almost have to ask Damon what he thinks he'll use that for but for us it was really just an accessory to the pool okay um full bath on that level um the is the front door I think the rendering is very nice of the arch I like that it echoes what's there um but it isn't a door is it or is it a door it truly is a door it's it's meant to look like an old or a barn door but only the middle section opens okay so it's a the two Sid almost like a door with two side lights okay okay that's and so that's probably what's in the top right hand corner of A5 um yes so Jamie I had so I did have a question about building coverage you you are going over on the building coverage from the previous proposal and from what's existing correct and what's the reason for that you couldn't fit it in to well I do you want to address the well it is going over I mean I guess the question is could you fit it in I suppose you could we did discuss in terms of shrinking it back I think s you had some comments on the design aspect that would create by sort of Shaving a little off here and a little off there in terms of how it would look yeah so mainly there are places we could shave we could shave a little off of the the garage I'll call it um or we could shave a little off the family room and if you really want to know the honest answer we get to this point and we draw for so long and then he says can you make it smaller and I say yes can we can we see what they say and we can make get smaller but it was kind of the end of the line of yeah no thank you for that I know we did talk Jamie at last hearing about um breaking up the one structure and you know maybe being able to accommodate a little bit more with um uh some of the but but anyway that those are my questions thank you okay Steve questions um I saw on the first floor of the pool that you have a mechanical closet there is that a mechanical closet for the pool or for that building itself what is that what is that that is for that building itself okay and it yeah I'm not sure if all the pool equipment will also get in there or in okay so so then where for the for the main housee enterers their mechanical equipment for the main housee generator or where is all that pool equipment the the filters and everything for the pool going to be I don't know that answer do you Damon or that don't ask the lawyer do we have a laser pointer here uh yeah is that what they so th alage again uh there's adequate space that meets the setback behind the pool house uh to be able to put generator air conditioning pool equipment for for the main house as well all the equipment can be back there oh yes no there's a good amount of space okay that setback comes back to the end there is also space behind the garage but that elevates a bit that and I guess if if we had a lcap plan it might be helpful to see what kind of vegetation might screen um this property from its neighbors um and I see you know what could be you know some cedar trees maybe lining the the property but not I I don't even think you knew for sure what was going to be planted what was going to be done we immediately put in vegetative screening and said to be designed by others it becomes a choice do you want Arbor VY versus a western Arbor VY that will grow that much faster everybody likes the Leland cypresses switch you know anything that you can do to sort of mitigate the the sound that I mean there's no deck or anything on that auxiliary building right so there's there's nothing coming off the back of that actually given instructions in the beginning noex okay only patios and I know the applicant's Happy to You Know listen to any any um any comments or thoughts on specific vegetative barrier because he certainly open to wants to make it private for everyone so and the fact that the neighbor was was questioning a three-story building that's really only because of the slope and that's the way it looks from the back of the building that's right that's what we're talking the rear elevation with the walk out on on both buildings really is where you get that so from from the road it's a two-story building it's just that it slopes off so much that it looks like a three-story building from the correct yep okay I don't have any other questions thank you Le questions um yes I have a question regarding the um the sighting of the structures is it going to be Cedar Shake yes is it going to be um considering the historic neighborhood and the fact that the home that's there now even though it's falling down um is considered historic um I'd love to make a request that we don't use the dyed or dipped Cedar Shakes we use the traditional you use the traditional just a a natural cedar White Cedar that will will fade like all the other buildings in on that street MH well most of the other buildings on that street yep interesting Paul questions just uh if you if you scale out the distance between the residents at 725 crw Road and the barn approximately what distance are we talking about I think that had 21 ft and it's 20 feet to our structure so I'm going to say 41 but I'll let him use the scale so the neighbor structure is closer to the sideline at the street but if we go directly off their back corner to the proposed we have about 42 to 43 ft between the two structures okay that's any questions I had okay Dave Nixon you have another question thank you madam chair yeah it's um it's following on the concerns that the neighbors have uh and it's sort of the the elephant in the room we've heard some talk about speculative Ventures and what happens down the road and so forth and that really isn't um a criteria that we consider but I do consider what sort of safeguards are built in to protect the neighbor now the neighbors were concerned about noise and so forth because that building is within 20 ft MH uh what sort of assurances can you and your client give them about the future use of that building and also the future dispossession of the property um I if I'm understanding your question correctly um they're not it's not a flip if that's what you're asking in terms of building it and then selling it they're they're building it to use it to live in it um again I think their goal is not to disrupt the neighborhood in terms of any sort of use and it's not going to be rented out as a separate structure you know in terms of they'll stay in the main house and rent this out to somebody that's not the intent the intent was to create some additional living area a place for uh family friends to stay um and again using the idea they didn't as you remember we didn't want the separate structure to begin with that was the original design we wanted one building but ra the concerns from the board which are very valid and the suggestion was why don't you try to incorporate that second structure so that's what we did so it wasn't like we had this scheme in mind all the time that we're going to have a separate structure and rent it out no that's not the intent at all so it's just a way to create some additional living area and not to be a separate rent renting rentable building thank you y um I have two questions um what is a steer Hall it's a very poorly worded uh additional room it's a changing room it's a laundry room it's it's a multi-function room to service the pool it may end up that's where they store all the pool furniture at the end of the season it's okay and then um Sarah's going to put up an elevation because I have another question oh it's already up um is there a reason why the dorms don't match on the uh accessory structure and the house uh I like I and just so you know I really like the plan a lot um very much and I love Dormers of Sir if you want to speak you have to come up to the mic and identify yourself he remembers better than I do it it's the the stair was going up there so the the one side has a stair in it and it functioned better with the single shed Dormer than the other side did uh so did you think that looked better than having the match or as an architect well you know what's uh do I it we actually went back and forth and we tried multiple things the older I get the more I appreciate the weird quirky things that happen in older homes that it isn't always perfect and not everything is symmetrical so yeah I'm okay with it and uh Virginia Fenwick had another question yeah yeah um I wanted to just follow up on Mr Nixon's comment about when I'm looking at the site plan I see owner of record and it's three people so how is how is it going to be someone's home one person's home I mean maybe that's not my business but it just looks um well they're they're Damon's best friends and they're also going to be using the property Damon's the primary homeowner but they are part of the project I guess you could say Okay um uh Greg and Chris but Damon is the primary owner um they provided some Financial backing for the project and they're going to have some use of it but it's really going to be David it's going to be your home okay all right when you said s you know a single owners but that's what sorry I've basically talked to David I exclusively on this so Sally and I he's been yeah whether I use Bank of America or Greg hrom or right okay financing shouldn't be a part of it but there has to be some you know title to their to their uh liquidity piece of it yeah and I agree the financing is not our concern but um it just struck me when I saw that and and what you said about the intent to Sure homeowner living in the home okay thank you and uh Steve you had another question yeah I just have one sorry one more question and it's a design question I guess um the shed Dormer on the pool building doesn't seem to have a roost or a return um at the roof line in the corner is that a design feature or is that a mistake or something you just left off or no we were trying to make that building a little little more utilitarian ever so slightly to give a sense of hierarchy between the buildings so that was the intent similar well we didn't to it not quite similar to the garage no that's that's why I'm asking because it's two different um treatments there yeah happy to take recomend I mean you know it's not a deciding factor but I think a design feature that you might want to look at thank you yeah good point does anybody else have a question and it's fine to have as many questions as you need Dave be you have another question you look like you do I'm full of questions I just can't think of what they are um I mean I'm I'm trying to follow all this and discussing the various Dormers and things and and I I I can't really follow it completely I I I do um uh appreciate the comment about not everything being just just so I think that makes sense but no I don't have any other questions thanks anybody going once all right well I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations D seconds and vote Yes Nixon yes den yes Paul yes as do I um deliberations see Lee um well I um would like to say that I I really like this design I really like all the thought that you've put into it I like the fact that you've looked at the neighborhood you've looked at the homes that would have been there when this home was built um I think the height is better um I think it fits in much better to the neighborhood traditional like it's been there like it's been added on to I think it was me that suggested you do that and you use the barn um so I'm pleased with it I I'm pleased with um the fact that you've moved it back from the road as well I'm in favor I I do hear the neighbors um I wouldn't mind a reduction in the building coverage to meet what is there now or maybe meet the requirement um but I'm overall I'm I'm happy with it okay my shingle statement stands all right Paul your thoughts on deliberations I think uh they have listened to what uh the board suggested with respect to the design and the historical suggested so we've come up with a new design which really is uh a a great improvement over what was offered initially um and when we did the 3D this time instead of it torpedoing your design it actually helped it I almost got fired after which was very nice um and I think that the distance uh from the neighboring property is sufficient um to meet the setback requirements and to deal with any uh noise issues um I agree it's not a barn in the sense of a uh of our ordinance but I think it is an accessory building that could function as such so I do not think that the new design is substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood um so I would be voting to support it all right Ed Acton if you were voting um well I wasn't here for the for the first meeting but I I did watch the um watch that and got a good shule um I think this is you know I think you heard what everyone said you you responded to um the comments um I think historic would be much happier with this design if I don't know if they've seen it but I think they' be you know 100% I agree I like the way that it looks like it's been added over on over time um so uh and as as far as the accessory structure um I mean it is a little bit further back than the existing Barn um if you were to keep an existing Barn what's not to say you could be fixing cars in there or making a bunch of noise in there I I think uh I think if you're uh your your owner is a good neighbor and uh I think uh we we put some screening in there I think uh it's a good project Dave Nixon deliberations trly you have listened and that's heartwarming because that doesn't always happen and to our new favorite architect of the day uh your description of how you came to this and as Ed just pointed out of giving us a feeling of a home that had been there maybe from 100 years ago but going back 250 years uh you know that's just unique and it's wonderful and what it is to my eye it's taking what's left of the current structures and bringing them back to life not just bulldozing it and saying well here's a new whatever as Jamie mentioned uh the rendition we had before looked like I think we thought it was part of it was an addition to CVI or something like that you know it just it it wasn't part of C Road put it that way but um I I do hear the concern of the neighbors and I heard what you said Jamie and also your client about what the use is going to be for that barn and I just hope that that's how it ends up uh I really do there's nothing we can do about that but uh overall um and thank you for the 3D that always always helps us make a decision sometimes no sometimes yes but thank you very much and I think Thad had maybe a little bit to do with this certainly did yeah so give him a give him his props um I certainly will be voting in the affirmative all right thank you Dave v deliberations um yeah well I wouldn't pretty much Echo what's been said you know I I really the um I was very pleased um to