March 10, 2026 – Zoning Board of Appeals – Video & Transcript
March 10, 2026 - Zoning Board of Appeals
Good evening. This is the March 10, 2026 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. I'm just going to read the meeting preamble here. This meeting may be recorded, and if recorded, it will be made available to the public on Waking End as soon as possible after the meeting.
Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, this meeting will be conducted in person and via remote access and according to the applicable law. One can watch or participate in the meeting remotely with a link that is found on the town website.
Or required by law or allowed by the chair, persons wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting may do so at the meeting location in person or remote access. Public comment should be limited to two minutes per person.
We have, was someone raising their hand? No. No? Okay. All right. So, do we have any public comment? Not limited to the specific cases here tonight? This is general public comment? It doesn't look like there is, and it doesn't look like there's anyone online.
Has everyone had a chance to review the meeting minutes? Yes. Any questions? Concerns? All right. I'd make a motion to approve.
The February 10th, 2026 meeting minutes? Second. All right. So, we'll do this by roll call. Mr. Perry. Aye. Mr. Saring. Aye. Mr. Hirsch. Aye. Ms. Paul. Aye. Mr. White. Aye. So, those meeting minutes are approved.
Thank you. All right. So, we can move on to our first case tonight. This is the continuation of CDA case 25-3043 Plain Road. This is the application of the IPA Development Company LLC for the property at 43 Plain Road.
Parcel ID 24-120 in the single residence R-30 zoning district. The applicant seeks a special permit, variance, or other applicable zoning relief to demolish the existing structure.
We can start the replacement zoning. The lot is pre-existing, non-performing, with respect to minimum lot area requirements.
So, I know this has been very patient. This is our, I think, our third attempt or fourth attempt to get through this.
So, I know that at our last hearing, we had a couple of questions and comments on some inconsistencies in the application material.
And it looks like all of that material has been updated and resubmitted to the board.
So, I guess with that, if you could give us your name and, I guess, give us an overview of where we are with this project. Certainly. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Attorney Andrew DeLorey, I'm joining my father, Attorney Paul DeLorey, tonight. We are before you, as the chair stated, on behalf of IPA Development Company, LLC, seeking a special permit for 43 Plane Road. We have been before you a number of times. There was a question in last month's meeting related to the plans that had been submitted to the board. First, the plans that were being presented. The board requested the whole new application to ensure that we were all automatically on the same page. Additionally, we became aware last month for the first time that a large contingent of neighbors had been submitting letters to the town related to the project. We were not aware of those previously prior to last month, but they have now been received and they have been reviewed. One thing I do want to talk about is, you know, despite not having the knowledge of the letters, I think that my clients were working diligently to resolve some of the things that were being requested, even unknowingly. So, mainly, you know, there are a number of letters that were submitted, some of them related to items on the plans that are either no longer relevant because the plans have been revised or they've otherwise been added and amended. But to look at the conditions or the requests largely, you know, some of the items that we noticed that were consistent throughout the requests were the location. So, again, this lot is kind of triangular shaped at the intersection of Plain Road and Glen Road, which is a, you know, according to the residents, is a high traffic area. There was a request related to protecting the site line for vehicles really would be approaching from Glen Road to somebody coming to the end of Plain Road. So, one of the original things that my client had done was to reduce the footprint in that area of the lot, which if you're looking at the plan, would be to the left. If you're facing the house, it would be to the left of the house. The original application was 10 feet closer to that lot line along Glen Road than the present application is. Additionally, there have been comments related to the aesthetics of the structure. My client has worked diligently to try to bring together a plan, which is more in line with the other houses in the neighborhood as requested. And additionally, there's been a large amount of concern related to stormwater runoff on the property, also relative to the location of the septic system. So, you do have a plan before you that cites the septic system. It's located in the rear of the property, as we discussed last month. Additionally, my client is installing stormwater runoff for the gutters and the downspouts, which will have two 150-gallon hyperbolic chambers, each located in the front of the parcel, which will work to mitigate any runoff, which is generated by the increase in the footprint of the property. Additionally, I think that we've been before the board a few times. We've presented the presentations. The board has the packages before them. As I said, I think my client has largely worked to address some of the concerns of the neighbors, even unknowingly, down to the point that one of the original requests was there's no three-car barrages in the neighborhood. And my client had actually voluntarily downgraded that to a two-car garage, which is a lot of the reason they were able to save some of that space in that 10 feet that we discussed. So, I suppose what I would like to do is just request from the board at this point, is there any further comments or any other additions that the board would like to see? We do feel that the project is now more in line than what was previously proposed and is not a substantial detriment, but I would like to hear if the board does have any further comment based on what the board looks like. Okay. So, we did receive a lot. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you for the updates for the presentation, and thank you for putting together a comprehensive package we have. I don't have any specific questions, excuse me, on the proposal, but I understand that we have someone from the neighborhood wanted to make a presentation this evening? I think they wanted to read a statement. We received, like, I think, one additional public comment and a request for a statement. Yes. Okay. So, I guess before we get into questions from the board, I guess I'd like to hear from, you know, either members of the public that are here tonight or the applicant, or the individual who wanted to prepare. Right here, gentlemen. Yes, please. Thank you.
Is there, is there, oh, so if you can come up and give us your name and address, please. Certainly. My name is Bill Dowling. And I'm in a butter living at 44 Millbrook Road. I'm the one who has the concerns with the stormwater. And I appreciate the systems that are being proposed to address that. Let me just say that I'm here tonight to voice some concerns about the March 3rd application that are somewhat consistent with what we saw in previous applications and consistent with the January 5th, I think, letter that 25 neighbors sent to the ZBA. You know, as described in that letter, the main issue we have with, that we expressed to the ZBA was the, the excess of mass and scale of this project, mostly related to the building height, which we still believe derogates from the neighborhood of the neighborhood. In fact, the newest proposal is three feet, almost three feet higher than the previous proposal.
And just to get into that a little bit, looking at this March proposal, this is the third application that understates the actual height of the building in spite of your directions back in October of last year, November of last year, to calculate the height based on the mean grade of the property. Correct. We asked that of all the applicants? All the applicants could ask that. And I have not seen the calculations. I've seen topography on the, on the, but I have not seen any calculations that determine what the mean grade of this, of this development is. You know, just on that phase, we believe that we'll have sufficient grounds to continue this application until you guys have provided that information.
You know, that said, you know, the apparent height of this structure from the beginning has only been reduced by three feet, which indicates to us, you know, a little effort to address the neighborhood's core concern about the mass and bulk and scale of this, of this project. Many of, you know, just to get perspective, many of the residents on Glen, Glen Road and Millbrook Road, which are behind the building, will be impaired by a view of a rear facade that is more than 35 feet high. There's a slope going down in that direction. The residents on Plain Road are going to see a roof line that's more than 50% higher than everything else on similar sized lots.
The proposed development has a Florida area ratio more than 70% greater than the average of comparable lots in the immediate neighborhood. And with ceiling heights of 9 to 10 feet and an attic ridgeline of 10 and a half feet, this will result in a structure that looms over the surrounding neighbors. The Plain Road abutter, I want abutter, there's a Plain Road abutter as well. They recognize a reduction in the side yard non-reformity, but again, the increase in the height of this structure is going to cast shadows and actually probably be more of a detriment than the current configuration is. So, you know, based on the merits of this, we asked the ZBA to consider the mass bulk and scale this project to be out of character with the neighborhood. But we also know there's over 2,300 feet of unfinished space in this building, which seems excessive for a three-bedroom house, but it also provides an opportunity for IPA to really take a look at what they're proposing and take some of 3,200 feet, or, I'm sorry, 2,300 feet, you know, out of the bulk and mass of the structure.
So those are some of the issues we have with the bulk and mass of the building. The other concerns we have, one has to do with the zoning bylaws connected with scenic roadways. And I don't know what board hears that, if it's this board or another board, but it's unclear that the applicant has been approved for right-of-way tree removals. That would probably be required for this property because the easement on this thing goes back 20 feet beyond the pavement. I mean, it goes back pretty deep.
And the driveway cut, as proposed, is much wider than is allowed under, under, for new construction on a, on a designated scenic road. So I don't know if they've received that approval from you or another board and what the conclusion has been so far. But if nothing's been done, I would ask that, you know, sort of hold on this until some answer has been determined. And, um, on stormwater, um, again, you know, we're appreciative of the fact that the, uh, the, uh, the applicant has, has put in two, um, two, uh, is proposing two systems to address stormwater. And on our face, that looks like sufficient capacity to address the issue. Um, as, as, as the butter will be affected by this, though, um, what I'm concerned about is that these aren't passive systems. Um, um, I mean, they sort of are, but they're not really in, in the sense that they need maintenance and repair. Uh, you know, gutters get clogged, et cetera, lines get clogged, systems need to be cleaned out. Um, and there's no way to ensure that these systems would, will be properly maintained unless there's some kind of, um, maintenance covenant or something similar to that attached with a deed, um, to basically ensure that future owners of this property, uh, comply with an O&M plan to, you know, address this. This, this issue. So, we're asking that, you know, when this thing eventually does get approved, approved through the ZBA, that some kind of deed, uh, requirement is attached to, to this. Um, we, um, we're asking IPA, uh, separately, we're asking IPA if they can confirm, and we know there's a, there's a, there's a septic system now on the map. And we'd just like to know that, or confirm that this septic system is in fact the existing three bedroom septic system that is, um, on the site. And that it will remain on the site, um, not to be modified or replaced with a larger system. Um, finally, there, there's just two, there's two issues on the application besides the, the height matter, uh, that I'd like to bring up. One, one has to do with an unanswered question connected with the stormwater, uh, query in, in the application. There's a question on there about whether or not your compliance with the stormwater rules. Um, and that's been left blank on all the applications. Um, my, my review of the plan, uh, shows that there is, you know, according to the plan, there's more than 500 additional feet of impervious, uh, impervious space, impervious surfaces being created on this property, maybe up to a thousand feet, maybe more than a thousand. Um, and, um, you know, if you're over 500, you gotta have a permit, at least a minor permit to, uh, to do any work. So, what we're asking here is that the, uh, the ZBA continue this permit application until an approved minor stormwater management and land disturbance permit with an enforceable O&M plan for the infiltration system and any kind of tree removal plan, you know, for the bylaws is addressed. And again, I don't know if that's this board or conservation or, or where, um, the last thing I wanted to know, and it may just be administrative. I don't, I don't know if there seems to be a discrepancy between, um, uh, IPA LLC's address on the application, which is somewhere in Belchertown, Massachusetts. And what's in what's online in the secretary of state's office, which is somewhere in Framingham. And I just like, I could agree to speak to that. And that's, that's, that's it. I have, um, nice, a quick question. Absolutely. Um, so on the stormwater issue, um, you brought up, um, concern about maintenance, uh, for the system. Yes. Um, is that applicable for, in your eyes, is that applicable for any new construction project on this site or, um, just because of the size of it? Well, because, because, well, I think, I don't know if you heard during the first meeting, but I mentioned, I expressed concerns in the first meeting that even Peggy's property, even the property as it was currently configured, um, in certain years, like this year would be a good example. If we had a huge rain, for example, with the snowpack and the frozen ground, her water would flow onto our property, flooding our property and go into our garage and all that. So that's, that's a potential issue. Um, so it's been mitigated to some extent by the putting in, uh, proposing to, um, infiltration systems because of the increase in impervious space, which, which we're appreciative of. I think that's a good idea. Okay. The only issue we have is with, um, you know, we just, I, I know I do this for work. I know these systems don't. Hunter, I want to say something about this. I built a house at 218 Main Street and I didn't have gutters. And because of the drip of the water, they asked me to put a drain in just for that purpose, not for any other reason. So I don't know if it's requirement for every house that we built, but because I don't know, in my opinion, probably they did it because I didn't have any gutters and, uh, run from the roof. They want it to be kept caught right in premise. So that's how they may be. But other cases, I don't know if they have required drainage system or so, unless it, you know, project is a major, major, big project. Yeah. I mean, there's general, as I read the bylaws and this town, there's, um, there's protections for lots of things related to stormwater, including, you know, flooding of private property. So what, what this is, these systems are intended to do is prevent that from happening because of the additional 600 to 1000 plus square feet of impervious. Well, any, any, any addition of impervious area, more than 500 square feet triggers compliance with the stormwater. Yes, that's right. So there is more than 500 square feet here. So stormwater management is required and the engineering solutions required. Yes. Yeah. So we have the engineering solution. We just, what I'm trying to do is tie it up with, um, you know, compliance, whoever owns a house to keep the systems working. Um, any other comments? Well, I don't know. You're, so for you, no other comments from you, right? No. Okay. No. All right. And what is your address, please? 