Hello everyone. Welcome to the zoning board of appeals. Please silence cell phones and note that this meeting is being taped by FCTV. If there's any private party recording this hearing, step up to the podium to request permission. I'll introduce the
board and staff. To my far right is Mr. On Time, Mark Finan. >> To his left is Scott Peterson. To my right is Frank Duffy, the clerk. My name is Suzanne Murphy, the chair. To my left is James Moors, vice chair. Tony Patucci, an associate. and our Ashley
Dlo, our office assistant. The zoning board of appeals is charged with applying the state zoning statutes as well as the town zoning bylaws and reviewing and voting on applications. All decisions are made through the public hearing process. Our goal is to hear testimony from the applicants and
the public and to allow a full and fair decision of the project. prior to closing the hearing process and reaching a decision. Number one, to each hearing, the clerk will read the public announcement for the hearing and read pertinent information from the file. Two, the applicant or the applicant's representative will then have 15 minutes
to make a presentation, but time may be extended by a vote of the board. Three, the board will then question the applicant. Four, the public will then be invited to comment. Comment should be limited to two minutes and be strictly related to the proposal. All members of the public wishing to speak should wait to be
recognized by the chair and should come to the podium. State your name and address for the record. Speak into the mic and it will not amplify your voice and record audio for V for FCTV viewers. And before we start the first hearing, uh if there's any person that wants to
make a public comment about anything that's not our on our agenda, you're welcome to come up. Anybody? So, we'll start. I'm going to take two things out of order. If you all have your um if anyone has their agendas,
there's two continues. So, I'd like to continue so people can go home and have a nice evening. Put it that way, I guess. The first one is uh case 02326 402 North Elmouth Highway. That's a continuence, a request for continuence,
and that's going to be continued till 79. Could I have a motion? Madam Chairman, I move that we take hearing 02326 Bennett uh 402 North Palmouth Highway, appeal the building commissioner's determination, continue with the request of the applicant to to July the 9th 79.
>> Madam Chair, >> is this our only possible option on this >> that I I do not >> continuation should be a contrivance? >> The the attorney requested a continuance. That's what we're going with it. Do I
have a second? >> Yeah, I'll second it. >> We have a motion and a second. It's July 9th for anyone out there for that hearing. All those in favor? >> I opposed. >> No. >> 41.
And the second one we're continuing tonight is 02726 11 Studley Street. I thought it was a mquite. says he's Felmouth and the name is Harvey. >> Both. >> Do we have a date, Madam Chairman, for you? >> And that one is continued to uh July
23rd, 723. >> All right, Madam Chairman, I'll make a motion that we continue to 723 hearing 02726 Harvey, 11 Studley Street, East Falmouth, an appeal to building commissioner's determination. >> We have a motion. I'll second. >> Any discussion?
>> Oh, just quite a village in East Falmouth. But isn't isn't that in WoY? >> Yeah, it's a village which is in East Falma. There's seven villages. >> I just don't know why it doesn't say Wooy. That's all. >> So anyway, um we have a motion and a
second. All set. All those in favor? I oppose? None. So that one is July 23rd on the 11 Studley Street. >> And now we'll take up our hearings. The first one is a continuation. It's 01826
Felmouth Heights Heights Road. Uh, good evening. Uh, uh, thanks for, uh, hearing us again. My name is Kurt Raber for the record. I'm an architect at Catalyst Architecture and Interiors. With me tonight in the front row is my client Carrie Bourne um
who's the owner of this uh property for um we were here a month ago uh started a hearing got continued for a number of reasons. We made some alterations to the plan which were submitted um on the 28th. I heard from Ashley that we'd like
a set um with uh the changes um uh circled in red. So, the sets you should have uh on your desktop or are those the changes have been circled in red and I also have those to show on the screen. Um >> you still um you still have this as a
five bedroomedroom. It's in the sewer area and you're only allowed four. >> We've done a lot of research on that which I was going to be my next breath. >> Well, that'll be a long breath. >> Um I've met uh we we've got some
correspondence from Amy L. We need two referrals before we go to the select board for a U variance or a waiver from the flow neutral bylaw for it. Turns out we need it for both a fourbedroom and we need it for a fivebedroom. >> Yeah. Well, you that that's obvious, but
it it still the fact remains that four bedrooms is the limit in the Seward area. >> Yes. and just >> and I can't vote to give you permission for a five- bedroomedroom when obviously when you're turned down you're going to have to have a different plan.
>> Does that make sense? >> Yes. Let me advance one slide. >> Commission decides it is. >> So we were asked to um put the septic flow notes on our plan and what we were requesting. Um so we did uh explain here
that we have an existing office space which when calculated on title five flow rate for office space of a certain number of gallons per thousand square feet there's only result in about 172.5 gallons currently. So any alteration above that would require a flow neutral
by law whether it was more office or conversion to residential. Um we were also asked through permodize to add the front setback on this drawing which has been done. Um subsequently after meeting with Scott Mcan he informed me that I no long the process no longer takes me in
front of the board of uh health but he's been authorized to review those in in the office uh administratively. Um we prepared a calculation which was shared with him that did show that we can fit a 550galon leeching field in the front
yard of this parcel. So with that submitted, we expect to he said that maybe even by tomorrow or Monday, we'd have his referral sending us to the board of selectmen uh p you know requesting not only the fourth bedroom
but also the fifth and we wanted to come tonight and make a presentation because quite frankly if this board's not inclined to to provide or grant the special permit for the raising of some portions of the building and the
construction of the new garage with some bedroom space above it, then the plans for the project changed drastically and we would end up full circle going back to the board of selectmen. So, um he said to me, he says, "Usually the
process is you go to the selectman, then you go to the ZBA." I he's I said, "Our clients want to understand what they can do with the property before they commit to a limitation on the sewer." We looked at other opportunities for this property
that were not residential that you know continued the the existing commercial use office space um whether it was more office or a mixeduse project with residential above. So there's the right now they've been looking for a summer
home in Felmouth. This is a property which they found the opportunity to purchase. Using it as a home makes sense now but is it the highest and best use of the property? So, what we're seeking is a conditional approval tonight or at
least the opportunity to present tonight and then could the board you're not inclined to approve it with the condition that the board of selectman also approve it. Could we at least get an indication from the board on an informal poll that there is
support for the project as presented? then we we should be a week away from being heard at the select board and we could come back on the July 9th and >> for a decision. >> I see it as Scott saw it. You're putting the cart before the horse and
>> I think it's a it's a very unique >> wasting our time. >> Well, we we think that we're about to make a really big investment in a parcel that has other opportunities because of its ex existing non-conforming use. So before we make the commitment to change
to an all residential use, we would like some indication of where this board stands on the merits of of the the design of the home or the the business renovated back into a home. So we're we're hoping that you understand that we
we should we do this or should we do that? And we really going to the board of selectmen waste their time if >> well they're going to tell you if you can have >> four five or six >> four or five. >> Yes. Right. >> I mean and and they're not they've never given one to my knowledge to anyone.
>> Right. But if >> I mean therefore sorry I don't want to you're you're wasting our time and yours. >> Madam chair. May I ask a question? >> Yeah. Go ahead Tony. Why would this board, other than the um
not having a variance from the select board, what would preclude this board from not approving this plan? What about this plan does not work as long as you get the >> We think it worked we think it works very well. >> Now, I'm talking from from a from a
bylaw point of view, what part of the bylaw would stop us from approving this other than the sewer issue stop us from approving? I don't think any part of the zoning bylaw does prevent you from approving the project >> because I cannot I can't find one. And I
just want to ask the board if they if if there's nothing that precludes us from approving a four or five bedroomedroom plan other than not having the variance. Why wouldn't we at least give an indication that this is a fine? It's their problem if they go to the psych
board and they don't get the right >> the variance, not ours. We all we have to do is say, "Look, this works as long as you get what you need from the select board." >> And if we were denied the fifth bedroom at the board of select, we would have to >> come all the way back and see us again.
>> Yeah. But I don't want to I don't want this board. I don't think we should make it more difficult for them. Let them just do what they have to do. >> It's just the order is improper. >> In this case, we don't think so because we we might be redesigning the whole project entirely, withdrawing this and coming back with something with, you
know, more density. >> That's your prerogative. This is not a zoning issue. Um, they've applied for a special permit under the zoning bylaw to raise a portion of the structure and construct an attached garage with habitable space above.
That's what we're doing. If the number of bedrooms to uh be accommodated by a septic system or whatever you're going to do or sewer, that's somebody else's decision, >> right? And and if you approve us conditionally and the board doesn't, the
board the building commissioner won't give us a building permit. >> We could approve six bedrooms or seven bedrooms. It doesn't matter. >> That's So we >> I think we hear them. I think we hear you all. >> You know, we understand traditionally we have the cart before the horse, but it it makes a lot of difference to us as to
how what we ultimately build. >> It is a much different case than we normally do anyway. >> Yeah. But it's >> I I think we hear myself. >> I you all right with that? >> Well, I'm I'm fine with that, but in the end, I I can't vote for something that
can't be done. >> He's only one deal. >> We don't know that yet. Somebody else that makes that. >> We know that there's only four bedrooms allowed in the sewer area. He's on the sewer. >> Asking for the flow neutral bylaw. So, >> you try and understand I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Go ahead. But you try and
understand the applicant's predicament here. There's a lot of money that has to go into this design work and they recognize that there is an issue that they may have once they get to the select board and if they do then they can come back. They're going to have to
spend money to redesign this. But at least let them have an indication that if the select board approves that that this is something that this board would approve. I I just I I don't want to make it any more difficult. >> I agree. I agree. I think we should hear him out. Madam
>> Chairman, there's a reduction. What is proposed is a reduction in the nonconformities. U it's a permissible use. >> Yep. >> And we don't zoning. Yeah. We're It's Yeah, that's all we're responsible for.
>> Right. So in this note on the plan, we indicated that we were seeking approval for at least a fourbedroom home and then the fifth bedroom if it were to be approved by the board of selectmen after this plan was submitted met again with Scott down board of health and he said
you're still coming through me for the fourth bedroom because you're you're going above the home you only have 172.5 gallons of flow now so you're coming to me no matter what. But we just, you know, there's there's value in the
non-conforming use and the commercial use on the property, which could be expanded again with a special permit, but it would be an entirely different design, but maybe that's more lucrative than this residential project. >> Do you, Madam Chair, >> do you understand that if they did not
give you the fifth bedroom, what you'd have to do to this design? You have a fixed pretty much a fixed exterior. You're going to have a room that's going to be s has to be shown not to be a bedroom. >> And I could explain what we would do. Bedroom number five would have would go away and there's a large, you know,
opening into that room. Now, that would just become part of the great room living space. Um, so bedroom five and we could also bring back a a revised plan to this board. Well, you know what? It would be in the building permit. Um,
>> can I speak? >> Come up here. >> We just need your name and address, please. >> Terry Bourne, 22 Brentwood Drive, Eastn Mass. So, I have four children, two twin boys. Um, we went back and forth
anyways, whether it's a fourbedroom with an office or another den. Um, and we just said, you know, the twin boys would share a room if we had four bedrooms or they would have their own room if we have five. So, I didn't I figured let's go for the five
so they can have their own, but if they don't, they're going to share and the other room would is going to be another den or an office or and we went back and forth with that and that's just the the plain facts that I just wanted to explain. That's awesome. >> Thanks.
>> So, let's go over this plan. >> Okay. Um, so this is the site plan. The pink areas are the pieces of the uh building. Um, this one here we believe was once a patio and or a porch that was enclosed. Then there was a a single room kind of office suite addition built here
many many years ago. We're not exactly sure when. It's a wood frame over block foundation crawl space. Um, and it actually does lean over the line. So after meeting downstairs with the building commissioner and the zoning uh team down there, we came up with the
notion of of basically taking down two pieces of the building, try to improve the existing setbacks and then in the front yard create a small addition which is compliant to the front yard setback. It's just inside of it. Um and that has a garage on the first
level and one of the bedrooms upstairs. So in in the packet ex 1.0 Z is the basement plan where there is a finished storage room and an unfinished basement. The rest of the small cellular areas are around the perimeter are the crawl
spaces uh with piping uh wiring uh etc. Um this is the existing floor plan which is kind of broken up and recounted the office spaces, the open office area and then this was sort of like a work room.
