[Music]
[Applause] [Music] All right. Welcome to the zoning board of appeals. Please silence all cell phones and note
that this meeting is being taped by FCTV. If there's any private party recording this hearing, please step up from the podium to request permission. I'll introduce the board and staff. To my far right is Mark Finan. Coming in is Scott Peterson. To my right is Frank
Duffy, the clerk. My name is Suzanne Murphy, chair. To my left is James Morris, vice chair. To his left is Tony Puchi, associate. Then we have Noren Stockman, our zoning administrator and Ashley Dlo, 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 the 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 discussion of the project. prior to to closing the hearing process
and reaching a decision. Number one, to begin 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 to should be wait to be recognized by the chair and come to the
podium. State your name and address for the record. Speak into the mic. It will not amplify your voice and record audio for FCTV viewers. And we also have a time right before we start if anyone wants to make a statement, a public statement, but on nothing that's on our
agenda and we don't respond to it. Anybody? So, we'll start off. Our first hearing is a continuation. Well, on our agenda, we have an executive session that we're going to take up at the end. So, you guys didn't
have to hang around the hall while we're having it. So, we're going to do it later. So, our first hearing is 058-25 George Trustees 15 Nashu Nashina Street, West Falmouth. They're requesting a withdrawal.
Madam Chairman, I move that hearing 05825 George Trustees 15 Nashina be allowed to withdraw without prejudice. Second. We have a motion and a second. Everybody all set on that? All in favor? I oppose? None. And next
at bat we have 0625 Mahoney to Allesian. Okay. This is um application 06 or 60 of the year 2025. Thomas Mahoney and Heather Mahoney trustees. They have applied to the FAMA zoning board of
appeals for a special permit pursuant to sections 240 10.2A and 240 11.3A4 of the of the Fenton zoning bylaw to construct an addition to the existing non-conforming dwelling and exceeding 20% lot coverage by structure. The property is located at three Alleian
Avenue in Falma. Okay. Now, the property is in an RSC zoning district. It's uh for overlay districts in the It's in the Little Pond, Coastal Pond overlay district. The flood zone is AE13. There's a previous zoning board of
appeals decision applicable to this property. It's 028 of the year 2020, which allowed them to put a front porch on the property. The existing single family dwelling, four bedrooms, square footage, 696 square ft. The proposal is
for a single family dwelling, the same four bedrooms, but 847 square ft. Uh the lot is small, 3,512 uh square feet in the zoning district, which currently requires a minimum of 40,000 square feet. Frontage is 50,000,
excuse me, is 50 square 50 feet. The zoning bylaw currently requires a 100. So that's non-conforming. Mleian Avenue is a public right of way at this particular location. The existing lot coverage by structure is 19.8%.
Uh the proposal is to increase it to 24.9%. The zoning bylaw limits lot coverage by structure to 20% but you may have a special may have up to 25% by special permit and they are asking for that special permit. The average in the
neighborhood is reported to be 27.65%. Light coverage by structure, parking, and paving is 29.4% will be increased to 34.3%. The zoning bylaw limits it at 40% so it's within the limits of the bylaw. There are two nonconformities. Um
the uh the north setback is 6 feet where it should be 10. The south uh setback is 4.9 where it should be 10. Uh the setback from the street is 30.2. Um I don't have any information on the height. Perhaps they'll give it to us
during their presentation. As far as um comments from departments go, the planning board has no comment. The engineering department reports that they will need a driveway permit. Uh they want storm water runoff contained on the property and erosion and sediment
control should be in place during construction. Board of Health reports that the propertyy's on the Falma sewer. The Conservation Commission reports that they have no jurisdiction. They have determined through a negative request for determination of applicability. The water department re suggests or I
guess requests an upgrade of water service to 1in PE with the meter in the house and the service to be in the front. Um the building um commissioner has reported that uh there's an encroachment
of a neighbor's driveway to the rear and that the patio pavers in the rear must be pvious uh surface. We have one letter in support, none in opposition. Take it away. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the
board. Thank you, Mr. Duffy, for the thorough review. Um, for the record, my name is Kevin Clower. I'm an attorney with Amed Clower Law Firm, and I'm before you tonight representing Tom and Heather Mahoney, the owners of Two Alleian Avenue. Uh, Mr. Mahoney is with us this evening. They are seeking
permission to alter the existing non-conforming dwelling on this property. So, Two Alleions located really in what I consider the heart of Felmouth Heights. It's a very dense residential neighborhood. Um, and as noted, it's a small lot. It's 3,512 square ft in the RC zoning district uh
in an AE13 flood zone and located on the Little Pond sewer. Presently, there's a four bedroomedroom single family dwelling and shed. I'm sorry, single family dwelling, no shed. Um with a footprint of 696 ft. That dwelling is non-conforming to sideyard
setback to the south being 4.9 where 10 is required and sideyard setback to the north being 6 feet where 10 is required. Otherwise, it conforms with front yard and rear yard setbacks as well as lot coverage by structure and lot coverage by structures paving and parking. The existing ridge here is 29.5 ft.
The applicants have owned this property for about 10 years and they're looking to make uh a modest modification to the dwelling which will improve the layout in habitable space. In 2020, they obtained a special permit to allow for a porch in effectively the same layout as is being proposed today for the
expansion. Um those plans were never executed for a variety of reasons and that's that special permit decision has since lapsed. So now what's being proposed is a small expansion of the first floor living space. It extends the living area uh 7 ft towards towards the
front of the lot and it creates a new entry area with a small porch on the left hand side. The proposal will not affect either of the non-conforming setbacks. Uh the lot coverage by structure will increase from 19.8% 8% to 24.9, but that is allowable
by a special permit. And the resulting front yard setback will be 30.2 ft, which is in excess of the 25 ft that required. There's no change in the bedroom count, which will remain at four, uh, which is what's allowed within the Little Pond sewer district. The bridge height will remain 29.5, again,
well below the 35 ft allowed. Due to the existing non-conforming setbacks and the proposed lot coverage being above 20%. This requires a special permit pursuant to 240 10.2A and 2401.3A4. Pursuant to 240 10.2A pre-existing
non-conforming structures may be changed by special permit provided they're not substantially more detrimental than what exists. This board has asked to consider the standards of 240 12.1E and whether or not that alteration creates any new dimensional non-conformities and pairs views and vistas and
reasonably conforms to the neighborhood. In this case, there's no new non-conformities. There's no effect on the views of vistas and public ways. And as we'll I'll elaborate, it is consistent with the neighborhood. Under 2401.384, lock coverage in excess of 20% may be
allowed by special permit. But here, the board's asked to look at the impact of use in vistics and public ways, the effect of nitrogen on coastal abments, and the size and height of the structure relative to the average size and height of structures in the neighborhood. In this case, there's no impact to the
views and business in public way. The house is going to remain largely in the same shape and form as it is. There's no effect of nitrogen on coastal embainments. There's no increase in the number of bedrooms. And in preparing the lot comparison worksheet, looking at this property and the surrounding homes. Uh this home this house even as proposed
is well below the average both for gross floor area and footprint which is appropriate since this is a small lot. The size of the house is proportional to the size of the lot. The dwelling as designed is very much in character with the neighborhood and similar in nature and size to many of the nearby homes. We did receive the
referral from the engineering department. Uh the driveway as exists is 45.8 ft wide. We had proposed originally to make that slightly wider. However, we submitted revised plans to maintain the same street opening as at present. This project as proposed represents an
improvement for the owners adding useful habitable space and is by no means substantially more detrimental than what exists. There's no new no new dimensional non-conformities um and no change to the existing non-conformity deformities. This meets all the requirements of 240
10.2A, 240 11.3A4, and 240 12.1E. For those reasons, I believe that this board can and should grant a special permit. And I would of course be glad to address any questions that you might have at this time. You want to start off, Mike? Um, yeah.
