The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About002-72 - 005-72 ~.,' .,-r:- 3 . ~-:;. .;; ~~ OO~."2. 00 =!a · '\2 oo~.'a .0-05 - '2. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS I, " Town of Nantucket ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS These minutes of a meilting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held at 8:00 P.M. November 21, 1972, at the Town Building of the Town of Nantucket. OJ2-72 IN RE: The petition ,of Robert '''limon for an eY:"~epti0n to allow the use of premises at 66 Easton' Street fo!' one or more retai, stores. Attorney Robert Campbell" appeared for the petitioner and outlined for the Board, the general character of the neighborhood by citing various com- mercial enterprises now conducted in the area. Attorney Campbell reviel-Jed the~eneral powers of the Board as set. forth in the By-Law and recommended that the exception be granted. Mrs. Robert Simon addressed the Board and outlined her plans for the propnrtyas follows: She proposed to move her bu~iness, the Calico Whale, into the premises and convert the remainder of the house into ~mall retail shops. No change is proposed in the physical structure except that a door entrance will be installe? on South Beach Street. Mrs. Simon stated she had no definite plan;; for other stores at this time and that she intended to install "101-1 key" type operations. Mrs. Ann Killen, realt0r, spoke on behalf of the peEtion stating the property l-1a;, not desirable: as a residential property and that efforts to sell or lease for residential use had been unsllccessful. OPPOSITION: In opposition appeared: Mr.' Alexander Craig who spoke of the.residential charaeter of the Brant Point area and who asked that the zoning by-law be given a reasonable time to work before variances and exceptions were granted; Mrs. Agnes Sylvia, Mr. Hichard Kotalac, Mr. Tames Worth, Mr. Merrill Haskins, and Mr. David Murr".J. Each 8peaker reiterated the residential character of the neighbor... hood and emphasized that no retail operation was now conducted on Easton Street-Such "commercial" operations as may surround the premises are residential uses ~mch as hote] and rooming house premises. Mr. Hurray asked what plans were made to accomodate parking, since this was now a high traffic a1"ea. Mrs. Simon replied to the question and stated no plans had been made other than to '~se street parking. The Chairman read ten tele"grams opposing the petition (from Mr. and Mrs. S. Connor, Edith Gifford, Edward Macomber, Helen Cuttings, Mr. and Mrs. F.P. N~sh, Virginia Hutton, Mr. and 'Mrs. S. B. Smith, Richard Deutscn) Brant Point Association by H. 'So Arct~ibald, Preside.l.!t, and Maribeth Ingram), and one :Jetter favoring thE: petitio? (from Robert Currie). "ll' . to ,. DECISION; ~ter due delibe~ation and upon motion of Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Greepe, it was un~nimously voted to deny the petition. The Board found the proposed use no~ to be in harmony with the general purposes of the Zoning By-Law and to be detrimental to the existing neighborhood. Therefore, the petition of Robert Simon is DENIED. \~~3:~ yne F. Holmes //~ /. r - Robert L. T or . . ! J {~tJ~ k ~~- lIar ingdf... roene 003 - 72 004 - 72 IN RE: In the matter of the peyition of Sherburne Associates for a variance to have certain premi~es classified as Residential Commercial and, In the matter of the petition of Virginia Rock to have certain premises classified "Residential COlrunercial '.' . :, " Attorney M~chael Drisooll requested the Board to ;jQin the two petition and conduct one hearing. Mr. Driscoll's request was granted. " ; Attorney Driscoll addressed the Board and read from MGLA concerning the power and scope of board~ of appeals and the intent of zoning by-laws. Mr. Driscoll outlined the premises as being Lots Dl, D4 and D6, Land Court Plan 14342C, situated at Macy Len an~ Old South Road. .Mr. Driscoll stated that Sherburne Associated has no definite plans at thi~ time to use Lots Dl and D4 but finds it difficult to plan an intelligent use of the property. Mr. Driscoll stated that Mr. and Mrs. Rock desire to construct additional , residential structures on their parcel which would house airport personnel. : Mr. Driscoll stated there is a need for housing on the islanq. Mr. Driscoll! stated that opposition rrdght come from the airpOl.'t commission because of the proximity of the premises to the airport. However, Mr. Driscoll said this is not a valid consideration. Mr. Rock spoke on behalf of the petition stating he was attempting to develop retirement income and to provide housin~ for airport employees. Mr. Ralph MacDonald spoke ,saying he was a new employee of FAA and that there was a need on Nantucl:et for housing. OPPOSITION: In opposition 'appeared: Mr. Byron Snow, on behalf ol ':-'i,o Nantucket Ai:port Commission and stated that further residential development in the area of the airport posed a possible source of liability to the Town and that such adqitional dev~lop- ment should be diGcouraged. Mr. Alexander Craig spoke in opposition stating the zoning by-law should be given a reasonable chance before variances are given. ~ ~ '- i' Mr. Driscoll addressed the Board in r~buttal and stated this land area would nOG have been zoned Limited Use General by the Town Meeting, Efxcept tha t Mr. Rock was on vaca !,Jon when the code was adopted. In respoHse to the Board's quesMoning, Mr. Driscoll replied that the Board was being asked to rezone for Sherburne Associates even though Sherburne Af-lSociates has no particular plans at thip, tjme. The Board suggested to Mr. Driscoll that a prop~r romedy would pr()ba.bl~( be a paM t:ion for an amend-' , rnent of the zoning by-J.awat the Town Meeting. The Chairman read two letters opposing the petition (from Mr. John McLaughlin and Mrs. Olive Butman). DECISION: After due deliberation and upon motion of Mr. Greene, seconded by Mr. Taylor, it was voted to deny the petition of Sherburne Associates and to deny the petition of Virginia Rock. The Board found no substantial hardships estab~ished by either petitioner. There fore, the peti tions" are ~IED. By the Bo~rd of Appeals ~U\~ · Wayne F. Holmes ~~r~: #~ IJ4I L ~ it, ' H rdin -~,,\;.....--' Greene 005- 72 IN RE; The matter of the petition of Joseph Danton for a variance to allow the construction of ,a dwelling unit of 1,750 square feet. Mr. Edward Strojny appear~d on behaif of Mr. Danton :nd stated that Mr. Danton wanted to construct l,750 square feet of ground floor area to accomodate his wife who is crippled and unable to negotiate stairs. Under the existing code, a unit of 1,200 square feet total lot area coverage is all that is allowed. J_~ ~~~-lll.."I."lnr"E l lJ~] },,:-~'O . _ ,^' " . '.. ...1' i : : 1... L _.' ^' n OPPOSITION: In opposition appeared; Mrs. Harriet Backus who advised the Board that this land area had been sold · by her some time ago with a general understanding that it was not to be developed. Mrs. Backus expressed the idea that the zoning code should be lived with for a while before a number of changes were made. The Chairman read two lotterr. opposing the granting of the variance (from Mr. Donald Hobinr-lon and 'Mrs. Qloed Thompson). w " " !If ... DECI~ION: After due deliberation and upon motion by Mr. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Greene, it was voteq to deny the petition of Joseph Danton. The Board found no substantial hardship established by the Petitioner. Therefore, the petition is DENIED. By the Board of Appeals W~~~~ " Wafle F. Holmes 4~L~ Robert L. T or / . <7 1'+-<<-\ L~ Lv /Le-~/ Ha di~ 9reene L__.-/' -:-" .. ~