44 Millbrook Road. Millbrook Road, 44. Millbrook Road. 44. Would you mind? I'm sorry. I will. Do you have any other members of the public for this case that wanted to make a comment? Do we have anyone online? One. Okay. Thank you. Um, so I, I know that the, uh, the applicant had a question that I, I would, I guess I would direct back to the applicants concerning the contact information for IPA development company. Sure. Um, just to touch on that. I can discuss more of my client. I do agree. If you, if you review the Secretary of State's website, IPA development does, uh, have a different address listed. What it is, is that's a, that address in Belcher town is actually my client, Ivy Daron is now here with me, who is one of the members of IPA. That's actually her personal resident. So, um, she's also the applicant of the next application and that Belcher town address is the correct address for the next application. I think it's just a mistake that, that, that took place. It's based on the, uh, need for the, the mean grade building. It sounds to me like another application is going to be forthcoming just to correct that. So it's certainly easy enough to just correct the corporate address of the, of the applicant at the, at the same time. Well, uh, okay. Um, I guess the, the, the concern I had instead of like, this has been going on since October. And we just kind of keep coming back with materials that are incorrectly labeled. You know, mistakes have been made. We keep asking about these mistakes. You know, I, quite frankly, I, I'm not really interested in continuing this case further. If that's something that you, you are, you insist on wanting to continue this to revise the application that that's your right to do. But I guess I'd ask other members of the board, you know, do we want to, do we want to entertain and continue it? So do we want to close to liberation of this project? I think closing deliberation on this. I think we've heard from both sides substantially on this. I think the closing deliberation might be the best option for both sides in which if it's small paperwork stuff, that can get modified. And then I, I guess, I mean, are we getting closer to, you know, the. Well, I, I honestly don't know. I mean, we have a lot of materials here. Um, we have a lot of, there's a lot of, you know, regenerative concerns about this project. So I can tell you when you do your average grade calculation, you're going to find that your proposed project is over the height limit. So, like, that's just me looking really, really quickly at the great difference between the and the fact that you increased this to 32%. So I guess I'd ask you, like, if, if this is the application materials that you have, and this is the project that your applicant wants, I think we should, we should close deliberation and vote on this. So if that's, if, if that's, you know, I'm, I'm putting this back, I guess in a way I'm putting this back on you, you can, you said, well, heard the, you've heard the concerns, you've heard from the board. So, um, just generally, I think you're going to, I mean, I, my two cents, you're going to have to, you know, if, if you do that average grade calculation, you're going to have to redesign this project again. Right. I, I just generally just a comment on a couple of things. Um, we, I don't disagree. We've been here for a little bit. We did have a stretch of time where there was no meeting. Then we, the board was dealing with that large school issue that you had over the last couple of months that cost us a meeting as well. Um, you know, I think that the most important thing is that my, my client is working in good faith to try to deliver a project that the neighbors are satisfied with. And there's, you know, imperfections throughout the process. But I think that we've always taken the, uh, comments from the neighbors and the board, even unknowingly, you know, when we also got eight letters that I hadn't seen until we were at the last, at the last hearing, and we're, we're working in good faith to bring forward the project. And, and Mr. Dowling just raised some good questions related to the tree removal in the, in the right way and the driveway. It seems to me appropriate to kind of vet the, the jurisdiction and the logistics of that question first. And then if there are any additional requirements, you know, to, to the, the project itself based on that meat grain calculation or whatever, I, you know, I, I think that, um, you know, what, what is the injury to the board? What is the injury to the abutters that we continue to refine the project to give them more of something, what they're asking for? So there's, so I can give you an answer to that. There's, there's not necessarily an injury to the board, but I would let you know that at next month, we already have five cases. So it would be impossible for us to continue you to next month. It would have to be, it would have to be to the month following that, which, uh, I mean, that doesn't, it doesn't do any harm to the board. Um, but it would basically be the May hearing would be the soonest that we could get you back here. I, I mean, that's, it's, I think that it's going to take potentially some time to get the answers anyway. If there's revisions to the plan, it's going to take time. I, I, you know, if that's, if that's what the board has to petition in order to have a continuum. I unfortunately think we do. If we didn't have, I would feel differently if we didn't have five cases next month. But, um, I think it's a, if in that case, so that I think we have a, we have a challenge. My, my client doesn't have any objections to that. If that's, if, if that's a singular concern. Okay. Um, also I do want to just, um, we just need, we need an answer on that stormwater question. You know, even with the system installed, let's make sure that it's conforming. Like I said, my, my client is working imperfectly to come into compliance or something happy. All right. So, so I guess with that then, if that's the case, if we're going to continue this. So there's a couple of, there's a couple of points I would, I would stress to you. Um, one is, uh, make sure you complete the average brain calculation. And the, the bylaw tells you exactly how to do it. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, the building department has like a, a cheat sheet that shows you exactly how to do this. That if it's not available for pickup at the window, we can, I can find a way to make sure it measure six feet off of any. Yeah. Six feet off. It's six feet off the building face. Yeah. Yeah. Um, I'd also urge you to check that your proposed curb cut is not too close to the corner of Plain Road and Glen Road. There are dimensional requirements about the distance between a curb, a driveway curb cut and an intersection. I have a feeling that you're on that. I think your location of the call attack in the corner between Plain Road and Glen Road is going to drop a problem with the sight line issues that the, um, Mr. Dowling raised with respect to tree removal. Um, I also think that if you look at the original house, the concern about sight lines for the corner, you know, you did improve this from what you originally proposed, but your proposal still pushes the corner of the house 17 feet closer to Glen Road, like making the sight line point problem worse than the current condition is right there. So, uh, you know, that in addition to the fact that I think if you look at the overall building mass, this is substantially larger than, than other houses. So I think the board is going to have a tough time determining this actually isn't more detrimental to the existing neighborhood than the current proposal. So we're going to go for a continuance. I, I would suggest that you look carefully at those design issues and a revised proposal. Sure. Can I just ask one question? Sure. You're saying, I just said I'm not familiar with the logistics of the town. You know, is there a separate scenic road approval? Who has the jurisdiction of that? There is a scenic road bylaw. And to be honest, I am actually not familiar with what board jurisdictionally enforces that. That's something that I would have to look up myself as well. The zoning board typically has not dealt with that before. It seems like a planning board thing. It seems like a planning board thing, but is that something you need and you might be able to look into and see if you can get the information back to the applicant? Yes. I believe it's the planning board. I got no real intent there. Just simply, you submit the application and you think it comes and says you got to do X, Y, Z. I would agree with you. That one's not clear. Okay. Well, I will review that. Okay. Internally. It turns out that that approval was needed first. There would be a lot of suit have to deal with it. Yeah. Well, we could or we could. We could. It could be done in parallel. I, you know, we've done that. We recognize that this town does have some overlapping boards. We, a lot of times we've gone for a concurrent approval or we've commissioned approval on approving something from another board. We don't, I wouldn't want to sort of have to go through that process, wait that whole thing out and then come here and we'd find a way to give you the ability to do simultaneous approvals on it. Okay. Right. All right. So, I guess with that, we need to, we need to, I guess I would make a motion to continue case, sorry, case 25-30 to, is it May 12? Yes. Okay. 7 p.m. on May 12th. Sorry. So, we're going to do a roll call because we're in those. So, Mr. Perry. May what? May 12th. Mr. Perry. Aye. Mr. Sarian. Aye. Mr. Paul. Aye. Mr. White. Aye. So, we are continued for this case for May 12th at 7 p.m. Thank you. All right. You can stay. You don't have to get off and get back to that. So, with that, we're going to move on to our next case. This is the continuation of CBA page 29-35 in Park Ridge Road. This is the application of API development company for the property located in Park Ridge Road. This is Carson ID 50-274. The applicant seeks a special requirement, variants, or other applicable zoning to demolish the existing structure and the structure replacement dwelling. The lot is pre-existing and unconforming with respect to the minimum lot area requirements. So, we need to reintroduce yourself. Good evening. Good evening. Again. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening. Again. We're here before you on the Green Park Ridge Road. Same situation as last month. We've been before on this project a couple of times. We were here last month with some questions related, again, to plans submitted versus plans presented to the board. My client did submit a wholly new application package with plans that are dated appropriately. And I believe that hopefully we're all working on that same set tonight. Again, this was a big difference from what the original revision was, including a relocation of the garage to a location which would take advantage of the existing foundation. We had had a comprehensive discussion about what section of the bylaw we were to be under. And it felt that if we used the existing foundation, we would go under one and not the other. So, my client has presented that. There were some neighbors that were present. I don't believe that they're abutters. But my client has been in discussions with the abutters. They did complete a renovation project diagonal on Harper Road across the street. So, we already had some familiarity with the abutters there. And as far as I am aware, unless there's somebody on Zoom, to the contrary, I believe that we have satisfied the concerns of the abutters. And we would ask tonight that the board grant the special permit for the reconstruction of the Parker Trail. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Do we have any members of the public here on this case? And no one online? All right. All right. So, if you had a chance to read or see the planning board, the original planning board comment from December, and the updated planning board comment from January 6th. I did. The planning department. Sorry. I did review those. Okay. What is your, I guess, I would ask you, what is your, what is your opinion on those? Because, you know, the town planner is, you know, in so many words telling us to deny this project. Or sort of encourage radical change to your, to your design. So, I'm just curious. You're asking us to approve this project. But, you know, we have, we have guidance indicating that, you know, there are issues with size and scale of this proposed project in the neighborhood. I just wanted to know your comments on those two documents from the planning department. Sure. So, it was a little unclear what the standing of the planning department was because there was not a new letter submitted where there had been with prior applications. The new proposed, the current proposal at A Park Ridge is smaller than the last, most recent product that was considered in his, in his January 6th letter. You know, generally, when we talk about a substantial detriment for the neighborhood, it's just, it's all lost on me by the people that are most affected by the project that generally signed off on it. You know, they're, they're the ones that would feel the impact of any density or increased floor area ratio. Um, certainly, um, if it, if it's the position of the board, um, that, you know, it's a request for us to find further reduction. Certainly, I would, I'll bring that to my client and, and we can work on that, uh, diligently. But, um, from where we started, we did, you know, consider the applicant, we did, we did consider the concerns of the neighbors. Um, and we did present the project to them, which, as far as we're aware, we have their blessing on. Um, so, you know, the, the information from the planner is, is certainly helpful. Um, it's also not lost on me that I'm not sure if, uh, well, it's gross floor area or I thought it was thinking floor area ratio. Thank you. Um, it's, you know, just generally, uh, it's, it's helpful for him to, to provide, uh, but I, I, I think that my clients are concerned, uh, to satisfy the concerns of, uh, the most immediate people impacted by, by the decision, which should, uh, you know, the board should be able to give some weight to that, uh, you know, regardless of what the proposal is in any, in any capacity. Um, um, so that's, would we want to also entertain the idea of additional modifications to this project? Um, all right, so we'll, you don't have any additional comments? I do not. All right. So I guess with that, we'll close, we'll close the public comment portion of this and kind of move to the deliberation portion on this project. Um, so we, we have seen some, uh, some modifications to this based on the initial comments from our neighbors. Um, as I said, I, I still think we have, um, we have documents in the planning board that, uh, well, two documents in the planning board. One that, that says this project actually should require a variance. I think we'd solve that problem by dealing with the fact that this is a special permit under, under the language of the by-law. And I think that the applicant sort of aligns the project to sort of stick within those, uh, or setback pieces. Um, I still think the project is, in my opinion, is quite large for the, for the neighborhood. You know, I think it's been, it's been modified from what it does, but I think it still is, it's by far, it is the largest house in the neighborhood. If you look at the comparisons that, uh, the town planner has put together. Um, I think this project does not, I mean, there's no topography on the site plans. So, there is, well, actually, there is, there is a little bit of topography on the second site plan. I mean, the lot appears reasonably flat. So, I, I don't think we have the same challenge of type of an issue that we potentially had on, uh, application for playing with. Are there any members to board of any? I think, I think it's necessary to take into account that they have spoken to the neighbors. Okay. And that, uh, we have, they have shrunk the size of the, uh, the gross work, uh, uh, gross for area to be about even to their largest, um, home, um, in the neighborhood. So we should take into account. It looks like to me that they're still using a room above the ground. They're still, they just changed the roof line to not match the other roof line between, uh, they didn't even need that space to get away. So, I mean, I think that was very good that they were able to reduce that. And the package looks a little different just because now we're using, uh, two peaks instead of having the single, which gives it a little bit of, but it's still a massive house. Um, and again, you have a huge area in the attic. Um, so, and I know it's unfinished and then they're not even taking into account the unfinished basement. It's, it's, it's a massive, massive property. So. Uh, Ms. Paul, do you have any comments? I mean, similarly, I just, I guess I think for the, for the size of the, of the parcel, um, uh, the actual house just, it is a very large property, but also in consideration with this actual size of the property, I think together, it just, it makes the house look that much bigger just because the property is. Is, you know, I think that the house that is on it is currently is, is, is small, um, and is being replaced with a, you know, just a much, much larger house that maybe doesn't exactly fit on the parcel that, um, it's being put on. So, I guess maybe that, that would be my, my comment. Um, sorry. I have a different approach for these houses that being built larger than before. Um, it has a lot to do with our lifestyle that we are in now compared to 1944 or 1950s or so. I mean, there are a lot of older houses and I bet every one of them is going to come to do something for those houses. They're not going to make the same thing. They're going to make it larger because everything we have is larger. Everything, you know, we have additional rooms, additional, you know, electricity before it used to be 60 amps. Now it's 200 amps is not even enough. So, I like to have an open mind and look at it that, you know what, if we forget 44, 40s houses or 50s houses and look at our new lifestyle or any house that is small enough that they come in front of us to make it larger. It's going to go through this. It's, it's, it's, I think like, you know, we're not seeing in a way that, you know, it's real. We're just imposing things that like, you know, uh, because we're imposing because it's too big. Yeah. But I mean, if you compare to the older houses and now what we have now, cars and things before the whole family had one car. Now the whole family might have three cars. So, I mean, everything is related to the time that it's different. So let's look at it that way and see how that works for all these applications that coming in front of us and making larger houses. I guess I hear what you're saying for this particular application, though, though, the parcel is only 15,500 square meters. Well, all the houses. I mean, there are, that's why they're here, because they have no pre-existing non-conforming house. But there are a lot of pre-existing non-conforming houses that families still live there. I mean, families are larger. They have more cars, more things. So, I mean, let's judge it that way. I mean, I, I, I don't disagree with you. But, like, I would, I would counter argue that this is substantially larger than a lot of other houses this board has approved. I agree. That's why I'm bringing this point that, like, you know, we are always approaching in a way that, like, you know, we're comparing to smaller houses, regardless of when they were built. And then we're judging for the size of the house that's going to be built now. No, I'm talking about houses that this board has recently approved. We always have this, we always have this issue about making sure that the house we approve, we recognize that patterns of living have changed, and houses have to get larger. That's a, that's a, that's a given. But, this particular application is much larger than we ever