Zoning Board of Appeals Aug 27, 2026

the meeting and it is being recorded. >> The chair knows the appointed time is 6:06 p.m. and I call this meeting of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals to order. My name is Everro Henry, chair of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals. I want to welcome everyone to this meeting. We'll begin with a roll call of the ZBA members. Mrs. Slovder, >> present. >> Mr. Offeld >> here. >> Miss Morton >> here. And I want to welcome Mr. Francisco Botto um here tonight for Mr. Craig Meadows. >> Yes, present. >> The chair knows to the core is present. Also present tonight is Mr. Steve McCarthy for the town. Pursuant to chapter 2 of the act of 2025, this meeting will be conducted via remote means. Members of the public who wishes to access this meeting may do so via [clears throat] remote means either by Zoom or telephone. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time. The zoning board of appeals is a quasi judicial body that operates under the authority of chapter 4A of the general laws of the commonwealth for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, convenience, and the general welfare of the inhabitants of the town of Amherst. One of the most important elements of Amazon in bylaw is section 10.38. Specific findings from this section must be made for all of her decisions. Statutoily for special permit, the board has 90 days from the close of the hearing to file a decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the sitting board members and is filed in the town clerk's office. Once the decision is filed with the town clerk, there is a 20-day appeal period for an agrieved party to contest the decision with the relevant judicial body. After the appeal period, the permit must be recorded at the registry of deeds to take effect. For tonight's agenda, we have a public meeting on ZBA FY2027-02, which is 28 Sha Street. And this is a consideration for the board to vote to extend the time limit to open a public hearing for an appeal regarding said address at 28 Sha Street. We have a public hearing continued from August 13th, 2026. ZBA FY20 2027-01 which is 408 Northampton Road request to modify under section 10.33 of the zoning bylaw condition 5 of an existing special permit to allow a resident manager instead of a professional on-site security guard coverage said property is located at map parcel 13D-51 professional research park PRP zoning district. Also on tonight's agenda is ZBA FY2027-03 34 Berkshire Terrace request for a special permit to modify and reduce front yard setback from 20 ft to 12.4 ft to enlarge a pre-existing nonconforming structure and increase building and lot leverage and construct an approximately 160 ft porch under table 3, footnote A and sections 9.22 22 and 10.38 of the zoning bylaw. Said property is located on map parcel 8A-34 neighborhood residents are in zoning district. We will also have discussion topics from KP law um or in KP law update rather on general law chapter 4A um amendments. As always, there are any there will be general public comments period and any topics not anticipated by the chair in the last 48 hours in advance of this meeting. So the first one is relatively um simple and that is ZBA FY2027-0228 Sha Street. Um Mr. McCarthy, is this a request from the town or from the appellent directly? Pardon me, I was muted. So, this is a request. Um, it is officially from the applicant, but it has been in discussions with town staff. Um, and town staff does think um it is a wise uh agreement to enter to enter into. I can give more details um or I could allow the um the I know the attorney the applicant is in the audience. if you'd like to allow him to speak. >> As long as they're speaking only on the continuence, not the merits. >> Yes. >> All right. Just a moment. >> Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Mclofflin, I did send you a uh you should have seen a notification to become a panelist. And if you just click yes on that, you should be able to Here we go. >> And and while we wait, Mr. McCarthy, do we have a proposed date or is it just >> for this? >> Okay. >> Yes. So, um this comes from Mass General Laws um chapter 4A section 15, which is what sets uh the deadlines for the zoning board of appeals to act upon um applications. Um and the statute provides that um the board must open a public hearing within 65 days after the application was filed. Um and the board must reach a decision on the appeal within 100 days after the application was filed. Um but it does also provide that the zoning board and the applicant may agree to extend said deadline. Um and given that um this appeal is presented in in um in association with a new application for the subject property um the appeal may be mooded by such by the application being approved. Um so the proposal is for the both of those deadlines to be extended. Um you can see dece um for the date of the public hearing it's honored before December 31st and for the date of the decision of the ZBA it's honored before February 28th. Um what would be expected is that if um if this appeal uh is not mooted by