And the question I've been looking at this house for a couple of years and the only question I had was when are they going to start and I mean you hopefully in about six weeks. Yeah. Uh, no. It's modest. I can
understand why they wanted a peeking in the windows too. But uh, no, I'm good. Uh I just would probably as we get going I wanted to make sure that we have an asbuilt for the project since we're getting right up to the 24.9% but uh
everything else seems fine. Yeah, I mean we'd be happy to have a condition for an asbuilt. Y thank you. That's all. Frank, you have anything? Well, Mr. Clar answered my questions. I had a question about the height because I couldn't find it on the plans and uh
there's no increasing any of the nonconformity. So, we're subject we're in that provision of the bylaw. So, I'm I'm all set. Thank you. Are the neighbors going to remove that stuff on your property? So, we'll have to work that out with the neighbors. We don't Encroachments are a funny thing. You don't really have a
right to just unilaterally go and rip something someone's stuff out, even if it's on your property. Um, so we'll work with the neighbors on that, but that's, you know, per the building commissioner's referral, that that wasn't counted towards our lot coverage, uh, since it's an encroachment, but we'll have to address that with the
neighbor. And then my other last question is it it has proposed pvious terrace coming off the driveway and then there's other steps towards the house that say proposed steps. Mhm. They they're not pvious.
Well, the steps itself would not be pvious. The the pavers are per the pavers are pvious because they there can be drainage around for the terrorists. Yes. But steps themselves wouldn't be pvious. Okay, that's all I have.
Jim, my concerns will be addressed with an asbuilt, so no questions. Thank you. Tony, thank you. No comments. 8:00 80 comes quick. I want to get back where I can. So, we're working on it. We're getting there. Um, everybody else
up for the public or uh I do have um I think one more question. Um, and that is, uh, it looks like you have a notation on the plans about the stairs
versus a landscape feature. And I'm assuming that that's related to lock coverage by structure where where where are we looking, Mr. Doc? Just uh, that's a good question. There's a lot of notes on the plan. Yeah, I don't I don't have the plans in front of me, but um,
what are they going to be made out of? where you say like the where it says proposed steps down to the proposed pvious terrace. Is that what we're looking? Okay. So at the rear which would be the easterly side. Mhm. Uh it says proposed landscape steps.
Mhm. So that I I I suspect that would be a granted step um which would count towards the lot coverage by structures, paving and parking but not towards the lot coverage by structures as we've discussed with the referral from Mr. Street recently. Okay. And then the other question I had
was related to the rinse station. Um so typically we do not count stations toward block coverage by structure. That being said, um it's talking about a wood
I don't know if that's a base, a gravel base with wood steppers type of thing, but so typically there's a line that's drawn there where you go from something that is effectively part of the lock coverage to not.
We'll make sure that the the embers out there is is counting toward block coverage by structures, paving, and parking, but not to structure. Well, crushed stone and wood is going to run through, so it's going to be pvious. Yeah. Cuz I think the problem is if you if you have a deck that's on grade,
it counts toward lock coverage by structure. That's not a deck. It's crushed on. No, but I mean if you if you took like what would be like a patio area and instead of having it be cement or pavers, you build a a deck on
grade, it counts toward lot coverage by structure. So, it's just sort of a fine line about what you're counting or not. And and obviously when you have very small lots, all those little tiny things add up after some point. So
Oh, yeah. And you only got 34.3 point. Everybody all set up here? Oh, is that the same as uh a step though? Would that that would count as a that would count towards the structures,
paving and parking, which we have 5%. No, but which one? Um I think you got 24.9. I'm just curious. So structures would structures is 24.9. The law coverage by structures paving and parking which would like landscaping. No, that's not my question. And uh what
I should know this, but um the uh deck uh uh you know the wood uh uh on the in the rinse station that's going to be count towards lot uh um totality. Yeah.
Yeah. But it's going to count on the uh um paving and parking as opposed to structure. Yes. Because you are down to Yes. onetenth of uh Yeah. Okay. But we're at 34.3 on Yeah. No, I'm talking about the 29.9.
Yeah. Just go ahead. You all set, Mark? Yeah. Yeah. Just to be consistent on the grand step. Grand step that is integral to the entrance of the house because it's code is not a landscape
structure. Why this town continues to see it that way, I don't know. Because if you take it away, you can't get an aquous permit. So, in fact, all granted steps, all granted platforms are not landscape features. They are integral to the entrance of the house. I'm just
going to say that I don't even want to argue. It's up to the board, the voting members tonight. But I want to be consistent is not a landscape feature. Everywhere doing this, I don't get everywhere but Felmouth. It counts. Yeah. I mean, I checked with other
towns. It's it's in part of the code to get into the house, right? I I would suggest I think given that this has been sort of an ongoing issue that where we have the upcoming uh Saturday session that we discuss that make some type of determination about
how we're going to review those going forward. Good idea. Okay. Put it on the list. Agree with so much but I would say I've had I was having a discussion with with with Mr. street just the other day about an unrelated issue. And you know, we have something that's said one way in our
bylaw, then we have his interpretation and and you know, ultimately it it's tough to fight the building commissioner's interpretation. I mean, there is a process to do that. I don't want to do that in most cases. And I but what I said to him was, you know, I'm fine with that being the interpretation, but let's make it say that in the bylaw
because it's hard to advise clients when we have things have gone one way historically and now all of a sudden they're going a different way. where we have ambiguity is where we run into these these questions where we you and I end up going going in circles sometimes on on this particular issue. Um but I
think you know if we have some clarity within the bylaw then it's going to eliminate that as well maybe 10 years from now we might get it but the fact the fact is and that's a rush common sense says if the code requires
a step then you need a step why we don't see it that way is beyond me. Yeah, I think that's certainly not not equitable to uh the homeowner who chooses one material over another. And so if one homeowner puts in wood
to the exact same dimensions, it counts toward their structure. And if somebody chooses stone, it now automatically, you know, it just it doesn't make sense, right? Totally. Sounds like a perfect petitioner's article for Can't wait to see it at our Saturday morning uh discussion session.