have typically approved. Well, that's why, because always we have the same approach to this judgment. That, like, you know what? Oh, the house is too small and the lot is too small. Yes, that's why they are here, because it's pre-existing. But, we are living today, we have a lot larger, bigger things. I mean, there were houses, cap houses. You couldn't bring a queen size bed upstairs. But now, I mean, you have to put it upstairs. So, I mean, why don't we look at it that way also? Could. We could. But, I mean, the, that issue was brought up, like, I would say three times. I mean, that's my opinion. Yeah, yeah. And, you know, and the, the, the applicant has still come back with the largest house in the neighborhood. So. Wow. Well, I bet if anybody comes that, in front of us to redo any renovation or any addition, they're not going to make the same size. They're going to make it larger, regardless of what. So, it's, it's, it's, we're not going to escape that. Oh, I don't, and I, I don't think we need to. My, my question is just, it's, it's, we have to balance the need between making these smaller homes larger and not making them too large for the, the land. Because it, it completely changes the character of what makes Wayland. Wayland. Wayland. Wayland. Wayland. So, the panel we have is, the five of us, Ms. Paul, Mr. Perry, Mr. Cesarian, Mr. Hirsch, and myself. So, I guess, with that, I would, I would, let me get my handy name sheet sheet. So, there's, there's a two-step process. We, the board's got to make a finding, which is, we don't have to vote on. It's just a statement. Um, that under 401.1.2, you know, a pre-existing non-conforming structure can be changed, altered, or modified. Um, as long as it's not substantially more detrimental to the existing, um, non-conforming building. Um, I'm, I'm not sure that we can make that finding in this case. So, uh, I, I, I guess with that, we would, we would then go to. Um, I guess I, I, I'd make a motion, um, that, uh, let me see how we would do this. Uh, make a motion under 203.1, um, for a special permit, um, that the outcome is shown. The building or structure, uh, is not against the public interest. It doesn't derogate from the character of the neighborhood in which such use of building or structure occurs. It's not worth detrimental or offensive because of noise, vibration, smoke, gas, fumes, or the dust, or other objectionable features. And that such building or structure should otherwise be injurious to the habits of the town, their property, or dangerous to the public health or safety. Second on that motion. Okay. I'm sorry, you can take the second. Yeah. Second. Okay. Um, all right. So we'll do this by, we'll do this by roll call, uh, again, because we are remote. Um, I'll start here. Mr. Hirsch. Uh, I vote against. Mr. Sarri. I vote for you. This call. I vote against this one. Mr. Perry. I vote for this one. Mr. Wright. I vote against this one. So, um, that is three. Opposed. One. Two. Two. In favor. So, uh, that motion, the special permit does not pass for this project. So, uh, we have to, we still have to write this decision. Um, send that, you can send that to the applicant. And then there is a 14 day process to write that in a 21 day period. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. So. The next is the continuation, uh, CBA case 26. 228. Please. And land. This is Doug Levine. On behalf of the land. So in the tennis club, they are requesting renewal of the existing special permit for the property located 228 leads and lanes. This is our slide. D 12. 31. Situated in single residence. R 60 zoning district. The applicant has revised the application is now and is now. And the extension of the current permit. The request to increase non member non neighbor membership from 200 to 225. Wayland families. Good evening. Good evening. How are you? Good evening. How are you? Good. How are you? You guys are moving efficiently this evening. Uh. Yeah. Let's see what's going to happen on that one. But, um, so I guess before we go, I just full disclosure to the board. Like I'm a past vice president and past president of the Wayland So Independence Club. Um, it's not going to influence my vote on this particular matter, but I want to let the board know that in case I won't have any questions or concerns about that. Are you hearing none? I don't know. Those are both of you. All right. So with that, you can give us a rundown. Sure. We'll do some introductions first. And we have a short slide deck that Lea and Nina can help me get up on the screen. So my name is Doug Levine. Um, I'm a several year member of the Swim and Tennis Club. I've lived in town, um, going on 14 years. Um, and in the immediate past president of the club, um, for which I served, um, as co-president for two years. Sure. Bill Welby. I've been the manager for Wellin's Home and Tennis almost 30 years. And Pat Murphy, uh, current president of Tennis. Yep. Let's step on the screen and some of the folks can see him. Um, should I just join? Zoom and then we can elevate. Okay. Automatically making me opinions. I believe so. I've been looking. Oh, sorry. We should be able to do that. Okay. I think we should just click on sharing on that. I'm going to be teaching. Like your actual name. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. So having just introduced ourselves, we just want to give a very brief background about the club for folks who may not be aware of it. Um, even though it has been around for going on its 64th season, uh, was founded in 1963 during the John F. Kennedy administration and it is 11 acres, um, owned and operated as a private family swim and tennis club situated right off of Gleason Lane. We have, um, a pool that is six lanes with a diving area space. We have a separate smaller size kiddie pool. Um, a more recent addition was a sand volleyball court and we have seven tennis courts as well as this grilling and picnic area. And so the club season begins Memorial Day weekend for the pool and wraps up, um, Labor Day weekend. Though we open somewhat earlier, uh, striving for late April, weather dependent, um, just for the tennis court. So folks can come and use the tennis court. So that is late April to some point in the middle of October. Um, as long as I've known, there's been a wait list to get into the club. And we hover between in the, in the last several years, between 200 and 50 and 300 families on that wait list. Um, I think the last I checked, it was 280 something and give or take, we admit in the twenties each year is what the turnover usually is. Uh, and so personally I was on the wait list for six years. I've heard folks who've been on the wait list as long as 10 years, uh, a shorter time being on the wait list would be closer to four years, but it's, it's varied over that time. Um, obviously it, it's a draw in our town and the community space. Uh, we have a number of programs that are offered for people of all ages, which includes the, the kids zone camp life experiences. What we call it, uh, for younger kids, ages four through 10, um, which is staffed by a number of Whalen high school students and has its own director. Um, we have a very active swim and dive team, which is coached by the head swimming coach for the Whalen high school boys and girls swim team. Um, and he has also been at the club nearly as long as Mr. Welby longer than Mr. Welby. So going back to the early nineties, coach Foley, uh, has been working at the swim and tennis club. Um, there's also a number of tennis clinics that are offered as well as tennis teams. And as I mentioned, the club really caters to, um, attendees of all ages, um, because there, there are various tennis programs run by our tennis pro, um, for adults and kids, different types of clinics and, uh, competitive tournaments. And then that tennis pro also helps us organize, uh, community events for the tennis group, which are listed there tournaments, um, pizza pickleball breakfast at Wimbledon. And then we also have offer private swim lessons, small group swim lessons, same with tennis, private tennis, private and small groups. Um, for the next slide, I'll mention that one there. Uh, it's really a member run club from the ground up in the sense that all members are required at some point in their tenure to serve on the board of directors. One, one member from each family to serve on the board. Um, and as a result, um, members are also required to help clean the club up every spring. We have a very robust turnout. Um, when that happens, uh, in April slash may, um, there is an opt out fee that people can pay, but I would say a huge number of folks choose not to pay that fee. And it's kind of a community gathering unto itself on three separate Saturdays in the spring. And if they really soup to nuts, clean that club up and get it ready for opening weekend Memorial Day weekend. Um, I think another unsung benefit of this club is the fact that there are so many high school students who come through there, who were members as, as younger kids, toddlers and up, who eventually come and serve as swim instructors, life guards, tennis instructors. And for a vast number of these folks, it's their first job. Um, so they get mentoring from, from Mr. Welby and his staff. And, um, I think that, that, that's a very valuable lesson that's imparted by the club. Uh, in terms of helping prepare some of these young folks to go out into the world, um, and having their first employment experience. So you can see the stats there. And, and last year we had 45 high school and college aged individuals serve in those various capacities. Um, and Mr. Welby puts other folks to work as well, who may not be serving in, in those formal capacities. There are a number of events that have been traditionally held for a number of years at the club. These are highlighting just some of them. Um, I, I have a friend that I grew up with, uh, who worked at the club in the early nineties and would talk to me about Hawaiian night back in 1991, 1992. So that is a longstanding tradition. Um, there are also a number of our members who have been affiliated with, have been affiliated with the club, uh, for 20 plus years. And so they convene, uh, one evening during the summer. You can see there, the longstanding members cocktail party. And it's, uh, I've been to the last couple, uh, again, a robust turnout. And it's clear that folks are very dedicated and committed to this club. Or even when their kids grow up, we still have a number of members, uh, that remain. I think this is probably, uh, the slide. I want to emphasize the most to folks here, because I think that the swim and tennis club is, is what I've said to the board is it's a real unique gem in the town. Uh, I grew up next door. There was nothing like this in Weston. I think this is a club that's accessible by everybody. I think, um, in a time when we need more spaces to gather as a community, the club provides that. Um, and just like we mentioned here, it's multi-generational. It caters to all different ages. It's really, it, we make it so it is also financially accessible to people. And we're very mindful about that. Keeping, um, the annual dues relatively low compared to some of our peer clubs and certainly, um, other private clubs. Um, so can I, yeah, jump in. Sorry. And just because this is late break news. And so it wasn't here, but it sort of segues in, um, some very longstanding members, the longstanding members, Howard and Susie Abel, who unfortunately passed, uh, years, like 18 months ago. Um, they're, they were at every, they were, they lived at the club. They were, um, they're fantastic folks. They attended little kids' birthday parties, the Shaverley kids' birthday parties. Um, but, uh, this is over the last 36 hours. Their daughters have established a, uh, uh, two small scholarships for members every year. Um, so with that, it's, you know, it's being implemented literally over the last, this morning. Um, but it's just the example of a really great way that this club, you know, helps. It helps, uh, the kids who are coming up through, and it's an intergenerational jam. Um, it's a really fantastic thing. And I'm, I'm super thankful to, um, uh, to the Abel girls who are, who have stepped up and are willing to do this. Yeah, there, there are a number of families I found, and I've only been affiliated with the club for a handful of years, but a number of people are very committed to this space. And it, and it shows by, by their longevity and, uh, of years that they've committed to it. So, um, as the chair mentioned, we initially were seeking to expand our membership by what we believe was a modest amount, 25 families. Um, there were a handful of abutters who were upset about what we were seeking to do. Um, I wasn't able to attend, but Mr. Murphy and our current vice president, Adam Shaywitz, hosted a zoom meeting for a handful of them. Um, was able to hear from them. Um, we had previous to that, uh, given a letter in each mailbox to make them aware of what we were seeking to do. Um, because we, um, historically have had periodic meetings with the neighbors and haven't done so recently. We thought it made sense at this point to withdraw that request in order to have a handful of these meetings in the coming year, especially during the season. So we can hear from folks in real time. I know the board has received a handful of letters, um, some opposing that request, some opposing generally our request to extend our permit, but there have been letters in support as well. Um, so I think it'll be incumbent upon us to continue to build the relationship with the neighbors. Over the next year, we knew that relationship, so to speak. Um, and help them see attendance and what the numbers are and if there are any issues firsthand, so we can discuss it in real time. And so just very briefly, these are the numbers for our attendance averages that we collected last season. And so you can see the, there's a max of 200 member families, but you can see the average number of member families that are at the club each month. And then that, that next column is the overall number of members and their guests. So even in the busiest month of June, you know, we're nowhere near maximizing the use of this club. And that's why we thought that additional request was modest and appropriate. And here as just the last slide that these are these specific numbers of our very most, our very busiest days at the club. The club is open for just over a hundred days. And they, these are the six days or so where the numbers are much higher than the other days. And what we don't have the ability yet to track is how many are there at a very specific time. So you'll see the asterisk at the bottom says it's attendance over the course of an entire day. So that's from the morning 9am or so until 7pm or so when the club closes. So that's, that's essentially what we wanted to share with the board. And we are seeking without any changes at this point for a five year renewal with an idea at some point, we may come back before that time with a request. But if everything seems to be working smoothly, we would just ask what the board has granted in the past. I think I counted that the club has been before some iteration of this board at least 15 times. So this is our sweet 16th appearance before the board. And we are happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you. So, do we have a copy, Anina? This is the application. Do we have a copy of their existing special permit? We do have a whole folder of like the last. Oh, God. Because if it's just, if this is just an extension of the existing special permit, it um i'm just wondering if formally we have to either just reference that exact the date of that decision because i don't know if that's been amended multiple times and if we have to reference the most recent amendment to do this is more of a technical question but um i don't know that may be a question uh for mr levine as well he used to be a member of the zba i just want to make sure whatever process we go through we have the right in right process in place so that i have a copy this is um permit 2105 which does reference previous permits okay because um the two before that are more substantive with with off with appendices with all of the conditions on the right so like we don't need i guess my question would be we don't need to review all of the dependencies for our renewal we would look at the most recent renewal which references though it doesn't seem like it was a whole substantive write-up for the 2105 decision okay and in 2005 it was it was valid until may of this year got it correct okay well actually the the 22 22 they are attached but the previous one the previous one right okay but if you look at the narrative of 2105 yep and finding in my i just printed all of those out when i was looking at the god i wanted to see what the last oh i see yep 26 got it okay um okay so i guess before we go on i think there's some people online that have their hand raised you know bill canter oh so if you could elevate if you could give us your your name and address please hi i'm bill bill canter uh 15 autumn lane i wasn't i was unsure if i was going to be heard here tonight nice to be unmuted thanks yeah so if you could give us uh let us know what was on your mind well i sent a letter uh to the board and i think you all have that um yes but you know my perspective is the uh the club has um uh expanded considerably since 1962 when the permit was originally issued for 150 families one i believe smaller pool i think it was four lanes can anyone verify that mr levine four lanes four lanes there was no diving i don't know when the kiddie pool showed up and two tennis courts it's now uh well eight courts reduced to seven because they needed more uh i guess deck space for the pool area is that right
yeah they were put in the 70s that's right yeah um so and what's also happened is there have been since the initial permit there have been 10 homes developed in previously undeveloped properties near it so they the the the town the the neighborhood has developed around the the club and the um club has developed considerably since the original permit was issued so it's kind of getting crowded and frankly i can't enjoy uh my backyard when the club is in operation so it detracts from my ability to join enjoy my property i think that you know some form of uh sound abatement or reduction in the membership is appropriate okay um can i ask how long you um lived um lived at 15 autumn lane i have lived at 15 autumn lane since 1990.