get these plans and and when I think think about you know the initial presentation and um I'm um um you know I I I try to be careful to you know when it comes to style of of houses that are presented to us to um um I I I have I have opinions but I I try to be careful not to we too heavily on on uh um I on some but this was a case where I I re I I just felt like the style of what was presented the last time was not a fit for the neighborhood this is very much a a a stylistic fit for the neighborhood U great job in doing that um and the a great job with the the the um the video I wish we'd had the popcorn but um I mean that really the setting it in the context was pretty amazing and that I'd also like to to thank you for um the set of drawings uh towards the latter part of the packet that that showed the outline of the existing buildings uh with the the the the new buildings against the outline of the existing buildings that's a great visual aid for us out in the field in in in you know um and so thank you for that as well um I I the um I think that you know these are pre it's a pre-existing non-conforming building as as is the neighbors's property they're not seeking to um um move that building closer to the lot line um I I hear the concerns about poent itial uses of the property um but we hear we hear these things I mean about rental and about this and about that and we hear these kinds of things but as David said these are not on our criteria um they are pro they are can become problems in sites in town those are not within our purview and and and um I I don't want to go overboard and trying to respond to potential problems uh with an individual applicant in a situation like this I just don't feel that it's correct also you know I mean who knows down the road um you know the town may be relaxing standards for adus even further and a building like this may come to be a desirable as a separate unit Someday I'm not saying that it's the the best thing to do and we're and certainly not the intention now but you know we have we're balancing the town is trying to balance housing crisis with with um the zoning P law and so um I I I think that you know we have to some of these things we have to set aside certainly when we make individual decisions like this one so I'm I'm I'm very happy to support this I think they've done a great job of responding to our concerns that we that we gave thanks thank you Jenny Fenwick So Jamie s and Thad great job a really nice presentation all of you Thad I I really always find your site plans the three the original the you know the before the combined and the after that they're so clear they're so helpful um Sally I'm so glad you came today this is you were very uh helpful in walking through you pointed out really important things I mean I I liked the design when I went to the site plan I mean to the site visit but the the detail that you pointed out with like the over six Windows um you didn't mention it but I had noticed the small Windows even though they're not the same they're not three over three it's it's echoing the historic property that's there which which Jamie you'll probably recall going backways that was one of the comments that historic had made at the original that they wanted leveraging the look and elements and they didn't mean physical elements they meant design elements of the existing home uh so I do think you've done that um very nice job of that the last time you were here we talked about specifically three things height well we talked about a lot of things but height mass and historic and you have addressed all of those I think the Dormers are breaking up the mass breaking up the building is breaking up the mass this the the setbacks have been very thoughtful um I already mentioned the historic how you brought that in um and a really excellent job of that in my view and then the height a two feet reduction in height is is really um significant so I wanted wanted to comment make all those positive comments I don't like the barn though um at least the the Dormer aspect and I mean I don't know that that's something that uh you can change or would change but I I do not really like the way that that is it looks a little odd as was pointed out before um I do hear the name nebor I had the same thought I went through the floor plans with the with respect to the barn I'm sorry did I say garage I meant Barn if I said g Barn okay um so I would like to con uh throw out possibly conditioning the the barn accessory structure for no kitchen no cooking um because it is a really incredible pool house or barn or accessory structure and you don't have the land um you would need 880,000 square feet to to have it be a guest house and I know one time someone said when it looks like a guest house and it quacks like a guest house it and it isn't I understand what you're saying and members of the board are saying about the fact that it's not a guest house but um if that could be conditioned maybe that would give the U neighbors and others some comfort no that's no problem conditioning they can't have cooking facilities because we can't have that with something we we're not allowed anyway we're happy to put that in writing okay that's all I had thank you thank you Steve deliv op ation um well you know I'm I'm a little uh sad to see the old house go um I think maybe if we were having this discussion 10 years ago um we might be talking about restoring it rather than raising it maybe that's what jackon Smith had in mind years ago but um I like what you've done here G Gambrell uh would not have fit in the neighborhood at all I think you've done a very good job of trying to make this look like it's been there all along you've hidden the mass of the house it's a big house but you've hidden it uh from the street basically um and and I think you've done a very good job in that um I think noise to the neighbors um I think the pool is probably going to generate the most amount of noise and not this barn and the barn might actually do a little to block some of that noise from the neighbors so you know whatever you can do you know put a lot of effort into try to mitigate as much as you can the the noise that might be transferring over to the neighbors if you could do that with with landscaping or whatever you can do I think would be beneficial to everybody um but other than that I think it's a it's a very good project and it it's a great looking house appreciate it thank you I I I'm in favor as well and just in case the neighbors weren't sure what an Adu is that would have to be a year round rental um so it's not come and go so just in case that uh law was relaxed and it was an Adu it would probably be um calm there so all that being said Paul I'll to close the hearing women just make one sure just one one more comment just as I thought of this I I would just like to Echo um what what Lee had said uh in terms of a preference about um using as as you indicated using uh White Cedar sh natural White Cedar and letting them uh weather uh it it's it does make especially on a historic look to a house makes a big difference I mean we're starting to see more and more of the dipped shingles and the this and that but you know the the you know Andor I mean clabs not weathered but painted and things like that but it the the exterior materials can make a big difference in how a house presents itself so um that's that that's just a preference that I wanted to Echo as well so thanks okay if anybody else has any comments before we close the well actually the hearing is closed all I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations oh no we we already did that we did that I knew that you knew that voting in terms of uh a motion I'll move to approve the application as submitted with uh our standard conditions uh which is that all construction activity and vehicles will be contained on site or at a neighboring property with the permission of the property owner between June 30th and Labor Day no exterior construction will be allowed no work shall be permitted on the weekends and construction activity between 8:00 am and 5:00 P PM only I'm not sure that we need any condition with respect to cooking facilities since the bylaw prevents cooking facilities in this situation anyhow so I don't see a need to add that as a condition it it would be redundant through that uh doeses anybody have a problem with not adding that I I think it' be better not to be redundant I actually right wait a minute I think it would be better not being redundant yeah if if it's covered it's it's been dealt with i for us to lay on top of that I don't see a need to do that no I I don't like that either what about you Dave Nixon well it's possible that in L of that uh a condition might be that it can't be wired for such a thing or Plum for such a thing as opposed to that which kind of puts it in a different just a little different level and I'd ask Miss Fenwick if that was a good idea I I do like that idea and who's going to make sure of that well when it's built so was part of the inspection sure is that possible um it it can be I will say that um El the electrical inspector he approves or denies electrical permits based on the fact of whether it is licensed professional licensed electrical contractor pulling it not based on a zoning board decision that says you cannot wire for cooking apparatus or whatever so it could theoretically after the fact get wired because he wouldn't necessarily know the protection of conditioning it is that it would be on the record at the registry of deeds so if the house was ever to sell in a title search they would see that there was a condition that this is not a separate dwelling unit under our zoning bylaw oh well that sounds like maybe it's not redundant then maybe it's a a good idea to put step yeah yeah it's a belt and suspenders so uh and and we've we've done that before we've no cooking so um yeah I I think that's probably better than the wiring um aspect that's not going to cause you to withdraw your application is it no no it's fine I did I have a uh Madam chair if I may just happy to have the construction vehicles on site we have plenty of room I didn't uh wanted to see if there's any thought on reconsidering the time frame in terms of no construction work during the summer um he is hoping to get demolition started um um sooner than later everybody think of that does anybody want to comment on that I it seems to me that we're already uh uh addressing uh or not addressing neighbors concerns with respect to noise on the property I think I'm more inclined to leave it the way it would normally be okay anybody else want to opine on that I agree with Paul yeah I think so I mean you know we're really not talking I mean I mean yes they you know they could do the demo and everything but but I think it'd be better we we're now I mean it's almost the beginning of June now I I just I think it would be best best keep our the time of exterior construction in there anybody else want to say anything about that so I just want to be clear where do we end up with respect to the discussion on wiring and and cooking facilities Sarah had the answer yes so you want to articulate that one um it can just be no cooking facility shall be installed in the accessory structure perfect okay and uh as far as the year round I mean I'm going to take since we're a quasi judicial uh body here I will take judicial notice that the neighbors almost uh jumped out of their chair at the idea of Summer construction no so that's fine is that yep no that's all right we won't uh that condition is fine yep so let's vote going to second the motion uh I second the motion uh and I vote Yes Dave Nixon I vote Yes J I vote Yes Paul I vote Yes as to why it's unanimous congratulations thank you very much thank you thank you we're going to take a five minute break channel uh eight thank you e for for e e e e e e e spe e e e over okay so we're back part two of the zba meeting on um May 30th 2024 and When Sarah's ready she's going to read the next application application number 24- 053 486 Shore Road LLC care of William F Riley Esquire PO Box 707 chattam Mass 02 633 owner of property located at 486 Shore Road also shown in the town of chattam assessor map 16g block 3D lot A5 the applicant seeks to construct an elevated stairway and landings under section 4 a3a of the protective bylaw the lot contains 31,900 ft in our 40 zoning District a special permit is required under M under Law chapter 4A section 9 and Section 8 d2b of the protective bylaw all right Mr Riley you you you could move that along fast I can that's what I'm remember just two weeks ago he was the captain of the SS procrastination remember that sometimes your advantages of being familiar sometimes there AR all right whenever you're ready Mr Riley good afternoon the slow Bill Riley on behalf of Bill Lynn and Mary Murphy that this is a project that uh you've seen before 4 six Shore Road uh the you have approved uh a house which is under construction uh and so the second step we have here is that uh they would like a staircase so they can get down to the water uh this is clearly not a place where they're going to go swimming but you know for access to the water for kaying and boating and and uh enjoying uh that wonderful asset uh the uh and there are there are many other benefits that come with this both for the for the applicants and and for the environment the uh the end result of this project is that the entire bank is going to be uh have all invasive plants removed and uh all Native species planted um Teresa spra is is online with us today and she'll go through it in in more detail but the the U uh so as I say I mean the reason why we propos these is that the alternative is to bushwack their way down the hill uh to cut a path to walk up and down on foot which is very damaging to the bank uh that's why in all the years that I've been doing this uh you know the Conservation Commission has approved every staircase we've ever applied for and I think that you know their guidance is important to you as well so I think that uh I'd like to ask Teresa uh to go through uh you know the planting plan and the benefits that uh will redown to the property we have the you have the planting plan Sarah so Teresa are you available hi yes Bill good afternoon Teresa's BR with blue Flex design um I'll just briefly go over what we're proposing and how it relates to what we had previously proposed So the plan that's before you you see two one shaded in a pink color and then the other shaded in green and of course down at the bottom of the bank just above the revetment is an area shaded in tan um the area shaded in pink um was the Upland area within the buffer zone to the top of Coastal Bank that is currently under um the process