the application then it would be likely heard on the December 12th meeting of the ZBA and the decision would then be out before February 28th. But since if the ZBA exceeds any of these deadlines, this application is constructively granted. So, this protects the town, the ZBA, and um allows for this to be delayed um without giving a constructive approval. And I don't know if Mr. Mclofflin has been able to enter and speak. You should be able to, Mr. Mclofflin. >> Thank you for that, Mr. McCarthy. But the heart of the question was, has town staff chosen a date when we want to put this on the calendar for or are we just giving it a blanket continuence, not continue to date certain? Um, I believe we would be looking at December 12th. >> Um, Miss McLaughlin. Yes, the chair recognizes. Just state your name and address for the record, please. >> Thank you. Uh, attorney John McLaclin um with the law firm of Green Miles Lipton at 77 Pleasant Street in Northampton, Massachusetts. Um, the the idea behind the document we I've got before the board today is to simply move out the date when you even open the public hearing. So you you haven't opened the public hearing. Uh we're saying you can have till the end of December to open it and you have to the end of February to make a decision on the the um application for the appeal because it's possible that um this you know this same board will allow us to amend the term of the special permit so that there will be no need for uh the a public hearing on the application. But this gives you plenty of time in CA uh in case the app appeal in case the application for the special permit is denied, you'd then have plenty time to undertake the appeal. Um and [clears throat] both the applicant and the uh town think that this is a wise way to go. Why spend time, effort, or anything else in regards to an appeal that at least has a possibility of being moot? Um, I asked for this in the uh when the application for the uh appeal was made and I referenced a case uh that specifically says that um you shouldn't go into a draconian order if there's a chance at least that there could be uh less um obtrusive zoning relief that would resolve the matter. And that's what we're hoping. My my client really wants to work with the town and uh try to get the special permit amended so that we don't have to get into a fight over the um the issue on the appeal. That's we're just saying let's give us some time and try to work it out through the um through the application. If it doesn't work, you'll have plenty of time to deal with this. But if it does work, we don't need to do this particular hearing. So, attorney Mccclaclin, we do understand the ask, but I I think by your answer, um we're not choosing a specific date. We're just allowing a continuence. >> That that's that's correct. All All that we're doing, uh today is um saying you have until uh the end of December to pick a specific date. You're not picking one yet, but you have till the end of December. You may find that you don't need to pick a date. Um that's all we're doing. And and obviously um as Mr. McCarthy said, if if you know way before the end of December that we're not going to get the amended uh special permit, you can call the hearing up then. So it's just giving you more time and not forcing this board to undertake quas adjudication you don't need to do. That's the whole idea behind it. >> Thank you. >> Um do any members of the board have any questions for either Mrs. McCarthy or or for attorney Mccclaclin? Um the chair recognizes Mr. Offeld. >> We are careful about um who is on a panel uh and and who is on that panel then has to continue participating in it. Does a vote tonight by any of us put us on that panel or is this a separate procedural matter? >> It does not. This is a procedural matter. >> Okay. >> Because we're we're not having an actual hearing on the merits. Yeah. [clears throat] Okay. Thank you Mr. Offeld. So I do not see any hands from anyone else. So um I think we all understand the ask. We're not continuing this to a date certain. We are voting to continue this so that there is a hearing on or before um December 31. So, I would entertain a motion to allow the continuence on ZBA FY2027-2 um for a public hearing on or before December 31st, 2026. Is there such a motion? [clears throat] >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to continue ZBA FY2027-02 for a public hearing on or before December 31st, 2026. Um, going in order of my screen, Mr. Offeld, >> I >> Mr. Botto, >> I, >> Miss Morton, >> I, >> Mrs. Slovener, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The vote is 5-0. The motion to continue ZBA FY2027-02 for a public hearing honor before December 31st, 2026 is approved. Thank you, Attorney Mcclin, for being here and thank you, Mr. McCarthy. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And just for the minutes, I did not catch who moved and seconded on that. >> I did all the who did >> Francisco B. >> Oh, wow. >> So, Mr. Botto moved and who seconded? >> Mr. B seconded and Mr. myself and the other David tied I think the first >> all the David >> all every >> made the motion and Mr. Botto seconded it. So there were three three people involved. You'll just have to deal with it. >> You you can take my name off if it's easier. >> No, just say David. Just say David. Let leave them wondering. Our next order of business tonight um is a continuation of a public hearing on ZBA FY2027-01 408 Northampton Road. This has been continued from August 13th of 2026. Um, the request is to modify under section 10.33 of the zoning bylaws condition number five of an existing special permit which is ZBA FY2023-17 to allow a resident manager instead of professional on-site security guard coverage. Um, the panel for this hearing is um myself, the vice chair, Mr. Clerk, um Mr. Meadows and Miss Martin. And of course, Mr. Meadows is not here tonight. We did commit to the applicant um that unless there is something significant, we would not oppose this in our last hearing. So, Mr. McCarthy, I think um you can welcome back attorney Rei um to the hearing, please. >> Uh Mr. Chair, I did receive word just a few minutes ago that Mr. is running late although he may have just arrived. Um, I will see I will throw it to the panelist and see if he is ready to begin. Pat Ready, welcome back um for ZBA FY2027-148 Northampton Road. Um we are in a public hearing and I'm not sure if there is anything that you wanted to add from our last meeting, but the floor is yours. Thank you very much. Uh sorry that I'm late. Uh but appreciate being here. So for the record, Tom Ready, attorney with Bacon Wilson out of Ammerst here on behalf of the applicant for its modification. Uh as you noted, Mr. Chair, we were here last time. I think had a very good discussion, successful meeting. Uh subsequent to that, we provided just kind of documentation of the updated information that the planning staff was looking for. Mr. McCarthy, I thought, did a tremendous job in his project application report. We've reviewed the conditions uh and we uh agree with the conditions that have been suggested uh to replace that singular condition five. And so I'm happy to answer any questions you have, but uh I think your staff has done a tremendous job as always. >> Thank you, Attorney. Are there any questions for attorney on this application? Does she recognizes Mr. offel. >> Just one little picky question. On condition number two, it says, "No guest shall be allowed access to the interior of the building unless checked in by on-site staff or escorted by a resident." And by on-site staff, I think you mean the business hours staff, not the after hours supervisor. So I is it I just want to make sure it's crystal clear in the condition that that's what we mean. Um, I don't know if there's a rewarding on that. Um, on-site staff during regular business hours or escorted by a resident, something like that. >> I think that's perfect. And I clarify that. >> Yeah, I think that'd be perfect. And I don't think I want to necessarily preclude a resident from letting somebody in during the day, but I I I get your clarification. I think that is the intent, not the after hours supervisor. >> Yep. Thank you, Mr. Offeld. >> That was it. Yep. >> Are there any other questions for attorney Rey? With no further questions, um I would invite any members of the public who wishes to comment on this application tonight to do so by using the raise hand function or if you're on telephone to press star 9 on your telephone. and Mr. McCarthy to see if we do have any members in the public who wish to comment on this. >> I am seeing no hands. With no hands raised, um I will entertain a motion that we move [clears throat] to a public meeting while holding the public hearing open so we can discuss the merits of this application and as well as any findings and conditions. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to keep the public hearing open while moving to a public meeting. Um, going by my screen, Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Miss Morton, >> I. >> Mrs. Sloder, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. We are now in the public meeting to discuss um any findings as well as any conditions on this petition. I I I think um I can start. We we heard last week what was being asked. I do not see anything that raise any red flags. I'm inclined to support this um with little or no discussion. >> Mr. Mr. Slovener, >> I said last week that I am inclined to support this and I have seen nothing to make me change that. So I support the chair or agree with the chair and have no and approve of this. This is all reasonable. >> Miss Morton, >> I also am inclined to support. It seems to be in line with what's done at other similar facilities. >> Thank you, Miss Morton. And the chair recognizes Mr. Offeld. Uh yeah, I'm also inclined to support and I just want to commend the town staff for a very thorough analysis on this. It was very very clearly and logically organized. >> Thank you. >> Well, this is as close as we get to a game show where everyone just says they think Mr. Rei is wonderful and yes, you go on to be Ammerst Ammerst talent. Wonderful. Well, he flew in at the last second with a cape, so [laughter] I have to