Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-8-9ZBA Minutes for August 9, 2018, adopted Sep. 6 pNTUC�{ \\ N -A { J v ,s` Fr�9 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS T o vy R : N 2 Fairgrounds Road y Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 _ , _ QN jQ 34 9ApRAI www.nantucket-ma.gov Commissioners: Ed Toole (Chair), Lisa Botticelli (Vice chair), Susan McCarthy (Clerk), Michael J. O'Mara, Kerim Koseatac Alternates: Mark Poor Geoff Thayer Jim Mondani -- MINUTES -- Thursday, August 9, 2018 Public Safety Facility, 4 Fairgrounds Road, Community Room —1:00 p.m. Called to order at 1:07 p.m. and Announcements made. Staff in attendance: Eleanor Antonietti, Zoning Administrator; T. Norton, Town Minutes Taker Attending Members: Toole, Botticelli, McCarthy, O'Mara, Koseatac, Poor, Thayer Absent: Mondani Late Arrivals: None Early Departures: Mark Poor, 2:48 p.m. A enda ado ted bu unanimous consent APPROVALOF 1. July 12, 2017: Correct error on the header date. Motion to Approve as amended. (made by: Koseatac) (seconded by: BotticeR Carried unanimously 11. OLD BUSINESS 1. 051-03 Rugged Scott, LLC Rugged Scott a/k/a Beach Plum 40B Hanley The Applicant seeks a determination that a modification to the Comprehensive Permit, as amended, and the plans approved therewith, may be considered insubstantial pursuant to 760 CMR 56.05 (11)(a)(b), and as such, may be authorized by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Specifically, Applicant requests approval of a minor modification of the Comprehensive Permit and plans to re -divide 12 Wood Lily Road (currently shown as Map 67 Parcel 815 and as Lot 16 upon Plan No. 2006-19) into Lots 16 and Lot 17A. Applicant further seeks the endorsement by the Board of a recordable plan showing such re -division. The re -division adjusts existing lot lines and does not create any new building lots. It will enable the conveyance by deed of proposed Lot 17A to the owner of 10 Thistle Way (currently shown as Map 67, Parcel 816 and Lot 17 upon Plan No. 2006-19), and will eliminate the need for an easement to use the garage being moved onto proposed Lot 17A. Voting Toole, Botticelli, McCarthy, O'Mara, Koseatac Alternates Poor, Thayer Recused None Documentation File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Representing Marianne Hanley, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP Public None Discussion (1:09) Hanley — This is to re -divide Lot 16 to create Lot 17A, a small lot with a garage to be incorporated into Lot 17 and by doing so remove an easement on Lot 16. Lot 17A has to be conveyed to the owner of Lot 17. Toole — We have to rule whether this is substantial or insubstantial change. Discussion about doing a new plan that makes 17A and 17 all one lot so that the change is recorded. Antonietti — If it is declared an insubstantial change, she will issue a memo with a letter attached that goes into a file with the Town Clerk. Koseatac — Asked if there is a layout of the garage; wants to ensure there is no second story. Poor — Suggested approved Historic District Commission (HDC) plans be attached to the decision. Toole — If it's deemed insubstantial, it is granted as the applicant asks; he doesn't think the ZBA can require attachment of the HDC plans in that case. If we want any conditions or further discussion, we need to rule it substantial. McCarthy — The garage physically exists across the street. This is a simple move off -move on. The garage is already approved. Hanley —The building permit can't be issued until the siting for the garage is finalized. Botticel i — Doesn't think it needs to be ruled substantial. We can attach items to the memo. The garage has been approved in this location; it's just conveying the property. Thayer — He would like to ensure the decision has back up information. Motion Motion to Rule this as insubstantial with the understanding that the memo will outline as discussed. (made by: McCarthy) (seconded by: Botticelli) Vote Carried 5-0 Page 1 of 5 2. 19-18 needed, than the Locus, a: on Plan zoned R, Voting Alternates Recused Representing Public Discussion (t: Motion Vote 3. 23-18 REQUI Applican validate 1 undersize conform Assessor at the N� Voting Alternates Discussion Motion Vote 1. 