of being restored so we removed the invasive vegetation where following up we've stabilized that area with um native grass and Wildflower seed mix and erosion control blank blanket um and now is the second phase of this project with the construction of the stairs we'll be moving further down onto the Coastal Bank to continue the restoration onto the Coastal Bank cell so are you breaking up breaking up loated at the top of Co oh my apologies I'm I'm on the road so I apologize can you hear me yes okay sorry you're still breaking up Teresa the um what what I was saying is that once we were able yeah you're going in and out um Teresa so maybe you could stop at one of the ends yes exactly is that better yes okay fantastic all right so when we removed the thicket of invasive vegetation from the top of Coastal Bank and we're able to work our way further down onto the Coastal Bank we um discovered that there was not as much in out again and that there's actually quite a bit of healthy native can you pull I can you pull over some place sorry oh Teresa let me make a suggestion I'm going to run through the criteria with the uh the members of the board perhaps you can get to a place with a better reception and we can you can call back you call back in then okay yeah sorry about that yeah okay all right go ahead Mr Riley all right so let me let me just go through the criteria so this is a special permit but it's not like the special permits you deal with when we're dealing with a non-conforming uh building or use uh so this is governed by section Roman noral eight of the zoning bylaw so the standard for this type of periment is not question of something is substantially more detrimental it's whether the the use uh will not be detrimental to the established or Future character of the neighborhood and the town and you must find that the use involved will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the bylaw so the specific criteria we have is it somewhat similar to the our criteria it's adequacy of the site in terms of the size of proposed use again our here we have uh considerable Frontage and our staircase is only four feet wide so uh you know it is the size is adequate the suitability of the site for the proposed use we've gone through this a couple of times with the Conservation Commission and we believe that uh although you make your own determination uh that you can rely on the fact that uh they have approved this we made some changes to our our design uh to meet their approval uh but the the benefit uh from their approval is that we we go through you know the removal of invasive invasive plants in the area and replant with uh Native species they are better able to uh protect the bank from erosion uh provide the habitat for the Little Critters and the U and generally you know it's an improvement uh to the property on a from a conservation point of view so impact on traffic flow and safety we would think is not applicable impact on the neighborhood visual character views and Vistas because it's a you know low to the ground we don't think it really impacts views and Vistas uh the and when we get talk to Teresa again um I believe that once the plants mature around the property uh it will hide much of the structure so that it really won't have a significant visual impact on the neighborhood uh adequacy of method of sewage disposal adequacy of utilities and and noise litter I think are not applicable compatibility proposed use with surrounding land uses uh you know this is a waterfront property and there are a couple of reasons why people buy waterfront property one is because they like to look at the water and the other is they like to use the water as a as a a way to enjoy our wonderful town uh and so the purpose of this project is is to ease access to the water impact on the natural environment including slopes vegetation Wetlands groundwater and water bodies again once we hear from Teresa which I hope soon the applicants believe the project will result in a beneficial uh impact for the natural environment the vegetation being planted will be an improvement of the existing invasive vegetation in terms of preventing Stone water erosion uh and the existence of the the steps themselves will protect the vegetation from foot traffic uh so I don't know if uh Teresa you are you available now I am is this is this more clear Yes Yes sounds good go ahead okay great thank you all right so what I was saying was when we were able to remove the thicket of invasive vegetation located at the top of the Coastal Bank and work our way down onto the Coastal Bank itself we gratefully discovered that there was quite a bit of native vegetation that's very much worth protecting particularly pitch Pines cherries and oak trees um so with our proposal to remove the invasive vegetation we're better protecting those existing native trees allowing them to provide some screening as well as keeping the bank stable and then where we are removing the invasive vegetation mainly white popler Bittersweet and and Asiatic Bittersweet and honeysuckle we're infilling that with um with additional trees including pitch Pines amalen or St Berry and Oaks scrub Oaks as well as as a significant number of native shrubs including Beach Plum Bayberry um by burum and then we're also protecting the area that we're showing in a darker green which is existing B Bayberry in Beach Plum on the bank itself so that is doing a significant job of protecting and stabilizing this Coastal Bank and finally at the toe of the bank we are going to be preparing to um plant Beach Grass just above the riv as well as some Bas to help better protect the area just above the lower vment from scarping thank you very much Teresa the one final comment on the design of the stairs the the bottom section uh is going to be capable of being uh removed uh particularly in the winter time to avoid you know creating problems uh with winter gate sces so it's either going to be hinged U so it can be rotated up or it's going to be removed uh disconnected and lifted up onto the the remaining stairs so will rest on the stairs itself uh during the winter time that'll be our presentation all right thank you is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this project if so please make it known seeing none I will read the one correspondence from the Conservation Commission received on May 9th 2024 let's see the owner of property located at 486 Shore Road also shown in the town of assesses map uh map 16g block 3D lot A5 the applicant has submitted a notice of intent that was heard by the commission on April 24 2024 continued to June 5th 2024 for an order of conditions the project will be revised to meet the performance standards under the wetlands protection act um and regulations uh anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wish to speak against this project or has a specific question seeing none questions from the board Steve well Bill thank you for um one of my first questions was going to be um what was going to be done with the bottom or the lower section of the uh of the stairway and you answered that question so I appreciate that um um apparently there's no beach access now so what were the former owners of this property doing were they walking around or just not accessing the beach at all that was the O coin family and and uh I guess they simply enjoyed their pool you know I'm a Boer so I can't I can't imagine why you would live there and not have access to the water but they were they were apparently content with it so how what was the uh criteria that you used to select the location of where this ended up on the beach was it because of that revetment were you trying to get over the top of that revetment right well you wanted they wanted to end it they didn't want to go over the rment itself the rment ends before the property line so they uh just brought it down there that was really it okay okay um the only other oh I guess I don't have any other questions that's it thank you right Dave each questions um I don't have any questions Ed no questions Dave Nixon questions yes Mr Riley um you know I'm I'm a little perplexed here about the need for this because as you pointed out swimming in front is not advisable to the current and the seals well swimming with the seals is fun I've done that well there's certain dangers to that uh Mr Riley anyway so so boating now the town's just spent millions of dollars to rebuild the fish Pier isn't that wonderful I love the way we support our fishing Community someday they're going to support the lawyer community that way but I really doubt it uh I think the shark Community comes first anyway and as part of the latest rebuild there's spots where uh a private party could pull up and load it up I like when I Envision that when I look down the slope that this is going to be built over I can't see a family loading up with all the paraphernalia and going down that walkway to get to a boat that is in a very strong current that's because you're not a boter so let me tell you how it works what how about if we let him ask the question well see because he he's he's positing something that would never ever happen and so I can I'll be happy to explain so you go down the stairs you get in your you get in your skiff or your kayak you go out to your boat you bring the boat down into the South jog on the float at the fish Pier and then if anybody's coming they go out on there and off you go but you know if you don't have people you just want to go down and get on your boat I mean that's how you do it okay but I don't understand why you wouldn't use the facility that's very nearby you can they will eventually if that if if they're going to load the boat up you know but if you know if uh the husband and wife just want to go for a boat ride or the kids just want to go for a boat ride you go down the stairs take your skiff or your kayak out to your boat and go off for a boat ride I mean not everybody loads up the boat every time they get on the boat some people bring a couple of fishing rods and just go fishing and a six-pack of beer but you know that's so I think you're what you're positing as a as a as a potential is it it doesn't happen that way that's it for questions okay uh Paul questions well I I had the same question that uh that Dave Nixon had um I take it we've had houses there for a long time both at 486 and coming up at 500 that have not had uh staircase is going down and I checked uh CU I saw the staircase at 488 and I was wondering when that was approved that was approved in 1988 um other than that there are very few if any stair cases down that side going to the harbor and I have some concern about the impact on the uh the view from the harbor onto the town as a result of multiple staircases going down there I'm not sure it's it's advisable given the criteria so um I guess that's my question well I the um and Teresa can weigh in on this also the the plantings that are going to be put in around this uh are going to grow up around it they do plantings underneath it uh to stabilize the ground beneath the steps uh and I guess the the uh I personally I think your perspective is uh not that of the property owner you know I I think that somebody going by in a boat you know they might see the stairs or they might not because the stairs are only 4T wide and it's not like there's a huge scar in the ground that they can see because we have you know a very substantial planting plan that's going to grow up all around it and so the uh and it's not like a a walkway that's flat and goes out over a marsh because it goes down a bank and so the growth comes up on the on the side of the bank and grows up around the staircase so but I don't think the criteria should be well there haven't been any there until now and now you want one why do you want one well they want to get to the water and so the reality is that people are going to get to the water spend a lot of money they want to get to the water they want to get on their boat and go out and so if if you don't give them a staircase then they simply cut a path and go down walk down the bank and so I think you know and the reason why the Conservation Commission approves these is because it protects the bank and the planting plan that's part of this is going to provide even greater even greater protection for the bank as as Teresa said you know there's a substantial uh Native Community there in the bottom third uh of the bank but there's also a lot of invasives down there and so if you leave leave it alone ultimately the invasiv take over uh and so there's no wonder story there's nothing protecting the ground underneath and ultimately you end up with erosion which we've seen many places uh here in chadam stage Island Morris Island up in up in Crows Pond and ryers Cove you know these are all areas that all have substantial growth on the bank but because it's invasive ultimately uh it weakens the bank it makes it more susceptible to erosion so there are a lot of benefits that come with this and I think the possibility of somebody going by in a boat you know I mean you have to think about it you got Aunt Lydia's Cove there basically a a moing field uh so I suppose if you're getting in your boat and AR ly's Cove you'll be able to see the staircase but if you're going by on your way out to the outer Beach I mean there there's no Channel close to turn Island so the closest boats that are going to be going by are you know way across the harbor so I don't think I don't think visually uh it's a problem and even if they could see them I think uh it's part of the town of chadam that we have we have access to the water for our property owners so I mean the the the criteria which I read here which of course I didn't memorize you know whether the use whether it's not detrimental to the established or Future character of the neighborhood in the town that's the standard and I think that this is very much in keeping with the town and how you know it's used its properties when I looked at the at the location and the drop off that's uh involved there um what you're saying is that this is an alternative to having someone cut their own path down there um can you legally cut a path through the conservation land well you know who said it was going to be legal people just bushwacked their way and and before you know it there's a path okay I have no other questions um Dave V questions I um there there are I think I'm just trying to look at the the here but there are there are there's more than one staircase along that stretch stretch of of uh of bank is there not you I didn't count them we have one next door I know that as you go further north there are other properties that access the water uh you know that the bank is not as tall as you go further north