go along with him. >> Steve, as long as this is recorded, we'll send it to my wife so she knows. >> Right. Right. Somebody should think you're fabulous. Yes. >> On the highlight. >> So, we So, thank you all. um we do still have to make findings and in reviewing the project application report if I'm not mistaken I think there was only um one or two and so that makes this relatively easy. Um so under section 10.38 of the zoning bylaw the board shall make specific findings um for all special permits um pursuant to section 10.38 and 10.31 I would recommend that we make a finding that the proposal is suitably located in the neighborhood in which it is proposed and or the total town as deemed appropriate by the special permit granting authority and the proposal is compatible with existing uses and other uses permitted by right in the same district and I would under 10.382 83 and 85 I would make a recommendation that we adopt the finding that the proposal would not constitute a nuisance due to the air and water pollution flood noise dust vibration lights or visually offensive structures or sight features and the proposal would not be a substantial inconvenience or hazard to butters vehicles or pedestrians. The prop the proposal reasonably protects the adjoining premises against detrimental or offensive uses on the site including air and water pollution, flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration lights or visually offensive structures or site features. And under 10.384 um while the facility is already existing, this proposal would ensure adequate and appropriate supervision of the use. And I do think that those are all the applicable um findings for this special permit. So are there any questions or discussions on those findings? I see no hand in the affirmative. So I would um enterain a motion that we adopt the findings as read into the record. Um is there such a motion? So >> moved. It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been second. Is there any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to adopt the findings as read in the record. Again, by my screen, Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Miss Morton, >> I. >> Mr. Slovder, >> I >> and the chair votes I. The findings as read in the record have been adopted. In terms of conditions, we have before us um seven listed conditions. Um as a matter of record, um these will be listed on the town site as well as any approved special permits. So I do not necessarily think we need to go through all of them, but I would like to read for the record that all conditions other than condition number five of the ZBA FY2023-17 remain in effect and we are simply modifying um what's requested before us which was that specific provision in condition number five. Is there any questions or comments on the conditions? >> With no comments on the conditions, I would enter a motion that we adopt the conditions as provided by town staff. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been move. It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. It has been moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to adopt the conditions. Again, Mr. Offeld, >> I. [clears throat] >> Miss Morton, >> I. >> Mrs. Slovder, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The conditions have been approved by unanimous vote. I would now enter a motion that we grant said special permit um for 408 Northampton Road. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to grant the special permit to ZBA FY2027-0148 Northampton Road. The vote occurs on the motion. Mr. Offeld, >> Miss Morton, >> I. >> Mr. Slovder, >> I >> and the chair votes I. The motion has been passed 40. The special permit has been granted for ZBA FY2027-0148 Northampton Road. Attorney Rey, thank you for being here and good luck. >> Thank you very much everyone. Good to see you again. >> You too. I would entertain a motion that we close the public meeting as well as the public hearing on ZBA FY2027-01 408 Northampton Road. Is there such a motion? So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Any discussion? >> With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to close the public hearing and the public meeting on ZBA FY2027-01 408 Northampton Road. The vote on the motion. Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Miss Morton >> I. >> Mrs. Sloder >> I. >> And the chair votes I. ZBA FY2027-0148 Northampton Road. The public meeting and public hearing is officially closed. Our next agenda item tonight is ZBA FY2027-0334 Berkshire Terrace request for a special permit to modify and reduce front yard setback from 20 ft to 12.1 ft to enlarge a pre-existing non-conforming structure and increase building and lot coverage and construction approximately 160 ft porch under table 3 footnote A and sections 9.22 22 and 10.38 of the zoning bylaw. Um, tonight's panel will feature myself, Mr. Offeld, Mr. Botto, Miss Martin, and Mr. Sler. Um, there was a site visit, and while I pull up my documentation for this application, um, does anyone who attended the site visit care to recap the site visit for the record? >> Mr. Offeld, >> I'd