Okay. So, 11 June 7:32 p.m. and we're going to start. We have a full full commission with us this evening. Um, we're doing this in person and via Zoom and this is our first Inerson meeting in
several months because we had other things that didn't need to get discussed and we saw no reason to gather us together for just administrative purposes. Um, we'll be having this meeting posted to the town's uh website tomorrow. Uh, we
are using something known as AI companion which has been recording as soon as the Zoom meeting launched and that'll generate a transcript. And William, I don't know, did you even look at the the transcript that was generated by the meeting? >> Not for March. No. >> Okay. All right.
>> It was very short. >> Yeah, it was a short meeting. that. Um, and I think this evening is going to be a short meeting, too. So, hopefully you won't have to go to AI campaigning for some backup data. >> Probably not. >> Um, all right. So, I noticed we have one
member of the public joining us by Zoom and I'll open the floor to see if he has any comment. It's Tanner Co. He's one of the applications that we're reviewing this evening. Okay. No comments from Tanner. Uh we
have meeting minutes from 12 March 2026. That thank you once again William for doing those meeting minutes. I know that's always a a challenge for time finding the time to do that. Uh I made one uh request of a change to reflect that our meeting was not at the Ritter
building on March 12th, but it was via Zoom only. And uh we will reflect on our letterhead from here on out that we now have a full commission with Andrew Gillis joining us. And then we were discussing um the
fact that Nathan is uh is subject to be uh reappointed as Andrews because he was fulfilling a term that ended 30 June 2026. All right. So is there a motion to approve the meeting minutes from 12 March? >> Motion. I'll
>> second. Uh, anybody uh have any comments? All those in favor? We'll do uh we don't have to do a roll call since we're all present. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? No. All right. So, the meeting minutes have been approved. All
right. So, the first uh business item is 50 Main Street. Um Nathan, have you had any response at all from our property owner at 50 Main Street? >> Uh yeah. So, I sent a letter last week, probably late in the week, Thursday or Friday. No, maybe it was earlier.
Anyways, I sent it uh certified returners. She requested um checked on the tracking it. It they tried to deliver it but no one was there. So I we sent it through the platform. He I got a call yesterday from
David. So he receal >> Dval. Yes. Uh Mr. Dval. >> Uh he said he received the letter. Um, we talked, you know, talked a little bit about the the status of it, like who was supposed to get it. Was it him or Rob? I
explained to him that we previously sent them to both of them. Rob told us I we should just be sending to him as the trustee for the the overall condo trust. And uh, at any rate, so the gist of what he told me was
he wasn't going to be able to make it tonight. He's current, his mother is currently um in Mass General Hospital. He's the only one to care for her. Um he has spoken with a contractor about the steeple. Tomorrow when he's in the
office, he is going to send us to our email address some information that he has from that contractor. He is planning to do the repair and he said and he's willing to come in sometime. So I told him to figure out when he can come in and get a date. I do have he did call
me. So he I asked him if I could reach contact him with that phone number. He said yes. So um so at least we have an open channel communication now you know and uh >> and some indication that work was going to happen. >> Yeah. Yeah. And he seems favorably disposed you know to to doing the work. He wasn't pushing back on the substance
of it at all. >> All right. We'll keep it open for uh the July meeting in the event that there's no activity. But if there is some activity, we'll just watch and see how how he performs. Okay. >> Any other comments, questions about the 50 Main Street?
>> Jennifer, you me you mentioned at I think uh either the February or March meeting. What's your connection to that building? >> Uh Jesse Sanderson um and his wife um two of the largest windows on Bowen's side. Um they they're the ones who
donated those windows. Um, in addition to, um, there's numerous smaller windows with family names, but Jesse and, uh, god, Mahabel, I think, or something like that, are the two main ones. Um, Jesse
was the brother of Alicia, who's my Revolutionary War patriot. Um, and so the majority of the windows in there were donated by the family. >> Wow. Interesting. So, when was the church built? Do you know?