so that yeah you know there there's smaller structures but I think I see I'm just now looking because and I walked on this I think I see be starting at the fish pier and going north before we get to the property that you're um asking for now there are two staircases intervening that I can see now I think Miss Fenwick knows exactly how many there are so yeah jeny yeah there there are currently four staircases um on that block on so uh private property south of north of the fish paer um 448 470 which is the southern of butter to 486 and then uh 520 those are the four thanks uh that's all I had yeah and 520 would have been there a long time because that property's been in the same family the Clemens family for many many years yeah all right uh Ed acting questions um I think I'm actually in a unique situation here because I live out on Minister's point and um I actually look over at this this property and I can you can notice existing stairs but they don't really stand out because of the ve vegetation that grows up and eventually you know they don't really stick out too much um also I appreciate that there isn't you know sometimes these set of stairs will have a a turn with like a viewing area and kayak storage and and this seems to be just a straight shot down just to get to the beach and it is a very nice area to walk you can walk over the fish Pier I can understand why you would want to get down here and as as someone who because of geography I think I'm where we are out in Minister's point we're the only ones really that can are going to really visually see this other than the two cabins that are left out on North Beach um so I I understand you know wanting to get down to the water I I don't feel it's going to be visually going to be you know eventually it's it's going to blend in initially I think we'll we'll notice it but I know um blue flax will do a good job and and stabilize the bank and it'll sort of all blend in my thoughts okay questions Lee um yes question for Teresa if you're still there is she still there yes I'm here okay um just just in general terms this all this mitigation H how long does it take to really fill in and really look you know like Gran and and and start to um You Know cover some of these stairs and have them have it seem Blended in yeah so one of the things I was going to add to the visuals of this is because of the location of the stairs on the north side of the bank there's a lot of existing native vegetation particularly trees um the stairs themselves oh I'm sorry can you hear me yeah go ahead Teresa oh I'm sorry so the the there there's a significant amount of tree cover um over the area of canopy cover so there's Oak and Pitch Pine located on that north side you will see that there are two red x's on the plans we do have to remove one small scrub Oak and one small p fine for the location of these stairs but otherwise the areas directly around the stairs are pretty well wooded um that's the most healthy um Native vegetation and the way the stairs have been laid out doesn't require any other removal of native vegetation other than those two trees that show the Red X um and then as we get further down the bank um there's that mature um Bayberry Beach Plum plant Community the stairs the way they're going to be constructed will be able to go right through that without major disturbance and then just to the north of that we're going to be planting we will be planting smaller Siz plants so 1 to three gallon size shrubs so when they go in they will be quite small but the the good thing about planting a smaller container sized plant is that the roots become established very quickly and once their roots are established we see two feet of growth per year um on the vegetation this vegetation will always stay a little bit lower because of course it's going to experience wind scour and um some pretty extreme um weather condition with hot sun wind salt spray Etc um but in general they fill in within 3 to 5 years um it will look as if um it won't look like it's been newly planted for the first couple of years three years it's going to look like it's newly planted after that the plants can take off very quickly um and quickly fill in the other part of this is when we do the invasive species removal we'll be seeding this bank with a mix of um deep rooted native grasses um taller grasses such as switch grass big blue stem Indian grass that get to be in the 4 foot plus tall range so those will quickly uncover the areas where the stairs are constructed so that it won't look like there's just a scar um down the middle of the bank and thank you and the if I'm correct in saying that there's no rock rment in front of this particular property and do you think that makes it a little bit more vulnerable no there is a rock rment if you if you look at the uh plan the yeah there it is so whoops that's the end of the rock rment goes all the way down to the fish beer as far as we know it was built by the town years and years ago so that again that goes all the way to the to the uh fish beer okay thank you Virginia Fenwick question I have a few Mr Riley let's let's start with a revetment um so it's existing Town put it in and it goes down to the fish Pier but it's really like the toe of the of the bank right it's that's correct three feet two feet I think it's taller than that but yeah not much for sure so um are you aware of the fact that the um Southern AB butter to 486 who is 470 have applied for an extension to their tow revetment to 15 ft uh no I'm not and you know 520 which is three properties down last year or recently put in 15 foot revetment no I'm not aware of it I think the I'm not familiar with the properties of the South I think the our situation is a little different because we're completely shielded by turn Island and there's been no uh change in this Bank uh for many many years I mean I don't know you know the again each Pro each individual property is going to have its own Dynamics with with the the waters and the tides and in wav strength but the uh we've had no erosion usually when you have a rment lots of times you have end scour mhm uh that's if the principal direction of sediment drift is along the revetment and when it reaches the end it scours out and takes the material in that direction apparently yeah here the dominant direction of sediment drift is to the South so we've had no erosion to speak of in this area well you are exactly right about the revetments and they really have it it's a tow revetment it's very low and then of course they're a budding Northern neighbor and the next three properties do not have a revetment and they wanted several of them wanted revetments there are arguments from decades a decade ago wanting revetments those properties that didn't have them for protection of the bank so um I I I'm I'm wondering if you're concerned or if there is concern about the fact that three properties without revetment even the toe are going to be sandwiched in between two 15 foot revetments you talked yourself about NS scour and and sediment display you know that that's why they don't like the town doesn't like revetments unless the house is in imminent danger or you already have one which is the existing 19 you know pre-1978 so that's a concern I have on that stretch of the of the beach I think the uh I think it's a concern that is somewhat misplaced um the again I the dominant direction of sediment drift is to the presumably to the South because there's no wind scour at this revetment the um and any revetments that go in assuming again that that's the direction south of the sediment drift in this area area uh usually when somebody's allowed to put in a revetment there's also uh requirement for Beach nourishment uh to replenish the sand that is displaced by the revetment and so um I'm I just we had a property down in South chaden where they just put in like 4,000 cubic yards it's a post 78 house so they can't have a revetment right so that's how they deal with it but and this is a post 78 house so they can't have a revent either right they just have to be lucky enough to have one in front of them so but no I'm not concerned and I know the property owner is not concerned okay um well what they currently have is really low and their neighbor is going to go quite High I know but you know the the um because I don't know if those have been approved or not uh let let me just finish so so here uh you know you have a you have a tall revetment if you have serious wave action here we have virtually no wave action because of turn Island and so that's one reason why there's no for instance there's no scarping on our property scarp is a vertical would be a vertical wall vertical face mhm because it's been eroded but we don't have that so so you know we're not concerned about it because it's been this way for decades and and I'm not familiar with any changes maybe if turn Island washes away sometime in the next 50 or 60 years it might be a problem but it's it's not going to be a problem in the near in the near term being the next 20 or 30 years um so F just to clarify the revetment 520 has it it's not a application being approved it it's installed okay 470 has applied for it and has received approval for it um so I just wanted to clarify that so I I know what you're talking about with the with the scarping um so the northern neighbor to this property um was so concerned in 2018 that uh and so I'm talking about 498 they're Northern AB butter that they they had terrible uh and they're right next door to the neighbor your your property and they were afraid they were going to lose their home that's on that's on a conservation tape that's just not my opinion yeah I know I'm familiar with that case and and and so I bring that up because it's the northern neighbor and I don't think erosion stops at the property line now um I do have a question about mitigation it's an excellent plan that Teresa has put together but are you are you saying that if they don't get the stairs they're not going to do the mitigation they' do the mitigation anyway because of the like you said the erosion no it's part of the uh it's part of the application I mean it cost it cost tens of thousands of dollars to do the mitigation at least I understand that but I'm just um you just in the way you were phrasing the mitig ation plan it sounded like you know because they're doing mitigation we can build the structure you know mitigation and revetments are protecting the bank and my concern like Paul's is the disturbance of the bank to build 172 feet of stairs that that would be my question I'm moving into deliberations a little bit I'm sorry but um well no we'd rather have you you speak of what your concerns are yeah even if they aren't questions and and the I mean all I can say is that in my experience working with Teresa you know not only uh do we are they doing plantings around the they're doing plantings underneath it so that uh rain that falls on the steps is not going to create a problem underneath the steps I I know that and read that so the the uh uh you know as someone who's worked with Teresa many times I have no concern personally you know of potential for erosion I mean there'll be a disturbance when it's built uh but you know I think that one of the things the things you're focusing on are not part of part of the criteria for this under this section of the bylaw and so I I think think they are Mr Riley just so you know um I mean certainly they are which he's focusing on our part of the criteria for this section of the B rev what revetments up the up the coastline the we're concerned with the impact on natural environment number nine and that's what I agree that is so on this property we think that ultimately uh there's going to be an improvement in the National environment because the mitigation plan is going to increase the stability of this bank and that they're tied these are tied together so that's why we think this meets the standards of the bylaw so they are tied together bill bill could go ahead Teresa oh I was going to say I just I just wanted to add one one thing I one of the things that we discussed when we were at do going through the initial conservation application for the house construction was um whether or not this Bank acts as a sediment Source um and because there's a revetment generally when there's a revetment the bank does not act as a sediment Source but because this revetment is fairly low there is some erosion just above the revetment and that is providing sand to the beach so it's helping keep the beach elevation high and this particular case there is also a fiber roll array um that was installed on the property to the north that does um extend somewhat onto this property it's the area that's shown in the hatch um on the plan in front of you so the the stairs will go over that existing fiber roll array that area has been covered with sand it's planted fiber rolls are required to stay covered with sand um the stairs are constructed all the time over fiber rolls arrays so I'm not I have no concern about these stairs being constructed um with that fiber array in place but there is some protection on that area just to the north where the stone revetment ends and it extends um to the north the only concern I had when these stairs were originally designed was that the original design showed the stairs coming just beyond the toe of the bank and did not include removable steps um that plan has since been revised and the re-engineered so that those bottom stairs are removable that would be my main concern for damage at the toe of the bank in a in a storm event um so since those stairs are those steps at the bottom are being removed I'm not as concerned um about the stairs causing any significant damage or erosion on the bank itself I'm also not concerned about runoff coming from the top of the bank down and causing any kind of erosion because the vegetation on that North Side that's existing that's native is healthy it's intact and then the the proposed vegetation that we're going to be planting around the stairs will further protect that from erosion coming from the um from the Upland portion down onto the Coastal Bank um again with the revetment um and potential for scarping on either side and there's you there's no way anybody can predict the future um but I don't think these stairs are going to cause any additional erosion issues particularly since they've been re-engineered so that those bottom steps are removable and they're ending right at the toe of the bank thanks Teresa thank you and I I did listen to the hearing that you went over this in great detail and I think it is a great plan um Mr Riley you may remember at the application hearing the zba applic a hearing for the house I talked a lot about the