Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-9-12ZBA Minutes for September 12, 2019, adopted Oct. 10 r ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2 Fairgrounds Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 wwxv.nantucket-ma.gov '' F1 2:58 Commissioners: Susan McCarthy (Chair), Lisa Botticelli (Vice chair), Ed Toole (Clerk), Michael J. O'Mara, Kerim Koseatac Alternates: Mark Poor, Geoff Thayer, Jim Mondani -- MINUTES -- Thursday, September 12, 2019 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, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani .Absent: McCarthy, Botticelli, Koseatac, Poor \ enda ado ted by unanimous consent APPROVAL1. OF 1. June 13, 2019: Held by unanimous consent. 2. .August 8, 2019: Held by unanimous consent. 1. 18-19 Peter L O'Brien and Natalia V. O'Brien 36 Low Beach Road Cohen REQUEST TO CONTINUE TO OCTOBER 10, 2019 Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani Representing None Discussion None Motion Motion to Continue to October 10, 2019 meeting. (made by: Mondani) (seconded by: 01%fara) Vote Carried unanimously 2. 19-19 Sheila Giardini and Carmine Giardini 7 Clifford Street Cohen REQUEST TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani Representing None Discussion None Motion Motion to Approve the withdrawal without prejudice. (made by: O'Mara) (seconded by: Mondani) Vote Carried unanimously 3. 22-19 Richard J. Glidden, Tr., 4 Shawkemo Road Realty Tr. 4 Shawkemo Rd. Glidden Applicant seeks relief by Special Permit pursuant to Zoning By-law Section 139-33.A to remove and reconstruct any or all of the pre- existing nonconforming dwelling structure or any portion thereof within the side and front yard setbacks and in excess of the permitted 3% ground cover ratio. Specifically, Applicant proposes 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 of 2,110 SF with no change to the pre-existing nonconforming setback distances, to the extent necessary. As a result of a zoning change from LUG -1 to LUG -3, the Locus became pre- existing non -conforming as to groundcover and as to lot size. The Locus is improved with a dwelling and garage which are also pre- existing nonconforming as to setbacks. The Locus is situated at 4 Shawkemo Road, is shown on Tax Assessor's Map 43 as Parcel 91.1, and as Lot 16 upon Land Court Plan 14732-E. Evidence of owner's title is registered on Certificate of Title No. 27324 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court. The site is zoned Limited Use General 3 (LUG -3). Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani Recused None Documentation File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Representing Richard Glidden, Glidden and Glidden Public None Discussion (1:17) Glidden — This was continued for the final plans; we still don't have the final plans, but he can confirm ground cover will be no more than 2,110 square feet (SF) and all new construction will be compliant with setback with removal of non- compliant structures. Consensus has no concerns. Motion Motion to Grant the relief as requested with a maximum ground cover of 2,110 SF. (made by: Thayer) (seconded by: O'Mara) Vote Carried unanimously Page 1 of 4 ZBA Minutes for September 12, 2019, adopted Oct. 10 1. 23-19 Lee A. Papale Kalman 43 Appleton Road Reade Applicant seeks relief by Special Permit pursuant to Zoning By-law Section 139-16.C.2 to validate an unintentional setback intrusion_ The relocated subject structure was sited based on measurements taken from a licensed survev, surveyor but due to an oversight by the sueyor who did not factor in a proposed front porch, said porch was built within the front yard setback. In a district where minimum front yard setback is 30 feet, the porch is as close as 19.9 feet and the exterior wall of the structure is as close as 29.6 feet from the front vard lot line. To the extent necessary, Applicant further requests relief by Variance pursuant to Section 139-32 to validate the as -built location of the structure. Locus is situated at 43 Appleton Road, shown on Assessor's Map 66 as Parcel 66, as Lot 126 upon Land Court Plan 13554-J. Evidence of owner's title is registered on Certificate of Title No. 20338 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court. The site is zoned Village Trade, Entrepreneurship and Craft (VTEC). Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, :Mondani Recused None Documentation File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Representing Arthur Reade, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP Public None Discussion Reade — Asked for a continuance without opening to the October 10 meeting. Discussion about a possible meeting the week of September 16. Motion Motion to Continue to October 10, 2019 meeting. (made by: O'Mara) (seconded by: Thayer) Vote Carried unanimously 2. 24-19 Edward F. Ahneman, III & Lucia T. Ahneman 26 Sesapana Road Brescher Applicants are requesting relief by Special Permit pursuant to Zoning By-law Section 139-33.A(2) to allow the alteration and expansion of a pre-existing nonconforming dwelling on an undersized lot. Specifically, applicant proposes to construct an addition, resulting in an increase of the pre-existing nonconforming ground cover from 1,726 SF to 2,226 SF, increasing the ground cover ratio from 5.66% to 7.4% where maximum allowed is 3%. The dwelling will remain conforming as to setbacks. In the alternative, applicants request Variance relief pursuant to Section 139-32 from the intensity regulations in Section 139-16. Locus is situated at 26 Sesapana Road, shown on Assessor's Map 68 as Parcel 98, as Lot 17 upon Land Court Plan 14664-C. Evidence of owner's title is registered on Certificate of Tide No. 14619 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court. The site is zoned Limited Use General 3 (LUG -3). Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani Recused None Documentation File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Representing John Brescher, Glidden & Glidden, P.C. Public None Discussion (1:18) O'Mara — Asked if the applicant is unaware that the hearing will be before a four -member board, would that put the board at risk. Antonietti — No. Applicant has entrusted judgment to legal representation. The Board leaves the discretion to move forward or wait for a full Board to the applicant or the appointed representative. We have had no control over the absence of 4 members today. Brescher — He communicated the board situation to the applicant. Suggested it might be best to wait for a full board since there is a question about using the Mullen Rule to bring the boar up to five. Antonietti — It's been done, it's not the preferred method. Breschet — Asked for a continuance. Motion Motion to Continue to October 10, 2019 meeting. (made by: Thayer) (seconded by- Mondani) Vote Carried unanimously 3. 25-19 Jayne C. Debiasio & Brian F. Debiasio 39 Meadow View Drive Williams; Applicants are seeking to modify prior relief by Special Permit (Decision File No. 030-11) which permitted a reduction of the sideline setback from 10 feet to 5 feet in order to construct a garage/studio within the northerly side yard setback The structure has been constructed and when the "as -built" survey was done in pursuit of the Certificate of Occupancy, issues arose related to certain conditions contained in the Decision which applicants seek to either eliminate or alter in order to validate the as -built stricture. Locus is situated at 39 Meadow View Drive, shown on Assessor's Map 56 as Parcel 133, as Lot 50 upon Iand Court Plan 14830-0. Evidence of owner's title is registered on Certificate of Title No. 23121 at the Nantucket County District of the Land Court The site is zoned Residential Twenty (R-20). Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani Recused None Documentation File with associated plans, photos and required documentation Representing Linda Williams Public None Discussion (1:24) Williams — Validating the as -built survey to get a CO. It doesn't exceed the height permitted by more than 3 inches. On Town water and sewer; claims health and building don't care once on Town water and sewer Page 2 of 4 ZBA Minutes for September 12, 2019, adopted Oct. 10 Toole — It is over the height. They have plumbing but they can't have tubs or showers. The board at the time restricted it to half baths; they must have had a reason. O'Mara — The issue has always been, why do you need a bathroom with shower in a studio; that was a question of capabilities of the septic. He's never seen anything in writing that condones a shower or tub in a studio even when on Town water and sewer. Antonietti — Read the definition of a studio. Toole — We have permitted studios with showers before. The footprint is larger than approved by 13 square feet and it is 3.5 inches taller than permitted. Mondani — We put restrictions on this and three of four weren't complied with. Thayer — You know were supposed to be at 5'5"; you could have made it 5'9" and given yourself wiggle room. The owner is responsible for the builder being compliant with the plans. Motion Motion to Grant the relief as requested with no further expansion without further relief from the Board and the remainder of the relief to remain in full -force effect. (made by: Thayer) (seconded by: O'Mara) Vote Carried unanimously OTHER 1. 051-03 Rugged Scott a/k/a Beach Plum 40B Holland / Posner / Haverty CONTINUED DISCUSSION of implementing policy in fulfillment of obligation to allow abutting property owners non-resident family membership privileges and access to the common amenities (Clubhouse/Pool/Lawn/Tennis Court Facility) in Beach Plum Village, as per provisions in Section 3.2(0) regarding Management Issues in the original Comprehensive Permit and Section 9 of the "Settlement Agreement". Voting Toole, O'Mara, Thayer, Mondani Representing Josh Posner, Principal Ruth Plandowski, 10 Thistle Way Public Tucker Holland, 5 Seikinnow Place Jill Vieth, 12 Okorwaw Discussion (1:32) Holland — This morning, Peter McEachern, Chris Young, Burt Turner, and he had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Posner and two residents of Beach Plum Village, Mr. & Mrs. Plandowski and Robin Halik (property manager for Beach Plum Village). There seems to be a gulf in the interpretation in including this program; Mr. Posner made it clear inclusion isn't his first choice. There might be an opportunity for further talks. One aspect that seems to fly in the face of inclusion of non-resident membership is the idea of paying an initiation fee of $33,000. Doesn't know if that was the intent of the ZBA when the Comprehensive Permit was approved. O'Mara — He would expect that Mr. Posner would have provided a yearly membership fee. He'd like to see any discussion during the Comprehensive Permit hearings on a fee to join. Holland — He hasn't gone through an extensive review of the discussion. He doesn't dispute there being a fee commensurate with what residents pay; Mr. Posner indicated more restrictions on