>> Uh, the church, >> uh, if it's put me on the spot, >> uh, it wasn't until late, a little bit later. I want to say early 1800s,
maybe earlier, but I think that's that's accurate. >> Okay. >> Um, I can come up with specific dates. That's not necessary. >> I have access to it, but >> top of my head it's >> it's an old building. >> Yes, it is.
>> Okay. All right. Any other questions, comments? >> I'm just curious. So, what's it's I think you were It was brought up in the meeting that I attended. I was like, it's something with the steeple portion. Is >> anything you want to describe what we've been talking to the owners about?
>> Yeah. So, there's like a a steeple or a a cup or whatever it is tower thing out the roof. Um it's uh it's deteriorated somewhat. It had already deteriorated even before the
establishment of the APDC. >> Okay. >> Uh it's at a point where it's probably still salvageable. And so under the APD bylaw, you know, we're charged with preventing demolition by neglect of
historically significant structures. And you know that that is that is one. Um and so the ask for the owners simply to uh make the necessary repairs to at minimum arrest further deterioration and
you know protect the integrity of this people going forward. We're not asking for a full restoration to its original glory but to just you know >> Sure. keep it from getting worse. Yeah. >> Exactly. Do you know when the the the pointy piece actually came down? Anybody in the room? Jennifer, I'm looking at
you because >> No, it was a few years ago. >> It's got to be more than six because it wasn't there when I moved there. >> Well, I don't don't know about pointy piece. It was like a there was like four little points. I think there was points on each of the corners. >> Okay. And um yeah, >> that was in my lifetime, but that's not
saying. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions, comments? All right. 990 Mass Avenue determination of applicability. We have a fairly comprehensive application that uh set of plans that was sent to us. Um I want to
note that um I drove by the the project area today and the building is already been through demolition and uh I'm not quite certain how that happened because >> wait which which building we talking? >> 90 Mass Avenue >> because
already gone. Yeah, the chimney. All the windows have been replaced. That's what prompted me to drive by. I wanted to see >> Well, the chimney we approved, right? Yes, we did. >> Yeah, we approved that back in January, February, somewhere in that time. >> But I wanted to see what the windows were and the windows are all gone. Um,
>> but uh the other issue is I note that noted that this went to ZBA yesterday and there is a 20-day clock on any ZBA determination. It was approved, but it has to go through a 20-day window for
any potential appeals. >> What was the what was the matter before the ZBA? >> It had because it's uh turning into a >> multi-unit >> multi-unit house. It has to be has to be approved as special permit. So got
>> you know and and fundamentally you know like I there have been other houses single family houses that that have been converted to uh d you know multif family units but clearly uh any house that's
was a single family house that turned that is historic that turns into a a two family house I think that that was certainly something that we should have been able to discuss but I think the water's over the damn I mean the house has been um been gutted uh you know it's
>> unfortunately my experience with the historical commission um what I've learned is is that people uh become very forgetful when it comes time to I don't know ripping down properties and then letting people know after the fact um
seems to be a issue at times kind of >> well >> so the do the work and then let someone know. I Yeah. >> Right. So, of the things you're talking about though, the usage is not governed by the APDC. The interior is not
governed by the APDC. The chimney was approved by the APDC. The only grayer area is is the windows. And I think in our current rules, yeah, that that the building inspector should have brought something before us. uh
what what I think is uh something that I agree with what you just said, but I think that one of the issues that um I want to explore with the planning board and with um the town's land use director
Steve Wallace is a conversion and use from a single family house that's that is underneath our bylaws. um at what point in time cuz that's a significant alteration of the facility
structure. So it's not intended to be regulated. >> I I that's what I want to clarify. >> That's what I clarify. >> Taking that from a single family to a multif family >> makes it more compliant with a village district's zoning than being a single
family. At this point, >> I think there's a gray area between what we would do in reviewing a an alteration versus what the village district and and that's that's what I want to get clear. >> But use is not a structural alteration.