conservation and the bank and that was why I was so persistent with pulling things out of the 0 to 50 because of these concerns with um knowing about the neighbor 498 concerns about revetments and what they do to adjacent properties these were some of the concerns that I was aware of then and um so I feel like the application exacerbates that a little bit by by putting uh proposing steps 70t several pilings you know we aren't just we're talking about now in the bank not just from the bank or of the bank but but in it and so that was just my question about uh disturbing the bank um one last question though have you or the are you aware that there's been contemplation of sharing stairs they I I do love how you Orient to the stairs way to the north on the end of the edge of the property um very nicely placed I believe and the neighbor is 498 they're right there and maybe they're not interested but has that been a discussion at all um because we don't just have this set of stairs that we have to be uh thinking about um I'm not aware that the neighbor has approached us about sharing the stairs now have you're have you approach the neighbor about sharing their stairs okay no which I mean which what the stairs to the South the their Northern neighbor um 498 has stairs no no the answer see part of the part of the difficulty with sharing stairs yeah is insurance which Mr Nixon knows all about you know it's it's a it's a potential liability issue I have represented people that built stairs and a dock right on the property line we got permission from the zoning board to do it and it lasted about three years before they get into an argument about something like you know and we ended up coming back and moving the thing further away from the property line so but I think the principal issue really is potential liability you know and um you know these prob as you know very valuable uh you know the people who purchase them have significant assets and and uh so potential liabilities are very important to them to be concerned about so I don't know that that was an issue I don't know that anybody ever discussed it with them they certainly nobody discussed it with me uh and if the staircase is not right on the property line then that means you have to go you have to go across their property to use the stairs which uh a lot of people don't want people walking across their property so it's I mean I think it's it's a noble idea that has not worked out well in actuality yeah well I throw it out there I mean this is this is a vulnerable area this Bank um the homeowners I would too if I had access to a waterfront and and could get to it I don't know that I agree with you that conserv ation is going to be um that bank is so steep that if you don't get stairs you're not going down that bank so I don't agree that we are going to save the bank by putting in stairs I just I mean I I don't know if you've been there but I mean the slope of that bank I've Been There is almost 45 degrees well I've skied on slopes that are like that and going down at you know in your bathing suit and with beach chairs is a different thing um okay that's I I appreciate the liability issue but I'm just trying to explore some common ground thank you so I have a question for T did anybody else get to ask their questions I think I I hit everybody um so my question is for Teresa if are you there yes oh great yeah Randy parash yeah so my question is if there wasn't the revetment would you be concerned about the coastal bank with these steps no um I don't think the revetment like I said the revetment is it's a revetment but it's a very low revetment and um the bank is still experiencing a little bit of you know just typical erosion as Banks do not any kind of erosion that causes me any alarm but it is still providing um it is still providing sediment to the beach the bank is a sediment source which is a value um so I no I don't think that these stairs are going to change anything whether there was a revetment um just to the self of them or not it's a as it was pointed out earlier in this um hearing there it is a low rment it is providing some protection to the toe um we do have some vegetation above it but I don't feel that the stairs would um I don't think the stairs are going to have an adverse impact on this Bank whether there's um whether there's a revetment to the South or not so do you think they're not going to have adverse effect on it because of they're going to be built properly and allow plenty of sunlight to go through and it's going to be a Net Zero Effect would you say that yeah exactly I feel very confident with that I think the my only concern with stairs in honestly in and in a case like this would be if rain or storm water was coming from the area the Upland area above and it was creating some sort of channel that water could run quickly down or that we weren't going to be able to vegetate underneath the stairs and water coming through the stairs would cause some erosion underneath the stairs um I don't and then at the toe of the bank where their stairs are located in large storm events if water was trapped underneath them and churning and scouring that out but because the stairs at the bottom of removable um I I feel like as long as they're removed they will not cause any significant impact or any additional erosion and with that there's the fiber roll array that's underneath the stairs um that comes in from the property just to the north and one last thing I know you're going to do a lot of planting and I'm wondering is this like is one year all the planting and all the mitigation and the next year the steers go in or is it uh at the same time I believe it'll be at the same time um I have not gone through a construction U methodology or protocol with the property owners but generally they put the stairs in and then we would plant right behind it okay okay I don't have any other questions um could I could I ask Teresa a question sure thank you Teresa so what what kind of plantings are you going to do underneath the stairs so the stairs underneath the stairs will be seated and blanketed so we'll have erosion biocable erosion control blanket and that tall grass mix the switch grass the big blue stem the um Indian grass mix will go underneath the stairs so that we get that grass growing up and through it that's generally what's going to be under the grass I mean under the stairs and the grasses that we're including in this mix are deep rooted their roots go 16 20 ft deep um so they really do a good job of holding and stabilizing underneath because of the elevation of the stairs we can get grasses in at that height um so that the because of the elevation and the way the stairs designed it really helps us plant underneath and the fact that um we get ample sunlight coming in underneath those stairs is really helpful as well um and then the shrubs will be planted around um around the staircase anything else any other questions Mr Riley no thank you okay Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into Del ation Dave V seconds and votes yes yes yes yes and yes okay deliberations let's see Ed deliberations if you were voting yeah well at first I apologize because I got a little into deliber deliberations uh early on this but um I I think this set of stairs initially you know it's going to be quite noticeable but I think eventually with the mitigation it'll they'll sort of blend into the environment um as far as I like the idea that the the bottom set is going to be removable or can be pulled up and if I was Voting I I would approve but I would probably want to condition that that bottom set of stairs you know at a certain time of the year would actually be pulled up because I think that's going to help quite a bit yeah no we'd have no objection to that all right thank you Paul well I've uh and looking at this property and also looking at 500 Shore Road I was disturbed by the Steep bank that goes down there um and I to a certain extent thought um why are we doing this U because it's just uh it seems as if because we have the engineering ability to put stairs there we do um and um uh the properties have been there for a number of years without the stairs uh so I'm wondering well why are we dealing with the impact of it um and I look at our criteria involving the impact on the natural environment and the uh visual character um because I it seems to me if we approve them here we're going to end end up approving them anywhere along that line and um up to this point that hasn't been the situation so um I'm willing to listen to the other comments but those have been my concerns about where I'm going to end up okay Dave Nixon deliberations well it's difficult because I have a set of stairs where I live and I use it a lot but it doesn't go to a revetment it doesn't go out to the beach it's set back quite a bit from stage Harbor where I live but it's very useful keep Kayaks at the bottom clamming kids like to swim uh maybe not all of those things will be true of this property and at the end of the day I come down so I look at it and I say well so if it gets wiped out in a storm what's the impact on the neighborhood and I don't think there is one so if we're concerned about whether this is detrimental to the neighborhood I don't think I could find that it was that doesn't mean I think it's a great idea but I don't think I could vote no okay um Lee um well this this is a difficult one I I'm concerned I was initially concerned about the um disruption to the bank I feel like less is more um when it comes to disturbing the Coastal Bank um but now that I understand the mitigation that goes along with it and the fact that the mitigation won't be done without the stairs um I'm not voting today but I could vote in favor of the stairs but I'm still concerned about other properties along that beach um that are going to request and that's a lot of stairs so um I'm a little torn okay Steve if you were voting um well I guess I probably share most of the sentiments that Paul um alluded to in that um there hadn't been any stairs here prior to now and a set of stairs just so you can get down to get to your dinghy to get to another boat somewhere else um I don't see as a as a large need it's more of a want than a need um who's ever lived there before has has dealt with it in whatever way they dealt with it without having any set of stairs um I'm also not crazy about them being 4 feet wide I think they could be narrower if it's just a simple um walkway down to the beach I don't think they need to be 4 feet wide um and I I I just think that um I think there's a large environmental impact I think on on any set of stairs whether it be this one or any place else and um if I were voting I would probably want to see um some other kind of plan or elimination of them all together Dave vich deliberations well I'm um I'm uh I guess I would say that my I I'm have kind of the same feelings and thoughts about this as Dave Nixon has expressed um I I think that um it's you know given that these the engineering uh is available to um um create the stairs do the mitigation and the plantings etc etc um and um again I don't I'm not sure it's a great idea but I think that it they demonstrating and the professionals are indicating that the um the that this can be done without representing uh uh uh necessarily it's I don't see it as a threat to to the stability of the bank um it's and um you know if if an event comes along that that and and I guess I I think I guess I do think that um I and I noted in N plan no no indication about um you know a removable section but the paperwork pointed I think that is a very important a very important part and we I might want to fold that into any um conditioning in this case um because um that's that might be an area where it could be problematic in a storm event um but I don't think um I mean it's that's a it's a long way up and down um and um but I also know um uh from my own experience some of my own experience that uh it's a there's a powerful draw uh to people to access the water and um and um these property owners are in this area uh have the if they have the the desire and the wherewithal and and all to to create that access um I I don't think it's I don't see it as my place or our place or the town's place to say no you you you you can't do that um because I don't think oh and at the end of the day if you will I don't think that it if they somehow compromise the bank the property owner is in in the front lines of any damage that will be done and not and and so they have much more risk in in this than the town as a whole does so the property owners and the and the neighboring property owners and they in this case the neighboring property owner has a stare to the to the north side so I I don't think that it's I just don't feel that it's our place to say no no that's that's not it's not good for the environment or it doesn't meet our criteria I I think it does meet the criteria has been presented um but I it's also going to be a pretty good workout going up and down that set of stairs uh but I I don't know I mean I I also I think and I and there are you know in the ideal in an Ideal World um somebody could put in a set of stairs say to their neighbors hey go ahead use my stairs and um you know and there wouldn't be liability issues and those various things um but I don't think that we I mean we I think we could try to encourage that kind of thing but not I don't think that we can say that it might it must take place and there's a lot of reasons and problems where it would be difficult as bill has pointed out so um I I'm not surprised there are already some steps in place I'm not surprised that these folks would like to have some as well um and so um I I I think it's I think I think it's the right thing to do is to support uh offer my support and feel that it does not um uh involve a detriment uh to the neighborhood okay um JY so I'm torn too um I I I don't know that I agree I I don't know that I agree that the mitigation wouldn't be done anyway because Mr Ry himself said that you really need that mitigation to protect that slope and it's a 60 foot slope and I think that homeowners were going to be today V's point it's in their best interest to protect that slope um there's just something inherently in congruent in my mind that we are so protective of the property leading up to the coastal bank and then we are okay building a massive set stairs going down um in the Coastal Bank so I'm just conflicted with that when when I and then when I recall the hearing of the neighbor which is their Northern neighbor um saying you know we were concerned after the storm in 2018 that we were going to lose our home I I feel like we should be focusing on that and not stairs and and we do have