Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout030-78 030 -79 ~5 BOARD OF APPEALS Nantucket, Massachusetts DECISION: At a regular meeting of the Board of Appeals neld December 19, 1978, in the Town Building, in the matter of MARY HOvlARD (030-78), after due deliheration, the Board found: 1. The petitioner presently owns a three- apartment building at 4 Lyon Street in a district zoned Residential-Old Historic, and seeks a Special Permit to expand the non-conforming use by adding one basement apartment. 2. The addition of one mo~e apartment in this neighborhood would not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use to the neighborhood. 3. The Special Permit is granted~unanirnous vote. ~""'~\\.~'-3~~ \)...\ ~l.:.~ "'l~ BOARD OF 1-.PPEALS ~ ~~ ~l:l ~''-' ~~~. ~ !Zkfl. ~ ~J~~~tL~~ . "-, (~~ \ ? ;, ., ( . ) , ( I U r. ~'~)1 f. MICHAEL DRISCOLL Attorney at Law Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Post Office Box 898 (617) 228,0016 DATE January 8, 1979 TO: I I Madelyne E. Perry Town Clerk Town and County Building NANTUCKET, MA 02554 SUBJECT /It/he/hi}1 (j /~{'~ )/,j _ -p r:- fi-/ (/Sd uf 4p/f:'/) fc )0- 7~) L _J MESSAGE Dear Mrs. Perry: Enclosed please find copy of Complaint filed in Nantucket Superior Court this date, bearing Docket If /71~ This is delivered to you persuant to MGL Chapter 40-A,Sect. 17. May I have a copy showing the filing dat~kZ' . . Enclosure SIGNED . A L' ~E'C-~~(/t/" REPLY DATE SIGNED COi-l>lClNh'CALTH OF l'li\SS1\CHUSETTS NANTUCKET,sf; SUP E RIO R f: 0 II !>l CIVIL No)l!/ CHARLES E. WELTON, PlaintifF ) ) ) ) ) ) CGrlPLAINT vs MARY M. HOWARD (Petitioner) and NANTUCKET BOARD OF M'PEALS Robert F. Mooney,Chair~an Eileen I Cahoon, Member Judith K. Bartsch,Member \ ) \ ) 1.) Plaintiff owns and is a ~esident of 6 Lyon Street,Nantucket,Ma. 2.) Defendant Mary M. Howard is a resident of 325 West Upper Terry Road, West Trenton,N.J. 08628 and owns property at 4 Lyon Street, Nantucket,MA. 02554 3.) Defendant Board of Appeals for the Town of Nantucket has office at Federal & Broad Streets,Nantucket. Its members residents of Nantucket as follows: ROBERT F. MOONEY,CHRMN EILEEN I CAHOON 171 Orange Street Main Street Siasconset an are JUDITH K. BARTSCH 5 Orange Street , 4~) Mary Howard applied to tile Board of Appeals for a SPECIAL PERMIT to extend a non-conforming use by adding a fourth appartment in a district zoned RESIDENTIAL OLD HISTORIC. 5.) The plaintiff, an abutter to the locus in question, never re- received notice of the hearing date and alleges none was ever mailed to him as is re~ired by the Nantucket Zoning By-law as amended through 1978 ,- Section VIII-E-3 and by MGL c40A Sect 11. 6.) The Plaintiff says had he been notified, as required by law, he would have objected to the granting of a Special Permit on several grounds, including but not limited to: increased fire hazzard, increased congestion on the narrow streets in the area and lack of adequate parking. 7.) The Plaintiff says that the Special Permit without a Variance from the parking requirements as set forth in the Zoning By-law Section VI-C-l-a cannot be used by Defendant Hcrw"rd. 8.) There appears to be no petition for a variance from the pravlslons of See VI-C-l-a (parking requirements) and without such a variance a Speclal Per mit should not issue. Lchae1 Dri scalI '. Broad Street mtucket ,HA 02554 L7/228-0016 9.) The P1ainti ff says the Board of Appeals exceed its authority in grantiilg the Special Permit, numbered (030-78). 10) WHEREFOR the Plaintif PRAYS that the Board of Appeals decission filed with the Town Clerk on 12/26/78 be annulled by this Ho rable CO'uY"t. -- Charles L Welton, by his Attorney Michael Dh 22 Broad Street,Na I CC.u/J 77: /" 1"1/1 ....-r- (d'']' ~/ {H/I/k " /l . ~ ;/J I{/' ( (fL//l / .)F ':T NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Pursuant to C40-A Sect 17 of the MGL I send you a copy of complaint filed in ttle Court in whic~r~~"t~d a part:7-fH3~~NT. }/V'- '---- The complaint is on the reverse side of this notice. "'~, Vl:rv . ,- / truly youls, .( "C'(/~/C~,'-'-"~c) / /~ l ,,- .{..-- >,i .1,1 i c h a e 1 Dr i s c 0 .1 1 .:q.t ~ JAMES K. GLIDDEN. ESQ. RICHARD J. GLIDDEN. ESQ. 37 CENTRE STREET NANTUCKET. MASS. 025154 TEL. (617) 22B~077t CO~IMONWr:ALTH OF ~lASSACHl1SETTS N,lDtucket, SS. CIIARLr:S F. WELTON, Plaintiff ) ) ) Vs. ) ) tvlARY ~1. HOWARD (Petitioner) ) ) and ) ) NANTllCKET BOARD Or: APPEALS ) ROBERT F. HOONEY, Chairman ) EILEEN 1. CAHOON, Member ) JUDITII K. BARTSCII, ~lcmher; ) Defendants ) Superior Court Civil No. 1799 STIPULA'!'ION Or: OJ 91ISSAL Now come the parties and, pursuant to Rule 41 A, hereby stipulate that the ahove entitled action be dismissed. 