non-resident members with similar pricing. It was the initiation fee that was an unexpected twist. Antonietti — Noted Condition O of the Comprehensive Permit. Plandowsld — An initiation fee would have been part of the purchase of the home; it was outlined in the amenities under the homeowner's association (HOA). The neighbors who didn't purchase homes in Beach Plum Village haven't paid that. The expectation is some kind of payment would be contributed by people who did not buy homes in the area but want to be members with full use of all amenities. Toole — Asked if negotiations are on-going. If so, his inclination is for the parties to take them further. Thayer — The non-resident "initiation fee" to pay for the work should have been part of the development. Mondani — He agrees and would also like to see the discussions. Vieth — Asked if there was anything in the permit that had a timeline on it. Toole — No; but he'd have to read the entire decision. Posner — He sent a memo outlining our approach; I met with Mr. Holland and the others this morning. It had been his idea non-resident inclusion would be something done at the end of the project once all lots were sold. It might be possible to work something out. O'Mara — Asked if there's a document that mentions an initiation fee for the neighbors. Posner — It says they will pay a fee comparable with the residents. Mondani — To him it's not an initiation fee but a maintenance fee. Thayer — There was no initiation fee from Great Harbor Yacht Club (GHYC) for the neighbors for use of their pool and tennis courts. Toole — He can see the non-residents paying the HOA fee, which in part goes to the upkeep; that benefits the HOA. Antonietti — Cited Page 11 of the Comprehensive Permit Section 3.2. The HOA has authority to make the decision and enforce the rules and regulations. Toole — His hope is that the parties involved will work this out. If they can't, then we'll get involved. O'Mara — Asked if anyone has consulted with Edward Sanford, chair of the ZBA at the time, on his opinion of the decision. Page 3 of 4 ZBA Minutes for September 12, 2019, adopted Oct. 10 Posner — The residents recognize there would be an offset in up -keep, but the pool is already very busy on a hot summer day. Toole — He doesn't think the intent was neighbors could become members for $33,000 initiation fee; there is some reasonable ground. O'Mara — Asked how many homes outside the subdivision would be eligible. Posner — He thinks it's 30; he'd have to map that out and get names and addresses then send out invitations once the terms and fees are established. It would be first -come -first -serve. We can limit it to 10 non-resident members a vear. Toole — That is expressly stated in the Comprehensive Permit, by vote of the HOA. He wants the parties to try and work this out. Holland — The only issue is perhaps the initiation fee; he's willing to come back in October with an update on negotiations. Thayer — Read the settlement agreement Section 3.2. They have to come back for ZBA approval. Vieth — Pointed out the GHYC is a private club. This is a subsidized 40B development that should be providing benefits to the community. The developer didn't do anything about it until Mr. Holland called them; this has gone on for a very long time. Toole — Both sides have said they are trying to work this out; let them do that and come back in October. Ultimately we might have to open a public hearing. We don't have to vote to continue. O'Mara — Asked if there would be only one -level of membership where you have to join everything. Posner — Yes; that's the way it is for homeowners. 2. Discussion of policy and protocols with Zoning Administrator applications and decisions which are submitted to members individually and separately for review within a specific time -frame in order to further clarify process. Antonietti — Would prefer all Board members present for this discussion. Tabled to October 10b meeting. 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion to go into executive session at 2:06 p.m. under G.L.c.30A, §21(x)(3) for the purpose of discussing strategy with respect to litigation, which are known as 1) Rugged Scott LLC v. Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, Housing Appeals Committee No. 2018-01 and concerns a denial by the Zoning Board of Appeals of a request by Rugged Scott LLC to modify the Beach Plum Comprehensive Permit so as to allow a garage to be placed upon Lot 27 Beach Plum (8 Blazing Stu Road), an affordable lot, for the benefit of and for the purpose of serving Lot 28 Beach Plum (1 Blue Flag Path), an adjacent market rate lot; and 2) Rugged Scott LLC v. Zoning Board of Appeals, Housing Appeals Committee No. 2018-04, which concerns a denial by the ZBA of a request by Rugged Scott LLC to modify the Beach Plum Comprehensive Permit so as to allow a garage built on Lot 24 Beach Plum (12 Blazing Star Road), an affordable lot, to be used for the benefit of Lot 23 Beach Plum (14 Blazing Star Road), a market rate lot, because an open meeting discussion may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the Board. (made by: Thayer) (seconded by: O'Mara) Voice Vote: Carried unanimously: Thayer — aye; O'Mara — aye; Toole — aye; Mondani - ace V. ADJOURNMENT 71otion to Adjourn at 2:13 p.m. (made by: O'Mara) (seconded by: Mondani) Carried unanimously Sources used during the meeting not found in the files or on the Town website: 1. Beach Plum Village Comprehensive Permit Submitted by: Terry L. Norton Page 4 of 4