be happy to do that. So we we um I I believe all uh all but Mr. Bto were there along with town staff, Mr. McCarthy and the uh applicant. We saw the um location of the proposed uh porch. Uh we assessed its um size and position relative to um the property lines, relative to the road, relative to the other properties uh in that neighborhood. Um, I would make my own observation that it's a neighborhood of very small lots about a quarter of an acre typically. So that if you carve out the um, uh, setbacks on those lots, you're t you tend to be left with very little space uh, when you start off with just a quarter of an acre. Um, so that's the kind of neighborhood it is. And there were many we we we have a document in the packet about the other non-conforming properties and we saw those um visually ourselves. Thank you Mr. Offeld. [clears throat] Um Miss Morton, Mrs. Slover, anything you want to add? I think that sums it up for us as well. Um thank you. So for the record, the applicant submission includes the applicant packet, the application form file of the town clerk as of August 17, 2026. The cover letter dated June 19th, 2026. The project narrative dated August 6, 2026. A management plan, a site plan by Harold Lat and Associates dated July 21st, 2026. Construction plans by BRJ Builders dated June 19th, 2026. existing conditions and proposed rendering comparison date August 8th, 2026. The neighborhood existing setback comparison and of course our project application report as submitted by the staff. Um, by way of background, the current owner purchased the property, a corner lot at the intersection of Berkshire Terrace and Fairview Way, which was previously a rental property with a history of complaints in June 2022 and lot and and lives full-time on the property. The property, as are many in the neighborhood, is pre-existing non-conforming as to dimensional requirements in multiple different ways. As you heard from Mr. Offeld and as we saw from the site visit, the owner occupant requests permission to construct a 10x6 screen porch on the Berkshire terrace facing side of the house, which would be within the front yard setback. Um, Mr. McCarthy, um, could you please invite the applicant and or the representatives into the meeting, please? Yes, I will do so. And Mr. Chair, let me know if there are any documents you'd like me to screen share at any point. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, >> Mr. Cursen. Good evening. Welcome. >> Thank you. >> I'm good to see you again. >> Thank you. Please introduce yourself and address for the record and this is your opportunity. I know we have all the paperwork but this is your opportunity in the public hearing to tell the ZBA what it is that you're asking for. >> Thank you. My name is Rebecca Kerzen. I live at 34 Bergkshire Terrace in Ammerst. As you said, I bought the property four years ago. I have done consistent improvements on the property based on the fact that it was in very poor condition when I bought it bas because it was uh a college rental as you mentioned. Uh my intention for the property is to age in place. So a singlestory um simple property such as this is what I wanted. And I have made it energy efficient and to some extent energy independent with solar panels and all electric. My uh intent with this screen porch is to uh fix an odd thing about the property, which is a front an original front door that is way around the corner from the garage and the driveway with not even a walkway leading to that front that original front door. So, putting a screen porch on it will add functionality to the property as well as um allow that door to be an eress out to the screen porch. I've tried to design it in a very simple, modest way that is consistent with the neighborhood. Uh, and neighbors have been universally supportive and appreciative of the renovations I've done and the improvements to the property. I'm happy to answer any other questions. >> Thank you, Miss Kon. Are there any members of the public who have any questions uh for Miss Kruzan? [clears throat] And seeing no hands, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Um, with no questions for the applicant at this time, um, I would invite any member members of the public who wishes to comment on this application to do so. You may do so by using the raise hand function on Zoom or if you're on the telephone, you can do so by pressing star 9. I'm seeing no hands. >> I do not see any either. So, with no public comments and no questions from the board, um, Mr. Karzam, before we move to a public meeting, is there anything else you'd like to add? >> Uh, not at this time. Thank you. >> Thank you so very much. Um, I would entertain a motion that we move to a public meeting while keeping the public hearing open so we can discuss the merits of this application as well as make findings and conditions. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Any discussion? [clears throat and cough] With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to move to a public meeting while keeping the public hearing open. Um the vote occurs on the motion. Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Mr. Botto >> I. >> Miss Morton >> I. >> Mr. Slovder >> I >> and the chair votes I. We are now in the public meeting for this special permit application. I I think from the if I may start from the lack of questions and from the site visit I think we all fully appreciate and understand what the ask is. Um it's a very relatively one of the rare times when something comes before us that is very straightforward and yeah [laughter] and something that we have no issues with. I mean the standard that we're asked to apply is whether this addition would be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming structure already is. The answer is simply no. I think it conforms with exactly what's there. It adds value um to the neighborhood. Um, and as we heard from Miss Kzan, now is now owner occupied. So I imagine the neighbors welcome that as well. Um, and so I have every intention of supporting this. The chair recognizes Mr. Slovador. >> This is exactly the kind of property and application that we should be supporting. This is an intelligent and appropriate modification of the property. [clears throat] It is completely consistent with the neighborhood. Uh I see not only nothing wrong with this. I see everything right with it and I have every intention of supporting it. I commend the applicant on what she's doing and how she is approaching this. So she absolutely has my support. >> Thank you, Mrs. Slovador. Did she recognize Miss Morton? >> I would like to say I agree with Mr. Slovador. It seemed like um very much in line with with what is um already in that um area and would definitely add to the beautifification of the street. Thank you, Miss Morton. Mr. Offeld, >> um so I'm I'm in agreement with my my colleagues on this. I don't I think I think it's a reasonable um expansion of the of the building and the um increase of the uh of the uh non-conforming element is negligible, trivial. So, I'm inclined to support. I I have a few little details as usual which we I guess we can get into when we discuss the findings and the conditions perhaps if we want to hold off on those. I guess the overview is that this that the special permit goes with the building. So if at some future time there's a different owner of this property, the special permit still applies. And this this addition is still permitted under our under this permit that we're would would perhaps approve tonight, presumably approved tonight. So, I want to make sure that that we've got all of our ducks in a row anticipating any future situation. >> I think once we've classified as non-conforming, it does stay that way. So, I think the fact that it is non-conforming in it in its existence and we're now adding something else non-conforming um I think that status remains with the property. So, yes, I think it would pass to a new owner without issue and >> yeah, >> so yes, that is a that is a very valid concern, but I think that is my understanding of the non-conforming use. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I just have a few suggestions and we can get to them in the commissions um discussion, but I I certainly support this. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Botto. >> I also support the petition. >> Thank you very much. So, to that end, um I would entertain a motion that um actually rather um not a motion at this time, I'm sorry. Um go through the findings as mentioned by Mr. Afeld and then we can discuss um conditions. Um so table three dimensional regulations pursuant to table three the required friend set back. >> Mr. Chair, Mr. >> I'm sorry Mr. >> Mr. Could Mr. McCarthy put up on share his screen and show these things so we can look at them. It makes it easier to follow along. >> It does. So Mr. McCarthy, can you display the project application report for this property, please? Yes, just a moment. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Off. Mr. Slovter. >> Yes. The other David. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> I am having a bit of a technical issue, Mr. Chair, but if you want to continue along, I will keep working on that and get it up when I'm able. >> Thank you. Um so pursuing to table three the dimension regulations I recommend we adopt the finding that the neighborhood contains other single family dwellings that contain setbacks less than what is required. The addition of the front porch at 12.4 ft rather than 20 ft is similar to the setbacks of at least nine other structures in the neighborhood. And based on the submitted map, at least two structures have sideyard set back at zero feet and three structures with front yard set back at 14 feet, 11 feet, and 11 feet. The proposal to construct a small porch at 12.4 ft does not increase occupancy or intensity of use and is of a design and size that is compatible with the size and scale of other homes in the neighborhood. Under article 9, the non-conforming structure, the board finds that the porch addition and correspondent increase in building and lots coverage are minimal under articles 10. Um, sections 10.38 and 10.31 recommend a finding that the board finds that