This was a little kitchenet. Um, again, no second floor, existing elevations, and this wing on the left is the one that we proposed to take down that leans over the property line on the left by about 9 in.
>> And this little flat roof lean to in the back here on the rear >> posted every week evening around 700 p.m. Eastern time. And you can get it wherever you get your Howie car. Oh, howie car came on the board. >> Sorry about that. >> Um, so this area here is the piece that
would be the old porch that was enclosed that would come off. Um, here's our proposed plan. And again, the piece that was missing is this. Um, and that was the patio with a old bulkhead which was then finished as an enclosed stairway.
We proposed to remove that. Um, and over on this left side there was another piece of the building that we've removed. This is the foundation below the garage. And again, the red are the circled the major areas that have changed since the plans we submitted a month ago. Um, but
I circled all the room names because the room names and the room numbers last time were misleading. Um, and some of the bedrooms were next to room numbers like nine. So, we cleaned that up. Um, we did modify the design a little bit to make the stair head room in the stair
work better. um since we had a little extra time to refine the design. But um so bedroom this is bedroom four in the corner. This is an office actually with a vated partially vated ceiling. So that's going to be the TV room. And then this area would be
bedroom number five. And you can see this gray shaded wall underneath the cursor. That's an actually a a pass through window and a large door opening into that space. Now, so if for some reason this the select board was not favorable on the fifth bedroom, um this
would be a large cased opening into this living space. >> Okay. >> Um again, the uh stair goes upstairs now and comes up to a landing and we've got um kind of a a second master with a on
suite bathroom up there and then more of a um twin bunk room up here. um or grandkid's room or something like that. Um so this is the only second floor space is over the garage edition and one about one about 20% of the
existing footprint. And here are the elevations. Again, the circled uh areas are things that changed since um we were here a month ago. >> What's the height of the garage? Um, the garage is 22 foot3 measured from grade
at the front yard. It's a little less at the backyard. >> That's the highest. Yes. >> Garage, right? Yeah. >> Yes. >> 22.3 or 22t 3 in >> the ladder. 22' 3 in. Yeah. Um, again, we just changed some of the
window and door configurations where the TV room moved since the last time we were here. putting patio doors in that room. The bedrooms that are along Alba Road, uh, Alma Road, um, we changed to Barn Sash, which are set up higher, uh, just so less headlights shine through
those windows and a little privacy. Um, so maybe I'll jump back to the site plan to highlight. Oh, you know what? The floor plan has it. Um, no it doesn't doesn't have the whole
parcel x6. Let's see how do you zoom in the >> do something. >> Not sure how. Anyway, the existing um setback over here was plus 9 in um and
we're proposing a setback of you know it's hard to read on this screen. Um, yeah, that that goes from 9 in over the line to 7 feet. Um, so, um, and then
on the rear, that corner that's still 2.5 here, and I'll highlight that. So, the setback here was encroaching and now it's 7 feet to the property line to the structure. Back here, we're taking this off and only at this one point is it 2.5
ft. um to the existing fence with the neighbor, but the uh that leanto roof is coming off there. Uh the prop the setback on uh Alma Road is unchanged and the setback in the front yard was
47 here by the big tree. And over here by the where the garage approaches the property line the the the closest point is 25 foot three about just 3 in inside of the required setback. >> Quick question. >> Yes. Go ahead.
>> And that rear set that's 2.6 not 2. >> Oh sorry 2.6. >> Yeah. Just for the record. Um so we and on more importantly on lot coverage um the allowable or 20% allowable
coverage we were 2305 and that's me that's the the the footprint of the first floor. Uh at that was we were in existing condition at 31.1 with the reductions of the two dem demolished and raised areas and the addition of the garage we still have a
reduction down to 30.7. So slight reduction in lot coverage um by structures and the allowable coverage uh by imperous buildings and imperous areas uh went from down from
because the big existing driveway the circular driveway through the front yard comes out. Um we were at 52.8% of imperous coverage and we're going down all the way to 32.6% of coverage. So site plan wise we think it's a dramat dramatic improvement. Um
and of course we removing the building that encroaches. Um, so we think that we uh certainly making this new structure um a lot more conforming than it was before and are seeking a special permit for that uh as a as a five-
bedroomedroom if allowed by the board of selectment with referrals from um wastewater and board of health. And I'll stop and let you ask questions. >> Mark, do you want to start off?
You have a referral from wastewater that says you can have five bedrooms. >> As I understand from Scott, the letter will come >> Scott's health. >> Yes. But their letters are not a decision or even a recommendation. They kind of explain the condition and it
goes to the select board. And I understand that the select board have a list of priorities. Commercial uses aren't among them. Residential use is. Um, and so Scott thought this would be a something that the
select board would get behind. >> That's as far as I could push him on his opinion on what he thought would happen. >> Nobody's ever asked us for five bedrooms. >> Scott, you have anything? >> No. I I I you know, with Mr. Finan, I I wish again that you had run these traps
prior to coming to in front of us. We're kind of the last board of review, but uh I fully understand the project. I'm okay. I I like that you had reduced the reduction in the total lot coverage and things like that. So, yeah, just get that completed and it would have been
nice to have wrapped it with a bow tonight. But, uh >> other than that, no no questions. >> I have uh two questions. Um the conservation commission referral that we received some time ago uh noted that the
AE zone had was not shown on the plan so they could not determine if they have jurisdiction. Have you satisfied their requirement for >> you know what I think we did the the plan that was submitted there's a note right here um is located um as uh so
it's it's located on the panel but it is an AE zone in um I believe that it's a um >> Frank I believe it's an AE11 there >> above that red. >> Yeah, but but that's that's not
jurisdiction of the conservation commission. That's a flood zone. >> Yeah. >> Um have you got a determination from the conservation commission that you're outside their jurisdiction? That's what my question is. Oh. Um
I don't remember seeing I don't remember receiving a a referral from or even a letter from them in the documents that were in permanized but um I believe that the AE zone goes kind of through the through the front yard. So I don't think that I think the property is in it but
that structure is not but >> the Azone does not affect the the building then >> correct the existing building. Um and and of course the garage is an occupied space. Um all right. Yeah. Well,
>> do you want to read the referral again here? >> Yeah. Right on. >> Sorry. Concom right there. >> Uh please add the flood zone del delineation to determine if the garage work lies within our jurisdiction. You
you've satisfied that request of the conservation commission. Not on this. >> No, I No, I guess they probably want the flood zone on this project. >> They have jurisdiction over this project. And I think what they're saying in this referral is that they don't know whether or not they do have
jurisdiction. >> Okay, we could provide them that. >> Well, I think you're going to have to because >> No. Oh, I understand. Yeah. >> We're not going to approve something with with an outstanding request from a board referral board that's unsatisfied.
>> So, all right. Um, the second question I have is a little more perhaps legalistic, but I got to answer it anyways. You've applied under section 240 10.2A to,
you know, do some alterations to a structure and 10.2A applies only to single family or two family dwellings. You don't have a single family or two family dwelling. You have a commercial building. So, right off the bat, I'm wondering, you know, you're not I don't think you've applied for us for your
special permit under the right section. Um, now I'm going to just walk you through it because you you don't practice in in Fmouth very often. I haven't seen you here before, but um I don't think section 10.2A
applies to convert to a single family dwelling. You have to start out with a single family dwelling rather than end up with a two single family dwelling. Does that make sense? >> Right. We there is an existing special permit which I think >> but it has to do for a for an office and
it also has to do it's a variance to allow I think um 14t setback from Elma Rose. But this this probably can be resolved because under section 10.2b 2B, which you don't site, which applies to
non-conforming structures other than single family or two family dwellings. So, um I'm going to suggest to you that I think you should have applied under that section, and perhaps you can do it by amendment. >> We we actually originally filed for a a modification of the old special permit.
>> That wouldn't have worked. >> And then would that's what the building department suggested we do. So, I appi I prepared that application. When I got to Norin's desk, she rewarded it this exact way and asked me to come in this way.
>> Well, I think that you were you've applied under the wrong section, but I I'm not saying it's fatal. I think it can be corrected, but >> and maybe maybe Well, I'm sure she understood that it wasn't it was once a residence, converted to an office, and now going back. So, maybe that's why she
had me come under this article. >> I don't know. There's no nothing in the file saying it was a residence. I think we may assume it was, but there's nothing in the file to show it. But anyways, I just raised that issue that I occurred to me that you may have applied under the wrong section. I don't think it's fatal. I think you correct.
>> We can amend. >> We can amend, but um >> are we? >> Well, it's not me to amend. It's up to them to decide if they want to. >> That's proper. >> Well, I guess I'm >> Are you also >> I'm confused.
Norine's not here tonight, of course, to explain why >> back. So, you think about this. >> Sorry. >> So, you're probably going to be coming back. So, think about it. >> Okay. >> Did you give them the 102B? >> 10 240 102B, I think, is the section you want, but it's up to you to decide, not
me. >> My only question was the flood zone question. >> J, do you have anything? if he's coming back. Testimony is that it's an AE11. I'd like to see that represented on the plans. I'd like to see where the flood zone comes through on the plans. Do you know off answer what the elevation is of
the existing building? Oops. Um there were you know what on the existing survey which we did not I I believe the the um the contour here at the back is
like elevation nine and the street is a little bit lower. >> We're concerned with the corner of the garage. Well, we're happy to put this the the the uh flood zone map overlay on this.
>> What's the proposed ridge height? >> Proposed ridge height. >> We got room to go up to three going to be a >> It could be a significant cost. >> The um this is higher than the Boeing. Now,
>> are you staying below 35 ft? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um well, two other questions. your reduction in impervious, you're removing the paved driveway. Is that >> That's correct. Yeah. Here on the >> is the clam shell or crushed crush shell driveway just going to keep the same contour? Are you changing that at all?
>> Um it'll be the same contour. The the garage door will be at the where at the existing elevation here on the front and the driveway goes straight out to the road. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, it'll be on existing grade. We're
not proposing any retaining walls or um lowering any grade if that's what you're asking. >> And the only thing I couldn't find on the plan, it says GG. I just couldn't find. What is that little circle target bullet that's out in the roadway? Is that anything related to your house or
is that utilities? >> Oh, GG is a gas gauge. >> Gas gauge. Okay, thank you. I think it's gas, but just wanted to make sure. Tony. >> Um, aside from the technicalities that came up tonight, I mean, we all know this building. This is a tremendous
improvement to this area and a really fine redesign of this building. And um, I'm hoping that the technicalities can be cleared up. As Mr. Duffy suggested, it's not fatal. You just got to get a few things straightened out. But I'm hoping this board would approve this
some at some point in time. That's >> all you have. It's so so clear. It's just so absolutely clear. >> Any other questions up here before I go to the public? >> Everybody good? Anybody from the public
want to comment on this project? >> I think we're good. So, you have your homework list. >> Yeah. Right. So, you asked for two things. Whether we should, and I'll speak with Noren and Ashley about this, you know, tomorrow if I can, um about the non-residential
chapter or article number. >> Um the flood zone on the plan. >> The flood zone on the plan and I think that was it. >> Do we have anything else? >> Anybody have anything else? >> No. >> Now we with good luck. We may have been
to the board of selectmen by the time we come back. >> Yeah, >> that'd be great. >> And we we would we would be brief when we come back. Could that be the night? >> I just have a quick question. Is there going to be any outside space like for your grill?