any other um comments we i know we have the letter i've read the letter well the you know i i you know there are there are a number of you know i don't want to get into the um you know the a litany of of issues but um one of the slides that was just shared indicated that the attendance was over 200 on several days now i know some of the neighbors were questioning the uh method of accounting for it for the uh attendance because uh one of my neighbors actually uh uh two of his kids or one at least one of his kids was a lifeguard and and you know knew how how the attendance was counted and not particularly reliable in his estimation but um you know the club has a limit of 200 family 200 members on premises at any time and we just saw a slide that said i believe well over 200. at any given time but that was for the entire day that doesn't necessarily mean uh at that one moment well it's my understanding based on what what i saw in the uh well and is is the club saying that they're never over 200 members there are 200 attendees yeah i guess the question i have uh mr mr canter um i believe that the club permits for 200 families not 200 individual people that's both there's a separate separate constraints there's 200 families and 200 in attendance and i see mr i see mr levine nodding in an agreement is that right yeah that's right but yeah it's the entirety of the day those numbers are the entirety of the day
okay all right well thank you for thank you for your comment do we have other comments online comments i thought there were four yeah there's someone else but i say they're hand rings i see i just said two of the two panels i paid online and there's other there's like rest of our panelists oh okay all right so no one else any other comments from the club um i would note um that also subsequent to reaching out to the neighboring residents we did receive a pair of letters of support uh one came some weeks ago from uh mr creamer bob creamer and one as recently as today uh from the shaverly family who are of the media debaters are they members the shaverly family here and the cravings are not we're past members we received another email of support sent today from barbara barbara levin and frank zedona 237 okay as well good to hear here so we have another letter of support who's email to the board this is obviously a little bit a little bit challenging because we have um we have a neighbor who's written to us who's basically asking us to not renew your special order which to me seems potentially an extreme situation for a permit that's been in place since 1962 um that said um i i understand the um the club's mission to kind of continue outreach to the neighbors and sort of the uh the importance of that i think they should be commended for the fact that they review they didn't move forward with the fact that they are adding 25-foot place there that they're just looking for that right now until they get further with the neighbors and i think that's a real shine it's just shining what that really stands for community i uh i would agree um so i guess before we i mean we want to um i guess does the club have any other comments they want to add before we close the generation on this uh yes nothing for me thanks okay we're good thank you um three it's like i i've been on the board for the past um approvals um and sort of i guess recertifications or reapprovals of uh special affirmative before and um there have usually not been any additional conditions you know uh added to those um in the past um in this case we have a letter as i said that um basically telling us the board could deny the application uh could have approved it but sort of requires some sort of sound measure or sort of somehow restrict the club um i think those are all quite complicated to do and you know my concern is you know the club has been there since since two so i think you know people who live there or purchase property there are aware of the presence of the club so i i don't know that it's a reasonable position to take that like something that has been in the neighborhood for a long time like menu is the enjoyment of your property but it's untenable it seems like a pretty extreme um position you know to take so that's that's i guess i open up back up to the board yeah i agree with you and i didn't read anything in the letter or hear anything in the presentation from the department you're talking about um that stated anything that sounded like it's become an exceptionally worse condition for him than the past 35 years since he's lived there so um i see absolutely no reason why we wouldn't extend this uh especially is there a reason why we make him come back every five years it's a good question i don't i don't know i don't know the answer to that but they asked for it if i remember the previous hearings they asked for it extension for factors and no adam is asking the question in reverse like why like why why is the request to extend for five years and why is the initial not six years or eight years or two years or ten years i don't know i don't know i don't know the answer to that i don't know if um if the club has any knowledge of that to the best of my knowledge inertia is the only answer to that um and to the extent i i i i would if the board is open to it i would certainly love to have the permit extended for 10 years um but the most important thing for us right now is to ensure the club is it stays open um and it's able to you know operate in the ordinary course i just don't know if that's it could that be in the initial special permit that says
possibly i don't know if that's part of the original decision from 1962 that authorized this so we're looking at the original or i think what doug's pointing to something that says the original permit was for a period of 25 years well it was modified during that time but the original permit request i think originally was granted for 25 years but it looks like they came back in 1964 1969 1973 then there was a gap till 1981 then another gap till 1995 so maybe it's varied over the last 62 years and how long permits have been issued okay
but i think mr murphy's right it's essentially we looked at what the previous one was yeah and echoed that with west but no you didn't want to be greedy and you just wanted to you know from my perspective like i i'm not a member i've heard wonderful things about the swimming tennis golf fantastic things how respectful you are how nice it is to have that community space for everyone to get together and i've been a guest a couple times probably on one of the days that you showed here but you know everyone is very like respectful and nice and like i was really blown away on how well the community kind of uses the space and trying to keep that same type of like atmosphere so you know for me it's a no-brainer to be like all right well you have a respectful uh community member really and why why make them come back in five years you know why not give them a ten-year graces i think since being here since 1962 that you know maybe they've earned a little more graces yeah and it it it doesn't appear as though well so i know that for the club to change if the club wanted to add another pool they wanted to add another tennis court they wanted to renovate the building they would have to come back before the board and modify the special permits so like extending that special permit for 10 years doesn't off it does nothing but authorize the club to continue to operate it doesn't basically allow the club to expand their operation it doesn't change anything right so um i guess i'm still a little confused on why they applied so what triggered you to apply for this extension well because the last permit was granted for a period of five years and it expires in may okay so we hypothetically could extend it for we could extend it for longer we could we could extend the permit for 10 years if we if we so choose because they're not asking for i i think it would be different like if the club were asking for a change to the special permit that's something different yeah so and we've done this on other projects not with this one but with uh camp trigamy for example has come before the board in the past and asked for modification to something and that meant that when we renewed that special permit with that modification we we put it in place for one year to make a determination if that increased modification for them resulted in something that was more detrimental to the neighbors so i think if the club was asking for say the club was asking for 220 additional members right as an approval i would say would it be prudent for the board to approve that for more than one year we would want to yeah we would want to basically approve that additional membership for one year and then determine and if everyone who was in a butter complained that that made a meaningful difference in the way the club operated then we would have after that after that one season would have the process in place to sort of review that but in this case the sort of tennis club is not asking for a change for anything so i would agree with you i see no reason why we can't increase the time horizon to 10 years for the approval for this given that nothing is being requested um from the club that changes their permit and it as i said if they next year want to modify the pool or do something that would reopen the permit even though it's been approved yeah okay um i guess any other comments from the board this ball any comment or no i mean i have no other comments other than i mean similar to to adam's statement when when i moved to to weyland i heard it was one of the first things i heard was um was about the club so um i've heard nothing but good things um about the about the club and and um the members so um i i think that um it sounds great um yeah you're interested i move uh we extend the courts a special permit for a term of 10 years um
i would say i would say subject to all uh compliance with all of the conditions of the previously approved special permanent okay okay okay all right so um uh by roll call uh mr perry all right mr sarin all right mr hirsch all right miss paul all right mr white aye so um the club permit is is approved to renew to prove for a period of 10 years thank you all thank you all appreciate it thank you there is uh i i guess i have to say this there's a 14-day process to write the decision and then a 21-day appeal period and then after that um the decision is ready to be filed perfect thank you thank you so much all right thank you um do we have anything else on the agenda oh you yes sorry all right i was i was about to say um all right so uh this is the uh our next case is the continuation of zba case 2605 for 24 boston coast road this is the applicant on application for a sign around on behalf of the property we order wayland plaza lxc seeking the investor permit for the property of 24 boston coast road located in the business aid district install an additional building sign of 38.5 square feet non-eluminated and to obtain retroactive approval for a standalone street sign of 27 square feet the applicant is requesting requesting to be on both the number of signs and the full square footage
they're on zoom great hello mike wood here good evening how are you i'm well so thank you for bearing with us tonight um i think my recollection at the uh hearing was um you were going to modify the size of the sign or the font of the sign on the building i can't remember which one it was both okay so we had sent in four different options modified font modified size uh i hope that you all have a seen a copy of that there was a b c and d yep great these are go ahead sorry sorry what what what what did you just say sorry i said the material of this is as pvc so it is not illuminated in every option and uh significantly different from one to the next um any other um comments on this i have no other comments on this um as long as you all are able to see those options a b and c and d you have one that your marshall too uh myself um they i i recommend it they've they have actually gone with both of these fonts so i am i really indifferent i if i had one to choose i would say b um because uh it just it stands out well and it's it's i believe it's tasteful on the building as opposed to just a standard or standard block bold letter like a and c i think b i think option b looks the nicest uh on here um i think d is more set more sizable based off of p i was looking at the from a sizing standpoint and yeah i guess d does look he is a little smaller um it's a little narrower 97 versus 106. um and you know we did not get any new comments from the design review board on this we had comments last time where they urged us to reject the sign that was applied to the roof of the building but they didn't give us any additional comments no they're also not required to go back and um they did not um look through these options um so it would be up to the dba to to make the final decision okay um all right so just to remind the board that uh this finalized it's not the best it's kind of poorly worded but you know 501 allows the board via a special permit to approve signage in excess of the maximum allowed um and it's subject to the same findings the same criteria of special permit that it's not dangerous to the public safety doesn't derogate from the character so um i think given that context of of the building and the fact that the previous owner had a sign there in this exact location uh this to me seems seems like a reasonable request in the interpretation of the bilat to to give us the latitude under 501.1 for a special permit for this and they're also retroactively asking for approval for uh the existing standalone sign that's out front so they're uh i'm guessing it means that that sign does not have approval as it currently stands so this would be we need to kind of codified that that sign up there i don't think there's any more or less signs signing spur footage being proposed for this building than there is for the old tv bank or for the gas there the two different gas stations or for the um the business there with the dry cleaner and uh the variety deli and the electricians in there so i agree and as for the fonts and colors i'm not really offended by any of them you know i think the ones on the right definitely look better in my in my mind b and d look better than a and c in my opinion yeah um yeah i think the smaller size from the scoping of that wall might fit better i don't know option d option d that was just my original thought on it and looking at the two so i guess i'd ask the applicant i'm assuming you know your clients are okay you presented four options i'm assuming assuming your clients are okay with any of the four i think at this point they'll be they'll be satisfied just to have a sign there yep i i guess in that case um any other there's no no one else here in the meeting we don't have anyone online that has any comments about this right right okay i'm going to close hearing the meeting to deliberate um in my mind i think this is a straightforward approval i would recommend option b i think option d is something so after looking at it with the purchase a little smaller than option b but it still stands out nicely and i think the white pvc letters look they're white or silver but they look great i think against uh you know the fascia and the little railing detail on top so i agree this is agree with our architecture uh expert like that i get my cheek might get you in trouble but um so i so i i think under 501.1 we're we're able to approve this so i'm just going to look at the uh the special permit language so i i'd make a motion that we grant the approval for um the 26 so far application 2605 for uh to retroactively improve the existing street sign and to approve a sign that is designated as option d on the material submitted to this award date stamped february 18th 2026. second um well i i have to also read the special permit language i'd say that in selecting that uh i think the applicant has shown the satisfaction of the special permit granting authority that the building use or structure or sign in this case for which the application is made is not against the public interest it doesn't interrogate through the character of the neighborhood in which the use building or structure occurs and shall not be detrimental or offensive because of the noise vibration smoke gas or dust or other objectionable features and that such use building or structure is not otherwise injurious to the inhabitants of the town their property or danger to the public health or safety second okay i think the only condition i would apply to this is that as i said um they've got to they've got to substantially confirm with the application material submitted for option d dated february 18th um so by roll call uh mr curry aye mr sarion mr hershey aye miss paul aye mr white aye so this is approved so um we've got uh 14 days to write this decision and then there's a uh 21 day of 20 of your period and then after that the permit is ready thank you everyone i appreciate it all right thank you have a good night all right thank you too um move to adjourn second by roll call mr farry aye mr sarion aye mr hershey aye this fall aye the white aye we are adjourned thank you everyone