the porch addition is suitably located in the neighborhood and the proposed setback of 12.4 4 ft is similar to other building setbacks in the neighborhood. Under 10.382,83,85 and 87 recommend we find that the porch addition is associated with a single family dwelling and is a normal and expected feature within the neighborhood and therefore meets this provision. Under 10.393, I recommend we make a finding that any new exterior lighting will be downcast and shielded to eliminate light trespass in the neighborhood. Under 10.395 recommend we make a finding that the addition is attached to a single family dwelling, does not increase occupancy or intensity of use, and is of a design and size that is compatible with the size and scale of other homes in the neighborhood. And under 10.398, recommend we make a finding that the proposal is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of of this bylaw and the goals of the master plan. To that end, um I know Mr. Offeld, did you have something in terms of um findings or was this more on the condition side? >> It's more on the condition side. >> Thank you. Um Mr. McCarthy, I see your hand. >> I just wanted to apologize. I don't believe I'm going to be able to resolve this technical issue um tonight, but I have enabled every anybody else to share uh if they are so able, but I apologize for the inconvenience. If anyone wants to share their screen, that's fine. I'm on unfortunately I'm on two devices. My Zoom is on the iPad and I'm reading from a larger screen. Mr. I know you asked, but um >> I think I can share. >> Okay, >> I'm going to try this. >> Uh okay, project application. Are you seeing it now? >> We are. Thank you. >> Okay, good. >> Okay. >> Um I guess if I I have to advance it though or >> So we're down at the bottom. Yes, you do. >> I'm now in charge. >> You took this on. This will be the last time you volunteer for anything. I know. >> So, to that end, um, Mr. Slover, do you have any questions about our findings or was this a matter of you like to see what we do? >> M me? No, I just wanted I just find it easier to follow along with if I'm looking at it. No, I I'm fine with this entire thing. No problem at all. >> Right. Understood. Thank you. >> Okay. >> So, to that end, I would enter a motion that we adopt the findings as read into the record um for this application. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? Second. >> It has been [clears throat] moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion. Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Mr. Botto. >> I think I see your eye, but you're on mute. Am I? And Miss Morton, >> I. >> Mr. Slovder, >> I. >> And Mr. B, just for the record. >> Yes. Uh, I >> thank you. and the chair votes I. Um the findings as writing to the record are adopted. Next we have to discuss conditions. I believe there was only one condition that was proposed and that is the project shall be built in accordance with the approved plans and the setback shown on the survey. The approved plans include the site plan by Harold L. Eden and Associates Inc. dated July 21st of 2026 and the construction [clears throat] plan by BRJ Builders dated June 19th, 2026. Are there any discussions on the condition? Did she recognize as Mr. Offeld? >> Yeah. So again, anticipating and I and I I wish the applicant a long and happy life in this property, but if at some point a new owner comes along, we want these conditions to be written in such a way that they apply to that new person. Um, and just to say I understand that because the plans say screen porch, this could not be converted to to a enclosed bedroom, an enclosed room uh in the future. That would require a new special permit because it doesn't follow the plan. The one the one thing I think we might add is uh specifics on the exterior lighting because this the construction plans are a little ambiguous on that. And I know there was an email that came out with an indication of what um specific lighting the applicant intends to use and that's great. It's a great choice. But all I'm I I would suggest simply that we have a proposed condition which is that uh or a condition rather number two which is that all exterior lighting will be downcast and you know it's kind of a standard language we use on these things. So it's it's crystal clear that that applies to all future use of this property. >> I will support that Mr. Ael. That makes sense to your point. Yes, this is standard language that we use >> and I'm sure Mr. McCarthy can dig up that sentence which we've used on many other >> condition sets. Um, >> yes, >> not necessarily right now, but I'd be happy to approve it as you know with the understanding that that would be added. >> And did you did your concerns about transfer to new owner were those concerns addressed? Are you comfortable with your questions or your thought process? >> That was it really. Okay. >> Yep. >> All right. Are there any other discussion on the conditions? I see no further um affirmative responses. So um the condition as proposed is the written condition um that is there and condition number two that the lights be downcast