Yeah, out out in the back there's going to be a little lawn where there isn't there's a little walkway now. >> That walkway by the generator. Don't blow the generator up. >> Yeah, there's not much space. >> But we're trying not to put back >> pvious um uh you know, if there was a if
there was a a um a pvious hard surface in the vacuum, >> you could roll it out to the Staples parking lot. There you >> That's a busy place, too. So, one one last question. Yeah. So, you understand about the bedrooms. You
understand what you have to do. You made that clear to us that you want that bedroom. >> Scott indicated that he thought it would go well for us, but he really wouldn't cut couldn't opine speak for the select board. So, >> you can deal with all the things that when you come back here could or might
hopefully aren't issues, but maybe they could be issues. >> So, in other words, if you can't have that fifth bedroom, >> right? So, we'll clean up the site plan, add the flood zone. We'll we'll >> I just want to see perhaps amend our application delayed because you didn't >> another chapter or another article or
both and um hopefully the select board will hear us before the your next meeting. >> I just don't want you delay it any further if you don't have to be. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Are you meeting again in two weeks? >> You have a date? >> July. >> Pretty busy. >> 9th. Yeah, we're real jammed. >> We're busy. >> July 9th. Are you available then?
>> Well, I'm hoping that we'll be through the select board by then. I was >> Yeah. optimistic for the the >> all the boards get real busy in June. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I've been warned. >> So July 9th. >> Yeah. But I haven't made a motion or anything. But >> can I could could I ask if generally is
there sounds like there's favor for the project amongst the board. >> I think it's fine project. >> Okay. Personally, we're happy to proceed to the select board as fast as we can. >> We just like it all clean. >> Yeah. Hope hopefully we'll have that box checked before we come back. >> Sounds like a plan.
Everybody from the public is all set. >> Oh, Richard. >> Richard. >> Richard Johnson, one Ambitz Avenue. Just in the interest of uh getting rid of any potential glitches, the elevation shows a trellis above the garage door. Does
that have an impact on the setback or not? Mhm. >> Does. >> It does. >> It's from a bird's eyee view. >> Good eye, Richard. >> You might have taken it off.
>> Do you know how do you know how wide the >> 18 thing is? 18 in. >> But it's open. >> Yeah, but it still counts. >> Remember we had that one in >> only what? Yeah. >> Uh, >> we never had >> exceeds the profile of the uh sophet.
>> So maybe put that on your plan, too. >> Okay. >> That would be a good thing to have on there. >> Like Frank would say, it's not fatal, >> but it might as well be on the plan. We We do like our >> lot in your head. >> Clean. >> So, should we continue before there's something a glitch in the matrix for
>> something else? July 9th. >> Yeah. He want to make a >> motion uh to continue to July 9th. >> Second. >> We have a a motion and a second from Frank. >> Uh any further discussion up here? >> All those in favor? I opposed.
>> Um question maybe for Ashley. Is the is the conservation note in the permit eyes? >> Yeah, it's the sign off referral section on the right hand side. >> Okay. >> It'll be in the drop down. >> If I can't find it, I'll call you. >> He read it to you. It's
>> Oh, I Yeah, yeah, yeah. I just wanted to have a copy. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thanks. I saw some people come in after I made an announcement. The two hearings were post were continued, which is 402 North
Falmouth. >> The cheese shop. >> And the cheese shop. Yes. And and 11 um >> Studley Street. >> Studley. Those two were um the cheese shop was July 9th and Studdley was uh June 23rd.
Just I just saw people come in late. Thank you, Frank. All right, let's see who's it about next. We have Oh, I'm going to miss that that name up. 173 Mech Mechtoxic Road. >> Toxic. >> Toxic.
>> Toxic. >> Oh, boy. Never mind the first name. Rao. >> Reto. Reetta. Oh boy, I'm o over for two. This is brand new. So >> it says this application 21 of the year 2026. Stephen Stefan, I think it is. B
and Janice RO um have applied to the zoning board of appeals for a special permit pursuant to section 246.6B and 2401.4A1i 4 A1i of the Falmasoning bylaw to raise the existing barn and construct a new barn
exceeding 900 square feet in size to be located in the front yard more than 50 ft from the property line. The property is located at 173 Mthoxit Road. That's in East Falmouth. Although some people might say it's in what way?
>> I was going to say that. Yeah. So, uh, all right, >> Steven Raido. >> The, uh, the properties in an RA zoning district. I don't have any information about overlay districts in the file, but uh, the flood zone that are applicable are AE1 and DE13.
Uh, I didn't find any >> for quite bay, Frank. >> Yes, I didn't find any applicable previous decisions of the zoning board of appeals. The lot is fairly large. It's 101,800 ft in a district that currently requires a minimum of 40,000 square feet. So,
we're okay there. The street frontage is 457 ft in a zoning district that currently requires 100. >> Um, this road, Matoxit Road, is a public right of way despite its condition. >> Um, the, uh, new barn to be put up is
26x 40. It's 1 and a half stories. The height is reported to be 21 ft 10 in. Lot coverage by structure uh is currently 3.2% uh will increase to 3.7% the limit is 20. Lot coverage by structure parking
and paving is 3.6% it will increase to 4.3%. The limit is 40%. There are no nonconformities noted on any of the structures on the property. Um engineering has given us a referral that they want us to consider storm water runoff. The board of health has no
comment. The conservation commission has no comment. The water department says if you need water in the barn, you have to get a permit from them, but they don't know whether you need water in the barn. We have two letters in support of the project. No letters in opposition.
Um, so I'm Steven Raido uh with my wife Janice. Uh, our address is 14 Meadow Neck Road in uh East Falmouth or WOI. um here to talk about the uh a new property that we purchased that we're moving to uh 173 Moxit Road. And as you said, this
is about uh raising the existing barn and uh hopefully uh proposing to build a new barn just basically a little bit uh across the driveway from where it is. So, just got a few slides that show it. I think everything you said is pretty clear. That's just a picture of the old barn with the house behind it. You can
see the existing barn there and where the new proposed uh barn uh is supposed uh to go. Um if we go to the next slide, it's a very wooded lot. Um I don't know if anybody's been there, but it's it's very wooded. So uh you don't really see
much from the road into the property. U the existing barn, you can see it a little bit. It is definitely run down. The it leaks. The roof is leaking. It's it's got a tarp on it. Um it's probably 60 70 years old which is why uh we're uh
you know proposing to replace it. Um the setback for the existing barn um is about 53 feet from the road and the setback for the existing one is 57 ft uh 57 1/2 ft sorry. Um the other setback is
will be closer. It's uh 29.6 ft uh from the side property and as you mentioned it's about uh 2.4 four acres. So, there's there's tons of property in that in the other direction there. Um, this is um actually a a barn that's
being built uh by Barnyard. It's kind of a catalog item. Um, and we're working with Mike Brcelli and Fm with Engineering who did the the site layout and the foundation plan. Um, and the local contractor is uh Broadick uh Construction. Uh, so it's a it's a very
simple design. I think you have the the plan design there. Um it's kind of a kit barn and they come and they assemble it on on on site. Nothing's finished on the inside. Um right now, no electricity, uh no um water, although would be nice to have a utility sink at some point and
and maybe some electricity, but right now there's no plans for that. Um it's really just a place to store a tractor, uh a small wher, and a small uh catbo uh is the intention for the barn. Um they almost fit in the existing barn. Actually both of them fit in the
existing barn. So um these are just some some details. I think you read all this for the it changes the teeny little bit on the proposed coverage of the structures. Uh I we believe it actually keeps the aesthetics actually improves the aesthetics. Uh we've socialized this
with all the neighbors in the Toxic Point community. They're all kind of ecstatic because the existing barn's kind of an isore. So I I would say that they actually think it's going to be an improvement rather than a than than any changes and we believe the proposed structure is not sustained uh not
substantially more detrimental uh to any of the of the of the bylaws. Um I think that's all I have. Uh oh, I did want to thank the staff. So they were very very helpful. Um I worked with a lot of the town committees and well this one was a joy to work with. So thank you to Ashby.
Great >> to hear. Sounds good. You want to start off? >> Good. >> Start and finish. What's not to like? >> I know. >> Got all the room in the world and it's beautiful. >> Uh upstairs was unfinished in the loft.
Correct. >> Yeah, it's really they they call it a one and a half story. It drops off pretty steeply. I think the the peak I worried about that I could stand up there. It's like seven and a half, but it's it's all unfinished. >> That was impressive. the ultimate wind
speed at 131 miles per hour, not at 130. >> It's a nice nice project. Thank you. >> Do you have any questions? >> No, this is permittable and um given the nature of the lot and all the trees in the woods, no one's ever going to see
it. So, >> I I'm okay with it. >> I just encourage you to do water >> now. Yeah. Yeah. >> Now, while it's being dug up. >> Yeah, that's a good idea. Yeah. Yeah. >> Our neighbors just did it and they told me about So, it's Yeah.
>> Put the conduit in. Anyway, >> no, no questions, >> Tony. >> Uh, I think it's a wonderful project. Just uh for the record, the square footage of this uh footprint is 140 ft. >> Yeah, I think 40 times 26. Yeah. 1,000.
>> Yeah. 140 ft in the uh roof height, ridge. Just make sure. Oh, I I should have brought that up. I think it's 21 foot 10 >> and three quarters. >> But if it's Yeah, they could change that if it's issue, but also if it's okay. And I asked Ashley this. There is a
Koopa which puts it above the 20. It's just a You can't get to the Koopa. It's >> decoration. >> It's just a decoration. You can't access it. >> So, you're not using it's not integral to the building. It's just a decoration. >> No, it's just it just pops on the roof >> because it has to only be a decoration. Otherwise, you can't have it. >> It's just a decoration.
>> Well, no, you're going to be up to 35 ft. So, the bottom line is You're 21 ft 10 and 3/4 22 for >> only 22. Oh, it's a garage for 22. >> What I Yes, >> I think it's a wonderful project. >> You guys all set up here?
>> Look how happy. >> Anybody from the public want to comment on this? Come on. You want to comment? It's a nice project, isn't it? She just wants it for herself. >> Is she kicking you out already? Huh?
>> Are you guys all set up here? >> Absolutely. >> Make a motion, Mark. >> Motion to close. >> Second. >> We have a motion to close in a second. >> Do you have anything else? Will we close? >> Thank you. >> Everybody's all set to close. >> All those in favor of closing? >> I.
>> Motion to approve with conditions. >> Second. >> Motion to approve. All right. Frank. >> Okay. We have a property here that under section 246.6. 6B of the Felma zoning bylaw. They need a special permit for accessory structure or a garage which exceeds 900 square ft. This is uh will
come in at 1,040 square ft. So they need the special permit. No special requirement, just general special permit conditions. Under section 2401.4A1i, 4 A1 I they need a special permit for an accessory structure in the front yard as
this will be provided it is more than 50 ft from the street frontage and this is so under section 240 12.1E which is the general conditions for a special permit we make the finding that this project will not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood that there's
site is adequate for the proposed use the site is suitable for the proposed use there's no negative impact on traffic flow and safety There's no negative impact on neighborhood visual character, views and vistas. There's adequate sewage disposal and drainage for uh on the property,
adequate utilities, and it will not have an adverse effect on the supply of affordable housing. And then conditions, um >> hours of work. >> Hours of work, 7 to 7 Monday through Friday, 8 to 4 on Saturdays.
>> No construction on Sundays or town holidays. He won't have to worry about any trucks or contacting the police. He's got plenty of room. Right. Okay. >> Unlike your neighborhood. >> Unlike my neighborhood. All plans, all
boards, all you know, referrals. Um, >> can I ask for uh because it's uh at the maximum height on the roof of Nazil, >> it's 22. >> Yeah, but they're at the max. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean, that changes so easily at this point. >> H away. Yeah,
>> good point. Yeah, they could they could change it a little bit more. I wanted the but they could they could make it a little bit less you get as built. >> But this I think what you got was supposed to be the as built. Uh but >> well no that's a proposed. >> Oh I'm sorry. The proposed Kevin
>> it means when it's done and yeah >> the stamp plans right >> when you're that close. Yeah. >> I want you to hit your head. >> Right. And I should have mentioned this too and they're on the plan. There is two drywalls being put in. >> Okay. All right. Any any other conditions, Dave? Anything?
