Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout004-78 . \ (0 OD~-7~ ~ c;....:.-,~- Minutes of a hearing of the Board of Appeals, April 18, 1978. Present were Members Holmes, Bartsch and Alternate Member Cahoon. In the matter of the petition of Beachside Realty Trust 005-7$: Attornet Richard Glidden appeared for the petitioner and stated the petitioner is the owner of a 3.5 acre parcel located on North Beach St., Nantucket, presently improved with a motel. The parcel is loacetd in a area recently re-zoned by the Town Meeting to be Limited Commercial. The operation of motels is allowed in this dis- trict by special permit of the Board of Appeals. The present ground cover of 6 to. 8%. The proposed addition will increase the ground cover to 13-15%. The proposed addition will increase the units avail- able for occupancy from 52 units to 90 units. The proposed building is 178' X 52' in size and will be loacted to the rear of the existing structures. Mr. Glidden presented to the Board,. a plot pl9-~ of the site showing the present improvements and the proposed loca- tion of the addition. Mr. Glidden stated that the Town Meeting, in rezoning this area indicated its desire to encourage commercial expansion in the area. He stated that the findings required by Sec. 8 B (2) are guidelines for the Board in making a determination that the uses will be in . harmony with the present characteristics of the neighborhood. Mr. Glidden stated that the locus is in an area improved with a commercial fennis club complex, contiguous on the north, used car storage lot on the south, vacant land proposed for development on the east and residential improvements situated on a higher elevation to the west. Other commercial activities in the immediate area include a small hotel, several restaurants, automobile agency, rooming houses and a storage building used for automobile parts. The automobile agency incorporates a gas station. Mr. Glidden stated that the Historic District Commission has approved the design of the addition. He stated that the problem with the drainage and the sewer facilities has been worked out and the facility will have an adequate sewer pipe and drainage plan as part of the engineering design. Mr. Glidden stated that a satisfactory method of disposing of surface water has been worked out. Mr. Glidden stated that the present use and the proposed expansion will not be detrimental to the area to the west and to the single family houses located on the Cliff. He stated that the present facility has been operated for 12 years and there has not been a single complaint of noise or any type of disturbance. He stated the operation of the present facility is exemplary. Mr. Glidden stated that he was aware of the fact that this property serves as the division line between different zones. The test is whether this facility will be detrimental to the area used as single family residences and he believes this facility is now and can, in the future be used and operated without and deleterious effect on that ; area. Attorney Gerald Abrams spoke in opposition to the petition. Mr. Abrams stated that the Town Meeting zoning amendment incorporated the necessity for 8 B (2) findings for this type of expansion solely to guard existing properties from the harmful effect of such an expansion as is proposed. He stated that he represented several owners of property to the contiguous west of this site and they all opposed the expansion. He stated that the current problem with noise. lights and traffic is burdensome and harmful to those owners. In addition, the proposed expansion will double the occupancy of this facility and thereby increase the noise, lights and traffic. In rebuttal, Mr. Gilbert Waine stated that the drainage plan has been satsifactorily completed. He stated the effect of the expansion on homeowners on the Cliff will be negligible since the new unit will be situated 58' from the rear line and will be below the line of view of the immediate abutters to the west. Paul Waine steted that the drainage system has been designed to accomodate the largest collection of surface water experienced in any five year storm period. The Chairman read letters from D. Jensen, R. Horchow,J.A. Dezalduondo, H. Rank Bickel, Gen.& Mrs. S. Wooten, P. Malcolm and K. Hu~hes in opposition to the expansion and from the Nantucket Planning Board recommending the petition. ; The Board took the matter under consideration pending a 'viewing and further review of the plot plans. In the matter of the petition of William Blaikie et ux 006-78: Attorney Richard Glidden appeared for the petitioner. M. Glidden stated. that the petitioners are the owners of Lot 7 as shown on L.C. Plan 35820-B located on Sheep Pond Rd. The area is zoned Limited Use General 2 having dimensional requirements of 80,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size. The locus has 53,500 sq. ft. Mr. Glidden stated that the lot was purchased in June 1973 as part of a subdivision approved in 1972. This was an "approval not required" subdivision. The owners, relying on what was then considered to be the applicable ~ zoning law, believed the lot was a safe purchase and would always be available for use since the subdivision enJoyed a 3 year exemption. Glidden stated that this belief w~s inaccurate as decided in the Bellows Farms case in November 1973 when the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the 3 year exemption applied to use only and not to dimensional requirements. This decision, made after the purchase, rendered the lot unbuildable since it could not meet the minimum lot size. The owners are now faced with having made a substantial 'investment in the lot and cannot obtain a building permit. In addition, the problem of the lot size is unique to this subdivision only. There was no opposition to the petition. The Chairman read a letter from the Nantucket Planning Board recommending the petition. a viewing. ~~'-~~u... ~l>.