Use is use. Well, there there has to be some structural alterations, but we should be looking at the structural alterations. The fact that the use is changing, they could be making it a business. They could be making it uh mixed use. Like there says APDC says nothing about that. That's not in our
jurisdiction. It's that simple. >> The the bylaws do address use. >> The the APD bylaw or the village district bylaw? >> No, by the APD does. >> And that's what I want to get clarified. What does use mean in terms of the
context of the village district uh bylaw as well as ours? >> I have to look at that. I'd be surprised if it uh that it addresses to hear that it addresses use. >> Um but all right, so here's the here's my dilemma. Do we want to just go ahead
and approve the determination of applicability or do we want to caveat that to say that we're approving that approving it with the notion that the work has already proceeded? >> Um >> so I'm looking for a motion.
I make a motion just to approve it as is. I mean, have I guess a question first if we Well, we can discuss it. I make a motion to just approve it as is. Is there a second? >> Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor?
>> Uh oh, further discussion. Hold on. >> Yeah. Um, so if uh I looked at the plans were you I mean I assume that you know I don't I'm not personally particularly concerned about the windows as long as
they're you know protecting the envelope but whatever. Did do you look at the windows and >> and they look pretty good? Uh I I think that what I don't know is what the wind windows were before they were removed and that was what I was looking
for. You know, was there any historic fabric left in those windows? I don't know. >> Okay. >> So, so from that standpoint, I can't answer the question. >> Okay. Yeah. No. Okay. So, that's all. No. >> Which is one of the reasons why, you know, for us to have a discussion to just approve the determination of applicability without noting that I
think is is an error. But you made a motion. It's on the floor for discussion. >> Yeah, I have no problem make approving it as is, but with the note of, you know, everything was already removed prior to. So,
>> all right. So, now we got to modify the motion. >> I'm fine with that. I mean, what's the purpose the note? I'm fine with the note. Like, is it just for the record? Just uh so if we go back and review this, we can say, "Hey, here's an here's the examples where >> Yeah, I don't think so. Yeah, why not a
year from now to be like, "Oh, they knocked out their windows and you guys didn't say nothing." It's like, >> "All right, at least we can't use it as case law, you know, >> like that's just the way it goes." But >> Okay, I'm fine with that amendment. >> All right. So, the amendment is that we'll approve the determination of
applicability with the understanding that the work proceeded before we actually made the approval. >> That is that an accurate summary of the motion as amended? >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion as
presented and modified. I >> Any uh opposed? All right. So, we're done with 90 Mass Avenue. Um Free Oak Avenue determination of applicability. Uh pretty simple project.
The historic fabric of the barn, it's you I drove by there, looked at it. I mean, it's been pretty much modified over the years. Um, I'm not sure what kind of shingles they once had, but the shingles that they have now that are going to get replaced by the project are
going to be a vast improvement and certainly provide the ability to keep that building in good shape for the future. Um, so I'm going to make a request for a motion to approve the determination of three Oak Avenue. The determination of applicability doesn't
have to go for binding review. All those uh a motion here. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Um, >> do we have a motion? >> I I'll make the motion. Okay. >> Yeah, it's Thank you, Jennifer. Jennifer seconds. All those Any further discussion? >> All those in favor say I.
>> I. I. >> All right. Okay. All right. Um, closing public comment. Closing com comment from the public. We only have one. >> Tanner, you're on mute. Oh, there you go.