He'll retire on that one. Yeah. Does anyone from the public want to comment on this project? Wants to get involved with that. Motion to uh close. A little early for that. He made a motion to close. Do we have a second? Second.
Do you have a motion to close in a second? Any further questions? Attorney Clow, you good? Okay. All those in favor of closing? I oppose. None. Motion to approve with conditions. Second. We have a motion to approve with conditions. Everybody all set? Let's
take it away, Frank. I Okay. Um, I read into the record the pertinent facts from the file, but a couple things have come up during the course of the presentation. Uh, Mr. Clower has noted that the existing height is 29.5 and it will remain at
29.5. The zoning bylaw allows up to 35 ft. Um, Mr. Flower also advised us that he has addressed some of the issues presented by the building commissioner um in his referral. Um there was one letter in support, no letters in
opposition, there was no public comment. Um looking at there's also no increase in the nonconformity. So under section 240.2A 2A. For non-conforming structures, you're allowed to change or modify non-conforming structures provided the board makes a finding that
there's no increase in the non-conforming nature of the structure. And we so find we also find that the proposed uh changes will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood um than the existing situation. Under section 2411.3A4
in an RB district, the zoning board of appeals may permit lot coverage by structure up to 25% in that's over the minimum of excuse me the 20% allowed by the zoning bylaw. We make the finding that the size and height of the proposed
structure relates to the neighborhood average that the um sha there's no um shadow or on adjacent properties. Uh the there's no negative impact on views and vistas and because the propertyy's on the sewer, there's no concern with
nitrogen on coast and bayments. Under section 24012.1E criteria for a special permit, we find that the site is adequate for the proposed use. The site is suitable for the proposed use. No negative impact on traffic flow and safety. Um there's no
negative impact on neighborhood visual visual character views and vistas. There are adequate utilities. says adequate sewage disposal as evidenced by the presence of the sewer and there's no impact on the supply of affordable housing. Nice.
And conditions as built. Yes. Norin, how do we condition that the neighbors move that driveway? We can't we can't we can't even condition it somehow. Well, there should be no added Well, they they technically have control
over their own property. Um, but yeah, I guess the question is if they were to remove the bricks that are within their lot, that's going to cause some potential impact to the others. So, there should be some cooperative, but there has to be some, you know, the other part too is given
the location, they would probably need conservation maybe. I don't know how that's set up there. My suggestion, Madam Chair, is a finding that there is an encroachment from neighbors form of brick patio that is not being calculated through no fault of the applicant that
it is not being calculated for the purpose of block coverage. Also, uh if that were somehow like taken away for adverse possession or some such, it would actually potentially bring it over
the 25 because it would so something has to be done about it. Well, that that would go toward law coverage by structure parking, paving, right? So, it wouldn't be if if for somehow some reason the
neighbors were to take that property, it would put the 24.9 over 25 most likely, right? But they that, you know, would not likely be the subject of a taking, right? Like that's Yeah. Well, whatever. It's got to be
that taking generally does not create a zoning problem. But it would in this case mathematically mathematically but not really. Yeah. Well, really it puts it over 25. It's an issue. Yeah. But we can't diminish their we can't diminish their lot size before us.
Further pre-existing. Further pre-existing. Yeah. I just think I my suggestion is just so that we have documents that you know came up at the hearing. We understand it's there. testimony was that the building inspectors, not counting it against him, were acknowledging what's that it's there.
He did acknowledge he was going to work with the neighbors. We have no power to tell the neighbor to remove stuff. At the end of the day, the bottom line is if the size of the lot got reduced because that was taken away, then it would be over the 25.
It would be. Yeah. That's all just the point I'm making. It would be. Yes. So, you have Jim's finding. Okay. Um and then other conditions all per plans all boards.
Um got the ads built. Um work with the police department about traffic construction 7 through 7 Monday through Friday 8 through 4 and sad days. No construction Sunday or town observed holidays. Uh construction vehicles shall be located within the lot
and or or work with the police department or work with the police department. I took such time out. get as built. Mhm. Yeah. I said, right, that was the first one, I think. Yeah. Anybody have any other conditions?
So, I think with the patio, I think you they're proposing that it is um on a pvious base. So, I think maybe the installer can certify that it is indeed pvious so that the storm water
actually recharges. Um, the other note I had was related to the trash enclosure and I I don't think we have any details about that, but I guess I would just put a note that it's not to become enclosed
and be a structure. I mean, I know that's more could be for people to have effectively like a shed that you would stash your trash in, but they don't have the available lock coverage for that. one of those like plastic covers isn't a
fixed and that wouldn't count. You know, it's it almost looks like a plastic shed, but yeah, I don't know where where they draw the line with that. I guess it's up to the town, but structure requires a fixing to the ground, right? Yep. Throw some wheels on it.
Um, and then the cobble apron. Obviously, you have to make town engineering happy about that. Um, and then water. You're I assume good with um the water supper's comment about the water line. And
I mean, it's only going to improve water. It's only going to improve water pressure. So, yeah. And just that it not be over the abuters. Y. Okay. All good. I think we're all set. You guys ready to vote? Yep. Okay. All those in favor? I oppose? None. All right.
Thank you very much. Good project. Thank you. All right. Next at bat we have my favorite drive uh 061259 up along road.
