030122 email re 33 Pleasant Street1
Greene, Karen
From:Greene, Karen
Sent:Tuesday, March 1, 2022 7:34 PM
To:'Trevor Meyer'
Cc:Sherman, Lisa; jesse@pitchpinebuilding.com; Sears, Tim
Subject:RE: 33 Pleasant Street
Hi Trevor/Jesse
I am trying to get the item on the YHC’s agenda for 3/10. I think that what Jesse has put together in his email below
should be helpful to the Commission. I understand that what is being proposed for an end product has not changed, but
also understand that some updated plans are required by the Building Department. Ideally, these would be in hand
before the Commission meets. I will follow up with you both as soon as the meeting date is confirmed. Hopefully
tomorrow.
Best regards,
Karen
Karen M. Greene, Director of Community Development
Town of Yarmouth
kgreene@yarmouth.ma.us
508‐398‐2231 x1278
From: Trevor Meyer [mailto:tmeyer@meyerandsons.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:14 PM
To: Greene, Karen <KGreene@yarmouth.ma.us>
Cc: Sherman, Lisa <LSherman@yarmouth.ma.us>; jesse@pitchpinebuilding.com
Subject: Re: 33 Pleasant Street
Karen,
Just touching base to see if you had returned to the office and if you were able to touch base with the chairman
of historic, has a date been set to have a discussion about our project?
Thank you,
Trevor Meyer, Principal
Meyer and Sons Builders, Inc.
852 Main St, West Dennis, MA 02670
cell: (508) 776.6027
RE Sales # 9575525
CSL #101957
HIC #187252
www.meyerandsons.com
Leave us a 5 star review here!
Attention!: This email originates outside of the organization. Do not open attachments or click links unless
you are sure this email is from a known sender and you know the content is safe. Call the sender to verify if
unsure. Otherwise delete this email.
2
"your project is our reputation"
Email transmissions are not encrypted and therefore are not secure. The information in this document may
contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended solely for the use of the individual/entity
named above. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us at the above telephone number and delete this electronic
message.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 11:08 AM Jesse Connell <jesse@pitchpinebuilding.co> wrote:
Hi Karen,
Thanks for the follow up email this morning. I appreciate your attention to this matter. I am hopeful that we
can all come to a quick resolution.
I just wanted to reiterate what Trevor wrote in his email since it was I who worked with Joseph Dick on these
plans for nearly three years. The plans that are on file and were previously approved show all the
planned/proposed final details in regards to siding, trim, windows, and doors. We are NOT changing any of
those details. It has always been my goal to bring this historic home back to life and complete a renovation that
flows seamlessly into the historic structure on the left that is not being disturbed in this project. To give a little
context, we bought this house in 2016 and have completed significant improvements to the existing left
structure while maintaining historical significance. We replaced the roof shingles, repointed the three
chimney’s, replaced all the siding with new Boral true bevel siding to match the previous look and reveal,
replaced 28 windows with new Marvin replacement windows that matched the look and style of the previous
windows, while re-wiring the whole house to get rid of the knob and tube wiring. While designing this current
renovation, we planned on using the same siding as we previously used, the same windows as we previously
installed, and matching the details of the existing casing and cornice work. The current plans accurately show
what we are planning to do. In fact, we have saved and plan to reuse the old porch columns and
railings/balusters that were previously buried behind Anderson casement windows and T-111 plywood siding
from the 1990’s. What we are building is more accurately in line with what was originally built than what we
had a just few months ago.
The only thing that has changed is how the middle section of the house will be framed and supported. This
change means that we added a total of 5% more in structural demo than we originally planned (25% to 30%).
The approved plans called for working with the existing front/rear wall framing and first floor joists but that
was deemed unworkable given the lack of any foundation whatsoever and framing spacing that could not
support a second floor as planned. We now have a crawl space foundation where there was none and we are
adding new floor framing to the first floor of the middle section as well as a new front and rear wall in that
middle section. If we kept what was there, we would have had to sister so many new framing members to the
existing that they existing would be unrecognizable. During the construction process so far, we have followed
all the building codes and PASSED all our on-site inspections for the footing, foundation, water proofing and
backfill by the yarmouth building inspector. Again, the yarmouth historic department nor the cape cod historic
commission need to worry that any historic elements will be lost in this build. We are planning to build what
was approved. The relief we are seeking has nothing to do with the final look of the home. We are seeking to
move forward with our original plan with an update to the STRUCTURAL details involved in the build. Also,
the footprint has not changed. The new crawlspace foundation is exactly where we have it drawn on the current
plans and survey. It is reasonable for us to revise the structural framing plan to show this change in work and
that is what we plan on doing and resubmitting. This revision will be added to the current plans on file. This
revision is structural only. It will show the new crawl space foundation where there previously was none and
show two new framed walls and a new floor system on the first floor. This framing will match what was
already approved for the right side of the project.
3
In regards to protecting the existing structure….what was demo’d doesn’t affect the previously approved plan.
That portion of the house gets tied in the same way as it did before. We have been painstakingly repainting and
updating that portion of the house over the last five years and it will be tied in same as before. However, the
longer this drags out, the longer my home is exposed to the elements and potential for animals crawling under
the existing home or worse inviting someone to break in to an unoccupied home.
In closing, we regret taking down the two first floor walls in the middle section of the home, however it was
deemed a safety concern as it was not supported at all like we thought. We cannot go back and put it back but
what is there now gives this home an opportunity to last significantly longer than it would have. I grew up on
the bass river and I have seen home after home get torn down and completely rebuilt (especially on the water).
I am trying to maintain the historical significance of this home and stay true to its roots. I do not feel what was
removed affects the overall goal of the project. I have support from all my neighbors and they are eager and
excited for this to be done. Five years ago, they had vacant and overgrown home in disrepair. I bought it with
intention of giving it new life and to provide a haven for my for kids to enjoy their childhood on the Cape. I
would appreciate a speedy resolution to this matter so that we can continue with the project. If anyone wants to
talk about this over the phone, please call me at 240-417-4943.
Thanks
Jesse, Kristen, Owen, Zoë, Violet, and Benji Connell
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:00 AM Trevor Meyer <tmeyer@meyerandsons.com> wrote:
Karen,
I think there is misunderstanding when it comes what the look of what this center section is to become when it
is re-constructed.
It is to look exactly as its represented in the plans dated that are previously approved. The details on the plans
are representative of the finished product. The existing porch columns are going to be maintained, and the
railing are to be maintained.
The plans that you have on file, are the only plan set that needs to be reviewed, they show the details of the
porch, they show the columns, they show the railings, they show the trim details, they show the window
details. I don't believe any new plans will show a better representation of our goal to mimic all the existing
details of the previous structure, than what you have already. New trim on the porch, new windows, decking,
and sidewall for the middle section were always part of the original plan to complete.
To reiterate, the only changes being made from was originally approved is: new foundation to support this
section, new framing of a floor system, and 2 new walls on the first floor middle section. We are only talking
about framing and a foundation for the middle section that is in question.
We can draft a letter per your request, but would like to know when this matter can be scheduled for a hearing
seeing that the plan set is already on file.
You can call me if we need to clear up any of this confusion, we are ready at a moments notice, and the board
convenience to appear and move this project forward.
Thank you,