>> No. Can't say no sheds or anything. All right, I think we're all set to vote. All those in favor? >> Opposed? None. >> That was a great project. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. Next at bat, we have um 02426
marquee 594 Pomera. Okay, this is case number 024 of the year 2026. Um, Janette Marie Mark Marx um has applied to the Falmouth zoning board of appeals to modify special
permit 4 of the year 2004 pursuant to section 246.6B trash 2401.2B3A 2B 3A 240 12.1 240 10.2B
and 240 uh 14.1 I2 of the zoning bylaw to allow a sixth rental room to be located in the former gift shop. Property is located at 594 Palmer Avenue in Falma.
Um, we have property that's in the general residence district. Uh, there's a part of the property is indicated to be in the salt pond coastal pond overlay district. There's no applicable flood zone. Uh, the previous special permit or previous decision of the board of
appeals is referenced in the hearing notice, but it's special permit 4 of the year 2004. Um the lot is two 24,013 square feet in a general residence district which currently requires a minimum of 20,000 square feet. The
frontage is 85 ft. The district requires 100. Uh Palmer Avenue is a public right of way at this point. In fact, it's part of Route 28. Um the special permit uh for of the year 2004 allowed five rental rooms and
alternative parking surface in the parking lot. The lot coverage by structure is 16.9. Uh it's going to stay the same. The limit is 20. The lot coverage by structure parking and paving is 27.8. It's going to stay the same. The limit is 50 in a general residence district.
Uh no uh non-conform no there's no changes to the footprint of any of the buildings so we don't deal with changes in nonconformities. Um engineering had no comment. The board of health notes that the septic system is okay for eight bedrooms and this
property is not in a nitrogen sensitive area. The planning board has a referral which I'm going to read because it's kind of detailed and I don't want to paraphrase it and not do it right. So, this is from Jed Corno, who's the uh community development director. I am
submitting this email as a referral to the special permit for 594 Palmer Avenue. The planning division has no objection to the applicant's request to increase the total number of commercial accommodation units on the property from 5 to six. It appears that the additional
unit and the associated parking can be accommodated on the site. However, the application also includes potential impacts to an abuing residential property which need to be considered in multiple sections of the town zoning bylaw. There are requirements that attempt to mitigate the impacts of non
on non-residential entities, excuse me, of non-residential entities on their abuing residential properties. For example, section 24014.3D10 under the landscaping performance standards includes a requirement for
quote residential buffers end quote which are required between business and industrial uses and residents to quote protect the budding properties from glare and noise, dust, fumes, heat and traffic end quote. Although this property originally received site plan
review in n in 2004 from the planning board that included a landscaping plan, the requirements of said landscaping plan were never fully implemented by the property owner. This landscaping requirement is still an open item for the planning board and the property
owner will need to revisit this with the planning board following zoning board of appeals process. That said, having input from the zoning board of appeals as it relates to the plantings types, location, and height would be helpful. Thank you, Jed Caro.
Um, so that was rather lengthy, but the planning board is asking us to give them some input and they also have to go back to the planning board to get approval of their 2004 site plan review.
>> Thank you, Madam Chairman. Members of the board, I'm Bob Ament. I'm a Felmouth attorney with my office right next door in Town Hall Square and I represent Janette Robinson who is the former uh Janette Marks and she's the applicant.
Janette is here in the back row and next to her um or no, almost next to her is her daughter Fiona. Fiona, this is a fun fact. Fiona just showed me a photograph in the Enterprise of her being held as a
toddler by her mother um at this podium. Maybe not this exact piece of furniture um presenting to the board for that 2004 special permit. So I think that's >> You're a celebrity. >> That that's pretty neat.
>> So Janette obtained uh she bought the property in 2002. She obtained a special permit to uh create a bed and breakfast and she built a new building um the main house on the site in the front of the property specifically designed uh to be
a um bed and breakfast. It's uh works beautifully. Um and it's the Frederick William um house and it's operated now for some 20 years. Um, I want to show you the assessor's map and just describe
the area briefly. So, let me try to pull that up. So, this is the 594 property right here. The building in front is that is the guest house with the five bedrooms and a a kitchen, dining area, and a reception
area. It's connected to an older cottage, a two-bedroom cottage which was existing. That's a two-bedroom um residence for um for Janette and her son. Um
and some years ago, a old shed in this location. Um and I'll show you all this on the actual site plan. Um that shed was converted uh upgraded converted with building permits and approved by the uh
ZBA administratively um actually as a gift shop associated with the uh inn but also catering to people who would come off of the bike path which is right behind it. So
this is the bike path shining sea bike path. Um it, as Mr. Duffy said, it's a general residence district. The property immediately to the north at 620
um is a 4500 foot office building. The properties, both 582 and the property to the south of that are both duplexes. It's light industrial zone property on the other side of the bike path. Once
you cross the um Palmer Avenue, uh just south of Goodwill Park is Crab Apples uh restaurant. It's parking lot and underneath that, I don't know how far this doesn't go down, but there's Mark Hutker's uh architectural office in
there. So, there's quite a bit of business uh in the area, and it's on Route 28. Um, and obviously the amount of traffic that's going by there is uh too much. Um, the request is simply to be allowed to
use that uh building in the rear southwest corner right here. Um, which has been used, as I said, as a gift shop. It has a bathroom in it to be allowed to use that as a sixth guest room. Now, Janette came before the uh
board of appeals about three years ago. I was not involved, but she came before the board with a similar request. But at that time, the issue was raised as to whether her lot was actually large enough for the sixth unit. Uh because
the zoning bylaw um in a residential uh uh general residence district uh would require to have six uh bedrooms um 24,000 square ft. And it wasn't clear
that she had that. Well, the property lines um on both sides, north and south, of the property have been determined by by separate court decisions. Since then, I filed copies of those uh with the application.
And um now it's clear that the property has just slightly over 24,000 square feet so that the sixth unit can be approved. The Frederick William House is among the top rated uh bed and breakfasts in
Falmouth on various travel sites. Not every review is five out of five, but most of them are. Now, quite a few BNBs in Felmouth have closed over the years, such as the Copper Beach Inn, which was on Palmer Avenue, the in at one Main
Street, the Village Green in, the Grafton Inn, and actually many more. and maybe some have opened, but actually I'm not sure. The number of licensed commercial accommodations bedrooms in Felmouth is estimated to have dropped by
about 40% over the last 25 years. Um, and I don't think there's been a new um hotel approved in Felmouth um that I'm aware of in all those years. Um, and I'm talking now about licensed
commercial accommodations. Bed and breakfast as well as hotels and motel now face a lot of competition from short-term rentals operated by people in their homes. That's just the way it is. Um,
but B&Bs are different. And I think the one of the most important distinctions is that there is staff on the premises 24/7. Whenever there's a guest staying there, somebody is there's a host there or
hostess. Now, with regard to the request, the septic system is adequate as the health agent has reported to you. Um the
capacity of the septic system is 8 984 gallons per day. That's six gallons per day short of being sufficient for nine bedrooms. Uh the health agent described that to me
as a couple of shovels of of gravel. Um, I talked to him about it because, uh, there is a room in the basement. I could pull it up, but you have floor plans and there are, um, rooms for
storage and a room in the basement, which we'd like to be able to use for a staff member to sleep in, mainly because Janette is not always there. That room would not be for guests. house, not a seventh bedroom. It would
be just for staff. Um, and the thinking is it would be when Janette's not there because now when Janette's away and somebody else is there subbing for her, they have to sleep um in Janette's bedroom or in her son's bedroom. Um, and
this is a much better alternative. So, we would like the board to know about that. It's not changing the request from being uh six guest bedrooms, but we do want to be able to use that basement room um for staff
subject to the board of health approving it. So, the health agent said, "Look, it's six gallons per day short." Um he thought that's dimminimous, but he wouldn't approve it. He said you'd have
to go to the board of health and get them to approve it. So, we will do that if um we have the sixth guest bedroom allowed. We'd like to be able to to to do that. Also, if you're using a basement room for
uh sleeping, um the building commissioner will require that there be two means of egress. And there's one very good means of egress right right up a set of stairs from this uh room, but we'll have to
create a window well with a operable window and a couple of uh ladder steps. But anyway, we'd have to meet the requirements of the building department. Um so we want you to know that that's our intent. If you think it's necessary,
we'd like you to um spec allow that subject to um the necessary approvals from the board of health and from the building commissioner. That's the situation with that. >> That's not on your application.
>> Well, it isn't a request that requires a special permit. I I just want you to be aware of it. Uh that's >> just a head >> anymore than if we had um another person staying in the um in the in the cottage.
Um so I I I think that that is >> which cottage you talking about? >> I didn't catch that. Sorry. >> Which cottage are you talking about? >> The two-bedroom cottage that's connected to the house that is the residence of uh the >> Who's staying in the gift shop now?
>> Nobody. >> No one. >> No one. was a bed in there. It looked pretty slept in to me. >> Well, it's um I was there once when Janette's son was sleeping there, which will be perfectly allowable. Uh it's not it's not being rented.
And to the extent there are any issues, we're trying to clear them up here. And um that's what we hope you'll help us do. >> So, As far as parking, there's the site
plan. Let me pull that up. Okay, this is the engineer site plan. It shows um eight parking spaces. There's actually plenty additional parking spaces. It shows the uh septic system uh location and it shows the structures
that um I've described uh to you. So um just say that there's there is adequate parking for it. So the remaining issue is the landscaping which was referenced in the
uh town uh planners referral to you and the town planner notes that it's been an ongoing problem and it certainly has been. Now he says that this application for a sixbedroom will include potential impacts to an
abuing uh residential property. I disagree with that because we're not adding any uh structure. We're not changing the use and the extent that a sixth bedroom creates more traffic
on Route 28 is obviously uh insignificant on the site. There will be a little bit more traffic when the sixth U unit is occupied, but it's a um almost immaterial
impact and it doesn't increase the area that's available for parking. But nonetheless, the landscaping that was approved by the planning board and the ZBA back in 2004 was not followed. So we need to discuss
that and I hope come to a a good conclusion um about it uh now 22 years later. Now most of the property and pictures were submitted with the application and I hope probably most of you or all of you have been to the site.
I hope so. Um, but most of the property has attractive, mature, uh, abundant uh, landscaping. There's more planting there than is uh, shown on the 2004 plan. It's just that
it's it's different. Um, let me just pull up the um, another plan. So this is the 2004 plan. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on it, but I want to compare it to
the current plan. And the main difference is that all along the northerly uh boundary with uh 620 Palmer Avenue and the two boundaries with 600, this plan showed
uh Leland Cyprus to be planted. A lot of them I think it's uh 38. It might be 39, but one of the other. And the current plan, let me see if I can rotate this like so. um
shows all of the current planting and everything that's shown on this plan is existing. Um and as I'll get to it, some of it uh recently planted in an attempt to satisfy um the site plan review
requirements. I have a plan, but I think I can without without pulling it up uh mention to you that all of this planting on the west side of the property. Virtually all of it is not shown on the
2004 plan. >> Would you like to request more time? >> Yes, please. >> You guys all right with a couple minutes? >> Yes. Yeah. >> Go ahead. >> Okay. So the upshot is we have a robust
landscaping plan that um actually we think if we were before you for the first time you would find adequate with the question remaining of what to do about this border in particular. Views of the res from the residential property
here are really just views of a residential uh structure of the of the house. Here there's a view that is towards a parking lot and that's that's um a view that the zoning bylaw says we should you know try to protect. Um so
why hasn't this been a landscape? And I want to show you a couple things that suggest why. >> Good reason. >> If this works it'll be great. That's the view. Take a look at the water that's going to
come down on the right side there. Right there. That's what happens in severe storms. And unfortunately, it happens uh every year a couple of times. And what's the result of that? Well,
this is the um driveway going down into the parking area. This is towards the uh area that the connection between the two structures. And this next picture, try to get this right.
That's um June of 2024, two years ago. That's the parking area. You can um that water is pretty high along this stone wall and it affects the whole area that along that westerly
boundary of the 600 property um and makes it very difficult to landscape. Clover Landscaping has issued a letter. I have it to get I'll give you copies of it. I could pull it up. Um
but it says that the recurrent flooding has caused and will cause significant damage. The um overwhelming amount of water is killing surrounding plantings um and landscaping in those lowlying
areas are sure to fail. So you know we have a real serious problem. Thank you. >> Weren't there concerns also with the abuing property?