All right. This is application 061 of the year 2025. Fenton and Melody Brown trustees. They've applied to the Falma zoning board of appeals for a special permit pursuant to section 2401.4A1 I of the Falma zoning bylaw to construct
a pickle ball court in the front yard more than 50 ft from the front property line. The property is located at 159 Upalong Road in East Balma. Details from the file. Properties in an RA zoning district. It is in the coast
borne pond coastal pond overlay district. It has flood zones. It's AE12 and VE14. Uh it's currently the principal structure on the property is a single family dwelling at 355
square ft. There are two previous decisions of the zoning board of appeals applicable to this property. 043 of the worth of the year 2020 allowed for the construction of a garage and a pool in the front yard. 043 of the year 2021
allowed for a pool house in the front yard. The lot is 5.7 acres in a zoning district which currently has a minimum a maximum or minimum of 40,000 square feet. So it's way in excess of the minimum. Street frontage is 200 feet and
the zoning district requires 100. So, it's adequate. Up along road is a private uh way at this particular point. Lot coverage by structure is 1.43%. It will be increased to 2.21%. The limit is 20. So, they're under that. Lot
coverage by structure parking and paving is 2.94%. And I do not have the final, but it's the limit is 40 under the zoning bylaw. Perhaps they can address that issue during the presentation. The um proposed pickle ball court will
be 30 feet by 64 feet and it will be set back 92.6 feet from Upong Road. We have referrals from engineering. They request that storm water be retained on the property. The board of health has no issues. Conservation Commission reports
a negative request for determination of applicability. The water department has no comment. The building department had no comment. There are no letters either in support or in opposition in the file. Anybody here for up along? Okay,
that's different. Um, so no presentation. All right, so the board has two options here. Um, you can continue the hearing to another night and we can try and contact the applicant or if you feel that you have sufficient information
and you feel comfortable voting, you can do that. Suggested board discussion. Let's do board discussion. Yeah. I guess we just never have done this, right? We have never had a applicant not show up and not let us know that they're not going to be. They were I I went
there late this afternoon. Yeah. Actually, you know, I went yesterday and Yeah, I'm confused. The court already exists. The uh nets up. The only thing not there are the lines. Yeah. Well, that I think there was they were going to put something over that. I
thought they were going to Oh, that doesn't matter. I don't feel the need to punt. I'm okay with it myself. Um, I I I I guess what I would say is if you feel comfortable voting and you're not opposed to what's proposed, I think it's
fine to go forward. Somebody not showing up. I don't want to set that precedent. I have no problem with this whatsoever. Although I know that pickle ballers are the new skateboarders. They're just nothing but trouble with all that noise. I mean, if you read the newspaper
tennis Yeah. But I I'm still don't think that we should set the president of giving somebody a permit that doesn't um show up. And I'm I'm not against it. I mean, they can come in whenever we reschedule and that it's going to take four and a half minutes, but I just don't think that we should
set a precedent for somebody who doesn't do their due diligence. Not nothing against them or this, you know. Do you think they're Red Sox fans or Yankees fans? I think that might have something to do with it. But um it makes a difference. Yeah, it's you know and you know maybe the fish want to show up and complain about
the noise too because you know those pickle ballers. That was going to be my question is noise too. I I don't have any issue with the application but I think that they should be before us. So so okay I with Mark and and Scott and I guess I agree madam chairman. I would only suggest that we might before we
officially punt this give them the end of the hearing just in case they're running later or maybe they're watching us on the radio. All right, let's continue it to the end of we'll table it till we're done. Okay, that's fine. Okay, I I have represented in the past. You want to shoot them an email in the
morning? I can do that. Did you shoot him a text now? Yeah, I was going to say what what we will Oh, it's the owner. Okay, we almost just punted you. Come on. Tell us about your project. Oh, good timing. Yeah.
Yeah. Um, well, we just started playing pickle ball about 10 years ago, so we thought we'd uh try to get a court at our own house since Mash P is the closest place. Um, so we designed it to be in the way
back part of our property and um, just looking forward to using it and um, yeah, that's all. Could you just state your name for the Oh, I'm sorry. Fenton Brown uh, 159 up
along road in East Falmouth. Right. Well, we almost punted you, but um, we already kind of made our comments. I mean, obviously you got plenty of room. I see nothing wrong with it. Um, and as long as I mean, like I said earlier, you pickle ballers of the new skateboarders
trouble and you make a lot of noise and yeah, make the paper a lot. Uh, but the only neighbors you have there are fish, so I don't think it's an issue. So, I have no problem with it. Great. Whatsoever. I I've never I didn't even know that existed down there. I've been
down Bacon Farm a million times, but uh that's that's a nice little spot. God bless you. Yeah. It's funny. Every contractor, everybody, whoever comes out, landscaper that lived here for years. I've been here since forever and I never Yeah. I guess what made you come to us for a
permit since you kind of were 90% of the way there? Yeah. Well, actually, I didn't think I needed one at first, but I'm doing an addition. So, by coming in and asking, I didn't realize a pickle ball court was a structure uh so-called. So, uh, then I
learned that I needed to do that, so I started the process. Thank you. No further questions. Great. No questions. Conservation would definitely want to know if you're paving that large a chunk. Oh, they've already I've already been through conservation. They did.
You just don't do that kind of stuff without asking. Oh, I know. Just I know my mind. Have you had any problem since Have you played on it yet? Uh, yes. Yeah, we were problems. There was one neighbor, wasn't there? I saw a house. Wood uh Betsy. Well, the the people who
live right on out on Point, three of the people that come there, they only they're seasonal. Very seasonal. You've had no complaints with noise or anything like that. No, they want to play. They want to play, right? They don't want to drive to Mashby to play pickle ball. Yeah, you got a long road there guys in this town. What's that?
We frown on you guys in this radicals. I'm all that, Jim. No. So, almost on six acres and accept the representations, the applicant that the neighbors are on board. We don't have any complaints. So, no questions. No questions. Everybody all set up here? Yep.
Anybody from the public want to comment on this? All right. I'm thrilled he showed up. Great. Motion to close. Second. We have a motion to close in a second. All those in favor? I oppose. None. Seeing no discussion. Motion to approve
some sort of conditions. Second. We have a motion in a second. Frank. Okay. I read um into the record uh relative information, relevant information from the file. Um at the hearing, Fenton Brown presented the um
case on his own behalf. Um there was no additional information presented. U so we'll look at the conditions under I have these stats here. Remember, you couldn't find them. Yeah, but that's not really Oh,
yeah. They're all in there. One's with the addition and one's with just pickle ball, I think. I think reading it off. Uh lot coverage by structure existing is 1.43%. The proposal is 2.21% and the uh limit under zoning bylaw is
20%. Lot coverage by structure uh paving and parking is 1.43% 43% and the proposal is to increase it to 2.5%. They're allowed up to 40% so they're way under the condition under the limits of the zoning bylaw.
