The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About025-78 The pe ition r requ known situa ion a d to e ate lots. La ~L v~~~u~~y, ~uu ether he has valid form f a var ance. wo-lot ubdivision and seek re- 1.1'--' 1.1 '-. v ...L v .<. ,~. ~. . III doubl.. as . determine lief in th place his lots in a are, in fact, two separ There as no opposi e requ ~S-7 The Bo rd ad ised M der conside ation. Coffin that i would take the matter un In the matter of the petition of Harvey L. Pasten, Trustee, 025-78: Attorney Richard Glidden representing the petitioner ad- dressed the Board. Mr. Glidden stated that the petitioners were owners of a parcel of land at Dionis and being Lot 19, L. C. Plan No. 3887-8. The petitioners originally applied for permits for the construction of two single family dwelling units on the lot as allowed by the by-law in existence at the time of the application. The delay that followed was due to a replacement of Building In- spectors and a confusion as to the meaning of the code. At the time of the original application, it was permitted that two single family units be established on a single site, subject only to other reasonable dimensional requirements. In the time between the original application and this new application, the zoning by- laws was amended to provide that two single family units may be maintained on a lot subject to the placement of one unit being 20' behind, or in front of, the main unit's building line. In this case such a placement would mean that, due to the topographic features of the lot, the second unit would be down hill from the ocean front and cliff and that the second unit would have no view. The difference in topographic placement is such tha the second unit would be 10' below grade from the primary unit. Mr. Glidden presented a plan of elevations of the locus and calculated the line of sight from the various locations of the units. Mr. Glidden also presented renderings of the proposed housing units as approved by the HDC. It is not possible to excavate the bank to alleviate the situation since the Conservation Commission would prohibit the al- teration. Mr. Clarence Pierce spoke in favor of the proposed plan. Attorney Michael Driscoll appeared in opposition stating that he represented Mr. Boyd, an abutter. Mr. Driscoll stated that the zoning code should be observed and that the petitioner had shown no financial hardship. There followed a general question and answer period while the Board attempted to extract details from the plans offered by Mr. In the matter of the pet it ion 01 Allee Ca.rey 1'1.11. LLallls, uL..J.- 10. The Board reviewed the minutes of the meeting of September 19 1978 and reviewed the history of the subdivision and conveyance made therefrom. After due deliberation the Board found: 1. The petitioner has a hardship in that the lot as purchase was a non-conforming lot and was though to be guaranteed as to use and dimension for a period of seven years. The decision was an- nulled by the decision of the Massachusetts courts, and the use factor, only, was preserved; 2. The petitioner would suffer a substantial hardship in the event the use of this lot were denied being that she would suffer the loss of substantial funds. On motion made by Member Bartsch and seconded by Member Hyde, it was unanimously voted to grant the variance. ~F~ In the matter of the petition of David Murray et ux, 026-78: The Board reviewed the minutes of the meeting of September 19, 197 and received the report of the inspection of the property. After due deliberation the Board found: 1. The relief sought by the petitioner could be granted with out any detriment to neighborhood properties and within the scope of relief anticipated by the by-law; 2. The garage addition would contain no living area and woul not affect the density factors in this area; and, 3. The petitioner has a hardship in that his personal pro- perty is without adequate safeguard and his delivery of fuel oil cannot be maintained without other facilities as now exist on the property. On motion of Member Hyde and seconded by Member Bartsch, it was unanimously voted to grant the variance. ~c In the matter of the petition of Harvey L. Pasten, Trustee, 025-78: The Board reviewed the minutes of the meeting of Septembe 19, 1978 and received the reports of the members who had visited the locus. n _.,., __ ..1_.... __~..: ~~A +l,,,+ +ht=> 11"ll".11~ ha.s a. tODographic feature unique in that the area in the locus has a severe drop in elevation as the locus distances from the edge of the bank. It is sufficient in depth of elevation to prevent a view of the water and beach area from the area of the proposed second dwelling unit were it located according to the code. In addition, the history of the application and quest for per mits experienced by the petitioner makes it likely that substanti financial hardship has resulted to them. The procedure suffered by the petitioner has been burdensome and is without fault on thei part. After due deliberation the Board found: 1. The locus has a peculiar and unique topographic situation in that the site reduces in elevation as it recedes from the cliff and beach area; thus, the further away the building is located the less the view of the water and beach. This is a situation in the immediate area but is not repeated in the surrounding areas of the neighborhood; 2. At the time the petitioners made their initial applicatio for a building permit, the proposed placement of the structure was allowed. The time interval and unexplained delays without the fault of the petitioner is a basis for substantial financial hard- ship; and, 3. The area of the locus is a sparsely populated and little developed area of Dionis. The nearest dwelling unit is consider- ably removed and will suffer no diminution of value in the event this relief is granted. No detriment will be experienced by any surrounding property owner in the event this relief is granted. On motion of Member Bartsch, seconded by Member Hyde, it was unanimously voted that the variance be granted. ~L k?o- CLt.': ..Q. ~ -Ill ~ JOI '+('1 V ~~OO R m. ~~'€.~ a~~4L. -r~ CQ.vut TC Tn' OF N~. ~TTUCKET - oard of /' ppea1 s List of parties in interest in the matter of the petition of: Fa.me: lIarvey L. Pastan, Trustee Eel Point Realty Trust Address: P.O. Box 103. Winthrop. ~.Iass. Froperty address: Lot 19 - L.C. Plan 13887-5 1) Walter W. Boyd Ruth G. noyd 6740 Nilson Lane Bethseda, 1,lll. 20034 3~ .Frank f. Sylvia Elizabeth P. Sylvia Rays Court Nantucket, Hass. 02554 2. Edward N. Sherry Jeannette Sherry 360 Stam;ich Road Grcemdch, Conn. 06830 4. Linda Loring Wait Long Pond Nantucket, Hass. 02554 I certify the foregoing is a list of persons who are owners of land abuttin~ t~e property and owners of land directly opposite the property on any street or way. and owners orland within 300 feet of the property, all as they appear on the most recent applicable T AX list. .,.,Jl', ~ August 1978 I::ate ( / .~ ~ ;/ . '. ,( (1" .....,,'- 'i~' , /:~k:;;i,^-' . I r...... ...; 1. .' . "....... ..,.' _ .....r ..... '.._.....'..... . ''&ssessor - -.-- Town of ~lantucl<et '-....~ _ 'C~~~:~ \ ~~ .~'~