>> Yes. Yes. I'll get to that very quickly. >> Thank you. >> That's >> That's right. Um I have a GIS photo of um a budding property. Um, >> that's the other side of the building in
2000 somewhere here. This is the abiding property. This is the inn. This is 600 uh Palmer Avenue. It's owned by Jonathan uh Strange. John >> talking about the other side
outside of this unit we're discussing that a butter you can still see kind of a >> ugly fence there with no trespassing signs on it. one think that would think that some plantings there might uh >> well I don't think that's our offense
and I also think from being there on numerous occasion that it's at this time well vegetated and it's indicated that on the landscape plan if you felt that um and and that's not screening a parking area so there isn't a
requirement in our bylaw to do the same kind of buffering um so I don't not sure why we would focus on on that side of the property. Uh, nonetheless, I mean, some plans could be put in there, but I think that it's
>> well, when I when I went there the last time, this was in front of us. The abuter was there. I mean, he's obviously put up that fence and those no trespassing signs, >> whatever they are. >> Do you mean three years ago?
>> Yeah, whenever it was three years ago, two and a half years ago. Well, that was resolved by a court action and it turned out um I'm not real familiar with it, but the the land that the neighbor was complaining it turned out was determined to be Janette's um and that's what's
shown on the current plan. But I don't think that the landscaping is a is a problem over there. Let me just move on though. As I was saying that this at the 600 property, you can see there were was quite a number of u deciduous tall
trees. They created a a a canopy and a nice buffer. Uh Mr. uh Strange bought this property in uh 2020 uh 21. Um unfortunately I had to replace the septic system and the result was
that um all of those existing mature trees uh came down. And here's the situation u today. And this has this has exacerbated what as you can see the water coming off
of the state highway is is significant problem but the problem has been exacerbated by um by that condition. Um and Janette's engineer have have said that
that's their opinion that that's had an impact. Now, the purpose of this hearing to get a sixbedroom approved is not to solve these drainage problems because I don't think certainly the
board of appeals can't. and Janette has been unable despite years of effort dealing with the state which has acknowledged the problem but said they and they've done some installation north
on the road of uh drainage structures but it hasn't solved the problem and they can't do more work because there are utilities in the way. It's obviously a big problem to solve. Janette can't solve it. She hasn't
gotten people to solve it and there is no easement in favor of the state or the town to drain water onto onto her property. Um it's just a real difficult um situation that at times
oh hasn't happened yet this year but at times there's a lot of uh water that then has to drain. Janette's spent $85,000, had to refinance the inn in 2009 to put
in more catch basins on her property to try to help. And it has helped, but you can see it hasn't helped uh it hasn't anywhere nearly uh ameliated the problem. And the flooding, besides what she spent, the flooding in 2024 alone
cost her $45,000 because it flooded the basement of of the cottage um and cause damage to flooring and other systems. >> You need to wrap this up, please. >> I will. I have just a few more lines. Thanks. Anyway, getting a sixbedroom
approved is obviously going to help her out financially and to deal with this. Now, she's made a good faith effort this year to install plantings
um along that boundary. I won't go back to the landscaping plan, but it shows that she's put in 10 trees, one of them 20 ft high, four more of them 8 feet or more, 112, 110, 28. These are maples and
sassifrass trees. She's also put in over 22 Forcyia bushes. She has with um a protective stone wall uh created a raised planting area to put those trees in. They have narrower roofs
roots than um u the evergreens would be and she's there is concern about the planting fairly close to that septic system. So, she's making a good faith effort and we're hoping that the planning board will be satisfied with what she's done certainly under the circumstances.
Um, thank you very much for your time and uh we'll try to answer any questions. >> You want to start off, Black? >> Um, can you just put the cursor over the building and question?
>> Can you put the cursor over the building? >> Sure. over the gift shop. >> The gift shop. >> Would you like it on the uh >> No, right there is good. Just so everybody knows >> the these are roofs, of course. This is the structure. Um,
and as I said, when u on the bottom side of that over that patio or whatever you call it, there's a very short um distance to the property line, >> 8 ft 2 in to one corner of the overhanging shed roof. It's more than 10
years old. It's visible on plans more than >> No problem that you can tell it's been there a hell of a lot longer than that. Um, but I was just wondering if the plan uh the plantings that the um planning board was concerned about, none of them would
be along that property line because obviously the neighbors put up some kind of a spike fence there with the uh signs on it. >> Have you been there in >> this afternoon? >> Okay. I >> I was there three years ago. I was there
yesterday and and went to that corner to just check on staking. Um there are a lot of big trees there. I don't know if any more bushes need to be added, but putting trees in that location isn't going to really impact
views from from that adjacent duplex. Um and the request that we're making um again it's it's uh not to expand anything and and but we do need to have a plat uh >> you're expanding.
>> We need a satisfactory landscaping plan. The 2004 landscaping plan showed no landscaping in that area as I indicated earlier. There's a lot more landscaping and it's very attractive and in good condition on most of the property. Our
problem is with that um boundary next to the septic system up against the 600 property and what we can do there given the flooding conditions and and while that's a problem and we will work with further with the planning
board and the plantings that have been done in recent months uh was an indication of our effort to to address the problem. Um but um I don't think it should have much to do with your approval of the sixth
bedroom and it be subject to the condition that we satisfy the um site plan review which isn't required for this hearing but it's a 2004 requirement. We're just trying to
solve these problems. >> I'm good. >> Go ahead. Yeah, I it's hard to believe we did this three years ago. Um, so time flies, but again, you're you're spot on on your focus if there's a way to help
the abuter there to screen the parking lot area and understanding the unfortunate flooding conditions. Apparently, the state will probably never do anything. I fully understand that. So again, if you can stay focused on protecting the uh the abuter I would
>> fully understand. I'd note in res regard to that and I meant to say that u Mr. Strange has um installed as you could see a 6 foot uh solid fence around the property. Normally that would do the
trick. Um but it just so happens because of the topography and the slope which is part of the problem with the water, his house is up above and we'd like to do more. Um, >> other than that, I'm fine. Thank you,
>> Frank. >> Um, Mr. in the application, it references section 240 10.2b, um, which applies to nonconforming buildings other than single family or two family dwellings and a variance is
required to increase any nonconformity. But that that doesn't apply here, does it? Well, I put it in only because the shed that Mr. Fineran was referring to, the roof of it at an angle, so it's only
a couple square feet, is within 10 ft of the property line. So, that is a a non-conforming structure. It's over 10 years old, uh, as shown on aerial photographs of the town. It's therefore is protected. And I think that that
arguably that uh section of the bylaw therefore applies, but it certainly doesn't have much to do with the question of um the sixth unit and and it is just the roof overhang that's used for storage. What's >> um the guest unit itself is in the
structure which >> there's a roof on the gift shop >> is >> um less than 10 ft from the property line. >> No, not the g the former gift shop. No, just a shed. Just a roof, open roof shed
that has bicycle storage or something like that. Um, off of it. >> Okay. I >> Mr. Peterson just showed me his picture of it. Um, I remember that now. Okay. Um,
but it's been there for over 10 years. So, did do you need a do you think you need a finding from this board on that issue? I don't care whether you do that or not. >> Um, now also you one of the one of the sections that you used in your
application was 240 uh-141 I2 a special permit for an alternative parking space, but I think that was covered by the earlier special. >> Well, that's true. So I maybe I just need again I just want to make sure you're not asking for anything specific with
>> none whatsoever. >> Okay. So, we just say all the conditions of the previous special permit remain in force. >> Um, I think that's I think that's right. >> All right. Um, I think that's my questions. Thank you.
>> I have a couple. Is there going to be signage for the lot I mean parking lot spot eight like you have signs now? >> Yes. We'll put up a similar We'll make sure there are eight spaces designated. >> And then I I think you're going to need
a landscape architect to come in and get this certified and do it right. I went there today to look at those so-called trees. They're like sticks. And somebody threw softballized rocks on top of them on on
top of the where the roots grow. I I totally didn't understand that. Um, but that's what I saw and it looks like hell and that's what that guy's looking at. He Well, he's looking at some sticks coming over his fence, but there's zero
screening for him there at all that a bugger. >> Well, except the sixoot fence that that he's installed >> did himself, right? >> Yes. >> And um I I I feel a land I mean your site plan wanted landscaping. I mean, >> well, it turns out it turns out it
wasn't a realistic plan. Yeah, >> it wasn't that plan uh wasn't prepared, you know, it was prepared by the builder. It wasn't prepared by >> Right. That's why I think we need a a real landscape architect to come in and certify it and do it right. >> Well, we have had
>> that person may be able to help you with flooding. >> We've had Clover Landscape already visit the site and others. We have other opinions as well. Um, and I've given you the written opinion. Their opinion is that that uh flooding will kill
anything. So, we've raised it. We're hoping that these will work. >> And and in any case, although I appreciate that um it's a concern of the board. >> Yeah. >> Um but I think it can be left to the >> It's a concern of the planning board, too.
>> Well, yes. And I uh think that it would be helpful if the board would approve the sixth unit subject to our resolving site plan review issues with the >> But you didn't do it last time. >> Well, this is in everybody's uh to
everybody's attention at this time. >> Yeah. >> And I've discussed this with the town planner. We discussed whether to um resolve things at the planning board and and then come to the board of appeals. He agreed we could go to the board of
appeals, make sure we could have a sixth unit, go back and we would do that. And we will do that immediately upon uh upon it. And then I I don't have a problem with that being a condition of of your approval. And my last issue is the trash bins are
on the street all the time. All year long, every day I drive by there to get downtown. And today I couldn't even pull out forever. As you know, the traffic is horrific and you can't see when they come barreling off the highway through there. And I think we should condition
the trash bins leave and go down back or something off the high. It's it's a safety issue pulling out of there with those trash bins. Given the nature of this application, just going from five to six, I'm not sure that that's necessary. However, I
can't argue with with with that. >> I mean, there's going to be more trash. One new bedroom, so more trash. So, I mean, it does kind of >> Okay. >> It's a safety issue >> if that's >> You even said they whiz right by. You said it yourself. And that's what they do. And if you can't pull out, you're risking your life if you can't see with
the trash bin. And you're gonna have tourists in there that aren't going to know people are barrel assing barrel barreling, excuse my language, down the highway. >> I think it would be more attractive without the >> the trash can there. >> Yeah, legit. And that's all I have. Jim,
>> I'll share similar concerns about expansion of use when there were open issues from a previous plan uh planning board decision. Um, I still this I'm waiting to hear from a butter or if you butter number 600 is here to express concerns. Um, I just for
the record reading the bylaw, you need 24,000 square ft lot. You're at 24,13. I just want to confirm that that calculation is based after both land court decisions were recorded.
>> Yes, lot size. I believe those decisions are actually referenced on the plan. just want it in the record. >> I mean, it's just it's it's close, but these things are arbitrary, aren't they? >> Well, it resolved a significant issue
for me after the last time we're here three years ago. Um, so it appears based on your representations of the plan, you've got the requisite size. Uh, one second. Don't think I have any other questions subject to uh public comment. Madam
Chairman, thank you. Thank you, M. Thank you, Council >> Tony. >> Uh, couple quick questions. How did you go from in 2004, pull this off the registry, the uh, special permit? How did you go from 25,136
square feet to 20,3 feet in 22 years? So, how did how did it get reduced? says the subject property contains 25 these are the findings contain 25,136 ft in the general residence it's in the special permit
>> so how did you go from there >> and today it's measures to be 2413 >> all I'm asking is how did you go from 25,136 ft to 20,000 >> as you know Mr. Puchi, I didn't do the surveying. I also didn't do the land court cases. Um,
>> you get shrunk with all that water. >> But we now h we now have land court decisions that specifically reference plans um and establish by copies of the plans attached to the recorded decisions and the decisions issued by the court
that say what it is. I think I think it's a valid question. I think it's a valid question to ask because >> here we are concerned you're barely making it by 13 square feet and um I don't do we have a certified plot plant? Yes, we do.
