Present: Frank Polito, Chairman; Sandy Carter; Kate Rochford; Hank Riehl

Alternates: Samuel Zannini; Maggie Osborn

Blake & Donna Baker request for Special Exception as specified in the Zoning Ordinance Article VII, Section 700:2 to allow conversion from Seasonal to year-round/primary use for rebuild of dwelling on existing footprint and Variances from Article IV, Section 400:5 and 410:8 of the Ordinance to rebuild the dwelling 14.9’ & 9.5’ to sideline as opposed to the required 15’ and 50’ from wetland (Big Island Pond) as opposed to the required 100’ on property located at 16 Chase Island Road, Map 22, Lot 34, RR3 Zone.

Abutters list was read with the following present: Blake Baker; Everett and Bernice Smith; Big Island Pond Corp.

Mrs. Baker presented the Board with pictures of the existing camp. They explained that they wanted to reconstruct the dwelling using the old footprint, but expanding and making the dwelling 3 stories. The basement would be partially finished. Mr. Polito asked what the total square footage is proposed to be. Mrs. Baker said it was a 24’ x 30’ house and was approximately 2000 square feet. Mrs. Baker gave the Board a sketch of the proposed dwelling. The basement contained a cistern for fire protection and utilities and she said the proposal was for the ½ the basement to be finished with a walk out to the lake side. None of the Board members expressed a serious problem with the size of the house as this was a ½ acre parcel of land.

Mr. Polito did have a problem with locating the proposed dwelling in the existing location, where it did not meet the sideline setbacks. The Board agreed and asked why the applicants could not move the dwelling over 5 or 6 feet. Mrs. Baker said it was due to the topography of the lot. Mrs. Baker said there was a hill on the side and they did not want to have to clear a lot of trees and they were afraid there would be too much ledge. Mr. Baker said they would not be able to walk to the back of the house without removing trees. Mrs. Baker said there was also a big rock there. The Bakers said they have a three bedroom approved septic from the State. Mr. Polito said it looked like there was at least 10 feet of space to the first tree.

Ms. Rochford asked what the Conservation Commission had to say about the proposal. Mr. Dziechowski said the Conservation Commission was not asked for input on this proposal by the applicants but would want the runoff addressed.

Mr. Carter said that if they are putting in a basement there would probably have to be a frost wall which requires the foundation go down so many feet. The current house is on a slab, so even in the current location, there may be ledge, or rock that requires additional work.

The Bakers did have concerns about the septic system and whether it could be moved to accommodate the proposed dwelling it had to be moved over a few feet. Mr. Carter asked if test pits were done and Mr. Baker said there were.

Mr. Polito also had concerns about the deck and said that any approval would be conditional upon receiving the approval from the State for the deck. The Board discussed the height of the proposal, which is approximately one story higher than the current structure.

Mr. Smith said they were in favor of the proposal and that they had been through the same process a few years ago to rebuild their home. He believed the Bakers should be entitled to the same thing.

The Board agreed that a site walk needed to be conducted and find out for Tim Lavelle if there are any issues with the septic system if the dwelling were to move over a few feet. The Conservation Commission will also coordinate to be included.

Dube-Plus Construction for James & Jean Foley request for Variance from Article IV, Section 410:8 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of a 24’x32’ Accessory Living Unit within the wetland buffer as opposed to the 100’ setback required on property located at 5 Chase Island Road, Map 22, Lot 12, RR3 Zone.

Ms. Rochford recused herself

Abutters list was read with the following present: James and Jean Foley; Hemlock Heights Impr., Ms. Rochford; letter from John Pomer

Mr. Foley explained that they had made a mistake in identifying a small swale that is wetlands. It is part of the lake that swirls into a portion of his land. He said that it is a hayfield 6 months out of the year and the other 6 months it is marsh. He explained that it evolved over time with the damming up of the lake. Mr. Polito asked how far the dwelling is to the wetland. Mr. Foley said it is approximately 87.3 feet. Mr. Foley explained that the existing berm protects the wetland and was built when the house was built.

Mr. Dziechowski said this was a high value wetland but he thought it was well protected, especially with the garage becoming a front loading garage. As long as existing runoff containment was continued to the new addition and the current berm was maintained, the Conservation Commission had no objections to this proposal.

The Board reviewed the criteria:

Mr. Polito read the letter from Mr. Pomer, who was in favor of allowing the addition.

Minutes transcribed from tape. Respectfully submitted

Rebecca Russo