Um under section 240 11.4A1i, they may have a special permit for an accessory structure in the front yard. Um but it must be no closer than 50 ft from the front property line. In this particular situation, it will be 92.6 6 ft from the front property line. So it
conforms to the con conditions of the zoning bylaw and for a special permit under section 242.1E. We make the finding that the site is adequate for proposed use. It is suitable for the proposed use. There's no negative impact on traffic flow and
safety. No negative impact on neighborhood visual character, views, and vistas. There are adequate utilities, adequate sewage, and there's no impact on the supply of affordable housing conditions. Um,
per referrals. Yeah. Per referrals. There was referrals. Engineering asked for storm water containment. I think they passed it off to conservation, didn't they? Well, they did, but um
that' be a real trick for any of that storm water to make it off the property. Yeah. So, let's just do all boards and leave it like that. Slingshot per plans. All boards. We don't have to worry about construction or or trucks or anything, right? Lighting. We don't have to worry about I
think you got any other conditions for me? No. Um I did just make one note um that they are only before the board relating to the pickle ball court but that they do have an addition that they're undergoing with their house. So while we
capture their law coverage by structure and law coverage by structure parking paving within that decision I'll also in PNS capture the change that will happen with the house. Okay. Just so that the numbers align. Yep. Okay.
because there the addition to their house will slightly increase their lot coverage, but they're still way below all the minimums or maximums that there's no issue. So, that additions by right anyway. Yes. Yes. Yep.
So, we're all set. Yeah. Everybody else set to vote. Oh, we had a motion. Second. All those in favor? I oppose? None. You're all set. Happy pickle balling. Try to keep the noise down. Le
got to get his last dig in. Yeah. Anybody with And last at bat if they could design a silent. We have 19 Alma Road. This is application 063 of the year 2025. Michael and Molly Richards have
applied to the Palmer Zoning Board of Appeals for a special permit pursuant to section 24012.2A 2A and 241.3A4 the FAMA zoning bylaw to replace the existing landing and add dormers increasing lot coverage by structure
properties at 19 Elma Road in Phelma properties in an RC zoning district. We are also in the Little Pond Coastal Pond Overlay District and it has been identified as a nitrogen sensitive area. No applicable flood zones. No previous decisions of the zoning board of appeals
noted in the file. The existing uh house is a single family dwelling with three bedrooms, 1876 ft. The proposal is a single family dwelling, four bedrooms, 1883 square ft. The lot is 7,992
square ft in the zoning district which currently requires 40,000 square ft. Street frontage is 95 ft in the zoning district which currently requires 100 ft. Alma Road is a public right ofway at this location. Lot coverage by structure
existing is 23.47%. Um which and there it'll be increased 23.56%. So it already starts in excess of the 20% limit. So they'll need a special permit under the 20 up to 25%. The
neighborhood average for calculations is 20.52%. Lot coverage by structure parking and paving 29.78% remain the same. The limit is 40% under the thousoning bylaw. Um
the the existing nonconformity is the setback from the street. It is 20.5 ft in the zoning district which requires 25 foot setback. Um again the proposed height of of the the height of the proposed structure is 23.1
um feet in a zoning well 35 is the limit of the zoning bylaw. Engineering has advised us to require erosion and sediment control in place during construction. The board of health has notified us that the propertyy's on the phalma sewer. Conservation has no
comment. Water requests an upgrade to the 1 in PE with a meter in the house. Then the building commissioner has noted an issue with the landing um which we'll expect Mr. Clower to explain uh how they've responded to that. Planning board had no comment. There are no
letters in opposition or in support in the file. Thank you again. Uh for the record, Kevin Clower. Uh, and I'm before you right now representing Mike and Molly Richards, the owner of 19 Alma Road. I'm joined tonight by Molly. They are seeking permission to alter the existing
non-conforming dwelling on this property. So 19 Alma is really the northernmost area of Felmouth Heights. It is the lots just shy of 8,000 square ft. It's 7,992. It is an RC zoning district. It's not in a flood zone and it is on the Little
Pond sewer district. Presently, there's a three-bedroom single family dwelling and shed with a footprint of 1876 square ft. It's presently non-conforming front yard setback being 20.5 where 25 is required. Lock coverage by structure being 23.76
where 20 is allowed by right and up to 25 by special permit. The applicants, Mike and Molly, are uh both originally from Felmouth, graduates of Felmouth High School. Uh currently reside in Hangingham, but have owned this property for the last 12 years. uh when they bought this, their children, their
oldest was one and they now have two teenage boys and they they need more space. Um so the applicants are proposing uh an addition to the structure which is the addition of a second story entirely within the footprint through a dormer and which allows for reallocation of space. Um the
proposal involves very minor change to the entry area. Otherwise, there's no proposed changes to the footprint. This proposal is uh will would include a minor improvement to the front yard setback. It goes from 20.5 to 20.7 ft. Again, otherwise no change to the
existing setbacks um which would all otherwise remain conforming being sideyard and rear yard setbacks. There's no change to the lot coverage which will remain at 23.76%. I'm sorry, 23.45%. Um
the bedroom count will increase to four which is which was allowed by right on the Little Pond sewer district and the proposed ridge height is 23 feet.1 23.1 ft which is well below the 35 that's allowed due to the existing non-conforming setback and lock coverage. This does
require a special permit pursuant to 240 10.2A and 11.384. Under 10.2A 2A pre-existing non-conforming structures can be changed by special permit provided they're not substantially more detrimental than what exists. We're asked to consider the standards of 12.1E and whether or not
we're creating any new dimensional non-conformities comparing views and vistas and reasonably conforming to the neighborhood. In this case, there's no new non-conformity created. There's no effect under views and vistas of the public ways and it is consistent with the neighborhood.
Under 240 11.3A4, we um lock coverage by structure in excess of 20% may be allowed below 25 uh by special permit. And again, in that situation, you're asked to look at this uh impact of views and vistas, the u average the size and
height of the structure relative to the average size and height of structures in the neighborhood and the impact of nitrogen on coastal payments. So again, where are three bedrooms going to four? That is what's allowed within the little pon sewer. In preparing the little lot comparison
worksheet, this house is very close to the average footprint in the area. The dwelling as designed is in character with the neighborhood. It's similar in nature and size to a number of recently approved homes, including 16 Felmouth Heights and directly next door at 15 Alma. That property was approved in 2024
and is larger than this uh proposal both in terms of gross floor area and footprint. We did receive the referral from the building department. Uh I met shortly thereafter with Mr. Street. He felt that the building code uh would require an additional landing in front of the door.