Um so I mean you you let's put it this way. uh bread and breakfast, bed and breakfast are, you know, part of the fabric and character of this community and I think it's important to maintain them. Having additional income is a good
thing to help support that going forward. Um I understand the concerns that you have with regard to the flooding. Flooding can be resolved. Uh it hasn't been resolved in 2004. Must have been the same flooding uh at that
point in time. But you're asking this board to completely look past uh 240 14.3D 10 A B and C which requires well I don't have to read all of it. It requires a lot more than what's there, including
putting a burm there. A one a three to one burm. A one to three burm. No, three to one. >> Yes. >> Which is a difficult thing to do in that space. >> And I have reviewed the landscape requirements which you're referring to.
Um and I think under the circumstances it's impossible for us to uh to meet those given the nature of this use which is a use that's very similar to residential use. I point out that in a
general residence district three dwelling units which could have three bedrooms each is an is a use allowed by right in that district. Of course, one of the units has to be affordable, but but a triplex is allowed by right,
>> but that that isn't this isn't the case here. I I just want to bring this up for the board to consider. All I'm doing is that it is a requirement. The plane board's brought it up. You're going to have to face it there. Uh but you do have the requisite uh by 13 square feet
size to do this. Um, has anybody been complaining about or we're going to might maybe we'll hear somebody tonight. Has anyone complained about not having the landscaping there? Have you received any complaints? >> I I think the answer is yes from uh from
the butter who's who's here. Um although I shouldn't speak for him, maybe he'll say otherwise. Um and the planning board is concerned about it and it's a issue that um uh we're discussing with the town planner and again um based on
conversations with him um we we will be going back to them to re to resolve this. My hope is based on the plan that you've seen now um if there are other suggestions um >> let me let me just ask this question
because I I don't want to take up too much time. What I don't see here is I see the problem I what I do see is the problem you presented. What I don't see I see that we have a landscape company said well you know it
floods so trees die. What I don't see in this plan is how you can resolve it. And you >> which the flooding or the landscaping? >> Well, you can do both. But the landscaping, I see nothing. I see one catch basin which won't take care of all of that
water. And I'm not an engineer. Um I don't see anybody trying to resolve this problem. Well, as I mentioned earlier, uh Janette spent $85,000 in 2009 trying to improve the drainage on
the site, and she refinanced the property in order to do that. Um I think if there was a uh I don't know if there is any engineering fix that can take care of the volume of of water that's
involved. I haven't given it to you, but I will be happy to give it to you. We have an engineering report from JC Engineering that discusses the solutions and none of them have to do with uh more drainage on site has to do with what has
to happen off the site to solve this problem. Um and um I don't I don't see easy solutions and even if uh uh the private property owners were to
change the circumstances or if the problem is somewhat ameliated over time by landscaping growing mature and so on. Most of the water I suspect is coming off of the state highway. >> Well, I only bring this up because the
board has to consider it. It is a standard that is required and there has to be a really great reason in which for the board to not consider it. >> Well, let me suggest that the that the um video I showed you, the 7-second video um and those photos would indicate
a very um extraordinary um uh problem and it is a problem that is not of the applicant's making. Madam Chair, one may I think this is important. As this board goes forward, we have to apply the same
standards over and over again where discretion is not allowed. So if this board said, "Don't worry about uh this part of the bylaw. We understand it's flooding. We understand that we don't see a plan that's going to fix this."
And then the next one comes in and they say, "Well, you let this person do it." How does the board handle that? I think and I've thought the same thing for decades that the boards like yourself are
trusted and trusted and obligated to use your proper discretion in situations like this. And if there is the same situation in the future, if somebody can show you that water is coming off a
state highway to the extent that it's affecting this property, then yeah, go ahead and do it again. But you have the discretion to say yes and you have the discretion to say no. Um, and I think you should exercise that discretion.
>> I think this I'm sorry, Madam Chair. I think there's discretion when there's opakeness to a bylaw and I'm not an attorney so >> well >> forgive me but I'm not an attorney but when there's an opakeness to a bylaw you have to use discretion but when the
bylaw is specific what discretion do we have >> look one first of all I want this for the findings that's why I'm asking it >> okay I think you can consider the the the type of use and that is that the use in this case um is is similar to
residential uses where there would be no such requirement. I also think it's extraordinary situation and I also think that in many cases although I would think less cases um for this board and particularly with your concerns that
you've raised about um compliance with the uh performance standards um I think that to rec to make the requirements that would be are to meet those exact standards in this case are simply unreasonable. Now, I think that the fact
that there's a 6-ft fence makes a big difference and and we're we're we're trying to, you know, do plantings that are going to create a buffer. Now, one further thought, it's not where I want this to go because I think this is
an extraordinary situation where you can and ought to say fine. um and that is one could apply for a variance from a provision in the bylaw, a variance of that particular landscaping requirement.
Um and as you know a variance can be granted based on shape, topography or soil conditions of the property. You'll never find a case which is more based on where the hardship
hardship to the property owner is due to topography than this. So I think that's that that's a possible answer but it's expense work. I don't know if the board would be comfortable uh allowing us now to amend the
application to include a variance request. Um but you know um your concern should be doing what's right. Um and I know that's what it is.
But um this is a case where I I think um we've demonstrated an extraordinary situation. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else have any further questions up here before we go to the public? for the public.
>> Anybody from the public want to comment? >> You want to stop? Come on up. Landscape architect in the house. >> Richard Johnson, uh, one Ambitz Avenue and a registered landscape architect. you are >> the uh I would suggest that the typical
landscape plants that you can find at a garden center will die in this situation. But there are many species of flood plane plants and wetland plants that will tolerate periods of of flooding like this that last a few days. So, uh, looking to
those sort of wetland plants and the conservation commission probably has a list of suitable wetland plants might be a way to explore an alternative. >> Do you think my idea of a landscape architect is >> out of line? I I I don't think it is. I
think um perhaps a wetland biologist as opposed to a landscape architect because landscape architects may be more in the forcyia range than in the um summer cluster swampelia range. So
>> but you should see what's there now. It's somehow mad Richard >> if in that case what we've just learned is that the board's discretion is not to wave the requirement but to provide discretion the types of landscape plants
use because the this bylaw has very specifics about evergreens which I don't think are going to live according to what I've just heard. So I guess our discretion would have to be the type of plant that would survive there. We would not want him planting them. That's why I thought a landscape architect.
>> So, a person that would know how to deal with flooding. >> Richard, >> makes sense. >> Um, friend of mine's a landscaper and he told me hydrangeas do great with lots of water. Is there any truth to that? >> I think they like a lot of water, but not not standing water. >> Not flooding.
>> So, the periodic standing water, I would look for >> I'm not a plant expert, although I did win an award from the garden club once. streamside plants, wetland plants, flood plane plants are the the um the group of plants that I think you should look to
as a possible solution in this. And some of those are trees like um sweet gum um has its own issues. I wouldn't recommend that, but but there are there are wetland plants that might serve the purpose. We have a non-compliance issue here and there are plants that are out
there that would allow them to be in compliance. >> I think the non-compliance is with the planning board as opposed to >> Yeah, I mean the planning board. >> So they they might want to have approval of the plant list >> as opposed to you folks having approval
of the plant list. >> Thank you. Let me just throw out because it hasn't been said earlier that one of the problems with the water that's going down onto the site is that it it's lot got a lot of salt in it and I think that's been an issue too. But maybe
>> there are salt tolerant plants as as well. But we can uh take this up with the planning board. Uh we have put a bunch of trees and a lot of plants in that area and um we're hoping that that what's been done is satisfactory.
>> Thank you. >> Public. >> Anybody else from the public? >> Come on up. >> My name is uh Jonathan Stronic. I live at 600 Palmer. Um I actually wasn't planning to speak
uh tonight, so I don't have anything really groundbreaking. Um so I'll just be brief. Uh I spoke at a similar hearing in 2023, very similar to what's being requested. Um at that hearing, I rewatched it on FCTV around the 2hour
10-minute mark. Uh yes, there were issues with the lot size, but this same board, I believe Mr. Morris um recommended that before we come back to this proposal that the performance standards be addressed. Um a few minutes
later uh Mr. Duffy I believe said if there are issues uh with the zoning compliance those should be taken up with the building commissioner so we can make a determination. We can come back with known facts. Um so in 2023 also three years ago there's
a notice of violation that there's not compliance with the landscaping plan and the corrective action of 38 or 39 not sure lean cypress trees be planted and as far as my knowledge about where the situation goes it pretty much ends
there. Uh so my frustration is three years later um this is where we are. Um for both myself and the applicant uh no personal animosity. I wish them the best in their desires to expand. Um I just
think for both parties it would be best if there was a clear resolution to this matter. It's uh >> it's been a long time. It's been >> frustrating. Too long. >> Too long. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. What are you guys all thinking?
>> I'm thinking where we're rewarding non-compliance or being asked to. >> I know. >> We got We can refer it back to the >> I want a landscape architect. >> I think Well, the planning board decides what they want
>> because we're not going to judge the landscaping. The planning board is >> they abuse the planning board's order. The planning board can smack them on the head if they wanted. Um, >> okay. >> I don't know about that. >> We have a public human. >> Yes, I am a public human
>> and make make their meetings more popular. >> Hi, I'm Fiona. Um, Marquis. I'm Janette's daughter and um I grew up on 594 Palmer and I do have to say that the flooding was not as big of an issue as it is now. Um, and it is drastically due
to the trees that were all cut down with the buttering property. Um, additionally, I do have to make a note as direct visitor spending on Cape Cod totals about $2.6 billion a year, including um, peak season from April to September, it makes around 47% of all
business spending comes from our visitors in Cape Cod for Cape Cod. And I want to also note that we bring in visitors and once again this addition that we're requesting would bring in more visitors. And so I see it as a non-issue um when we're thinking about
adding an addition to the property because it's just bringing more to our economy within Cape Cod and especially within Falmouth. And considering that the bed and breakfasts are closing down and we are we even lost Kunamesa Inn's Eli's Tavern which I loved their burger night. Um, I really think that it's
important to consider like improving and continuing to support local businesses. Um, I know that Tony noted that um, you know, B&Bs are part of Cape Cod and part of Felmouth's like loving atmosphere that we have here and we just don't want to lose it. Um, and as far as the three
years that it's taken to put in plants, uh, everything has drastically gone up. And additionally, when you're considering the uh price and the amount of money that has been spent on repairs for the property due to the flooding, we need something to balance it out, which would be the sixth edition. Um, so thank
you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else from the public going on late, so I will try to keep >> you go. You got it. You can do this. >> My name is Tammy Smith. I live at 29 Twin Oaks Drive in East Falmouth. I own
a local sewing company that's based mostly online. Been in Felmouth for over 20 years. Um because Janette has some needs at a bed and breakfast that I am very proud of. I've seen her online. Um I help her out as an inkeeper when she's
able to go away with her family and she has lovely visitors who spend a lot of money. So I also second what Fiona says. Um, I think that um I would like to see her be able to get that sixth unit. I mentioned how I'm
able to help her as a flexible local business owner because she can't afford 40 hours a week. We all know that headcount um can really raise um your expenses. And so I'm willing to come in for two hours a day and help her get
everything pulled together. I'm able to come in. I don't require 40 hours a week, but it would be so lovely if the sixth unit could give her a little funding to have regular housekeepers to have um she's reached out to landscaping
companies. It's so unfortunate all of those great trees that he had to take out because of the um septic. I think if he lived on this side and the flooding was a problem, there would be more trees going in. Um, it's very unfortunate. Um,
but if it's the size of her property that was keeping her from the sixth unit, and I don't like the word expand because she's not adding anything new. That 10-year-old building is already there. Um, she has the parking spaces and the septic is okay. I would love to
see the um the trees go in to help everybody on flooding. I don't think it's as much of a visible space. You can't buy a piece of property there with um all the duplexes.