>> Yeah. So, Tanner Cole, 856 Massachusetts. have um I guess I'm a little bit confused by the process because I was really looking for an administrative review. Um
and so I don't know how that works. The only reason I even was made aware that it I was on the agenda tonight is because the building inspector brought it to my attention. Um, so I I don't
know what the next steps are in terms of what your expectations are. Um, when I came in front of the commission to get permission to remove the chimney, that was to facilitate the sewer connection
to the house. Um, so we could get that part of things established. Um, and in terms of the windows, the home went through a significant renovation in the early '7s. And prior to doing any work, the board
of health required us to do a hazardous materials assessment. And that came back that all of the windows tested positive for asbestous. And so that decision was really a result of the
board of health's requirement to address the hazardous materials in the house. I wasn't really thinking of it in terms of um you know circumventing your process. In fact, I
went to you before I got the permit for the interior work. Um, in terms of the rest of the work that we're going to do, the overall footprint of the building isn't really
going to change. Um, there are a couple of elements that are going to be difficult to work with. One is the siding. The second is the roof. Um, the roof framing is
not in great shape. Um, a couple of the dormers were put on in a way that really doesn't safely carry the load of the roof. Um, but in term in terms of the overall look
of um the house, the exterior really isn't going to change. We're not putting any additions on. We're not removing any part of the structure um other than the chimney um and doing lots of interior
work, but even the interior work, the room sizes, wall configuration, all that's pretty much staying the same. So, I guess I'm just looking for clarification like what the next step is. I I looked at this
meeting as being more of a you know what your thoughts were in terms of window choices, siding choices, um shingle choices, that sort of stuff. Um and I so I don't know if that's the
next step or not. Um but um you have the open gov process and you need to consult with the building commissioner if you have any questions about what reviews and what actions are required.
Our our business with you has ended with the approval this evening and uh I'll make a note in open gov.com tomorrow um that says we met we approved with some condition uh your request for
determination of applicability. >> Well, it wasn't a condition with a it was a comment. a comment. >> Yeah, it's a comment. Um, you know, the one thing that I find um
kind of troubling quite honestly is that in accordance with the bylaw, in accordance with the bylaw for zoning, um I didn't think work was supposed to start before approvals were given. And I've sent a note to the building
commissioner asking him um if I was correct in assuming that work wouldn't start until both the ZBA requirement for the for approval of the special condition permit was granted including the appeal uh time frame as well as you
know for us. So we're we we're done with you in terms of of uh our business. Um, I I think it's also interesting that you're now raising the issue that that roof framing isn't uh maybe going to work uh because you paid an architect
and I would have thought that in his demolition uh section of that set of drawings that you submitted that he would have evaluated you know what conditions exist that might significantly affect the exterior appearance. You can do anything that you
want to do in terms of the architectural preservation district bylaw in the interior. We have no authority over that. But if it turns out that that now that we've approved your determination of applicability and you can proceed with work even though you've already
started that the exterior is going to change then um that presents a challenge for us because we're making this approval based on the on the drawings that you submitted to us. And I would have thought that any demolition work
would have reflected roofing. >> Okay. I mean, in terms of roof framing, the the issue is you can't see anything in these areas until you do your demo and remove the plaster. These aren't attic accessible areas. They're shed
dormers that go out over porches and so on. So, until in one of the upstairs bedrooms, so until you pull the material down, you're really guessing at what's there. Um, if that makes sense. Um,
so >> was the house was the house occupied during the design? >> Uh, no. >> Okay. That would have been a pretty good opportunity for your architect to go in
and take some some looks at what he was going to present. All right. Um, we're Any other further comment, Danner? No, I have a good night. >> All right. Um, I haven't established a
meeting date for our next meeting. Uh, because I was thinking that we might actually have have a public hearing for 990 Mass Avenue, but we're not going to. So, our next meeting date would be the second Thursday of the month because I
was thinking, well, if we're going to have to have a public hearing, we probably want to do that before our normally scheduled meeting. So, it would be 9 July. Anybody have a problem with 9th July? Okay. So, let the record reflect that
our next meeting is something. >> I I will be out of uh I will not be available at that time. >> Okay, >> everybody. >> You don't need to risk it. Yeah. No, everybody else >> should be. >> Okay. All right. And if that becomes an
issue because some someone else's schedule changes and we'll just look at a different day. Okie dokie. Um, anything else? Any come before us? I I'm asking for a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second.
>> Second. Thank you. Me and Miss Jennifer. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. Journed at 7:30. >> Okay, so we're done.