So this is the original proposal. Um let me see here. This is the original proposal which was going to have an enclosed entry area within three steps. Um per Mr. street, you cannot have steps directly into the door. So, you would had to have an
additional three-foot landing outside that door. He basically said, "You can't build this as it's portrayed on this plan, and it would have would have resulted in an increased or a decreased setback to the front yard." So, what they actually did
was they tucked the landing into into the entry area, and you can see it here. So, the entry will come out onto the the landing area right here. So that way we're not coming any closer than it currently is. So based on that meeting, we revised the
proposed plans reorienting the door and the landing to be within the existing setback area. Those plans, the plans in front of you right now on the screen, were submitted to the board, I believe two weeks ago. So this project as proposed represents an improvement for the owners. It adds
useful habitable space and is by no means substantially more detrimental than what currently exists. Uh there's no new dimensional non-conformities. We have a minor improvement to an existing non-conforming setback and no change to the existing uh lot coverage which will be eliminated as a nonconformity with
the issuance of a special permit. I believe this meets all the requirements of 240 10.2A, 240 11.34 and 240 12.1. I believe you can and should uh grant this special permit and I would of course be glad to address any steps that
you may have at this time. ready. Yeah. Uh I don't have uh anything here except uh we're on the uh second floor. I mean, you call that attic. I mean, I
would call it unfinished space. Uh but uh other than that, no, it's uh obviously if they got two kids, they need the room. And uh you know, the footprint hasn't changed. So, uh, other than the landing or whatever. So, I have
no problem. But I do, uh, I I in my own mind, I wouldn't call that an attic. I would call it unfinished space. But, uh, whatever. It's just semantics till they build it into a bedroom. Well, I think we could, uh, address that
with a condition. Yeah. That that's to remain um unfinished attic space per plan. an addict generally conotes above uh yeah I I I grew up with Eve so I was thinking of it more as like an Eve
situation um but Adam and Eve well different Eve a Eve yeah anyway like I said same but very different yeah much of a muchness around here you know could have been a you know a gym and a library and a uh
rapping what was the the golf I like my favorite was the golf simulator room. That was awesome. Yeah. Well, I think God bless that guy's wife. Yeah, I know the house you're talking about. Yeah. Um, no. Onward.
Uh, no, you took care of uh the building commissioner's concerns or so. I I'm good. Thank you very much. Good project. Good luck. Uh, Mr. Clar, I just want to confirm now because your nonconformity
is the front setback at 20 20.5 ft and your testimony is it will now be 20.7 correct. Okay. So, you're improving the uh height marginally. Marginally, but you're improving it. Um, and the completed height will be 23.1
ft. So, that is how I read it. But let me just uh That's what I had. 231 231. Yeah. Yep. All right, Suzanne. You all set? I want to know why Tom Bunka put on
these plans that it's in a historical district. I don't know. Do I have to do a condition on that or No, it's not a historical district. He put it right on there. It's listed that it's he lists a whole bunch of items that's not. So if you look at the head of that category it says but not
within. It says not within. Oh good. I was wondering I mean it's not historical to me and I'm like why would he put that in there? Okay. I'm good. Jim I have no questions. Thank you. Tony I have no questions. Anybody from the public want to speak on
this? You just want to get going? Huh? Sorry. Uh so I I will bring up the same subject again which is the stairs. They you know are showing you that the setback is going to be improved yet they're showing you two granite stairs
and so the setback is technically going to be 17.8 ft from the street which is technically closer. So, I I understand that you're not going to change how you're voting tonight, but
I think for the future, it's important to be consistent. And that this is a good example. Stairs are made of Yeah. should not be a benefit to one and a detriment to another. Right.
Yeah. No, this is a perfect example. I'm not sure I I understand that. If you look at the very top of the proposed plan, it's the July 23rd one. Uh the revision date is September 24. Oh, that is why I am not looking at
right plans. I have it up on the screen, Mr. We got the first and uh No, the fifth. I don't have any September fourth, do I? Oh, I'm sorry. Something in the mail. So, so the problem is is
it's noted at the very bottom of the page. They've not captured the steps within the setback that they report on the plot plan. Well, is that why Mr. Street um was discussed
the direction of the steps? I I think at the time he was more interested in the landing the landing etc. which Ashley gave me the old you know they've they've accommodated but I guess what I'll say to you is funny somewhere down the road there's an
interest to raise and rebuild how's people will say that the closest point to the street is 17.8 8. Therefore, they will claim that they would be able to or eligible to put the house that close to
the roads. Yep. I think there's a very simple way to address that, Miss Docman, which to is to have include in the decision the setback to the structure itself is 20.8, but that the steps will be 17.8, but for the purpose of for the purpose of of existing setbacks, it would be 20 20.8 8
in this except you know unfortunately through practice um in the past stairs conveniently shift right and if somebody's looking to raise and rebuild they identify that that's the closest
point right so while I agree with you that it's pretty benign and that it's not going to affect the appearance which is what people are interested in it also sets up for the future So, you know, it's just something that I think the board needs to determine on, you know,
maybe their Saturday meeting. Um, I did also have a question about the rinse station again. Um, it notes that it is not included in lot coverage yet. It says it's on a wood deck of 32 square
feet. So, I guess the question I would have is when are we counting these and when are we not? So, I think that uh uh illustrates the point that you should take care of this at town meeting with a
petitioner's article and we won't have to argue with it about it anymore. You know, because obviously it makes sense, right? People want to have a rinse station and you don't want to be standing on grass or dirt or whatever, right? But
you know, if you don't have space within your lot coverage for it, but you're installing it, how are we cutting out what we're including or not? Now, what's the total lot? Uh, so even if you were to include that 32 ft, that would bring our lot coverage to
23.78. So, they're still fine. So, it's not an issue. No, we're we're that that lockage by structure and we and we're well under the lock coverage by structures paving and park. Yeah. Okay. But I I mean this this as we've stated, I don't want to beat a dead horse, but this just keeps coming
up all the time. And I'm all in favor of uh especially in a like a rent station situation. Uh you know, putting it over on the uh lot coverage by bathing or whatever. I mean, cuz the lots are all so small
around here. Come on. Everybody's got to take a shower. A structure is a structure. That's right. Shower or no shower? In this town, it's not though. Everywhere else it is. I mean, I think the lines should be drawn somewhere. I
mean, it's it's the whole thing's still up in the air, and it has been as long as I can remember. I mean, before I ever had anything to do with it, just watching this on TV, it's come up, you know, and I mean, granted, steps are a landscape feature, and I mean, let's
just This really should be nailed down. Let's put on the breakfast jamboree. Yeah, meeting. Like I said, Kev, you should take care of this at town meeting. Petitioner articles always go so well at town meeting. Yeah, they do. Actually, they they can go quite well, especially if I never do it in a
reasonable fashion. If I never bring another petitioner's article, it'll be too soon. I've done about 40 of them and I've had marginal success, but sometimes it's just the quickest route. I got one approved. Look at this thing's been been bounced around. This ball's been bounced around for 20 years.