So, I guess with that, if you could give us your name and, I guess, give us an overview of where we are with this project. Certainly. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Attorney Andrew DeLorey, I'm joining my father, Attorney Paul DeLorey, tonight. We are before you, as the chair stated, on behalf of IPA Development Company, LLC, seeking a special permit for 43 Plane Road. We have been before you a number of times. There was a question in last month's meeting related to the plans that had been submitted to the board. First, the plans that were being presented. The board requested the whole new application to ensure that we were all automatically on the same page. Additionally, we became aware last month for the first time that a large contingent of neighbors had been submitting letters to the town related to the project. We were not aware of those previously prior to last month, but they have now been received and they have been reviewed. One thing I do want to talk about is, you know, despite not having the knowledge of the letters, I think that my clients were working diligently to resolve some of the things that were being requested, even unknowingly. So, mainly, you know, there are a number of letters that were submitted, some of them related to items on the plans that are either no longer relevant because the plans have been revised or they've otherwise been added and amended. But to look at the conditions or the requests largely, you know, some of the items that we noticed that were consistent throughout the requests were the location. So, again, this lot is kind of triangular shaped at the intersection of Plain Road and Glen Road, which is a, you know, according to the residents, is a high traffic area. There was a request related to protecting the site line for vehicles really would be approaching from Glen Road to somebody coming to the end of Plain Road. So, one of the original things that my client had done was to reduce the footprint in that area of the lot, which if you're looking at the plan, would be to the left. If you're facing the house, it would be to the left of the house. The original application was 10 feet closer to that lot line along Glen Road than the present application is. Additionally, there have been comments related to the aesthetics of the structure. My client has worked diligently to try to bring together a plan, which is more in line with the other houses in the neighborhood as requested. And additionally, there's been a large amount of concern related to stormwater runoff on the property, also relative to the location of the septic system. So, you do have a plan before you that cites the septic system. It's located in the rear of the property, as we discussed last month. Additionally, my client is installing stormwater runoff for the gutters and the downspouts, which will have two 150-gallon hyperbolic chambers, each located in the front of the parcel, which will work to mitigate any runoff, which is generated by the increase in the footprint of the property. Additionally, I think that we've been before the board a few times. We've presented the presentations. The board has the packages before them. As I said, I think my client has largely worked to address some of the concerns of the neighbors, even unknowingly, down to the point that one of the original requests was there's no three-car barrages in the neighborhood. And my client had actually voluntarily downgraded that to a two-car garage, which is a lot of the reason they were able to save some of that space in that 10 feet that we discussed. So, I suppose what I would like to do is just request from the board at this point, is there any further comments or any other additions that the board would like to see? We do feel that the project is now more in line than what was previously proposed and is not a substantial detriment, but I would like to hear if the board does have any further comment based on what the board looks like. Okay. So, we did receive a lot. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you for the updates for the presentation, and thank you for putting together a comprehensive package we have. I don't have any specific questions, excuse me, on the proposal, but I understand that we have someone from the neighborhood wanted to make a presentation this evening? I think they wanted to read a statement. We received, like, I think, one additional public comment and a request for a statement. Yes. Okay. So, I guess before we get into questions from the board, I guess I'd like to hear from, you know, either members of the public that are here tonight or the applicant, or the individual who wanted to prepare. Right here, gentlemen. Yes, please. Thank you.
Is there, is there, oh, so if you can come up and give us your name and address, please. Certainly. My name is Bill Dowling. And I'm in a butter living at 44 Millbrook Road. I'm the one who has the concerns with the stormwater. And I appreciate the systems that are being proposed to address that. Let me just say that I'm here tonight to voice some concerns about the March 3rd application that are somewhat consistent with what we saw in previous applications and consistent with the January 5th, I think, letter that 25 neighbors sent to the ZBA. You know, as described in that letter, the main issue we have with, that we expressed to the ZBA was the, the excess of mass and scale of this project, mostly related to the building height, which we still believe derogates from the neighborhood of the neighborhood. In fact, the newest proposal is three feet, almost three feet higher than the previous proposal.
And just to get into that a little bit, looking at this March proposal, this is the third application that understates the actual height of the building in spite of your directions back in October of last year, November of last year, to calculate the height based on the mean grade of the property. Correct. We asked that of all the applicants? All the applicants could ask that. And I have not seen the calculations. I've seen topography on the, on the, but I have not seen any calculations that determine what the mean grade of this, of this development is. You know, just on that phase, we believe that we'll have sufficient grounds to continue this application until you guys have provided that information.
You know, that said, you know, the apparent height of this structure from the beginning has only been reduced by three feet, which indicates to us, you know, a little effort to address the neighborhood's core concern about the mass and bulk and scale of this, of this project. Many of, you know, just to get perspective, many of the residents on Glen, Glen Road and Millbrook Road, which are behind the building, will be impaired by a view of a rear facade that is more than 35 feet high. There's a slope going down in that direction. The residents on Plain Road are going to see a roof line that's more than 50% higher than everything else on similar sized lots.
The proposed development has a Florida area ratio more than 70% greater than the average of comparable lots in the immediate neighborhood. And with ceiling heights of 9 to 10 feet and an attic ridgeline of 10 and a half feet, this will result in a structure that looms over the surrounding neighbors. The Plain Road abutter, I want abutter, there's a Plain Road abutter as well. They recognize a reduction in the side yard non-reformity, but again, the increase in the height of this structure is going to cast shadows and actually probably be more of a detriment than the current configuration is. So, you know, based on the merits of this, we asked the ZBA to consider the mass bulk and scale this project to be out of character with the neighborhood. But we also know there's over 2,300 feet of unfinished space in this building, which seems excessive for a three-bedroom house, but it also provides an opportunity for IPA to really take a look at what they're proposing and take some of 3,200 feet, or, I'm sorry, 2,300 feet, you know, out of the bulk and mass of the structure.
So those are some of the issues we have with the bulk and mass of the building. The other concerns we have, one has to do with the zoning bylaws connected with scenic roadways. And I don't know what board hears that, if it's this board or another board, but it's unclear that the applicant has been approved for right-of-way tree removals. That would probably be required for this property because the easement on this thing goes back 20 feet beyond the pavement. I mean, it goes back pretty deep.
And the driveway cut, as proposed, is much wider than is allowed under, under, for new construction on a, on a designated scenic road. So I don't know if they've received that approval from you or another board and what the conclusion has been so far. But if nothing's been done, I would ask that, you know, sort of hold on this until some answer has been determined. And, um, on stormwater, um, again, you know, we're appreciative of the fact that the, uh, the, uh, the applicant has, has put in two, um, two, uh, is proposing two systems to address stormwater. And on our face, that looks like sufficient capacity to address the issue. Um, as, as, as the butter will be affected by this, though, um, what I'm concerned about is that these aren't passive systems. Um, um, I mean, they sort of are, but they're not really in, in the sense that they need maintenance and repair. Uh, you know, gutters get clogged, et cetera, lines get clogged, systems need to be cleaned out. Um, and there's no way to ensure that these systems would, will be properly maintained unless there's some kind of, um, maintenance covenant or something similar to that attached with a deed, um, to basically ensure that future owners of this property, uh, comply with an O&M plan to, you know, address this. This, this issue. So, we're asking that, you know, when this thing eventually does get approved, approved through the ZBA, that some kind of deed, uh, requirement is attached to, to this. Um, we, um, we're asking IPA, uh, separately, we're asking IPA if they can confirm, and we know there's a, there's a, there's a septic system now on the map. And we'd just like to know that, or confirm that this septic system is in fact the existing three bedroom septic system that is, um, on the site. And that it will remain on the site, um, not to be modified or replaced with a larger system. Um, finally, there, there's just two, there's two issues on the application besides the, the height matter, uh, that I'd like to bring up. One, one has to do with an unanswered question connected with the stormwater, uh, query in, in the application. There's a question on there about whether or not your compliance with the stormwater rules. Um, and that's been left blank on all the applications. Um, my, my review of the plan, uh, shows that there is, you know, according to the plan, there's more than 500 additional feet of impervious, uh, impervious space, impervious surfaces being created on this property, maybe up to a thousand feet, maybe more than a thousand. Um, and, um, you know, if you're over 500, you gotta have a permit, at least a minor permit to, uh, to do any work. So, what we're asking here is that the, uh, the ZBA continue this permit application until an approved minor stormwater management and land disturbance permit with an enforceable O&M plan for the infiltration system and any kind of tree removal plan, you know, for the bylaws is addressed. And again, I don't know if that's this board or conservation or, or where, um, the last thing I wanted to know, and it may just be administrative. I don't, I don't know if there seems to be a discrepancy between, um, uh, IPA LLC's address on the application, which is somewhere in Belchertown, Massachusetts. And what's in what's online in the secretary of state's office, which is somewhere in Framingham. And I just like, I could agree to speak to that. And that's, that's, that's it. I have, um, nice, a quick question. Absolutely. Um, so on the stormwater issue, um, you brought up, um, concern about maintenance, uh, for the system. Yes. Um, is that applicable for, in your eyes, is that applicable for any new construction project on this site or, um, just because of the size of it? Well, because, because, well, I think, I don't know if you heard during the first meeting, but I mentioned, I expressed concerns in the first meeting that even Peggy's property, even the property as it was currently configured, um, in certain years, like this year would be a good example. If we had a huge rain, for example, with the snowpack and the frozen ground, her water would flow onto our property, flooding our property and go into our garage and all that. So that's, that's a potential issue. Um, so it's been mitigated to some extent by the putting in, uh, proposing to, um, infiltration systems because of the increase in impervious space, which, which we're appreciative of. I think that's a good idea. Okay. The only issue we have is with, um, you know, we just, I, I know I do this for work. I know these systems don't. Hunter, I want to say something about this. I built a house at 218 Main Street and I didn't have gutters. And because of the drip of the water, they asked me to put a drain in just for that purpose, not for any other reason. So I don't know if it's requirement for every house that we built, but because I don't know, in my opinion, probably they did it because I didn't have any gutters and, uh, run from the roof. They want it to be kept caught right in premise. So that's how they may be. But other cases, I don't know if they have required drainage system or so, unless it, you know, project is a major, major, big project. Yeah. I mean, there's general, as I read the bylaws and this town, there's, um, there's protections for lots of things related to stormwater, including, you know, flooding of private property. So what, what this is, these systems are intended to do is prevent that from happening because of the additional 600 to 1000 plus square feet of impervious. Well, any, any, any addition of impervious area, more than 500 square feet triggers compliance with the stormwater. Yes, that's right. So there is more than 500 square feet here. So stormwater management is required and the engineering solutions required. Yes. Yeah. So we have the engineering solution. We just, what I'm trying to do is tie it up with, um, you know, compliance, whoever owns a house to keep the systems working. Um, any other comments? Well, I don't know. You're, so for you, no other comments from you, right? No. Okay. No. All right. And what is your address, please? 44 Millbrook Road. Millbrook Road, 44. Millbrook Road. 44. Would you mind? I'm sorry. I will. Do you have any other members of the public for this case that wanted to make a comment? Do we have anyone online? One. Okay. Thank you. Um, so I, I know that the, uh, the applicant had a question that I, I would, I guess I would direct back to the applicants concerning the contact information for IPA development company. Sure. Um, just to touch on that. I can discuss more of my client. I do agree. If you, if you review the Secretary of State's website, IPA development does, uh, have a different address listed. What it is, is that's a, that address in Belcher town is actually my client, Ivy Daron is now here with me, who is one of the members of IPA. That's actually her personal resident. So, um, she's also the applicant of the next application and that Belcher town address is the correct address for the next application. I think it's just a mistake that, that, that took place. It's based on the, uh, need for the, the mean grade building. It sounds to me like another application is going to be forthcoming just to correct that. So it's certainly easy enough to just correct the corporate address of the, of the applicant at the, at the same time. Well, uh, okay. Um, I guess the, the, the concern I had instead of like, this has been going on since October. And we just kind of keep coming back with materials that are incorrectly labeled. You know, mistakes have been made. We keep asking about these mistakes. You know, I, quite frankly, I, I'm not really interested in continuing this case further. If that's something that you, you are, you insist on wanting to continue this to revise the application that that's your right to do. But I guess I'd ask other members of the board, you know, do we want to, do we want to entertain and continue it? So do we want to close to liberation of this project? I think closing deliberation on this. I think we've heard from both sides substantially on this. I think the closing deliberation might be the best option for both sides in which if it's small paperwork stuff, that can get modified. And then I, I guess, I mean, are we getting closer to, you know, the. Well, I, I honestly don't know. I mean, we have a lot of materials here. Um, we have a lot of, there's a lot of, you know, regenerative concerns about this project. So I can tell you when you do your average grade calculation, you're going to find that your proposed project is over the height limit. So, like, that's just me looking really, really quickly at the great difference between the and the fact that you increased this to 32%. So I guess I'd ask you, like, if, if this is the application materials that you have, and this is the project that your applicant wants, I think we should, we should close deliberation and vote on this. So if that's, if, if that's, you know, I'm, I'm putting this back, I guess in a way I'm putting this back on you, you can, you said, well, heard the, you've heard the concerns, you've heard from the board. So, um, just generally, I think you're going to, I mean, I, my two cents, you're going to have to, you know, if, if you do that average grade calculation, you're going to have to redesign this project again. Right. I, I just generally just a comment on a couple of things. Um, we, I don't disagree. We've been here for a little bit. We did