four sets of stairs I want to make a comment that the oldest set is 36 years old and that's the property we've been talking about 498 the northern abutter um the the most recent set of stairs was 17 years ago now is that just because Property Owners didn't have boats and didn't want to go swimming or chose to go through the fish pair who knows but could it be because they you know didn't think that it was a prudent idea to put stairs down that bank um I don't know I I those are my those are the things that I been thinking about so did everybody else deliberate no go ahead Paul I mean I'm sorry go ahead um DAV just just one other thing and I didn't I didn't explore this or go into this but um there I maybe they didn't get built but I I remember since my in my time on the board a request for a set of stairs down the bank somewhere in this area casarah do you um it was CBI came um for a couple sets of stairs and it was the properties beyond the fish Pier um so headed south I guess maybe two or three years ago right yeah two or three years ago they never got built so that special permit would have since expired okay I remember those but I'm I'm thinking there was another one I remember Ryder and Wilcox did the design there was one very near your home for the town and oh Water Street yeah thank you the end of Water Street and I remember that one too Dave but yeah no I well I mean I certainly remember all those but I'm I was thinking that somewhere in this stretch but I I guess it doesn't matter I mean I but I thought that since the time I've been on the board there was a a request because I remember thinking boy that's a lot of stairs but you know I I can't I don't object I don't feel like she going to do it but yeah but I've seen Dave Nixon sprinting up his stairs so well that's what keeps him so youthful Dave there there have been there been a cup property owner or two that have reconstructed stairs but not built stairs don't remember yes well I'm getting the age where my memory is not reliable anyway so okay thanks I don't know if we should do a straw vote or do you want to hear what I have to say um I beg your pardon we could do a straw vote or you I could tell you what I think a little bit uh if you'd like to hear that sure um no don't roll your eyes I'm not rolling them eyes no I I thought a lot about this and I've gone there a few times um so I also listened to the tapes in 2014 where 500 was like crying they wanted a revetment so bad because they felt like the house was going to fall in the water and I think that's why stair weren't asked for there or maybe other areas too because there was a huge concern that the houses were on a a very fragile Coastal Bank um so at first when I listened to those and I thought about all this I thought why would anyone even ask you know but then I I have actually talked to three experts and I have yet to find somebody tell me that Ste is on the Coastal Bank is going to be a problem so you'd be happy to hear that um but I'm still concerned like Paul is that if we say yes to one we we have two more coming I think two or three and and it it's concerning and then one of the experts that I talked to and it's a local expert I'm not going to name names um said well that might be excessive so we're all concerned but um that was an ey roll yeah yeah no because it might be it might be excessive and so there's a concern too that maybe we should ask people to try to talk to their neighbors and find a way because with 500 there's also an an easement on there so that's two on 500 two sets of stairs so it's concerning because we're going down a steep path there pun intended and also there's no way that somebody would Forge a path cuz I I am a runner and I'm very happy to go up and down anything that you put in front of me and I would never find make my way down there no way so I don't so then that's another issue because the issue for conservation is often we need to let them put stairs so that they don't muck up the area you know try to make a foot path out of it this is not something that somebody's going to make a foot path out of unless you're an actual billy goat which I don't think anybody is so um so I think I'm going to vote in favor but I'm very concerned um and I I'm not sure what U Virginia's going to vote I'm not sure what Paul's going to vote um but I wanted to give you my two sense anyway um so how would you like us to proceed well this isn't a situation where we can uh do a redesign so I'd like to take the vote do you want us to do a straw vote just sure because I mean there is a there is a a possible um way to come back a a way to talk to Neighbors about Poss easements I actually talked to somebody that's uh important in the town and they also recommended that they said well why don't they all talk together and try to just do one set of stairs and I said I'm not sure they will but I'm throwing it out there no I appreciate that yeah no because I think everything should be explored because we're talking about putting several sets of stairs all of a sudden after 18 years on a an eroding Coastal Bank and it even says it on on the site plan maybe it's not this one one of them says eroding Coastal Bank so you know those are further north but yeah but still you know you can't deny it I mean but um so why don't we do a stra vote that something we do how do we do that we just go through yeah all right so Dave each how would you vote if this was real life I I would vote Yes and Dave Nixon yes Jenny no and Paul well I guess when I uh look at the standard um and the question of whether it's going to be detrimental to the future or established character of the neighborhood and the town um and I look at the individual standard with respect to uh uh impact on the natural environment um if I listen to The Experts the experts are telling me that the impact on the natural environment will not be uh of any significance given the way they're able to do this nowadays I still think it's crazy to be putting staircases down those kinds of share lines when they are so steep simply because we have the ability to do that with our engineering and so forth and the finances to do it um but does it violate the overall special permit standard in this particular case I guess I would have to say no so you'd vote Yes so I would vote Yes um and I'm going to vote Yes too so why don't we do a real vote well I'll move to approve the application for uh 486 uh Shore Road um they have construction going on there now I don't know that any of the construction issues uh would be applicable here I think we just just moved to approve it as submitted with the condition that the bottom toe area of the stairway be removable okay on a specific date I think Ed suggested yeah I I would suggest that a certain time of year um maybe we could ask the the owners well along the well I think the the uh I would suggest uh because of the way our our town is acting these days something like December 1st so before winter but if they're here for Thanksgiving and they want to access the water they'll be able to do that so that would be my request December 1st it's mainly the northeasters that we're going to have the issues with so yes the winter Gales winter Gales yeah so December maybe December 1st and until May 1st something like that but the availability to bring it back up and down yeah the water too cold before May 1st anyway so I'm not thinking it's the water people want to access something think it's the beach but that's just me it's probably the beach that they want to access anyway so I would add that condition uh that the stair bottom forward uh section of the uh stairway which they've represented would be removable would be removed between December 1 and may one of each year do each second and votes yes Dave Nixon yes Jenny no um Dave I'm so sorry Paul Paul yes and I'll vote Yes as well it's not unanimous but congratulations thank you very much all right we have one more application all right Sarah whenever you're ready the last application of the night of the day application number 24-35 revocable trust of Stephen A brierton and Stacy a Brion care of William G Lichfield Esquire 330 Orleans Road North ched Mass 02650 owner of property located at 500 Shore Road also shown in the town of chadam Assessor app 16g Block 3D lot A5 the applicant seeks to construct an elevated stairway and landings under section 4 4 a3a of the protective bylaw the lot contains 39,18401 in District a special permit is required under Mass General Law chapter 4A section 9 and section 82b of protective bylaw this was continued from April 25th 2024 Mr lville welcome thank you good afternoon Madam chairman Bill Lichfield and members of the board Bill Lichfield here on behalf of Steve and Stacy Bryon who were much younger when the hearing began but they are here uh they've owned and enjoyed this property for the last four years or so with us is RA lizardi Rivera of cap and Islands engineering and Matt lonberger of Wilkinson e environmental design who in so far as I know is not in his car and won't have to pull over to speak to you if you would like to hear from him uh they have been working with Steve and Stacy for quite a couple of quite a length of time on an important environmental uh shorefront stabilization project uh that has been going on for a long time the delay from the original April hearing until today was so that we could conclude our modifications to our overall uh plan to the satisfaction of the Conservation Commission which we have done uh you have heard a great deal today about stairs and I will try to be relatively brief but to tell you what is proposed and why first of all these stairs happen to be three feet wide not four we've narrowed them there is a removable section at the end uh but Steve and Stacy have a seven-year-old son and a 9-year-old son uh those are two primary reasons why we think that stairs down to the shore will be an environmental Improvement similarly they uh also have uh parents or the sandwich generation they have parents who are not quite as Adept as their two sons is climbing up and down the hill and they would like to have access to the water so we have uh as shown there a plan to locate the 3- foot wide stairs essentially in the middle of the lot we have about 125 ft of Frontage on Aunt Lydia's Cove uh and that's sort of a segue into the criteria as to adequacy of of site in terms of size for the proposed use we have a 39,000 ft lot which is entirely adequate for the use with 125 ft or so of Frontage onia Cove the walkway and stairs will replace an existing pathway and and path down the hill uh the stairs are located 43 ft from the Norther leab butter some 65 ft away from the southern leab butter only 25 ft is required and again they're C cited to utilize the existing path as the suitability of the site for the proposed use the exact site the Coastal Bank is suitable for little but a water access use Excuse me I would remind you that under our bylaw a much more intensive use a boat house is actually a permitted use in all zoning districts and they're necessarily in the coastal Conservancy District uh stairs are specifically acknowledged as allowable in Coast Conservancy districts and Provisions actually exist for special dispensations as to proximity to lot line they can be as close to three feet so the stairs are a favored use under our zoning bylaw rather than a disfavored one we are not however seeking that special dispensation as to impact in traffic flow and safety the purpose of the stairs is for accessing the kayak down kayaks down below and a whaler as well but there's not an impact on traffic flow in safety nor is there an impact in neighborhood visual character it is a large lot uh the walkway and the stairs are below the sight lines and will really have no impact on neighborhood visual character I under underline the word neighborhood for those who live out in ministers point and look across uh they won't be visible from turn Island they won't be visible from uh the long and and uh Smith Brown Properties on North Beach so I don't think they're going to have any impa impact the neighborhood visual character there's no impact on traffic flow on sewage disposal Public Utilities noise and litter and in fact while we had considered asking for a platform or viewing platform we decided not to we wanted simple stair access as to compatibility proposed use with surrounding uh land uses as we know Miss Fenwick does her homework and she is correct there are stairs at 4:48 470 498 and 520 Shore Road there are four properties north of the fish beer that have elevator stairs which are necessitated by the common topography from the old pain estate which is what this property was for years before it was divided up in 1978 79 as an accessory residential use in a water oriented neighborhood stairs are entirely compatible as noted there are others in the neighborhood and the bylaw could if the if the voters who enacted the bylaw were concerned about a plethora of stairs they could have done what they did with peers under the bylaw peers have to be located 250 ft away from the nearest Pier there's nothing like that in the bylaw for stairs had the voters thought about it and they clearly did think about it because they set AC aside a separate criteria for peers they could have enacted it here but they did not so our bylaw does not only not propose such a restriction as I said it also makes a special allowance for stairs allowing them by special permit and presumably with the ascent of affected neighbors to be as close as three feet to the lot line as the impact on the natural environment as to mitigation numbers and Matt I don't mean to steal your thunder as to part of the overall proposal but I think the board probably is tired would like to go home but I will tell you that our mitigation proposal has 2150 sare ft of planting restoration 6500 ft of Land Management as to bank stabilization 1,300 square fet of reinforced Marsh and 1,400 square fet of fiber rolls choir logs which we are doing regardless of the stairs uh we think however that this is a good environmental project uh someone mentioned the the prior proposal several years ago uh about a shorefront revetment on these post 1978 homes there was a great deal of hue and cry over that 10 or 15 years ago Steve and Stacy had nothing to do with it and they are instead committed to appropriate soft solutions to bank stabilization they've spent something approaching $500,000 to date on Bank stabilization on restoration on mitigation and stabilization generally which is the major part of this undertaking on which Matt or ra can comment uh that is consistent what with what their neighbors the humre have done at 498 Shore Road and Sarah could you bring up those three photographs please