27-18 Applican 18.B. Sp required Assessor' Title No. Voting Alternates Recused Documentati( Representing ZBA Minutes for August 9, 2018, adopted Sep. 6 ACK Crazy, LLC 9 West Chester Street Juraj Bencat is requesting Special Permit relief pursuant to Zoning By-law Sections 139-30.A and 139-33.A in order to alter the pre-existing rming structure by demolishing the rear wing of the dwelling unit, renovating and/or replacing the existing foundation as ad r constructing the wing in substantially the same footprint. The structure will be no closer to the westerly side yard lot line °xisting structure as a result of the proposed alterations, although there will be a vertical expansion within the setback. The and rsized lot, is situated at 9 West Chester Street, is shown on Nantucket Tax Assessor's Map 42.4.3 as Parcel 12, and as Lot 1 ook 17, Page 48 and Lot 4 on Plan Book 20, Page 1. Evidence of owner's title is recorded in Book 1618, Page 205. The site is ;ide tial Old Historic (ROH). Toole, Botticelli, McCarthy, Thayer, Poor None O'Mara, Koseatac n File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Juraj Bencat, JB Studio Arthur Reade, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP, Allan Breed 7 Bencat — Submitted a letter from the engineer about construction protocol- The section closest to the property line is going from 18 feet to 22 feet. Poor — The windows in that elevation need to be fire proof with shutters and the sheathing needs to be fireproof due to proximity to the property line; doing that work requires access from the abutters property. Toole — Read letter from the engineer explaining an interior foundation wall will support the 2nd -floor addition without any exterior foundation work. Reade — The work is within inches of the lot line; his client is not opposed to coming onto the property to do work. The plan proposes all foundation work from the inside. He just got the new plan yesterday and hasn't had a chance to have it reviewed by their engineer; he wants to ensure the methods will be successful and not adversely impact his client's property; asked for a continuance. Thayer — Asked Mr. Reade if his client is willing to enter into an agreement with the applicant about allowing access to his client's property before the next meeting. Reade — He thinks he can do that before the next meeting. Toole — The September meeting is scheduled for the 131h and three members won't be here. There are no concerns about the methodology of reinforcing the foundation. Discussion about a date to continue this and need for a letter of agreement between the two parties for access to the abutting property for construction work on the addition. Motion to Continue to September 6, 1 p.m. this location. (made by: Thayer) (seconded by. Botticelh) Carried 5-0 Adam Ross and Emma Ross 50 Okorwaw Avenue Beaudette T TO CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 13, 2018 are seeking to vacate and rescind prior relief by Variance granted pursuant to Zoning By-law Section 139-32 in order to lot as a nonconforming lot of record and a residential building lot. At the time the relief was granted, the 44,813 sq. ft. lot was for the LUG -2 zoning district in which it was situated. When the zoning was changed to LUG -1 in 2017, the lot became g in all respects, rendering the need for relief obsolete. The Locus is situated at 50 Okorwaw Avenue, is shown on Tax Ma�toole, 79 as Parcel 63, and as Lot 1 upon Plan No. 2012-82. Evidence of owner's title is recorded in Book 1375, Page 117 on file tucRegistry of Deeds. The site is zoned Limited Use One (LUG -1). Botticelli, McCarthy, O'Mara, Poor tiayer o discussion at this time. lotion to Continue to September 6, 1 p.m. this location. (made by: Botticelh) (seconded by: Poor) irried 5-0 atricia Martone Carrolo and Joseph G. Carrolo 5 Old Farm Rd. Reade are ;eeking Special Permit relief pursuant to Zoning Bylaw Section 139-18.D for a waiver from the provisions of Section 139- fica ly, Applicant proposes to provide one off-street parking space where 1.6, or two spaces per Section 139-18.A(3), are con iection with construction of primary and secondary dwellings. The Locus is situated at 5 Old Farm Road, is shown on Tax qar 55 as Parcel 921, and as Lot 11 upon Land Court Plan 12559-G. Evidence of owner's title is registered on Certificate of i15 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court. The site is zoned Residential I (R-1). oole, Botticelli, McCarthy, O'Mara, Koseatac with associated plans, photos, correspondence, and required documentation iur Reade, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP aie Metz, architect icia & Joseph Carrolo, co-owners Page 2 of 5 ZBA Minutes for August 9, 2018, adopted Sep. 6 Public Jim Grant, G&G Development and Architectural Review Committee Discussion (1:47) Reade — The HDC has approved the project, which involves construction of a main house, pool, and cabana. The clients would like the cabana to be a second dwelling with a single bedroom. The issue is the parking requirement for the second dwelling is 0.6 parking spaces per bedroom. The subdivision Architectural Review Board permitted the cabana. His client is asking to waive the parking. There is additional parking available on the street partially within the property. Metz — There never was any intent to have two parking spaces on this lot; that will never happen. Asking for permission to count the cabana as a second dwelling. P. Carrolo — Explained