I got I got one approved. I left to go on vacation the next morning. The next night, I get a call saying they brought it up on reconsideration while I was at Epcot with my family. That's because they were jealous, you know. All right. Well, it's still return, so be it. Everybody all set up here? Norin, you
good? Yep. Anybody from the public? We already did this. I did it. Was there an answer on it? I don't remember. Richard. Richard, come on. We're going to get some landscaper opinion here. Yeah, he wants more landscaping.
Okay, I'll put it over on your uh Richard Johnson, one Amst Avenue. I am a landscape architect. I just wanted to mention um the rinse station pad. Uh oftentimes those are not affixed
to the ground. It's like a wooden rug on the ground and you tip it up against the house to rake under it or find the chipmunks or whatever. So, I I think um it makes sense to count it as a structure if it's on a footing, but if it's a a mobile thing that one person
could easily move around, then it's in my mind something else. Just my two cents. Yeah. Thank you. I'm with him. I think we've all stepped on a few pallets and outdoor showers. Yeah, it's pallets. Yeah. Okay. So, we had all semantics.
Say something. Motion to close. Second at this thing behind us. Are you all Are you all set? I'm good. Okay, we have a motion to close in a second. You're all set, Norin? Yep. All those in favor of closing? I oppose? None. Motion to approve with conditions.
Second. All right, Frank. Okay. I've read into the record the relevant facts from the file. A couple of um points. The non-conforming uh dimension is the front yard setback.
presently is 20.5 ft. Um according to the applicant, it will be 20.7 ft upon completion. Um the applicant has also advised us that they have addressed the issue of the building commissioner with the um
front landing and they did that by filing a plan very recently showing a modification. Um, do you need the date on that? Yeah, it was last 9:23. 923. Yeah.
File a revised plan on 92325. So 24 Ashley just gave us plans dated 923 submitted 924. All right. So um under section 240 10.2A oh also there
was um go through the facts um there was one one person spoke at the public hearing uh who gave clarifying remarks Mr. Johnson uh there was no opposition noted uh under 240 10.2A 2A of the Felma
zoning bylaw. Non-conforming structures may be changed by special permit from the zoning board of appeals provided there is no increase in the non-conforming nature of the structure and we make that finding. We also find that there will that proposed structure will be substantial will not be substantially more detrimental to the
neighborhood than the existing structure under section 2401.3A4 in an R B zoning district. The lot coverage by structure uh may be ex uh increased from 20% to a maximum of 25% with a special
permit from the board of appeals. Coming in the lot coverage by structure here is 23.47% so it's already over. So we're going to give them a special permit that will uh legitimize the increase.
Um we find that the uh size and height of the proposed structure will be in keeping with the neighborhood average. There are no shadows on adjacent property. Uh there's no impact on neighborhood views and vistas and there's no impact on nitrogen on the
coastal embainments because this particular property is on the sewer. Uh under section 24012.1E the conditions for special permit we make the finding that the site is adequate for the proposed use. The site is suitable for the proposed use.
There's no negative impact on traffic clos and safety. No negative impacts on neighborhood visual visual character views or vistas. There are adequate utilities. The property has sewage adequate sewage disposal because it's on the felas sewer and there's no negative
impact on the supply of affordable housing. conditions. Uh, can I add one other finding? Sure. Uh, testimony is there's an increase in bedroom from three to four, but it is by right, but important to note under the sewer, you may have up to four. Yeah, by right. Yep. By right. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yep. Um, so conditions per plans, all boards, um, construction hours 7 through 7, Monday through Friday, 8 to 4 on Saturdays. Yeah. Revised plan of 92325.
sure. Yeah. In the conditions. All right. Thank you. Um, no, no construction Sundays or town holidays. Uh, construction vehicles and materials shall be located within the lot. I don't know if you'll need to contact police on that. It seems enough
room on that. We will if we have to. Yeah. I just want to uh go ahead. And uh Jim's condition. Um I was in the office the other day. there's something that uh there's an issue with the pass
permit and I think in the cases when we do have multiple submissions that should be regular that way what we approve is a specific set plan and then if somebody goes and alters it afterwards it's on
them because like I said there when I'm mentioning it there's one in the air right now and um you know what we uh approve is, you know, I mean, they there was five different submissions here and and I
mean just those should be noted all the time to cover ourselves and um because I just want everything that we do to be right and let the mistakes be made elsewhere. Yep. Agreed. No, it's good. Yeah. Um any
other conditions you can think of? Um, I had a note about certifying the lock coverage by structure. Okay. And no additional structures. No. Yeah, no additional structures. Good one.
They have a shed now. Yeah. Everybody, they still have enough. They're only 23 point something. So, if they wanted something on there, if they wanted to put a larger shed technically, they could come ask for one. We could do that through through an
administrative process. Yeah, but I mean to say no without without appropriate approval. Yeah. Yeah, that's okay. There you go. I'm a real stickler tonight. You wait till the comment or uh I got another one to stickle if that's a word.
I hope he doesn't stickle too badly. No, it's got nothing to do with you. We all Mr. Finner does on his own time is none of my business. No, it's our time. All right, are we all set to vote, everybody? We're all set with conditions. All those in favor? I oppose. No.
Thank you very much. Appreciate your time. Go Socks. Yeah. I have an 11-year-old boy who's baseball crazy and this is either going to be the best week of his life or the first real heartbreak. And either way, I'm here for it. All right. Um, moving on to minutes.
So we are tableabling the two that are uh listed. Tabling minutes. Wait, we got to get rid of what happened to Mashina Street. We did that one. Um
so no minutes. We're tableabling board discussion. I have something that I want to stickle. All right. As I mentioned earlier, um we spent a lot of time, a year and a half, um getting these staking down
correctly and um of late we've had requests to proceed without proper staking. Um, and uh, I've uh, 75% of the uh, engineers or whatever
that come in here, I've found mistakes in their staking in the past. And just to make this simple so we can go watch baseball. Um, I'm not going to allow anybody to come in here unstaked. Um, that's a no vote from me. Um especially
when we have projects that are multiple acres and tens of millions of dollars to uh tell us that they can't stake it or we had a few stakes up and they get ran over. Um that that's on you. It's not on me. Um and uh if it's not staked, you're
getting a no vote from me. All righty. Now, and we just had a request. I mean, there's you can stake the lot corners. I mean, you can give me a stake where the front door is going to be or whatever, but none of the I mean, I have
to see something, you know? I mean, to to and and uh as I said, I found enough mistakes like and somebody who's asking us for a uh dispensation um and expecting me to go in and divine where things are. I mean, I've uh
found one sitting in the car that was 900 ft different square feet different on a 7200 foot lot. And if that thing got the foundation got poured where the stakes were or whatever again, I mean, I don't want anything to ever be our
fault. And um and everybody should be treated the same. So, uh that's how I feel about it. if anybody has a contrary argument or whatever they, you know, you can vote the way you want, but um I I think
there's no reason why you can't at least give us a cursory staking of something. So, we know where it is. I I'm just, you know, these things can get out of hand and I mean, they have and uh I just uh
and they should at least clear us a path. Yeah, absolutely. We got to know where it's, you know, and I mean, if you're going to spend tens of millions of dollars, I mean, get somebody out there with a cutter and a gravely or whatever, you know, get somebody out there with a machete. I don't care. But, uh, I mean,
you can do all the stuff with the satellites. I mean, I'm not asking for every house corner in some of these situations, but no staking, no way. That's it. All right. Um, board updates.