have a stretch of time where there was no meeting. Then we, the board was dealing with that large school issue that you had over the last couple of months that cost us a meeting as well. Um, you know, I think that the most important thing is that my, my client is working in good faith to try to deliver a project that the neighbors are satisfied with. And there's, you know, imperfections throughout the process. But I think that we've always taken the, uh, comments from the neighbors and the board, even unknowingly, you know, when we also got eight letters that I hadn't seen until we were at the last, at the last hearing, and we're, we're working in good faith to bring forward the project. And, and Mr. Dowling just raised some good questions related to the tree removal in the, in the right way and the driveway. It seems to me appropriate to kind of vet the, the jurisdiction and the logistics of that question first. And then if there are any additional requirements, you know, to, to the, the project itself based on that meat grain calculation or whatever, I, you know, I, I think that, um, you know, what, what is the injury to the board? What is the injury to the abutters that we continue to refine the project to give them more of something, what they're asking for? So there's, so I can give you an answer to that. There's, there's not necessarily an injury to the board, but I would let you know that at next month, we already have five cases. So it would be impossible for us to continue you to next month. It would have to be, it would have to be to the month following that, which, uh, I mean, that doesn't, it doesn't do any harm to the board. Um, but it would basically be the May hearing would be the soonest that we could get you back here. I, I mean, that's, it's, I think that it's going to take potentially some time to get the answers anyway. If there's revisions to the plan, it's going to take time. I, I, you know, if that's, if that's what the board has to petition in order to have a continuum. I unfortunately think we do. If we didn't have, I would feel differently if we didn't have five cases next month. But, um, I think it's a, if in that case, so that I think we have a, we have a challenge. My, my client doesn't have any objections to that. If that's, if, if that's a singular concern. Okay. Um, also I do want to just, um, we just need, we need an answer on that stormwater question. You know, even with the system installed, let's make sure that it's conforming. Like I said, my, my client is working imperfectly to come into compliance or something happy. All right. So, so I guess with that then, if that's the case, if we're going to continue this. So there's a couple of, there's a couple of points I would, I would stress to you. Um, one is, uh, make sure you complete the average brain calculation. And the, the bylaw tells you exactly how to do it. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, the building department has like a, a cheat sheet that shows you exactly how to do this. That if it's not available for pickup at the window, we can, I can find a way to make sure it measure six feet off of any. Yeah. Six feet off. It's six feet off the building face. Yeah. Yeah. Um, I'd also urge you to check that your proposed curb cut is not too close to the corner of Plain Road and Glen Road. There are dimensional requirements about the distance between a curb, a driveway curb cut and an intersection. I have a feeling that you're on that. I think your location of the call attack in the corner between Plain Road and Glen Road is going to drop a problem with the sight line issues that the, um, Mr. Dowling raised with respect to tree removal. Um, I also think that if you look at the original house, the concern about sight lines for the corner, you know, you did improve this from what you originally proposed, but your proposal still pushes the corner of the house 17 feet closer to Glen Road, like making the sight line point problem worse than the current condition is right there. So, uh, you know, that in addition to the fact that I think if you look at the overall building mass, this is substantially larger than, than other houses. So I think the board is going to have a tough time determining this actually isn't more detrimental to the existing neighborhood than the current proposal. So we're going to go for a continuance. I, I would suggest that you look carefully at those design issues and a revised proposal. Sure. Can I just ask one question? Sure. You're saying, I just said I'm not familiar with the logistics of the town. You know, is there a separate scenic road approval? Who has the jurisdiction of that? There is a scenic road bylaw. And to be honest, I am actually not familiar with what board jurisdictionally enforces that. That's something that I would have to look up myself as well. The zoning board typically has not dealt with that before. It seems like a planning board thing. It seems like a planning board thing, but is that something you need and you might be able to look into and see if you can get the information back to the applicant? Yes. I believe it's the planning board. I got no real intent there. Just simply, you submit the application and you think it comes and says you got to do X, Y, Z. I would agree with you. That one's not clear. Okay. Well, I will review that. Okay. Internally. It turns out that that approval was needed first. There would be a lot of suit have to deal with it. Yeah. Well, we could or we could. We could. It could be done in parallel. I, you know, we've done that. We recognize that this town does have some overlapping boards. We, a lot of times we've gone for a concurrent approval or we've commissioned approval on approving something from another board. We don't, I wouldn't want to sort of have to go through that process, wait that whole thing out and then come here and we'd find a way to give you the ability to do simultaneous approvals on it. Okay. Right. All right. So, I guess with that, we need to, we need to, I guess I would make a motion to continue case, sorry, case 25-30 to, is it May 12? Yes. Okay. 7 p.m. on May 12th. Sorry. So, we're going to do a roll call because we're in those. So, Mr. Perry. May what? May 12th. Mr. Perry. Aye. Mr. Sarian. Aye. Mr. Paul. Aye. Mr. White. Aye. So, we are continued for this case for May 12th at 7 p.m. Thank you. All right. You can stay. You don't have to get off and get back to that. So, with that, we're going to move on to our next case. This is the continuation of CBA page 29-35 in Park Ridge Road. This is the application of API development company for the property located in Park Ridge Road. This is Carson ID 50-274. The applicant seeks a special requirement, variants, or other applicable zoning to demolish the existing structure and the structure replacement dwelling. The lot is pre-existing and unconforming with respect to the minimum lot area requirements. So, we need to reintroduce yourself. Good evening. Good evening. Again. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening. Again. We're here before you on the Green Park Ridge Road. Same situation as last month. We've been before on this project a couple of times. We were here last month with some questions related, again, to plans submitted versus plans presented to the board. My client did submit a wholly new application package with plans that are dated appropriately. And I believe that hopefully we're all working on that same set tonight. Again, this was a big difference from what the original revision was, including a relocation of the garage to a location which would take advantage of the existing foundation. We had had a comprehensive discussion about what section of the bylaw we were to be under. And it felt that if we used the existing foundation, we would go under one and not the other. So, my client has presented that. There were some neighbors that were present. I don't believe that they're abutters. But my client has been in discussions with the abutters. They did complete a renovation project diagonal on Harper Road across the street. So, we already had some familiarity with the abutters there. And as far as I am aware, unless there's somebody on Zoom, to the contrary, I believe that we have satisfied the concerns of the abutters. And we would ask tonight that the board grant the special permit for the reconstruction of the Parker Trail. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Do we have any members of the public here on this case? And no one online? All right. All right. So, if you had a chance to read or see the planning board, the original planning board comment from December, and the updated planning board comment from January 6th. I did. The planning department. Sorry. I did review those. Okay. What is your, I guess, I would ask you, what is your, what is your opinion on those? Because, you know, the town planner is, you know, in so many words telling us to deny this project. Or sort of encourage radical change to your, to your design. So, I'm just curious. You're asking us to approve this project. But, you know, we have, we have guidance indicating that, you know, there are issues with size and scale of this proposed project in the neighborhood. I just wanted to know your comments on those two documents from the planning department. Sure. So, it was a little unclear what the standing of the planning department was because there was not a new letter submitted where there had been with prior applications. The new proposed, the current proposal at A Park Ridge is smaller than the last, most recent product that was considered in his, in his January 6th letter. You know, generally, when we talk about a substantial detriment for the neighborhood, it's just, it's all lost on me by the people that are most affected by the project that generally signed off on it. You know, they're, they're the ones that would feel the impact of any density or increased floor area ratio. Um, certainly, um, if it, if it's the position of the board, um, that, you know, it's a request for us to find further reduction. Certainly, I would, I'll bring that to my client and, and we can work on that, uh, diligently. But, um, from where we started, we did, you know, consider the applicant, we did, we did consider the concerns of the neighbors. Um, and we did present the project to them, which, as far as we're aware, we have their blessing on. Um, so, you know, the, the information from the planner is, is certainly helpful. Um, it's also not lost on me that I'm not sure if, uh, well, it's gross floor area or I thought it was thinking floor area ratio. Thank you. Um, it's, you know, just generally, uh, it's, it's helpful for him to, to provide, uh, but I, I, I think that my clients are concerned, uh, to satisfy the concerns of, uh, the most immediate people impacted by, by the decision, which should, uh, you know, the board should be able to give some weight to that, uh, you know, regardless of what the proposal is in any, in any capacity. Um, um, so that's, would we want to also entertain the idea of additional modifications to this project? Um, all right, so we'll, you don't have any additional comments? I do not. All right. So I guess with that, we'll close, we'll close the public comment portion of this and kind of move to the deliberation portion on this project. Um, so we, we have seen some, uh, some modifications to this based on the initial comments from our neighbors. Um, as I said, I, I still think we have, um, we have documents in the planning board that, uh, well, two documents in the planning board. One that, that says this project actually should require a variance. I think we'd solve that problem by dealing with the fact that this is a special permit under, under the language of the by-law. And I think that the applicant sort of aligns the project to sort of stick within those, uh, or setback pieces. Um, I still think the project is, in my opinion, is quite large for the, for the neighborhood. You know, I think it's been, it's been modified from what it does, but I think it still is, it's by far, it is the largest house in the neighborhood. If you look at the comparisons that, uh, the town planner has put together. Um, I think this project does not, I mean, there's no topography on the site plans. So, there is, well, actually, there is, there is a little bit of topography on the second site plan. I mean, the lot appears reasonably flat. So, I, I don't think we have the same challenge of type of an issue that we potentially had on, uh, application for playing with. Are there any members to board of any? I think, I think it's necessary to take into account that they have spoken to the neighbors. Okay. And that, uh, we have, they have shrunk the size of the, uh, the gross work, uh, uh, gross for area to be about even to their largest, um, home, um, in the neighborhood. So we should take into account. It looks like to me that they're still using a room above the ground. They're still, they just changed the roof line to not match the other roof line between, uh, they didn't even need that space to get away. So, I mean, I think that was very good that they were able to reduce that. And the package looks a little different just because now we're using, uh, two peaks instead of having the single, which gives it a little bit of, but it's still a massive house. Um, and again, you have a huge area in the attic. Um, so, and I know it's unfinished and then they're not even taking into account the unfinished basement. It's, it's, it's a massive, massive property. So. Uh, Ms. Paul, do you have any comments? I mean, similarly, I just, I guess I think for the, for the size of the, of the parcel, um, uh, the actual house just, it is a very large property, but also in consideration with this actual size of the property, I think together, it just, it makes the house look that much bigger just because the property is. Is, you know, I think that the house that is on it is currently is, is, is small, um, and is being replaced with a, you know, just a much, much larger house that maybe doesn't exactly fit on the parcel that, um, it's being put on. So, I guess maybe that, that would be my, my comment. Um, sorry. I have a different approach for these houses that being built larger than before. Um, it has a lot to do with our lifestyle that we are in now compared to 1944 or 1950s or so. I mean, there are a lot of older houses and I bet every one of them is going to come to do something for those houses. They're not going to make the same thing. They're going to make it larger because everything we have is larger. Everything, you know, we have additional rooms, additional, you know, electricity before it used to be 60 amps. Now it's 200 amps is not even enough. So, I like to have an open mind and look at it that, you know what, if we forget 44, 40s houses or 50s houses and look at our new lifestyle or any house that is small enough that they come in front of us to make it larger. It's going to go through this. It's, it's, it's, I think like, you know, we're not seeing in a way that, you know, it's real. We're just imposing things that like, you know, uh, because we're imposing because it's too big. Yeah. But I mean, if you compare to the older houses and now what we have now, cars and things before the whole family had one car. Now the whole family might have three cars. So, I mean, everything is related to the time that it's different. So let's look at it that way and see how that works for all these applications that coming in front of us and making larger houses. I guess I hear what you're saying for this particular application, though, though, the parcel is only 15,500 square meters. Well, all the houses. I mean, there are, that's why they're here, because they have no pre-existing non-conforming house. But there are a lot of pre-existing non-conforming houses that families still live there. I mean, families are larger. They have more cars, more things. So, I mean, let's judge it that way. I mean, I, I, I don't disagree with you. But, like, I would, I would counter argue that this is substantially larger than a lot of other houses this board has approved. I agree. That's why I'm bringing this point that, like, you know, we are always approaching in a way that, like, you know, we're comparing to smaller houses, regardless of when they were built. And then we're judging for the size of the house that's going to be built now. No, I'm talking about houses that this board has recently approved. We always have this, we always have this issue about making sure that the house we approve, we recognize that patterns of living have changed, and houses have to get larger. That's a, that's a, that's a given. But, this particular application is much larger than we ever have typically approved. Well, that's why, because always we have the same approach to this judgment. That, like, you know what? Oh, the house is too small and the lot is too small. Yes, that's why they are here, because it's pre-existing. But, we are living today, we have a lot larger, bigger things. I mean, there were houses, cap houses. You couldn't bring a queen size bed upstairs. But now, I mean, you have to put it upstairs. So, I mean, why don't we look at it that way also? Could. We could. But, I mean, the, that issue was brought up, like, I would say three times. I mean, that's my opinion. Yeah, yeah. And, you know, and the, the, the applicant has still come back with the largest house in the neighborhood. So. Wow. Well, I bet if anybody comes that, in front of us to redo any renovation or any addition, they're not going to make the same size. They're going to make it larger, regardless of what. So, it's, it's, it's, we're not going to escape that. Oh, I don't, and I, I don't think we need to. My, my question is just, it's, it's, we have to balance the need between making these smaller homes larger and not making them too large for the, the land. Because it, it completely changes the character of what makes Wayland. Wayland. Wayland. Wayland. Wayland. So, the panel we have is, the five of us, Ms. Paul, Mr. Perry, Mr. Cesarian, Mr. Hirsch, and myself. So, I guess, with that, I would, I would, let me get my handy name sheet sheet. So, there's, there's a two-step process. We, the board's got to make a finding, which is, we don't have to vote on. It's just a statement. Um, that under 401.1.2, you know, a pre-existing non-conforming structure can be changed, altered, or modified. Um, as long as it's not substantially more detrimental to the existing, um, non-conforming building. Um, I'm, I'm not sure that we can make that finding in this case. So, uh, I, I, I guess with that, we would, we would then go to. Um, I guess I, I, I'd make a motion, um, that, uh, let me see how we would do this. Uh, make a motion under 203.1, um, for a special permit, um, that the outcome is shown. The building or structure, uh, is not against the public interest. It doesn't derogate from the character of the neighborhood in which such use of building or structure occurs. It's not worth detrimental or offensive because of noise, vibration, smoke, gas, fumes, or the dust, or other objectionable features. And that such building or structure should otherwise be injurious to the habits of the town, their property, or dangerous to the public health or safety. Second on that motion. Okay. I'm sorry, you can take the second. Yeah. Second. Okay. Um, all right. So we'll do this by, we'll do this by roll call, uh, again, because we are remote. Um, I'll start here. Mr. Hirsch. Uh, I vote against. Mr. Sarri. I vote for you. This call. I vote against this one. Mr. Perry. I vote for this one. Mr. Wright. I vote against this one. So, um, that is three. Opposed. One. Two. Two. In favor. So, uh, that motion, the special permit does not pass for this project. So, uh, we have to, we still have to write this decision. Um, send that, you can send that to the applicant. And then there is a 14 day process to write that in a 21 day period. Thank you. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you. So. The next is the continuation, uh, CBA case 26. 228. Please. And land. This is Doug Levine. On behalf of the land. So in the tennis club, they are requesting renewal of the existing special permit for the property located 228 leads and lanes. This is our slide. D 12. 31. Situated in single residence. R 60 zoning district. The applicant has revised the application is now and is now. And the extension of the current permit. The request to increase non member non neighbor membership from 200 to 225. Wayland families. Good evening. Good evening. How are you? Good evening. How are you? Good. How are you? You guys are moving efficiently this evening. Uh. Yeah. Let's see what's going to happen on that one. But, um, so I guess before we go, I just full disclosure to the board. Like I'm a past vice president and past president of the Wayland So Independence Club. Um, it's not going to influence my vote on this particular matter, but I want to let the board know that in case I won't have any questions or concerns about that. Are you hearing none? I don't know. Those are both of you. All right. So with that, you can give us a rundown. Sure. We'll do some introductions first. And we have a short slide deck that Lea and Nina can help me get up on the screen. So my name is Doug Levine. Um, I'm a several year member of the Swim and Tennis Club. I've lived in town, um, going on 14 years. Um, and in the immediate past president of the club, um, for which I served, um, as co-president for two years. Sure. Bill Welby. I've been the manager for Wellin's Home and Tennis almost 30 years. And Pat Murphy, uh, current president of Tennis. Yep. Let's step on the screen and some of the folks can see him. Um, should I just join? Zoom and then we can elevate. Okay. Automatically making me opinions. I believe so. I've been looking. Oh, sorry. We should be able to do that. Okay. I think we should just click on sharing on that. I'm going to be teaching. Like your actual name. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. So having just introduced ourselves, we just want to give a very brief background about the club for folks who may not be aware of it. Um, even though it has been around for going on its 64th season, uh, was founded in 1963 during the John F. Kennedy administration and it is 11 acres, um, owned and operated as a private family swim and tennis club situated right off of Gleason Lane. We have, um, a pool that is six lanes with a diving area space. We have a separate smaller size kiddie pool. Um, a more recent addition was a sand volleyball court and we have seven tennis courts as well as this grilling and picnic area. And so the club season begins Memorial Day weekend for the pool and wraps up, um, Labor Day weekend. Though we open somewhat earlier, uh, striving for late April, weather dependent, um, just for the tennis court. So folks can come and use the tennis court. So that is late April to some point in the middle of October. Um, as long as I've known, there's been a wait list to get into the club. And we hover between in the, in the last several years, between 200 and 50 and 300 families on that wait list. Um, I think the last I checked, it was 280 something and give or take, we admit in the twenties each year is what the turnover usually is. Uh, and so personally I was on the wait list for six years. I've heard folks who've been on the wait list as long as 10 years, uh, a shorter time being on the wait list would be closer to four years, but it's, it's varied over that time. Um, obviously it, it's a draw in our town and the community space. Uh, we have a number of programs that are offered for people of all ages, which includes the, the kids zone camp life experiences. What we call it, uh, for younger kids, ages four through 10, um, which is staffed by a number of Whalen high school students and has its own director. Um, we have a very active swim and dive team, which is coached by the head swimming coach for the Whalen high school boys and girls swim team. Um, and he has also been at the club nearly as long as Mr. Welby longer than Mr. Welby. So going back to the early nineties, coach Foley, uh, has been working at the swim and tennis club. Um, there's also a number of tennis clinics that are offered as well as tennis teams. And as I mentioned, the club really caters to, um, attendees of all ages, um, because there, there are various tennis programs run by our tennis pro, um, for adults and kids, different types of clinics and, uh, competitive tournaments. And then that tennis pro also helps us organize, uh, community events for the tennis group, which are listed there tournaments, um, pizza pickleball breakfast at Wimbledon. And then we also have offer private swim lessons, small group swim lessons, same with tennis, private tennis, private and small groups. Um, for the next slide, I'll mention that one there. Uh, it's really a member run club from the ground up in the sense that all members are required at some point in their tenure to serve on the board of directors. One, one member from each family to serve on the board. Um, and as a result, um, members are also required to help clean the club up every spring. We have a very robust turnout. Um, when that happens, uh, in April slash may, um, there is an opt out fee that people can pay, but I would say a huge number of folks choose not to pay that fee. And it's kind of a community gathering unto itself on three separate Saturdays in the spring. And if they really soup to nuts, clean that club up and get it ready for opening weekend Memorial Day weekend. Um, I think another unsung benefit of this club is the fact that there are so many high school students who come through there, who were members as, as younger kids, toddlers and up, who eventually come and serve as swim instructors, life guards, tennis instructors. And for a vast number of these folks, it's their first job. Um, so they get mentoring from, from Mr. Welby and his staff. And, um, I think that, that, that's a very valuable lesson that's imparted by the club. Uh, in terms of helping prepare some of these young folks to go out into the world, um, and having their first employment experience. So you can see the stats there. And, and last year we had 45 high school and college aged individuals serve in those various capacities. Um, and Mr. Welby puts other folks to work as well, who may not be serving in, in those formal capacities. There are a number of events that have been traditionally held for a number of years at the club. These are highlighting just some of them. Um, I, I have a friend that I grew up with, uh, who worked at the club in the early nineties and would talk to me about Hawaiian night back in 1991, 1992. So that is a longstanding tradition. Um, there are also a number of our members who have been affiliated with, have been affiliated with the club, uh, for 20 plus years. And so they convene, uh, one evening during the summer. You can see there, the longstanding members cocktail party. And it's, uh, I've been to the last couple, uh, again, a robust turnout. And it's clear that folks are very dedicated and committed to this club. Or even when their kids grow up, we still have a number of members, uh, that remain. I think this is probably, uh, the slide. I want to emphasize the most to folks here, because I think that the swim and tennis club is, is what I've said to the board is it's a real unique gem in the town. Uh, I grew up next door. There was nothing like this in Weston. I think this is a club that's accessible by everybody. I think, um, in a time when we need more spaces to gather as a community, the club provides that. Um, and just like we mentioned here, it's multi-generational. It caters to all different ages. It's really, it, we make it so it is also financially accessible to people. And we're very mindful about that. Keeping, um, the annual dues relatively low compared to some of our peer clubs and certainly, um, other private clubs. Um, so can I, yeah, jump in. Sorry. And just because this is late break news. And so it wasn't here, but it sort of segues in, um, some very longstanding members, the longstanding members, Howard and Susie Abel, who unfortunately passed, uh, years, like 18 months ago. Um, they're, they were at every, they were, they lived at the club. They were, um, they're fantastic folks. They attended little kids' birthday parties, the Shaverley kids' birthday parties. Um, but, uh, this is over the last 36 hours. Their daughters have established a, uh, uh, two small scholarships for members every year. Um, so with that, it's, you know, it's being implemented literally over the last, this morning. Um, but it's just the example of a really great way that this club, you know, helps. It helps, uh, the kids who are coming up through, and it's an intergenerational jam. Um, it's a really fantastic thing. And I'm, I'm super thankful to, um, uh, to the Abel girls who are, who have stepped up and are willing to do this. Yeah, there, there are a number of families I found, and I've only been affiliated with the club for a handful of years, but a number of people are very committed to this space. And it, and it shows by, by their longevity and, uh, of years that they've committed to it. So, um, as the chair mentioned, we initially were seeking to expand our membership by what we believe was a modest amount, 25 families. Um, there were a handful of abutters who were upset about what we were seeking to do. Um, I wasn't able to attend, but Mr. Murphy and our current vice president, Adam Shaywitz, hosted a zoom meeting for a handful of them. Um, was able to hear from them. Um, we had previous to that, uh, given a letter in each mailbox to make them aware of what we were seeking to do. Um, because we, um, historically have had periodic meetings with the neighbors and haven't done so recently. We thought it made sense at this point to withdraw that request in order to have a handful of these meetings in the coming year, especially during the season. So we can hear from folks in real time. I know the board has received a handful of letters, um, some opposing that request, some opposing generally our request to extend our permit, but there have been letters in support as well. Um, so I think it'll be incumbent upon us to continue to build the relationship with the neighbors. Over the next year, we knew that relationship, so to speak. Um, and help them see attendance and what the numbers are and if there are any issues firsthand, so we can discuss it in real time. And so just very briefly, these are the numbers for our attendance averages that we collected last season. And so you can see the, there's a max of 200 member families, but you can see the average number of member families that are at the club each month. And then that, that next column is the overall number of members and their guests. So even in the busiest month of June, you know, we're nowhere near maximizing the use of this club. And that's why we thought that additional request was modest and appropriate. And here as just the last slide that these are these specific numbers of our very most, our very busiest days at the club. The club is open for just over a hundred days. And they, these are the six days or so where the numbers are much higher than the other days. And what we don't have the ability yet to track is how many are there at a very specific time. So you'll see the asterisk at the bottom says it's attendance over the course of an entire day. So that's from the morning 9am or so until 7pm or so when the club closes. So that's, that's essentially what we wanted to share with the board. And we are seeking without any changes at this point for a five year renewal with an idea at some point, we may come back before that time with a request. But if everything seems to be working smoothly, we would just ask what the board has granted in the past. I think I counted that the club has been before some iteration of this board at least 15 times. So this is our sweet 16th appearance before the board. And we are happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you. So, do we have a copy, Anina? This is the application. Do we have a copy of their existing special permit? We do have a whole folder of like the last. Oh, God. Because if it's just, if this is just an extension of the existing special permit, it um i'm just wondering if formally we have to either just reference that exact the date of that decision because i don't know if that's been amended multiple times and if we have to reference the most recent amendment to do this is more of a technical question but um i don't know that may be a question uh for mr levine as well he used to be a member of the zba i just want to make sure whatever process we go through we have the right in right process in place so that i have a copy this is um permit 2105 which does reference previous permits okay because um the two before that are more substantive with with off with appendices with all of the conditions on the right so like we don't need i guess my question would be we don't need to review all of the dependencies for our renewal we would look at the most recent renewal which references though it doesn't seem like it was a whole substantive write-up for the 2105 decision okay and in 2005 it was it was valid until may of this year got it correct okay well actually the the 22 22 they are attached but the previous one the previous one right okay but if you look at the narrative of 2105 yep and finding in my i just printed all of those out when i was looking at the god i wanted to see what the last oh i see yep 26 got it okay um okay so i guess before we go on i think there's some people online that have their hand raised you know bill canter oh so if you could elevate if you could give us your your name and address please hi i'm bill bill canter uh 15 autumn lane i wasn't i was unsure if i was going to be heard here tonight nice to be unmuted thanks yeah so if you could give us uh let us know what was on your mind well i sent a letter uh to the board and i think you all have that um yes but you know my perspective is the uh the club has um uh expanded considerably since 1962 when the permit was originally issued for 150 families one i believe smaller pool i think it was four lanes can anyone verify that mr levine four lanes four lanes there was no diving i don't know when the kiddie pool showed up and two tennis courts it's now uh well eight courts reduced to seven because they needed more uh i guess deck space for the pool area is that right
yeah they were put in the 70s that's right yeah um so and what's also happened is there have been since the initial permit there have been 10 homes developed in previously undeveloped properties near it so they the the the town the the neighborhood has developed around the the club and the um club has developed considerably since the original permit was issued so it's kind of getting crowded and frankly i can't enjoy uh my backyard when the club is in operation so it detracts from my ability to join enjoy my property i think that you know some form of uh sound abatement or reduction in the membership is appropriate okay um can i ask how long you um lived um lived at 15 autumn lane i have lived at 15 autumn lane since 1990.