because this gives you an idea of what had that was at 498 in 2018 after the storm to which illusion had been made before it was in pretty rough shape the stairs were there and if you go to the next slide or picture that was in September of 2008 when our immediate neighbors to the South began their shorefront restoration you can see the beginning of the low or the marsh at the bottom you can see the fiber rolls going up 2018 two did I not say that you said eight I'm sorry in September of 2018 just in case anybody's listening at home yeah this this was four years ago and then after four years the next photograph is what happened in that photograph was taken in 2022 our property is to the right just beyond the edge of that scene as you can see the grasses and other appropriate plants are growing up under the stairs the bank itself is much much healthier uh so I think you can see from those photographs uh that it is an environmental Boon this project will have a positive positive environment environmental impact because as has been said before state s are preferable to EXA exacerbating erosion by clamoring down the hill especially with the specific mitigation uh which is going to be undertaken in addition for the stairs in addition to the work in progress the chair will read a generic but outdated and frankly not actually correct letter from the conservation staff saying that the project will be revised to meet performance standards in fact that letter doesn't reflect revision that have already been made and they're shown on the plans filed with you which a member of the Conservation Commission hearing at their hearing on May 1st called wonderfully responsive the Conservation Commission in so far as I know is ready to write an order of conditions allowing the project to go forward and is merely waiting for your approval because there is no environmental impact and it is in fact a positive step so I could go on at Great length but I know you don't want to me want me to do so the special permit being sought requires a finding that the use will not be detrimental to the established or Future character of the neighborhood in the town and that the use involved will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the bylaw the purpose and intent of the bylaw speaks specifically to encouraging those qualities which make chadam a desirable place in which to reside and being able to get to the shore over one's own property in an environmentally sensitive manner is plainly one of those qualities that is all that Steve and Stacy are seeking on the facts and the circumstances in this location I think you can make a finding that the stairs will be positive for the uh character and neighborhood of the Town particularly environmentally and that they are in keeping with the purpose and intent of the bylaw R and Matthew are both able to respond to go on longer than I have and to respond to any questions but I rather suspect you've had enough about stairs for the day okay is there anybody here are on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak in favor of this project if so please make it known seeing none I will read the one correspondence from the let's see from Crystal Keon of the uh Conservation Commission and the commission accepted the proposal as an amendment uh that you filed for an order of conditions uh the project is scheduled it says it's scheduled for phase two on May 22nd you're saying that already happened and today is May 30th yes it is well you never know maybe you will I don't know anyway um and so it's been approved and um you still have to go back to conservation though they will yeah they will close the hearing right in order of conditions I don't mean to put words in their mouth but that's my understanding right okay um is there anybody here on Microsoft teams that wishes to speak against this proposal pre please make it known um R has a specific question seeing none uh questions from the board Dave um yeah so I is there um uh I because I noticed on the stairs uh the adjacent stairs at 498 is is there a little bump out like a storage or kayak storage or something there there is a small kayak storage near the bottom yeah because Bill you had said they they there was the there's no viewing platform or or but there is a sto because clearly looks to me like storage is a good idea yeah that you know I mean I think that's a positive rather than trying to carry things we agree um and then um um what's I I went back out the other day or the other night and looked again and and there's some stay so what's the what what about about the easement and and and what's the plan or is there a plan what what's talk to me about that that there is an easement for the benefit of some folks across the street that's been there since the Lots were created in the late 70s early 80s it's we we are not disturbing that easement we we acknowledge it but it's not before us it's not before the board today okay we have no plans to do anything with you're not doing anything with the easement it it but it's something that the the perhaps the the people who enjoy the benefit of the easement May someday uh absolutely okay they they can I think they I think they may have filed with con I believe they have filed with con well I guess I wondered because there was something I saw a stake that said Center Line of of proposed path or something like they did file with conservation yeah I mean I'm and I'm thinking path whoa this is not a good idea but that's just um and and so but this is completely independent that cor not not not a factor at all with that [Music] um okay I think um and then the only other thing I think because based on our last discussion would you um um be okay with a condition about um um making sure that that lower section is seasonally seasonally withdrawn would certainly be reasonable yeah because I my concern would be that if we don't do that that it it would be too easy to be to forget and leave the thing in place and then get caught by surprise uh you know uh those the only questions Randy thanks questions um was it my imagination or did I see some pictures of an existing path that that goes down uh this property is there an existing path there there is a path it's R you want to have it if I may RAR Rivera for rec so yes the property currently has a path there's a clearing about 3 to 4 feet down kind of the middle which is what we're using to align this proposed walkway and stairs okay and it goes to the top of the eroded Bank okay so with this property there's an existing path that's over the Dune and this would solve perhaps some of the issues with with the with the path of that nature and thank you for raising that Mr a and if I didn't do so I I meant to that we exactly are we're taking the already Disturbed area and making it better by having the boardwalk and the walkway stairs okay thank you Dave Nixon questions the easement um we will be asked for a set of stairs just feet away from your client and the idea of approving or disapproving two sets of stairs that are so close together now I don't know if they're similar or what but it seems to me that we need to have some answers first the answers being is there a possibility for a shared stare is there not if so you know why and so forth that I don't think that has been explored correct me if I'm wrong and I would suggest very strongly that it be explored first before we make a decision because I I wouldn't want to assume something was going to happen or maybe there are members that don't want to see two sets of stairs that close together when they could be combined and never mind Mr Riley's concerns about insurance and all that as you know that can easily be handled with agreements so for for the benefit of insurance agents it can be handled but that's right that's not not necessarily uh for the lawyers involved that's a separate issue there there was there were discussions has has it been thoroughly explored as thoroughly as explored as some people might do perhaps not but Mr Mrs Bryon would like their own stairs in the middle of their own property which I don't find to be an unusual desire to have if uh something were to change before these stairs were constructed then that might be the case but right now this is the only proposal before the zoning board of appeals thank you J questions a couple Mr Lichfield um have you approached 498 about um using their scares we have a very very good relationship with the current owners of 498 and in fact uh there's in support of this proposal and our shorefront mitigation is extending onto their property however they are the owners of 498 we are the owners of 500 the houses are further apart than the two digits would appear similarly they might not always be owned by appropriate people so there there is no desire to have a shared stair there is a desire to have for the Brians to have their own stairs for their own uses and their own family I I understand exactly what you're saying um and I echo my own remarks I guess to the fact that if the town who the town's voters who created the B had wanted a limit on proximity they could have imposed it just as they did with peers yeah uh I asked about that because I see that they're listed on the application but that maybe that was because of the mitigation is that why yeah the the the owners of 498 joined us in our application to uh I don't remember how many hundred square feet were on their property but I yeah yeah sorry the the sole purpose was because to connect to the Shoreline stabilization that they had done four years go we had to use their property to connect and they had to be part of that application so the plan was a combined plan for those right yeah I thought that might be it but I just thought because that communication was already open about the bank and mitigation that maybe that had been discussed um so I do hear what you're saying about the path um and that is and that was what drove the placement of the stairs in the center I don't like the placement of the stairs I think it is they should be maybe in the least conspicuous area not in the center that's just what I've read and is desirable and then also the top of the bank is the highest there so I don't I don't know that it okay did you have yeah one of the things that that we are trying to do is not disturb existing vegetation and that's one of the pitch that we had to conservation so the existing pathway it's already void of vegetation we are proposing to Reed underneath it and the seating will take so there will be some vegetation underneath the the stairs and the walkway now the point where it's mentioned that it's the highest point what happens there's two ways of looking at this at that point where we're meeting the top of the eroding bank that's the least steepness of the bank so a stair you can think of a stair that is probably 45 degre not quite exactly but if we find a slope that's already on the bank that it meets that those stairs are not going to be pronounced away from the the bank that location that we we chose plays good with the slope of a stair if we choose another location the stairs as they go down the bank Veer away from the face of the bank and it becomes more pronounced so if you think about it you have a bank that's this way the stairs can only be this way but if you have a bank that's this way and the stairs are that way the bank itself is not that much higher than the vegetation that's going to be around it so that location it's actually playing better with the placement of the stairs so the steeper part of the of the hill is a better place to put the stairs the reverse the reverse so right now we're going to the point where it's less deep at the top at the top at the top okay but okay it's it's not a tradeoff I mean you're also covering more you know resource area with okay um Mr Lichfield um do you see a problem with the revetment being so 520 their their Northern neighbor has one recent 15 fish and then 470 is has an application to put them in three properties in the middle uh any concern with that no we we know that our property uh like the two immediately to the south of ours were built prior to after 78 actually the houses further south were built after 78 but when a ly's Cove was created as the Fisher in 1947 some years after that the town did the low revetment as it has been called before the concern about protecting their property is precisely why uh Matthew and Raul and a lot of other people have been involved over the last many months and why uh the Brians have undertaken a very expensive preservation and maintenance uh stabilization program so concern there's nothing we can do about the fact that there's a revetment to the north and a revetment to the South that's not unus that's not unique okay um last question so I talked in the prior hearing a bit about um it was different owners but it was the same property a dozen years ago were attorneys and Coastal Engineers were vigorously arguing for the protection of that bank 500 um and 498 actually they both were um for the protection of the bank to protect their home and because they're post 78 1978 they couldn't get the revetment unless and the requirement was unless the home is in imminent danger of of being lost that they were denied the revetment but that was the cons so again I find it do you find it in congruent at all that 10 years ago we were there were vigorous Arguments for protection of that bank and here we are 10 years later no not at all because we are doing exactly what those people wanted to do which is to protect the Coastal Bank but we are doing it in the environmentally sensitive and appropriate manner with the fiber rolls the the the planting and so forth I'm I'm very familiar with that that case and the actually the Conservation Commission allowed the revetment there was a uh 10 tax action against it the state said no I recall it well if call you uh but I am I the Brians don't want to go down that road they want to do things the right way and they have done them the right way right right so you know there's a fellow with his hand up oh Matt L an ecological thank you he might be able to answer Miss finck's question I'm gonna acknowledge sorry I did just want to add that the technique that we're using uh in the fiber roll array wasn't developed 12 years ago wasn't even developed 10 years ago this is this is Cutting Edge and one of the first uh highly successful uses of it was right next door at 498 and when you look at that site now um it's it's kind of shocking how it went from being a site where like you said the owners were nearly in tears talking about how scared where it was going to affect their house and now you have a a a site that we use as an example for what a absolute success looks like and we're doing