So, we had a request from uh the Benjamin Nye development that's proposed about a sitewalk. I don't know if the board members were able right here. See if if that worked for folks together. Yeah, sure. I might as well.
Everybody got the dates in times? Um, so I crossed off the dates that I think um tomorrow was one and I didn't didn't work for right and you know obviously that's a little bit soon but I think um one that they were
looking at that we hadn't really or I heard specifically back from people was uh Monday the 6th between 2 and 4 in the afternoon. I don't know if that now is that with architect and engineer. Yeah, never mind cuz that's um
they do a great job with their aritecture. I don't have to have the guy that's that's just with engineer. Yeah. And the sixth um well why were they offering us boat off both on other dates? Yeah. And why um probably not a bite, you know, I'm just somebody why
why wouldn't it be better if we had an architect? I think you have to ask yourself what what is the benefit of having an architect there? Well, they offered it at the half of the uh Well, what I mean what I mean is would you my opinion my we're trying to figure out the site
itself rather than the architectural design. I don't know if that if that's important to you. Well, it was important enough to them to offer for half of the dates. So, uh yeah, I I think primarily more is better than less in my mind. I I
mean the more facts I can get the better. Um I'm with you. leads to a better decision. Yeah. I don't know if Tuesday the 7th works for people. They were they had that date does not work for me. The 7th? No. Okay. Um
well, you got pickle ball. Be nice. Uh I know there will still be people away. I mean, it's always going to I guess come up, but I don't know about Wednesday the 8th. They've also offered work. That that works.
I could do that. I can do that. I can do the eighth. Okay. I do the eth. You want to take the eighth then? And yeah. Yeah. Um Okay. What time is on the take pictures for you and so they're giving us a time span of from
2 to three to do everything there. Yeah. I mean I think an hour is probably pretty reasonable for you know you just want to go out and see and they'll always if we have questions we can always direct them to them afterwards or whatever. I mean, this is just preliminary, but yeah,
the the the more information I get, the better, you know. And they'll stake the center line of the road. Good. So, where are we meeting? Uh, at the site. Well, what street? It's got two streets, right? You go down the drive. There's a driveway. Yeah, there.
We'll go to that house and go down that driveway road. Okay. No, right beside. So, there's Cameron Road, then this driveway here. You'll see it because it has stone walls. All right. That same driveway entrance is about the same location of the
proposed driveway. Okay. So, the 8th at what time? 2. We'll send out an email uh 2:00 and you guys will post, right? Yeah. Okay. Yep. Perfect. Okay. Great. Let's get our tick clothes on, folks. Yes.
Oh, yeah. I was just asking my husband was talking to his dog, infectious disease doctor about ticks. My dogs eat gummies for ticks. And I said to the guy, "When are they gonna stop making gummies for the humans for ticks?" That would be what have I been eating?
Okay. And it looked like Saturday, November 15th, worked for most people for our Saturday session. What day? Saturday the 15th. Oh, yeah. Great. Yep. Okay. Good. All right. You love that one. 8:30, 9:00 is the time.
I think 9. I mean, unless you want to start earlier. Oh, that's Wow. Nice. Yeah, right. People don't want to jump out of bed. No. All right. That cold sleeping weather. So, future agenda items. I'll just say now our next meeting is October 9th at 6
p.m. And and then we're going to go into executive session. Right. So, announced that we're going to go out of public session and that we will not be returning to So, you you'll need a motion to You want to read my motion? leave public
session and go into West Felman. Just do a minute. Yeah. Uh Madam Chairman, I make a motion to go into executive session under general law chapter 38 section 21 A3 to discuss strategy with respect to litigation
uh and to not return to open session. Second. We have a motion and a second. Finan. Oh yes. Feneran I. Peterson I. Murphy I. Murphy foresight Patricia. All right.
Bang that gavl. I'm sorry. We have to do this in executive session. We're not We're not in it. We're not in it. I am so sorry that come here. I should have asked why you were here anyway. It's on me. I am so sorry. My name is Lear Mortza.
I just bought 30 Shore Street. Shore Street. Yes. 30. Yes. Okay. And it's in the historical department. We've been going back and forth with the historical department about the windows shutters. I don't think this has anything.
Yeah. I don't know if this is before us. They told me They came yesterday. I'm so sorry. They came yesterday to look at the property and they told me to come here to discuss it with you guys. I think you should have gone to the office. Yeah. Upstairs during the regular business hours.
No, they told me a six today here. Did you tell him to come here? No, you got to go through them in the office upstairs. It was Jed from the historical department. Uh, I think you might have misunderstood. You want to go to the office the other end of the hall where
Jed is and talk to either Norin or Ashley during regular business hours and then if you have to come here, we can deal with you then. But yeah, our to come to commissioner told me to come to commissioner. So yeah, you can meet with her. You you guys I don't know if she
Yeah. No, you have to go to the office. If they told you that there they told you something wrong. No, they came they visited the property yesterday. That's all right. They can do all that. But I mean No, no. They told me they especially told me to come today at 6:00 over here. But you're not on the agenda. You're not on the agenda.
They told me they they can't tell you. They can tell you. Yeah. If Do you want to come by the office tomorrow and we'll figure it out for you? Yes. No problem. I'm not Okay. Only thing I want to discuss, I'm not changing anything. We don't It's that all has to go through
the office. You're just There's a baseball game tonight. I don't mean to give you the bums rush, but I'm sorry you said your time. I apologize. Not your fault. They just visited the property yesterday, told me to come here. So, I'm sorry.
All right. Stop by the office. Yeah, the office during business hours. Okay. Yeah, no problem. Thank you. Oh, no. No, it's all good. I should have asked why he was sitting there. That's all. All right. Are we officially Did you gabble? No. Okay. So, go ahead.