they have no intention to rent the cabana; one car is perfect for their lifestyle. J. Carrolo — He has read through abutter concerns. Explained why they don't want to redesign the landscaping for tandem parking. They just want the second dwelling for visiting family. Botticel i — The permitted parking is only 7X17 rather than 9X20. Reade — Under Section 139-18.A(6), a single parking space may be undersized. Metz — In the development plan, the curb cut for this lot was designed for a single car; that is the curb cut being used. Grant — Going back to the original subdivision plan, each lot has two parking spaces; since then we have worked with five owners to get two off-road parking spaces. If this property is ever sold, it could become a rental with two residents and parking in the subdivision will be overloaded. They should be required to have two parking spaces. Thayer — On the subdivision plan, it looks like all the parking are single spaces; asked if there was always an intent to have tandem parking. Grant — In that section yes. They can ask for a permit to widen the curb cut and not impact on -street parking. Thayer — He thinks they can get two parking spaces on this lot. They might have to move the house back. Botticelli — She has problems waiving parking where a special permit is requested. Metz — One option is to go back to the HDC for a redesign for two parking spaces. Another option is nothing changes and the studio can't be used for sleeping. McCarthy — She can't see in the Planning Board decision anything about parking. If parking is such an issue, she thinks the Architectural Review Committee should have addressed parking issue when this came to them. Reade — Confirmed there is nothing in the Planning Board decision about parking. Asked them to vote on this. Motion Motion to Grant the relief as requested. (made by: Botticelli) (seconded by: McCarthy) Vote Not Carried 4-1//McCarthy for 2. 28-18 Estate of Pauline Dalton (Owner) and Amy Banse & Joseph Dworetzky (Applicant) 8 Shawkemo Rd. Alger Applicants are seeking Special Permit relief pursuant to Zoning Bylaw Section 139-33.A(4) to remove and reconstruct any or all of the pre-existing nonconforming structures or any portion thereof in excess of the permitted 3% ground cover ratio. Specifically, Applicants propose to demolish all or portions of existing structures to allow for new construction and/or additions with the ability to retain the pre- existing nonconforming ground cover ratio of up to 4.8%. As a result of a zoning change from LUG -1 to LUG -3, the Locus became pre- existing non -conforming as to groundcover. The new construction will be conforming as to all setback requirements. The Locus, a pre- existing nonconforming lot of record as to frontage, is situated at 8 Shawkemo Road, is shown on Tax Assessor's Map 43 as Parcel 90, as Lot 9 upon Land Court Plan 14732-B and as Lot 13 upon Land Court Plan 14732-D. Evidence of owner's title is registered on Certificate of Title No. 18606 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court. The site is zoned Limited Use General 3 (LUG -3). Voting Toole, McCarthy, Koseatac, Thayer, Poor Alternates None Recused Botticelli, O'Mara Documentation File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Representing Sarah Alger, Sarah F. Alger P.C. Joseph Dworetzky, owner Public None Discussion (2:13) Alger — The proposal is to demolish the existing structure and rebuild in a different configuration with no change in ground cover thus maintaining the existing non -conformity. The gazebo and shed don't count for ground cover, but the playhouse does count. The aluminum car port will be removed so she isn't counting it as ground cover. The garage/dwelling will be coming into conformity. Antonietti — The ZBA has granted similar requests before, so there is precedent. Motion Motion to Grant the relief as requested. (made by: Thayer) (seconded by: Poor) Vote Carried 5-0 3. 29-18 Gordon E. W. Gilbertson & Nancy Anne Gilbertson and 34 Dukes Road, LLC 32 and 34 Dukes Rd. J. Brescher Applicants are requesting a finding from the Zoning Board of Appeals that no relief is necessary because 32 and 34 Dukes Road (Locus) have not merged with each other pursuant to Zoning Bylaw Section 139-2. In the alternative, Applicant is requesting Variance relief pursuant to Bylaw Section 139-32 for a waiver from the provisions in Section 139-2 and 139-16 to confirm that the adjacent properties have not merged and remain separately marketable and buildable. The Locus consists of adjacent undersized lots situated at 32 and 34 Dukes Road, as shown on Tax Assessor's Map 56 as Parcels 188 and 187, and as Lots 1 and 2 on Plan File 7-A. Evidence of owners' tide Page 3 of 5 is recon Probate Voting Alternates Recused Representing Public Discussion (2:: Motion Vote 4. 