That hand therapy place is not residential. You all the traffic to the hospital and this is a restaurant. Like you can't say I live on a culus. I mean, I live on a little corner and it's so peaceful and I knew that when I bought it, but I can't
imagine being that guy and saying, "I bought there, but now I'm mad that a sixoot fence is blocking my view or I need more trees, even though the difficulty of the trees and the plantings." Do you see what I'm saying?
So, I think that the nature of a sixth unit, which is in question, is a good thing for Janette. I think it's a good thing for Falmouth and I think it's a good thing for the neighborhood because it gives more money. Plant those. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you for listening. >> Anybody else from the public? >> Hi everyone. I'm Clarissa Kimble. I'm also a Felmouth resident, live over on Seaboit Road and um I've I grew up here. I grew up in Woods Hole. So I also really love what the town is and these
local B&Bs that are quaint. The inowner actually lives in it and takes care of the community. That's huge. We have to support that. We really do. When there's 100 unit properties going up for sale consistently and there's more and more
other things happening, I think that we need to support a little thing like this. From everything that I've seen sitting here, I totally back from what both of them said. But I really see that you almost have two separate issues. And so you have the issue of the sixth
unit, which we've already discussed is an existing unit. It's not expanding the property. you're not adding any building or anything like that. And then you have the flooding slashtreeswetlands issue. And I completely agree. I personally live on a marsh and I have
done a ton of planting on my own property that has taken. So you mentioned it. There are plants that you can plant. Yes, you may have to order them offline, but I'm totally with like why do we want to spend thousands of dollars on evergreens that are going to die next week? That's That's silly for
everyone involved. I also can't help but wonder if there were trees. I think this is the best photo because the flooding wasn't as bad and there was blockage to this unit when that person bought that house.
So, when they chose to buy, there were trees blocking the the parking lot on their property. As we already discussed, the septic system that had to go in removed all of those trees. So, I can't help but wonder why they aren't being
requested from the other side of it to put more trees back in. >> Just another thought. >> I'm sure the board is feeling about ready to close the hearing. Um my concern is that of course we want to end
up with a a favorable uh decision that gets us a sixth unit while recognizing um the obligation that we deal with the planning board and uh get that resolved. Um, I think it would be possible to issue a decision that includes a
condition um about that perhaps um a review by the board in 6 months or a year to be I mean we want to resolve this a whole lot sooner but my concern is that it's um it's uh June
and if we can work things out with the planning board who'd really like to capture the uh the summer season with the sixth unit. It would really be important economically. Um and um we can't do that if um we
don't get an approval from the board of appeals. And um hope that the board of appeals will let the planning board resolve this um and we'll work with the planning board, the town planner who, as I said, I've already had discussions with him uh multiple
um and with the understanding we would get this resolved after the ZBA. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thanks. All right. So, what do you guys want to do? >> Motion to close hearing. >> To close the hearing. I
>> close. Do we want to have a discussion about where we are before we close? >> I think we're probably a good idea. >> I um I really want the trees to grow, but you you were insisting we have no jurisdiction and we have to blow it off to the planning board.
>> Correct. Let me just read the planning board referral. This landscaping requirement is an open item for the planning board and the property owner will need to revisit this with the board following the zoning board of appeals process. That said, having input from the zoning board of appeals as it
relates to the planting types, location, and height would be helpful. >> Okay. >> Now, the planning board issued a site plan review back in 2004, I guess it was, and there has been an open item. It's not complete. they have to go back. >> Never been done.
>> Um the planning board in my view is the board that has expertise in landscaping and tree types and >> all of this other stuff. We do not or at least speaking for myself I do not and I don't know that this board as a bug as a
board does either but I think if we have a condition specifically saying that the special permit if we were to grant it for the six bit is conditioned upon them getting a satisfactory completion and sign off by the planning board on that site plan review then I think we we've
done our job. I think we need to take it one step further and should there should be condition compliance >> right >> with definitely not that's where I have a hard time >> I'm not a fan of awarding non-compliance >> right >> and that's
>> I feel it could happen again like that that's that's >> they've met every condition if in fact the the planning board has the jurisdiction over the landscaping for this board they've they meet the criteria for the sixth unit and and why why would we want to
>> I just wanted to know how to condition it to make sure the planning board has teeth. >> Yes, that's appropriate. That's appropriate, >> right? >> That that's >> because I don't want to see it happen again. That's all. >> It shouldn't happen. >> Well, with that said, motion to close is
proper now. >> Everybody's all set. >> Second. It's proper. >> You all set? >> We're all about proper here. >> All right. >> So, we have a motion to close. We have a second, >> right? Second. All those in favor? I >> I >> opposed. None.
>> All right. >> Motion to approve conditions. >> Okay. I'll second. >> Okay. So, we have um property in the general residence district. And I previously read the uh the u facts from this the sheet that
I have here about the particular property. But there's a couple of other additional facts that I want to put into the record as a result of the public hearing. Um, it's been determined that this property, 594 Palmer Avenue, is located in a primarily commercial neighborhood. There are some
residentials, but a lot of commercial property. Um, it was represented by attorney Amond that they would like to use an extra bedroom um or create a room in the basement as an extra bedroom for staff. It is not to be a commercial
accommodation. It will not be rented to guests. This is for our information only and it is subject to the approval of the board of health with respect to the adequacy of the septic system and to the building commissioner with respect to access and egress >> and parking
>> and parking. Fine. Um now there's a I read the um referral from the planning board. I'll just read it again for the record that this landscaping requirement he's referring now to the site plan review in 2004. This landscaping requirement is still an open item with
the planning board and the property owner will need to be re need to revisit this with the the board following the zoning board of appeals process and it was represented to the board by Mr. Ahmed that they are willing to have a condition on the special permit if it's granted that requires them to return to
the uh planning board to address this issue and seek compliance with this with the site plan review. >> Sounds good. Um there was an issue raised about um the uh owner uh not keeping uh the trash containers uh out
of public view. They should be removed from the street uh put in the back of the property. We have um five I have five public comments. Um, two were both favorable pro both pro and
con with some criticism but uh not in not in oppos not in direct opposition to the project and we had three members of the public who were uh in favor of the project. Um now under section 246.6b 6B of the
fallen zoning bylaw. We are allowed to approve commercial accommodations in a general residence district by special permit uh which they already have. We're just amending the permit issued in 2004. Um as far as the size of the lot under
section 2411.2b3, 2B3 uh a lot for commercial accommodations. If there are six to 15 units in the general residence district, you need 20,000 square ft for the first five units plus 20% for each additional unit.
That means there 20,000 square feet is is the minimum of the district. Um 20% of that is 4,000. They have 24,000 square feet is required. the lot according to the plan which is stamped by a registered engineer, a professional
land surveyor, excuse me, and a professional engineer that the lot contains 24,13 square ft. So, it is sufficient for the sixth unit. Um there was a question about um whether or not uh a special
permit is right. We are granting a special permit for a non non-conforming building um other than a single family dwelling or a two family dwelling. This is section 2410.2b. The requirement is whether or not um
there the uh project will have an adverse effect on the neighborhood and we make the finding that it does not. Um the section 24014.1I2 of the zoning bylaw allows the zoning board of appeals to approve alternative
parking surface by special permit. We note that that is specially was approved in the 2004 special permit and that condition shall be carried forward. Um now with respect to special permits generally we make the
finding that the project or the sixth um commercial unit will not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. The site is adequate for the proposed use. It is suitable for the proposed use. There's no ne negative impact on traffic flow and safety. There's no negative impact on neighborhood visual character views
and vistas. There's adequate sewage disposal and for this dispos drainage of water. Well, no. There's that's to be determined, I guess, but there's adequate sewage disposal. The utilities uh there's adequate utilities and there's no ne negative impact on the
supply of affordable housing. >> May I add something? >> Yeah. Uh, I'd like to make a finding that we recognize that the Concom and that the planning board have significant more expertise in determining appropriate landscaping uh and that we defer to them, but that we would suggest that they require something that would
thrive in a flood plane or significant. >> Oh, that's appropriate because they do ask if we have any comments. It's not not a condition really a finding. Okay. >> That's it. Any other findings? >> Uh 600 did testify. Uh
>> yes, I got six. >> I got five of them. Maybe there was I counted five. >> Number 600. I meant 600 Palmer Avenue. Okay. >> Testified with concerns as he did three or four. >> I I got him as one of the um in the count of five. Um I I noted that of the
abutters, two of the abutters spoke. They were both pro and con. They basically did not object to the project, but they had comments and criticism. >> Yeah, I think I think you did. I think you did, right? All right. conditions
um per per plan, >> your trash issue, >> the trash issue. Um the sign for um the parking spot like the other signs were up there so that number eight won't go into number seven spot and snag it.
Um I I I want to word it pretty meaty to the planning board. I I think it should be listed as a condition. >> Yeah. Yeah. comply with the planning board's >> site plan review. >> Yeah. >> Pertaining to buffer vegetation >> that this special permit is conditioned
upon going to the planning board addressing the issue and then complying with the planning board decision. >> And you don't think we need to mention landscape architect or wetland special. I think they're capable of doing that. >> Hopefully the weren't hopefully the finding is enough. >> Okay.
>> For them where we're where we're feeling. >> Yeah. Any other conditions? No other buildings right on on site. >> Well, >> I don't think >> um all the portions of the special
permit are still in effect. >> Yes. >> Right. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Um I can't think of any other conditions. Any anybody else think of any other conditions? You think of any? No, I think that's it. >> Okay. All set to vote.
>> Yes. All those in favor? I opposed. >> Thank you, Council. >> All right, moving on. We have 59. How am I going to say that word, Frank? I'll say >> fatigue.
>> Mr. Duffany, >> hopefully be quick. >> Yes, >> definitely. I don't even have a point. >> So, we have before us now application 28 of the year 2026. Uh, Michael A and Christy A. Duffany have applied to the Falma Zoning Board of
Appeals for a special permit pursuant to section 240 11.5B and 246.1B of the Falma zoning bylaw to construct an addition to the existing detached garage. The property is located at 15 PI
Road and it's represented to be in Hatchville. Um the uh property is AGA. Um it's in a water resource protection district and it's also in the great pond
coastal pond overlay district. Um there's a letter dated March 13, 2026 from the building commissioner designated Patei Road as the primary front yard, which means that the uh frontage on Davodon Drive is secondary.
Uh we found uh no flood zone that's applicable. The um no previous decisions of the board of appeals were found. The lot is 87,911 square feet in a AGA district. 45,000
square feet is the required minimum. Um the street frontage which is now on Apache road is 167t 167.53 feet or 167 1/2 ft 100 ft is required.
Um the uh we've noted that this is a private right away. We are in a nitrogen sensitive area. Lot coverage by structure is 6.43%.
It will be increased to 8.86%. 20% is the limit. Lot coverage by structure parking and paving is 9.48%. It will be increased to 11.92%. 40% is the limit. There are no noted nonconformities.
Um, and the proposed height of the structure is 21 ft 7 and 316 of an inch. We have uh no comments from engineering, board of health or conservation, planning board or fire. The water department, however,
says that you have to get a permit for a water service if water is needed. And I couldn't under couldn't determine from the application whether there's going to be water in there or not. So that they'll tell us. Uh that's it. >> Take it away, Tom.
>> Take it away. Thank you. Recognized professional land surveyor uh with BSS design. And before I get started, I have a uh brief statement signed by 11 neighbors uh saying that they uh have no
objection to >> Oh, great. What's proposed? >> What two of them? >> Two pages. >> Two pages. One one person. >> 11. >> Oh, >> 11 of the findings. Perfect. >> Nice. >> It's actually 12 signatures or two of them from the same. >> I didn't think there were that many
people up that way. >> Right. Yeah, as you can see, there's a lot of open space in that area. >> Uh yeah, thank you. So, I'm representing uh Mike and Christy Duffany here here who live at 59 Pati Road. Uh you know,
this this uh area right right there. They bought the property in 1975. So, I just noted that they've been there for more than half a century. However old makes somebody feel a little old. >> Don't rub it in. Oh, really?