or um is that correct Mr. Offeld? >> Yeah that light light has to be downcast and dark sky compliant. There's some standard language we use on that. >> Thank you. And Miss Mr. McCarthy Mr. author is correct. That language is in probably nine out of 10 special permits that were granted. So, um you can just grab that language from any one of those. Ma'am, >> yes. Thank you. >> Thank you. So, to that end, I will enter a motion that we approve the conditions condition one and two um for this application. Is there such a motion? >> So, moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. It has been moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion. Mr. Offeld, >> I. >> Mr. Botto, >> I. >> Miss Morton, >> I. >> Mrs. Slovder, >> I. >> And the [clears throat] chair votes I. The conditions um condition as condition one and condition two has been approved. I will now entertain a motion that we grant said special permit for this application. Um ZBA FY2027-0334 Berkshire Terrace. Um is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> So seconded. >> It has been moved [clears throat] and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote the vote occurs on the motion to grant the special permit for ZBA FY2027-03 34 Bergie Terrace. The vote. Mr. Offeld. >> Hi. >> Mr. Botto. >> Yes. >> Miss Morton. >> Hi. >> Mrs. Slovder. >> I vote long life, good health, and enjoyment of your screened in porch. Yes. >> And the chair votes I. Congratulations, Miss Kerzan. Um, your special permit for ZBA FY2027-03 at your property 34 Bergkshire Terrace is approved >> and I just want to say thank you all very much and I do hope to live long and prosper. You know [laughter] that Miss Kzan, thank you so much for being here. >> Thank you so much. Have a good evening. >> You too. Thank you. >> Byebye. I would entertain a motion that we close the public meeting and the public hearing on ZBA FY2027-03 34 Berkshire Terrace. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on the motion to close the public meeting and the public hearing on ZBA FY2027-03. Um, the vote. Mr. Offeld, >> I. >> Mr. Botto, >> I, >> Mrs. Morton, [clears throat] >> I. >> Mrs. Slovener, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The public meeting and the public hearing on ZBA FY2027-03 is officially closed. Our next order of business tonight um is KP Law updates on amendments to chapter 4A which governs a lot of what we do. Um Mr. McCarthy, is there someone here from KP Law or how what was the intention behind this? >> So we do not have somebody with KP Law here tonight. Uh this is something that staff received recently um in regards to these changes and um we ourselves are still trying to uh take in the implications of exactly what this will mean and um looking forward to some further guidance on how this will play out. But we wanted to just bring it to the board's attention. Um and the part that we anticipate being the most impactful to the board which may end up being significantly impactful and that may more many more variance requests may be coming in uh is chapter 48 section 10 and I again apologize I'm not able to screen share tonight but you'll see that on the bottom of the second page easing of variance standards. Um so historically hardship variances could be granted only if the applicant was able to demonstrate significant hardship due to soil shape or topography. Um and that was quite a a high bar to meet. Um the new standard is now whether strict enforcement of the ordinance or bylaw will result in practical difficulty. Um so we do anticipate that with this lower standard for variances to be granted, the ZBA may see an increase in um variance requests coming in and um we will continue to analyze the implications of this and look forward to further legal guidance um and see what is happening in other municipalities. But um definitely something to keep aware of on the horizon. Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. Um, with that, um, I I know that there are not many public here, but if there's any members of the public who wishes to comment on anything not before the ZBA tonight, this is an opportunity to do so. Um, you may use the raise hand function of Zoom or if you're on the telephone, um, the star 9 function. McCarthy, imagine we're the only ones still here. >> Uh, I I don't see any raised hands now at all. >> Okay. So with no raise hand functions, I think we have um gone through our agenda items for tonight. Are there any matters not anticipated within the last in advance of this meeting within the last 48 hours that anyone wants to bring up? I do not see any hands in the affirmative. So to that end, happily before 7:00, I would entertain a motion that we adjourn tonight's meeting. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. The matter is not debatable. The vote occurs on the motion. Um, Mr. Offel, >> I. >> Mr. Bto, >> I. Miss Morton. >> I >> Mrs. Slover. >> Uh [laughter] oh jeez. All right. Okay. I >> at 6:54 p.m. Thank you all for your service. This meeting is adjourned. Have a good night everyone. >> Good night. >> Good night. Good night everyone. Night. Bye.