11ARY ~l. HOWARD by her Attorney: - (?r-',) ~'--?r~)\f>~~"J^-- Richard J( Iyidden :'7 Center,street \/ Nantucket, Mass. NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS ~tJeY Charles A. CZgli 16 William Stre Wellesley, Hass. 01ARLES F. WELTON / _~.~~__~~~o,~~~ :_ L---rtZ;-- (if' Michael'riscoll 16 Broad Street Nantucket, tbss. FILED ATTEST JUL 1 31979 GERTRUDE E. WIIElD(~ CLERK I - ~<J_ (' , ~ BOARD OF APPEALS Nantucket, Massachusetts A regular meeting of the Board of Appeals was held November 28, 1978. Present were members Mooney, Bartsch, and Cahoon. Mr. Mooney announced the resignation of Wayne F. Holmes, Esquire, from the Board of Appeals, and called for the election of a new chairman. On motion of Mrs. Bartsch, Robert F. Mooney, Esquire, was elected Chairman-of the Board of Appeals. In the matter of the petition of Peter Kerr (029-78), Attorney Robert E. Campbell appeared for the petitioner, seeking a determination that the Kerr property on Washington Street should be classified Residential-Commercial in its entirety, ,the property being apparently divided on the zoning map, and stat~the property should be entitled to the least restrictive zoning classification. Attorney Michael Driscoll also spoke in favor of the petition, stating the zoning lines had no regard to reality and should have followed the back lot lines of the Union Street properties in dividing the area. It was noted that Washington Street is substantially commercial in nature. Mrs. Juliet Taylor questioned if the Town Meeting had considered the question. There was no opposition, no correspondence, and no other speakers. The Board took the petition under advisement. In the matter of the petition of Mary Howard (030-78) requesting a Special Permit to expand a non-conforming use of property at 4 Lyons Street, Attorney Richard Glidden appeared for the petitioner and stated the building presently contained three apartments. The petitioner wishes to expand the use and install an additional small apartment in the cellar. The petitioner has owned the property since 1954, has retired to Nantucket, and occupies one apartment for her personal use. The apartment con- struction will not change the exterior of the house except for the addition of one rear door. Speaking in favor of the petition were Mrs. Howard, Mrs. Mary Phillips, Mrs. Eunice Haskell, and Ms. Martha Walters. One letter in favor was received from Mrs. Maxine Shaw. No speakers were heard in opposition, and one letter of objection was received from Mr. and Mrs. Edward T. Johnson and read into the record. The Board took the petition under advisement. -2- In the matter of the petition of Willard Greiner, et ux (032-78) seeking to sub-divide a lot in Tom Nevers into two lots, the petitioners were represented by Attorney Richard Glidden. He stated the present Lot 574 consists of 5.00 acres. The petition- ers wish to divide this into two lots in order to convey one to their children. He stated present lots in the Tom Nevers area are 65-75,000 square feet in area and the petitioners have a hardship in that they cannot convey property as desired to for children because of the intensity regulations. Christopher Holland appeared and state he would be in favor of the petition provided there were no further sub-division of the land and that no more than one house would be built on each lot. Mr. Glidden was agreeable to this restriction. The Building Inspector, Norman Chaleki, stated he had some question as to the allowance of a second building on one house lot since under the by-law this must be only an accessory to a home and not a second major house. The Board received one letter in support of the petition from Col. and Mrs. Golding, and one letter in opposition from Dr. and Mrs. Theodore Tirk. The Board took the matter under advisement. There being no further business to corne before the Board, on motion duly made and seconded, the Board adjourned. ~~~"'~~~ \~ l~," ((~ ~ ~'.~~ ~........... ~~~.~~ ~ \~~~~, ~ BOARD OF APPEALS /7 .\ ('-'(;-(1 :"f' f ;..., I,...., .\, / . ...J I' .) .n.I':, ':" / I L\. (I :." {, )C '., , it '..~}. - , I I i \ I I i \ ~ I