~~ ~<~~ - ~~ ~~~~, \. ~~ \...- ~ \ \\~ ~ Pt- The matter was taken under consideration by the Board pending ~~ ; ~ cr.G3~ , ~' /;;~{~./~)\I), 'J~ In the matter of the petition of Howard Jelleme 004-78: The Board reviewed the information preswnted at the time of thw public hearing, March 14, 1978, and reported on the views taken of the locus. After due deliberation, the Board found: 1. The locus is situated in an area that is mixed commercial and residential uses. The present use of the locus is an assembly l. and fabrictaion plant for a general contractor and for the storage of equipment and materials commonly associated with ,~ such a business. 2. The zoning by-law permits the expansion of this non- conforming use subject to the requirments of a finding under the provisions of the by-law. 3. The expansion of this facility can be accomplished without any deleterious effect on the neighborhood and surrounding properties. 4. The 'expansion will accomodate equipment and material that is now stored outdoors and will improve the appearance of the site and general area. On motion made by Mrs. Bartsch, seconded by Mrs. Cahoon, it was voted to grant the petition of Howard Jell~me' 004-78, ; the vote being unanimous. "-~""-- ~~~ ~,\C\. '\~ ~ .~~ \~'..~ S- ~.."'. ~~ , .~q.~ ("-j ~~ /<(.;.v ..I.L-vr ~ ( 1978. Minutes of a meeting of the Board of Appeals held March 111, 004 -7 ~ In the matter of the petition of Howard Jelleme, 0011-78: At- Present were members Holmes, Bartsch, and alternate, Cahoon. torney Robert Mooney told the Board that Mr. Jelleme presently hnd requires additional warehouse and storage areas. The site of conducted the business of a ~enernl contractor at New Mill Street the business is in a residential zone, and Jelleme requires a vari- ance in order to construct 11 structure. r['he structure would be Used for the storage of bUilding materials and supplies and would allow Mr. Jelleme to place under Cover the machinery and supplies that are now stored outside. Mr. Mooney indicated that in addi- , tion to the benefit of the petitioner the neighborhood would be substantially improved by removing the exterior materials and machinery. Mr. Mooney indicated the Town Meeting would ~oon bohsidcr an in~ uses by special permit. , , amendment to the zoning by-law allowing expansion of horl-conform- ~ the matter under consideration. After due deliberation the Board unanimously voted to take (/' ' ::;;--" 0 ~-.. p ,. ) r- "I rl:.,,( ,.<-..", (\,., (f7"l / L.Lt~-.<-~ l '-"" r (;\~ ~\: CJt: .jl', J, , ~ ( \ ,~ ('1'2, r.. \UA/'; \ ........; " \, ~-'\ ..... lC.\{ : Michael Driscoll, Esq. appeared for Mr. DOWling. Mr. Driscoll I In the matter of the petition of Thomas Dowltng et ux, 003-78: . ' stated that the Dowlings are the owners of Lot C, L. C. Plan No, 14889-A, Nantucket Registry District of the Land Co~rt. The tr~ct' I~",,, , f, .',,'~, ,rll FEE $50.00 Case No. (Jo'l- 7Y APPLICATION TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS Nanmcket February 17, 1978 To the Members of the Board of Appeals: The undersigned hereby applies for relief from the terms of the, (ZONING BY"LAW) (BUILDING CODE) on property described below: Location of Property West Chester Street and Pilqrim Road Lot No. 7 LandPlan No. 14393 District is Zoned for R-l Type of structure (Existing or Proposed) or proposed 1,lse: Storage Buildinq Owner's Name Howard M. Jelleme Owner's Address Fair Street, Nantucket When did you acquire this property? about 1960 H as application been filed at Building Department? no Has any previous appeal been made? no Section of By-law or Code from which relief is requested: IVB-l, permitted use in residential section; Sec. V,groundcover Reason for asking relief: Petitioner seeks to construct additional storage building, 32' x 60', which will expand present non-conform- ing use and possibly exceed groundcover on lot. Buildinq is neces- sary to put storage material, trucks, and equipment under cover, ~nd to enhance the appearance of the neiqhborhood. ATTACH: BV his attorne~ ~ Signature of applicant ~f:/ f. U~ Rotiert F. Mooney (1) A list of the names and addresses of each abutting owner and owner abutting the abutters. (2) Check in the amount of $50.00 made payable to the Town of Nantucket. (3) Map or plan showing the location of the property to be considered. (4) If the applicant is other than the owner, please indicate your authority to make this application. BOARD'S DECISION Application submitted to Board ;?-J 7-7'1 Advertising dates ;!;-.ri-7f /:)-f-.22.... Hearing date .3-{_-71 / Decision of Board DeciRion filod with the Town Clerk "I:L~~ ~'~',-\.~ ~\''-\\'l~ -~~~ _1t~~.' it~~ti~ *~L--"~"1 'l 10 ~ .:.~~,"-- -'"---'-~ ':11 i_ . "'- ',h"!\'i.i'