Well, I'm not far behind. Uh, special permit, uh, I say the special permit under section 2461B is the use table that allows garage space for more than two cars by special permit. Uh, so long as the lot is more
than a certain minimum, which it is, we have more than two acres. when the garage is more than 900 square feet or if the garage is more than 50% of the footprint size of the principal structure which this is it's um in a 90%
range of the uh existing principal structure 240.115B under accessory structures dictates a maximum height of 22 feet but allows a height of 25 feet on parcels of two acres or larger.
Um, and so that is we're applying under that also. And I should note that the height of this uh is not I don't know if you're reading somebody's reading off of one of these building sections, but the height is not 21T 7 and 3/4 in. It's
actually 24 and a half feet tall. 24. >> So it's under the 25 that's allowed. >> Why Why does the plan say 25? It says the the um if you look at the I'm
looking at A4. I can I can bring that up. >> I'm looking at A3. >> Uh hold on. I just have a copy here, but I can um hold on a second. I will clarify. >> I mean, just for clarification, I mean, it's all
>> fine. Well, well, here this, like I said, I have A4. the average grade is uh 44 and a half and the elevation so the elevations are listed on on several of these uh sheets and I have A4 up on the top here now. So
if you see down at the uh average grade is 44 and a half. Uh the elevation of the height is 69.5. So that is a a height of 24 and a half.
How do you get 44 and a half and 25 is 69 says 252? >> The elevation of the peak of the roof is 69 and a half. >> Average grade is 44 and a2 >> and that's
>> 25 >> 20 >> five >> four and five is nine. It >> says it on every page, Tom. >> It's on A5. Yeah, >> it's so we just got to have it as built >> 25 years an asbuilt fixer.
>> 44 and a half to Yeah. >> Get out your planer. >> Yeah, it's it's right up to 25. >> Looks at me like that's how I look at the point. >> Well, I could point out that Well, I was we're going to get to it. Um, so it is anyway it is more than 21. the
the existing is just under 22 uh the existing structure and this is getting taller. My math was bad but it's 25 ft tall to the peak of the roof here. Um
so put her on more than two acres. Um, let me just So, I have the site plan here. It's 2.018 acres. Uh, here the the garage, the existing garage is right here. And
the proposed addition is here. So, it's uh on the Dave Don uh drive side. We have a front yard designation of front yard on Panti Road. The the house is
um 60ome feet back from Patty Road. The garage is 100 I have to enlarge this some to read it myself. 109 ft back from Patty Road. It's 19.8 ft from Dave Dawn
Drive. But as being a secondary yard, it only needs to be 10 feet from the street line. than this. So this is further from the uh required distance from the street line. Um the uh
on the what I had up previously here, let me see what I was going to get at here is this elevation. So, so reading from this elevation here, it's 21t 7 in uh above the ground on
Davidon Drive and that is 19.8 ft. But the at at that closest point uh of the addition to uh David Drive, it's only eight feet tall. If you see
the slope of the roof here, so right there, the closest point there, 19 almost 20 feet back from the street line is only eight feet tall. Then it slopes up. It's in it's a total of it's another 27t back. So it's 46 1/2 ft back here uh
from the street line. And if you were to measure from the edge of pavement, it's about another 12t back. So, it's 58 ft back from the edge of pavement to the high point of the building uh which is here. So, uh and as you can see from
this section, the reason it says it's 21 ft from this elevation is because the existing garage is down here at a lower level at more of the house level and that that level grade here is three feet six feet lower than up at the street. So
this this whole structure is basically built into the hill. Uh so from Dave Dawn Drive from the the backside if you would. Uh and because of this long slope of the roof going up, it will not appear
to be it will not even appear to be 22 feet tall uh from that direction. Looking at it from from the Duffy's house, uh then yes, it will it will appear taller than that. Um
so that the uh and there is a there is a special permit for home occupation on on this property uh which will allow one one uh unrelated person to work in the existing
uh existing garage here which Mike says once in a while there's a person goes in and does some cutting. uh but but not often. Um and have the front yard letter and the
the purpose of this is for storage of some vehicles. They have an RV which they take drive around and the uh the vehicle the truck that will that tows the RV is in here and then also a
smaller antique uh pickup truck uh will going in this. So there's no no home occupation or any type of uh professional occupation going in this. Uh and this would get to the uh the uh
some of the the findings and I'd say that uh based on the criteria for a decision is adequacy of the site in terms of the size of the proposed use. I would say that it it is it it has to be more than two acres to get to above 22
feet tall. So which it is and the total site coverage as you read is only 8.8%. So it's uh less than half of the 20% that would be allowed
uh the suitability of the site and I think this is a good good site for this proposed use uh partly because of the topography that it will be built into the hill and so from the opposite street where it's close to it will not appear
tall uh but from the Duffy's own site from the garage then it it they'll will get to see the full height of it, but not not maybe a slight view of it from from Pate Road. Uh because it's just for
storage of a uh of a infrequently used uh vehicles. I except for during construction, there'll be no impact on the uh traffic flow and safety um impact on the neighborhood visual
character. There's already a garage there. this will add to what what's there. Uh but if you see the uh that elevation of what's visible. Um there's looking that direction, there's no view except up their their house. Uh and
that's not not what's talked about in the views and vistas part of part of this adequacy of method of sewage disposal. There's no bedrooms. Uh there's basically no utilities going on here except for some electricity I
suppose uh uh for for heating and lighting uh in there and uh this will have no effect on the supply of affordable housing either. So I I believe and I know that uh Mike Christie
believe that this is a um a good project um adequately cited suited for this property. uh take any questions and they they can answer any questions you might have also. >> Great. Thank you,
>> Mark. >> Um no, I got nothing. It's nice uh nice garage. Um the only thing is um is you're pushing the height so much we're definitely going to have to have an ads built. But other than that, good luck to
you and the Red Sox. >> They need a lot of help. They need it. No, it's a nice project. Uh it's it's well thought out and uh a great use for all the uh the extra toys, I guess, that are outside in the yard. So,
>> no comments. >> Big toy box. >> Nice. Nice job. So, >> Frank, you have anything? >> I have enough information. Thank you. >> Is the water going out there? >> There's no plans. There's no no bathroom. No, there is a well in the
basement of the existing shed that we put in before we had town water. >> Wow. >> So, it's currently abandoned, but just has 200 amp service. >> Oh, cool. Cool. It's a great project. It's lovely up there.
>> Yeah. >> Plenty plenty of room. No questions, no concerns. >> So, just quick just want to understand something. Apparently, there's no limit to how big this can get. This can get other than the side yard set back, front yard set back in coverage when you're at
3,300 square ft or more than that actually once you get this on. So, I couldn't find anything that restricts this thing could get to be 10,000 square feet over time. And the current use of there's no contractor assemblies of any
kind going on in the existing barn. >> No, Mr. Duffany Mike can speak to that, but there's nothing proposed for in there. >> Nothing that can be said in a contractor's yard, which would be prohibited. >> Yes, thank you. It's It's I think you need five acres to have a contractor's
yard. Um I do have on purpose. We did get permission to have one unrelated person be able to work in the shop that I have there now to assemble, you know, rip some tubby eyes. You know, it it gets
used on occasion. It it does um but to within the limit of the permit. >> So that that so you got a permit for a home occupation but you're doing it as a contractor. >> No. >> No. Okay. >> No. The idea of the home occupation is I
as a contractor I I am I fall under the home occupation bylaw. >> I just wanted it on the record. >> Absolutely. But have no intention of utilizing any of this space for for my our business. This is This is our personal This is >> your toy box.
>> I think it's I think it's a wonderful design. Wonderful design. >> Richard, do you have anything? >> Anyone else? Does the bride want to speak? >> Okay. >> May I one thing? >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Thank you for the letter getting the
butters and neighbors. That always makes our job much easier. >> Yeah. >> Well, thank you for hearing this. I just think it's it's worth worthy of note that when we bought our original lot which is a halfacre lot that this building is on in its entirety
>> and then we bought a lot the next lot. Okay, which the house is on the next halfacre lot. But just to say it that that was one of my frustrations is that if you know if we hadn't added them I you know I'm not saying I would build a house but it I just wanted you to know
that this is on the original lot. Oh, it's so cool. There's two driveways, too. >> All right. >> Motion to close, Madam Chair. >> Second. >> Are you all set? You guys all sec? I >> think we are. >> We have a motion and a second to close. All those in favor? I
>> I motion to approve with conditions. >> We have >> second. >> Motion and a second. >> Okay. We have a couple of amendments to the findings which I previously read. It's been reported and revealed that there is a outstanding special permit
for a home occupation um on the existing garage um but that the uh home occupation will not move into the new addition. Um the 87 uh,911
square ft uh works out to be 2.018 acres. So they're over the two acre uh minimum required for the project. Um the proposed height is corrected to be 24 and 1/2 ft. Okay. Uh we also have a
letter signed by 11 neighbors all having no objection and in support of the project. Also because of the height being 24 1/2 ft uh the board will require an asbuilt be filed.
Um now we have under section 240 11.5b accessory structures the max height is 2 22 ft but on lots of more than 2 acres and we have 200 2.018 acres. So we're just over the two acres.
The special board of appeals has the authority to grant a special permit for a maximum height of up to 25 feet with the provision that there be no accessory apartments and there be no adverse effect on the neighborhood. and we so make those findings. Under section
246.1B, uh the zoning board of appeals is authorized to grant a special permit for garage space for more than two cars if the or if the footprint of the structure is more than 900 square ft. It is so a special permit is appropriate. The
conditions for special permit are that the proposed project will not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. The site is adequate for the proposed use. The site is suitable for the proposed use. There's no negative impact on traffic flow and safety. There's no negative impact on neighborhood visual
visual characters, views or vistas. There's adequate sewage disposal and drainage. There's adequate utilities. And this project will not affect the supply of affordable housing in Felma >> conditions. Um work hours
>> for plans. >> Her plans. Um the asbuilt. Yep. >> I think that's it. Right. >> I think that's it. Yeah. Right. Yeah. Guys ready to vote? >> Yes.
>> All right. All those in favor? >> I none. >> Great. Enjoy. >> Thank you so much. >> Have fun playing in the toy box. >> Thank you. >> They'll last a lot longer. >> There you go. >> All right. Minutes. Are we doing any of these, Ash?
>> Negative. >> Negative. >> All right. Let's do um number two. >> Make the motion. Yeah. >> Sure. >> Brief discussion just for purpose of the record. Uh so there's a request from 48 Benjamin Nane North Phelmouth uh to
change the name of the comprehensive permit number 06825 uh from hospitality the name of the road excuse me from hospitality way to Atina Woods. Kat Katana C A T A N I A
>> Kania >> Katania Woods. >> We have a We have Frank our speech. >> Little difficulty pronouncing this evening. So >> um so I'll make a motion of discussion that pursuant to 760 CMR 56.074D that the board finds that this is an
insubstantial change and that it should be approved uh regarding comprehensive permit 06825. I'm happy to speak to my motion. >> Should I second your motion? I'll second your motion. You don't >> um >> feel free.
>> So, as discussion and for the purpose of anyone watching, um the CMRs are very clear about what constitutes a substantial versus insubstantial change or a change of a 40B to sub be substantial. It has to be an increase of units by over 10% and the whole there's
a series of other things in the statute of the CMR. uh a change of name of the roadway certainly does not apply. There's no requested change in the number of buildings, size, architecture, type or so on. So, >> and the number of letters was under 10% anyway.
>> True that. >> So, I would suggest uh my feeling is this is clearly an insubstantial change and that it should be approved. >> Agreed. >> Anybody have any questions or anything? All set. >> Second the motion. >> All those in favor? I opposed. None.
Uh board discussion, board updates. It's going to get busy. Buckle up. Future agenda items. We have a meeting June 11th at 6 PM. >> Oo. One week from today. >> One week from today. And that's it.
>> Sounds like a motion would journ until then, Madam Chair. >> It sure does. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? I oppose? None.