any other um comments we i know we have the letter i've read the letter well the you know i i you know there are there are a number of you know i don't want to get into the um you know the a litany of of issues but um one of the slides that was just shared indicated that the attendance was over 200 on several days now i know some of the neighbors were questioning the uh method of accounting for it for the uh attendance because uh one of my neighbors actually uh uh two of his kids or one at least one of his kids was a lifeguard and and you know knew how how the attendance was counted and not particularly reliable in his estimation but um you know the club has a limit of 200 family 200 members on premises at any time and we just saw a slide that said i believe well over 200. at any given time but that was for the entire day that doesn't necessarily mean uh at that one moment well it's my understanding based on what what i saw in the uh well and is is the club saying that they're never over 200 members there are 200 attendees yeah i guess the question i have uh mr mr canter um i believe that the club permits for 200 families not 200 individual people that's both there's a separate separate constraints there's 200 families and 200 in attendance and i see mr i see mr levine nodding in an agreement is that right yeah that's right but yeah it's the entirety of the day those numbers are the entirety of the day
okay all right well thank you for thank you for your comment do we have other comments online comments i thought there were four yeah there's someone else but i say they're hand rings i see i just said two of the two panels i paid online and there's other there's like rest of our panelists oh okay all right so no one else any other comments from the club um i would note um that also subsequent to reaching out to the neighboring residents we did receive a pair of letters of support uh one came some weeks ago from uh mr creamer bob creamer and one as recently as today uh from the shaverly family who are of the media debaters are they members the shaverly family here and the cravings are not we're past members we received another email of support sent today from barbara barbara levin and frank zedona 237 okay as well good to hear here so we have another letter of support who's email to the board this is obviously a little bit a little bit challenging because we have um we have a neighbor who's written to us who's basically asking us to not renew your special order which to me seems potentially an extreme situation for a permit that's been in place since 1962 um that said um i i understand the um the club's mission to kind of continue outreach to the neighbors and sort of the uh the importance of that i think they should be commended for the fact that they review they didn't move forward with the fact that they are adding 25-foot place there that they're just looking for that right now until they get further with the neighbors and i think that's a real shine it's just shining what that really stands for community i uh i would agree um so i guess before we i mean we want to um i guess does the club have any other comments they want to add before we close the generation on this uh yes nothing for me thanks okay we're good thank you um three it's like i i've been on the board for the past um approvals um and sort of i guess recertifications or reapprovals of uh special affirmative before and um there have usually not been any additional conditions you know uh added to those um in the past um in this case we have a letter as i said that um basically telling us the board could deny the application uh could have approved it but sort of requires some sort of sound measure or sort of somehow restrict the club um i think those are all quite complicated to do and you know my concern is you know the club has been there since since two so i think you know people who live there or purchase property there are aware of the presence of the club so i i don't know that it's a reasonable position to take that like something that has been in the neighborhood for a long time like menu is the enjoyment of your property but it's untenable it seems like a pretty extreme um position you know to take so that's that's i guess i open up back up to the board yeah i agree with you and i didn't read anything in the letter or hear anything in the presentation from the department you're talking about um that stated anything that sounded like it's become an exceptionally worse condition for him than the past 35 years since he's lived there so um i see absolutely no reason why we wouldn't extend this uh especially is there a reason why we make him come back every five years it's a good question i don't i don't know i don't know the answer to that but they asked for it if i remember the previous hearings they asked for it extension for factors and no adam is asking the question in reverse like why like why why is the request to extend for five years and why is the initial not six years or eight years or two years or ten years i don't know i don't know i don't know the answer to that i don't know if um if the club has any knowledge of that to the best of my knowledge inertia is the only answer to that um and to the extent i i i i would if the board is open to it i would certainly love to have the permit extended for 10 years um but the most important thing for us right now is to ensure the club is it stays open um and it's able to you know operate in the ordinary course i just don't know if that's it could that be in the initial special permit that says
possibly i don't know if that's part of the original decision from 1962 that authorized this so we're looking at the original or i think what doug's pointing to something that says the original permit was for a period of 25 years well it was modified during that time but the original permit request i think originally was granted for 25 years but it looks like they came back in 1964 1969 1973 then there was a gap till 1981 then another gap till 1995 so maybe it's varied over the last 62 years and how long permits have been issued okay
but i think mr murphy's right it's essentially we looked at what the previous one was yeah and echoed that with west but no you didn't want to be greedy and you just wanted to you know from my perspective like i i'm not a member i've heard wonderful things about the swimming tennis golf fantastic things how respectful you are how nice it is to have that community space for everyone to get together and i've been a guest a couple times probably on one of the days that you showed here but you know everyone is very like respectful and nice and like i was really blown away on how well the community kind of uses the space and trying to keep that same type of like atmosphere so you know for me it's a no-brainer to be like all right well you have a respectful uh community member really and why why make them come back in five years you know why not give them a ten-year graces i think since being here since 1962 that you know maybe they've earned a little more graces yeah and it it it doesn't appear as though well so i know that for the club to change if the club wanted to add another pool they wanted to add another tennis court they wanted to renovate the building they would have to come back before the board and modify the special permits so like extending that special permit for 10 years doesn't off it does nothing but authorize the club to continue to operate it doesn't basically allow the club to expand their operation it doesn't change anything right so um i guess i'm still a little confused on why they applied so what triggered you to apply for this extension well because the last permit was granted for a period of five years and it expires in may okay so we hypothetically could extend it for we could extend it for longer we could we could extend the permit for 10 years if we if we so choose because they're not asking for i i think it would be different like if the club were asking for a change to the special permit that's something different yeah so and we've done this on other projects not with this one but with uh camp trigamy for example has come before the board in the past and asked for modification to something and that meant that when we renewed that special permit with that modification we we put it in place for one year to make a determination if that increased modification for them resulted in something that was more detrimental to the neighbors so i think if the club was asking for say the club was asking for 220 additional members right as an approval i would say would it be prudent for the board to approve that for more than one year we would want to yeah we would want to basically approve that additional membership for one year and then determine and if everyone who was in a butter complained that that made a meaningful difference in the way the club operated then we would have after that after that one season would have the process in place to sort of review that but in this case the sort of tennis club is not asking for a change for anything so i would agree with you i see no reason why we can't increase the time horizon to 10 years for the approval for this given that nothing is being requested um from the club that changes their permit and it as i said if they next year want to modify the pool or do something that would reopen the permit even though it's been approved yeah okay um i guess any other comments from the board this ball any comment or no i mean i have no other comments other than i mean similar to to adam's statement when when i moved to to weyland i heard it was one of the first things i heard was um was about the club so um i've heard nothing but good things um about the about the club and and um the members so um i i think that um it sounds great um yeah you're interested i move uh we extend the courts a special permit for a term of 10 years um
i would say i would say subject to all uh compliance with all of the conditions of the previously approved special permanent okay okay okay all right so um uh by roll call uh mr perry all right mr sarin all right mr hirsch all right miss paul all right mr white aye so um the club permit is is approved to renew to prove for a period of 10 years thank you all thank you all appreciate it thank you there is uh i i guess i have to say this there's a 14-day process to write the decision and then a 21-day appeal period and then after that um the decision is ready to be filed perfect thank you thank you so much all right thank you um do we have anything else on the agenda oh you yes sorry all right i was i was about to say um all right so uh this is the uh our next case is the continuation of zba case 2605 for 24 boston coast road this is the applicant on application for a sign around on behalf of the property we order wayland plaza lxc seeking the investor permit for the property of 24 boston coast road located in the business aid district install an additional building sign of 38.5 square feet non-eluminated and to obtain retroactive approval for a standalone street sign of 27 square feet the applicant is requesting requesting to be on both the number of signs and the full square footage
they're on zoom great hello mike wood here good evening how are you i'm well so thank you for bearing with us tonight um i think my recollection at the uh hearing was um you were going to modify the size of the sign or the font of the sign on the building i can't remember which one it was both okay so we had sent in four different options modified font modified size uh i hope that you all have a seen a copy of that there was a b c and d yep great these are go ahead sorry sorry what what what what did you just say sorry i said the material of this is as pvc so it is not illuminated in every option and uh significantly different from one to the next um any other um comments on this i have no other comments on this um as long as you all are able to see those options a b and c and d you have one that your marshall too uh myself um they i i recommend it they've they have actually gone with both of these fonts so i am i really indifferent i if i had one to choose i would say b um because uh it just it stands out well and it's it's i believe it's tasteful on the building as opposed to just a standard or standard block bold letter like a and c i think b i think option b looks the nicest uh on here um i think d is more set more sizable based off of p i was looking at the from a sizing standpoint and yeah i guess d does look he is a little smaller um it's a little narrower 97 versus 106. um and you know we did not get any new comments from the design review board on this we had comments last time where they urged us to reject the sign that was applied to the roof of the building but they didn't give us any additional comments no they're also not required to go back and um they did not um look through these options um so it would be up to the dba to to make the final decision okay um all right so just to remind the board that uh this finalized it's not the best it's kind of poorly worded but you know 501 allows the board via a special permit to approve signage in excess of the maximum allowed um and it's subject to the same findings the same criteria of special permit that it's not dangerous to the public safety doesn't derogate from the character so um i think given that context of of the building and the fact that the previous owner had a sign there in this exact location uh this to me seems seems like a reasonable request in the interpretation of the bilat to to give us the latitude under 501.1 for a special permit for this and they're also retroactively asking for approval for uh the existing standalone sign that's out front so they're uh i'm guessing it means that that sign does not have approval as it currently stands so this would be we need to kind of codified that that sign up there i don't think there's any more or less signs signing spur footage being proposed for this building than there is for the old tv bank or for the gas there the two different gas stations or for the um the business there with the dry cleaner and uh the variety deli and the electricians in there so i agree and as for the fonts and colors i'm not really offended by any of them you know i think the ones on the right definitely look better in my in my mind b and d look better than a and c in my opinion yeah um yeah i think the smaller size from the scoping of that wall might fit better i don't know option d option d that was just my original thought on it and looking at the two so i guess i'd ask the applicant i'm assuming you know your clients are okay you presented four options i'm assuming assuming your clients are okay with any of the four i think at this point they'll be they'll be satisfied just to have a sign there yep i i guess in that case um any other there's no no one else here in the meeting we don't have anyone online that has any comments about this right right okay i'm going to close hearing the meeting to deliberate um in my mind i think this is a straightforward approval i would recommend option b i think option d is something so after looking at it with the purchase a little smaller than option b but it still stands out nicely and i think the white pvc letters look they're white or silver but they look great i think against uh you know the fascia and the little railing detail on top so i agree this is agree with our architecture uh expert like that i get my cheek might get you in trouble but um so i so i i think under 501.1 we're we're able to approve this so i'm just going to look at the uh the special permit language so i i'd make a motion that we grant the approval for um the 26 so far application 2605 for uh to retroactively improve the existing street sign and to approve a sign that is designated as option d on the material submitted to this award date stamped february 18th 2026. second um well i i have to also read the special permit language i'd say that in selecting that uh i think the applicant has shown the satisfaction of the special permit granting authority that the building use or structure or sign in this case for which the application is made is not against the public interest it doesn't interrogate through the character of the neighborhood in which the use building or structure occurs and shall not be detrimental or offensive because of the noise vibration smoke gas or dust or other objectionable features and that such use building or structure is not otherwise injurious to the inhabitants of the town their property or danger to the public health or safety second okay i think the only condition i would apply to this is that as i said um they've got to they've got to substantially confirm with the application material submitted for option d dated february 18th um so by roll call uh mr curry aye mr sarion mr hershey aye miss paul aye mr white aye so this is approved so um we've got uh 14 days to write this decision and then there's a uh 21 day of 20 of your period and then after that the permit is ready thank you everyone i appreciate it all right thank you have a good night all right thank you too um move to adjourn second by roll call mr farry aye mr sarion aye mr hershey aye this fall aye the white aye we are adjourned thank you everyone