the exact same approach here um so uh your concerns understandable but this the approach that we're doing here like Bill said is the ecologically responsible way to do what they were trying to do 12 years ago thank you Matt any more questions Jenny um uh no I don't have any more right now Steve questions well the questions I think that I was going to raise have already been asked um I was going to ask you about the removable section for the bottom which you addressed um I was going to ask about the choice of location which was addressed um the thing I was going to ask about was the easement um and I think everyone would like to see sort of a shared use there because there's a potential for four sets of stairs in about a 200 foot uh section of the of the bank there potentially two at 500 one at 498 and one we just talked about at 486 it just seems like a lot of stairs and a lot of impact on that on that on that bank so I was I I know it's sometimes difficult to to deal with neighbors and neighbors don't always stay neighbors so there might be a whole different set of people that the owners would have to deal with over time but you know if if anything can be done to sort of combine um you know two into one it it would be a good thing if if that was a question to which I could respond uh I understand what you're saying but of course of course you and we live in the real world not the hypothetical world and there is a petition for you today for the three foot wide stairs replacing the path I understand the concern that may be something for the future but it's not before I understand the zoning board of appeals this afternoon right I understand and then if someone could just touch briefly on a planting plan because we don't really have anything so if we can just sort of document it we Sarah has them in the file uh because they were submitted a long time ago frankly I I I was not uh considering that because well I know that the environment impact of the natural environment is a concern here I don't know what well Matt can probably read it we've got a three-page document here from Wilkinson that I can provide you with but the plan you know if someone could spend you know a minute tell telling us um what what you expect to do sure i' I'd be happy to um we are going to be putting Arrowwood Bayberry black choke Berry Carolina Rose sweet Fern and switch grass plugs and and shrubs along the bank uh uh quite a bit of that is going um along you know right along the backyard there and then as you get to the the uh the bank itself self we've uh seated it with a salt tolerant mix that's um if anything an improved version of what we were using next door we've learned a lot in the subsequent six years about what works um we're going to have big blue stem broomsedge creeping red Fescue Indian grass purple love grass switch grass in Virginia wild Rye those are all uh Cape Cod native grasses that are extremely well suited to this particular spot they're the type of grasses that put root down you know feet underground rather than uh you know maybe just a few inches so um the grasses themselves are what is going to be doing the heavy lifting in terms of stabilizing this Bank long term okay thank you very much um you're still on question I know one one very quick one the flood the Conservancy District flood plane concerns yes v135 what is 135 refer I assume that's the elevation uh so it's um 13.5 is probably what it should be the velocity Zone here or the flood zone is called a velocity Zone elevation 13 so that's the the base flood relation for that velocity Zone okay this is I'm sorry it's V5 yeah 15 15 okay this was 135 on our thing but it might be a mistake tyo um no all my other questions were answered thank you Paul questions I think all of my questions have been answered y so I don't I don't actually have any more questions I think it's all been addressed my first like I said impulse was this is crazy but I still haven't found an expert that says I I'm looking really hard but I haven't seen one um so Paul I'll move to close the hearing and move into deliberations Dave each seconds and votes yes yes yes yes and yes so deliberations uh might as well start with Dave well um for uh first of all thank you Bill for um framing um some of the issues with respect to the the approach of the bylaw and the voters to um these the situations that has has can be applied here you know um I think um I just thought in the discussion the discussion was taking place about the concern about the number of of stairs and things and and all I I I realized well uh I took a quick look at my own neighborhood and and just did a little um Google Maps measure distance thing and um in there are starting uh up just north of the lighthouse uh Overlook um there are three sets of stairs in 104t of distance four sets of stairs and 140 ft five set of stairs in 328 ft uh now admittedly those stairs are all over the revetment um and are not as uh extensive as these but I um I'm thinking and and and also look and thinking about this this easement and what something that may come along with respect to easement things I I don't want I don't want that to color my decision with respect to this proposal I think that this proposal as the previous one did first of all I appreciate that it's three feet wide and not four feet I thought I think four feet is a little excessive but I forgot to say that the last time around um so I I think um that much as I said much what I said in the previous hearing I feel is is true in this case as well um I don't think that it's the I think that it meets all of the criteria and I I I'm I don't think um that I at at the end of the day on this one I don't think that we our our um projected concerns over proximity of um ultimately what could be a lot of these I don't think that that's a negative I really don't I think even if if if we were to approve this um which is if we were approve this and then something a proposal does come along with respect to that easement it looks to me like the that that would be closer to the uh Southern neighbor perhaps than where this stair these stairs are proposed and as bill has pointed out the bylaw makes a specific exception for sideline setback for Access stairs over the over the banks so they they've in as he has pointed out in in in contrast to the the the bylaw setting specific distances between docks and peers the bylaw makes a special exception to allow stairs to be closer together out stairs over the banks so I don't think that we should be letting that concern guide our decisions with respect to these things that's just my take on it and and some of is my experience too as well and why I mean I I kind of looked and I watched all my neighbors build those vment one of them asked me if I would if if I could build hers for her and I said I did mine and that was it I'm not doing any any more than that um and it you know they're there uh you get used to it you see them you don't it's not an issue uh I don't find them to be an issue at all uh the only issue honestly I find there's one of them that got built uh with a a this has nothing to do with this stair it's just somehow they designed the stairs in such a way that the rise and run of the uh steps you you it's like you're mincing your steps trying to get up and down it's not a natural doesn't follow the the guidelines for a normal stairway which is too bad but that's what happens um so I I really this I like this proposal it's going to be and and and I've been looking at photos and photos from following the storm form and the the the um effect that um has already taken place on the neighboring property with stabilization of the bank and um and I applaud these folks for wanting to do the same thing and and do that kind of of Bank stabilization and uh I think as a an an entire package um and I think it's it's a good thing for the town and um I will support it all right anded delber a if you were voting if I was Voting I would approve of the project I think it's U going to take replace a path that is you know going right through the the uh the bank and um I don't think it's going to be detrimental in any in any way Dave well I'm I'm disappointed that um there's no interest in making one stairway on the property as opposed to two but I understand uh Mr lichfield's clients that's not something they're interested in well it's their property but they will have to deal with I suppose they'll with the easement on the property line they'll probably have to put either a fence or a line of God knows what kind of bushes or what not to separate that from their property and their privacy and likewise if a set of stairs is constructed uh that won't be a pleasant thing unless they can again separate it one way or the other but uh that's my disappointment that has nothing to do with what's in front of us and what's in front of us is a very specific set of stairs well presented well designed and it certainly is not detrimental to the neighborhood okay Paul well uh I have some of the same hesitations that I had with respect to uh our prior uh hearing the uh I've watched the erosion uh down in my neighborhood in South chadam um going from the motel towards Red River where uh the bank this winter was just Swept Away to a large extent and uh the stairs that go down from the houses up there actually have uh pilings uh S standing in the air because there's no ground underneath them anymore and they've spent thousands and thousands of dollars before this um hundreds of thousands of dollars before this and have now done another Beach uh restoration which has involved huge amounts of sand fiber matting grasses and so forth it's a huge problem um and um the idea that we're now encouraging more stairs going down in an area area where it is just extremely steep um is disappointing to me but I think um and and you know I understand the concept that you the the bylaw makes Provisions with respect to Wares and says they can only be so close it does not do that with respect to staircases but on the other hand the voters could also be thinking we have a zoning board that's going to look at these issues and make decisions when it's not appropriate so that we would have the ability to say no but when I look at the standard as I said with respect to the prior application I'm forced to say that in dealing with that standard I would have to vote Yes we if you were voting um if I were voting um I just wanted to say that I appreciate the explanation regarding the placement of the stairs because I had the same feeling as Jenny it looks like it's the steepest place place but I understand why it's there and I was also hopeful that we could maybe work out something with the easement but I understand that doesn't always work um so the fact that the stairs are placed where they are might be a benefit if the people applying for the easement do get a staircase because then it does space it out a little bit I just think it would look silly to have them right next to each other um so um yeah uh I'm not voting um but if I were I I would probably be in v in favor Steve well I think that the placement of the I I was going to question the placement of of the um of the stairs also but it makes sense that it's in an area that's already been eroded uh you know from a pathway that's been in use for who knows how long so um you know to to correct that situation is probably a good idea and to uh you know regenerate that area underneath the stairs is is is beneficial I think to everybody um you know the the easement question is going to keep coming up I you know I wish everything could uh um could could be settled but I I realize that you know we're you're not always going to be dealing with the same people um people move and uh ideas change so it's probably uh as long I think it would be a good idea if it could happen but I understand why it can't so um if I were voting I would approve the location of this there and Virginia fenmar so um can so this photo that we had before um I I know Ed Mr Acton is saying that he can't see it really from his property but I I'm very familiar with this speach I I walk it regularly and and you can see the stairs I mean I don't I mean this is five years four years later this mitigation and they're very visible and the locker which is on the Northern side is very visible from all the way down to card um so I don't I don't agree that they're not visible I think that having two sets of stairs on one property on and we already know how I feel about suitability of the site is um is something I'm uncomfortable with and I would um I would like to see the um the easement we've all brought up the easement holders and I know we're not talking about that today but they've applied to conservation their Stakes are in when we went to the site site there we see their stakes and I don't know with all due respect r that I agree that just because there's an existing path that that's where the stairs should go because we're talking about disrupting you know a whole long section of a 60ft bank and if we're willing to do that we could move it over have less disruption on the southern side and share it with the easement holders so for that would be my opinion on this particular properties project um so for those reasons I would not support this so it looks like the ball is in my court and I I actually agree with Jenny but at the same time I don't think that this couple would put $500,000 into a into a project to just make it worse with stairs I I trust that that they're not stupid people um you'd have to be really so um and again I've really done my homework on this one and um I'm going to vote Yes but I'm not you know I'm not happy about two sets of stairs on and we might not even see that who knows um we one in the hand is worth two in the bush so this is what we have here like you said and I'm sure that if there was anybody that could have tried to mitigate this and mediate it it would have been you um Council and you haven't done that so I'm going to assume you couldn't do it so all that being said Paul I will uh move to approve the application as submitted uh with the provision that the uh lower portion of the stairway which is removable will be removed between December 1 and may one of each year Dave V seconds and votes and votes yes I vote Yes J I vote no I'll vote Yes and I'll vote Yes as well it's not unanimous but you've thank you very much we appreciate you thank you good luck and uh I need a motion to adjourn I think I'll move to adjourn uh Dave V seconds and votes yes nion Ed Ed votes yes Dave yes any yes everybody one at a time Steve uh votes to adjourn I vote Yes I vote Yes as do I um what time is it 6:43 p.m. all right good night chadam and our next meeting is June 13 at 2:30 p.m. make a note of it 2:30