30-18 Applicant amend th first floor Assessor': Evidence 1494, Pag Voting Alternates Recused Representing Public Discussion (2 Motion Vote ZBA Minutes for August 9, 2018, adopted Sep. 6 1 in Book 1581, Page 297; Book 1582, Page 36; Book 1588, Page 123 on file at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds and Nantucket ock t No. NA16P0080EA. The site is zoned Residential Twenty (R-20). Botticelli, McCarthy(acting chair), O'Mara, Koseatac, Thayer None Toole, Poor z File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Jessie Brescher, Glidden & Glidden Paul Donarum, 89 Vestal Street Sarah Alger, Sarah F. Alger P.C., buyer's attorney t) Breschet — There has been no merging of the lots. Explained where the confusion occurred. Thayer — Asked if Ms Brescher would write the letter of non-contiguous ownership. Brescher — Technically, yes. Practically it is murky. Under R-20, the lots are undersized but not grossly so. The lots are currently for sale and marketed as separate buildable lots. All title issues have been resolved in Massachusetts and Florida. The lots are issued separate tax bills and are taxed as separate and buildable. The zoning changed sometime in the mid to late 1970s and the application for subdivision into two lots predates that zoning change. Donarum — Wants to know how this impacts his property and the lots next to him. Brescher — Not at all; this is separate from the Vestal Street lots. Alger — The four lots along Vestal Street (79, 81, 83, 85) will be going to three lots; that change is not going to a public hearing. Koseatac — He wants to see a letter of non -contiguity before ruling on this Thayer — If there is documentation from Florida confirming separate lots, it should be provided. Brescher — At the Registry of Deeds there is a deed from the estate attorney to the current owners detailing the court agreement in regard to ownership. Now there is a confirmatory deed that deeds the property from the estate to the LLC; however, the intervening deed is still there. Discussion about why they have to be here if there is a confirmatory deed. McCarthy — If we issue a finding, we need to be very detailed in it so that it isn't considered precedent. O'Mara — Suggested continuing this to September to get a decision from Town CounseL There's a lot going on. McCarthy — Asked for an affidavit from the owner explaining the chain of events. Motion to Continue to September 6, 1 p.m. this location. (made by: Botticelh) (seconded by: O'Mara) Carried 5-0 adaket Wheelhouse, LLC 13 Massachusetts Ave. Cohen was previously granted Special Permit relief pursuant to Zoning By-law Section 139-33.A to extend and alter the pre-existing ming dwelling and cottage/garage on the locus, as provided in ZBA File Nos. 15-16 and 49-17. Applicant is requesting relief to existing Special Permit to allow the cottage to be raised roughly one (1) foot in elevation to provide for the foundation and o cc mply with new flood plain and building code requirements. The Locus is situated at 13 Massachusetts Avenue, is shown on Mali 60 as Parcel 75, and as Lots 12-15, Block 29 upon Land Court Plan 2408-Y and unregistered land lying north of said Lots. & owner's title is registered on Certificate of Title No. 25696 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court and in Book 39 on file at the Registry of Deeds. The site is zoned Village Residential (VR). Toole, Botticelli, McCarthy, O'Mara, Koseatac one le with associated plans, photos and required documentation even Cohen, Cohen & Cohen Law P.C. The original permits have expired and now they have to comply with flood code issues. Neither structure needs ief but the last decision says they must meet height codes. The cottage needs to be raised one foot — The last time this property was before this Board, she remembers asking if it complied with the 1 -foot flood was told yes. The house was raised but at that time the garage was a garage; now the garage is a house; that change requires oor be one foot above the flood level. — Asked what the flood zone is, what the minimum height could be. t says the base flood elevation is 10.4 with the structure being one foot above that The information is on the original plans; he can have that information confirmed by an engineer and attached- - ttached— It would be helpful to have an engineer plan listing the base flood elevation and confirming the cottage first ttion. o Approve with an engineer site plan certifying the base flood elevation and the garage first -floor to be no more than .2 feet above the minimum 1st -floor elevation. (made by: Botticellr) (seconded by: Page 4 of 5 ZBA Minutes for August 9, 2018, adopted Sep. 6 OTHER 1. None ADJOURNMENTV. Motion to Adjourn at 2:58 p.m. (made by: Koseatac) (seconded) Carried unanimously Sources used during the meeting not found in the files or on the Town website: 1. None Submitted by: Terry L. Norton Page 5 of 5