HomeMy WebLinkAbout087-07 Barrett - T/Barrett Family Trust
To: Parties in Interest
the BOARD OF APPEALS in
Application No.:
087-07
Owner/Applicant:
Chester Barrett Jr., Trustee of
Barrett Family Trust
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this
day been filed with the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk.
An Appeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to Section 17
of Chapter 40A, Massachusetts General Laws.
Any action appealing the Decision must be brought by filing a
complaint in Land Court within TWENTY (20) days after this day's
date. Notice of the action with a copy of the complaint and
certified copy of the Decision must be given to the Town Clerk so
as to be received within such TWENTY (20) days.
:Jl' r
iil/; I t\ 0 & {~
'!/If:.. J I(~ JB6j
Michael J. O'Mara, Chairman
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner/Zoning Enforcement Officer
PLEASE NOTE: MOST SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES HAVE A TIME LIMIT
AND WILL EXPIRE IF NOT ACTED UPON ACCORDING TO NANTUCKET ZONING
BY-LAW SECTION 139-30 (SPECIAL PERMITS); SECTION 139-32
(VARIANCES). ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD
OF APPEALS OFFICE AT 508-228-7215.
d
co
c::J
c-J
~
,
co
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
--J
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
--0
\...oJ
N
Date: October 8th
,2008
To: Parties in Interest and. Others concerned with the Decision of
the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the following:
Application No.:
087-08
Owner/Applicant:
Chester Barrett Jr., Trustee of
Barrett Family Trust
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this
day been filed with the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk.
An Appeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to Section 17
of Chapter 40A, Massachusetts General Laws.
Any action appealing the Decision must be brought by filing a
complaint in Land Court within TWENTY (20) days after this day's
date. Notice of the action with a copy of the complaint and
certified copy of the Decision must be given to the Town Clerk so
as to be received within such TWENTY (20) days.
~L~rmaif~
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner/Zoning Enforcement Officer
PLEASE NOTE: MOST SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES HAVE A TIME LIMIT
AND WILL EXPIRE IF NOT ACTED UPON ACCORDING TO NANTUCKET ZONING
BY-LAW SECTION 139-30 (SPECIAL PERMITS); SECTION 139-32
(VARIANCES). ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD
OF APPEALS OFFICE AT 508-228-7215.
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
2 Fairgrounds Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Assessor's Map 56, Parcel 163
21 Somerset Road
Residential-2 (R-2)
Land Court Plan l3554-A, Lot A
Deed Ref. Book 1054, Page 188
DECISION:
1. The Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals held public hearings on October 19, 2007,
November 16, 2007, March 13,2008, July 11, 2008, and September 12, 2008 in the Garage Area
at 2 Fairgrounds Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts regarding the appeal of Chester Barrett, Jr.,
Trustee of Barrett Family Trust, c/o Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP, Post Office
Box 2669, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02584, Board of Appeals File No. 087-07. On September
12,2008 the Board made the following Decision.
2. The Appellant is APPEALING a "Notice of Zoning Code Violation and Order to
Cease, Desist and Abate" issued by the Zoning Enforcement Officer ("ZEO"), dated June 19,
2007, without prejudice to the Appellant's contention that the ZEO has no power to issue such an
Order and that no appeal need be taken in order to protect the Appellant's rights. The ZEO
determined that the Appellant had begun a new commercial use (trucking and excavation
company) on the locus which is situated within the Residential-2 zoning district. Appellant
contends that the use in question is both pre-existing and has continued with only normal
business development and seasonal variations in the extent of the use. (Appellant also sought
relief by SPECIAL PERMIT pursuant to Nantucket Zoning By-law Section 139-33A
(alteration/expansion of a pre-existing nonconforming use/structure) in order to validate any
expansion or alteration of the pre-existing uses on the property, but that application was
withdrawn by the Appellant without prejudice by separate unanimous action of the Board of
Appeals). The Premises is located at 21 SOMERSET ROAD, Assessor's Map 56, Parcel 163,
Land Court Plan 13554-A, Lot A. The property is zoned Residential-2.
3. The basis for the Cease and Desist Order issued by the ZEO was the contention that a
new commercial use had developed on the locus.
4. The Appellant, through Counsel, presented oral and written testimony and evidence
asserting that the locus had been in continued long-term commercial use for various purposes,
including for a trucking and excavation business. Several Abutters spoke in opposition to the
Appellant's use of the locus for such purposes. Portions of Appellant's assertion were affirmed
by the personal recollections of members of the Board of Appeals, and the ZEO recommended
1
that the Board overturn his Order, noting that he intended to shortly issue a new order citing the
Appellants for expansion of a pre-existing nonconforming use without required relief. The ZEO
stipulated that the use of the locus for some commercial uses, such as for motor vehicle repairs
and operating a tour, charter, and transportation business were uncontested. The Board
determined that the commercial use of the locus for trucking and excavation purposes is
grandfathered, as such use pre-dates 1972, noting that a review of any alleged expansion should
be the subject of a separate matter.
5. Therefore, based upon the foregoing, the Board of Appeals finds that the existing
commercial uses of the locus as of this date are not new and existed prior to the adoption of
Nantucket's Zoning Bylaw in 1972.
6. Accordingly, by a UNANIMOUS vote (4-0), the Board OVERTURNS the Order to
Cease, Desist, and Abate issued by the Zoning Enforcement Officer.
SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW
2
....,.
<::--- .
~
Dated: I()I,
,2008
" \
,-:-J .-.-......
Dale Wai /
?-.h~
,Kerim Koseatac
'~7.~...
~n'r
Burr Tupp
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, SS.
On this Jilt day of {JC/t;W- 2008, before me, the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared R;/U.-/."/LI A:!o~~~ , who is personally known
to me, and who is the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and
who acknowledged to me that he signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose.
ah~8 ,2008
~
/~~~
Notary Public: V{l1(tO.SA-K.... Mt:fJyr'
My commission expires: Mdr~ "~I ~,,/.>
3
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
2 FAIRGROUNDS ROAD
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
FEE: $300.00
CASE NO.
-08
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
Owner's name(s):
Mailing address:
Applicant's name(s):
Mailing address:
Locus address:
Chester S. Barrett, Jr., Trustee, Barrett Family Trust
c/o Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley & Gifford, LLP
Same
6 Young's Way, Post Office Box 2669, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02584
21 Somerset Road
Assessor's Map/Parcel:
56-163
A
Land Court Plan No. (by reference only): 13554-A Lot No.:
Date lot acquired: 12/17/07 Deed Ref.: 1117-234 Zoning District: R-2
Uses on Lot - Commercial: _X_ Yes (describe) Vehicle repair and service, tours and charters, and general
trucking and excavation, including septic and drainage installation and land clearing/grading, and outdoor storage
of related materials and equipment.
Residential: Number of dwellings_2_ Duplex_ Apartments_ Rental Rooms
Building Date(s): All pre-date 7/72?_yes_ or
Building Permit Nos:_None
Previous Zoning Board Application Nos.:
C ofO(s)?_No_
087-07
State below or on a separate addendum specific relief sought (Special Permit, Variance, Appeal), Section of the
Zoning By-law, and supporting details, grounds for grant of relief, listing any existing nonconfoimitiei:'
1
)
See attached addendum.
l
J
I certify that the information contained herein is substantially complete and true to the best of my
knowledge, under t pains and penalties of rjury.
SIGNATURE: ~ A'.jpplicant Attorney/Agent x
(If not owner or owner s attorney, please enclose proof of agency to bring this matter before the Board)
FOR ZBA OFFICE USE
Application received on:_/~_ By: Complete: Need copies?:
Filed with Town Clerk:_I_I_ Planning Board:_/~_ Building Dept.:~_I_ By:
Fee deposited with Town Treasurer:_I_I_By: Waiver requested?: Granted:~~_
Hearing notice posted with Town Clerk:_1 ~ _ Mailed:~ _I _ I&M:~ _I _ & _1_/_
Hearing(s) held on:~_I_ Opened on:~~_ Continued to:_I_I_ Withdrawn?:_I_I_
DECISION DUE BY:~_I_ Made:_I_I_ Filed w/Town Clerk:~_I_ Mailed:~_I_
DECISION APPEALED?: / 1 SUPERIOR COURT: LAND COURT Form 4/03/03
---
1
ADDENDUM TO APPEAL OF CHESTER S. BARRETT. JR.
Appellant brings this appeal under Nantucket Zoning By-law ~139-31, from a
"Notice of Zoning Code Violation and Order to Cease, Desist and Abate" ("Order")
issued by the Zoning Enforcement Officer ("ZEO") dated September 15, 2008, without
prejudice to Appellant's contention that the ZEO has no power to issue such an Order and
that no appeal need be taken therefrom in order to protect Appellant's rights. At the
September 12,2008 meeting of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, the Board voted
unanimously in Board of Appeals File No. 187-07 to overturn a prior Order of the ZEO,
which alleged that Appellant was operating a new trucking and excavation business in a
residential zoning district (R-2) at 21 Somerset Road (Assessors Parcel 56-163),
Nantucket Massachusetts (locus), finding that such uses were grandfathered on the locus,
as they predate the Nantucket Zoning By-law enacted in 1972. The ZEO now contends
that Appellant has expanded the pre-existing nonconforming use without benefit of
special permit.
Appellant contends that the entire 3.25 acres of the locus have been in use by
three generations of the Barrett family for mixed commercial and residential purposes
since at least the 1930s, and that the commercial uses in place in 1972 have continued
with only normal business development and seasonal variations, such that Applicant does
not require (or seek) relief at this time. The locus has two dwellings (a main house and a
separate cottage), a commercial structure, as well as storage sheds and several areas used
for exterior storage of residential and commercial vehicles, goods and materials. Except
for the dwellings, Applicant uses essentially the entire locus for commercial purposes,
primarily as a base for a business that engages in motor vehicle repair activities, tour and
charter services, general trucking and excavation activities, including selling or delivering
goods and materials, with seasonal and market-based variations.
The locus has been used for four commercial uses since 1972. These commercial uses
include vehicle repair services, transportation services, and trucking and excavation services,
including the storage and sale of related materials and equipment, and the use of the lot by others
for the same activities. The Order does not challenge the grandfathered nature or level ofthe
vehicle repair activities or transportation services and only addresses the trucking and excavation
services, although the Appellant suggests that there is great overlap between them. For example,
the trucking activities include hauling cars junked by the repair business and the tour/charter
drivers are often the truck drivers or mechanics. Any suggestion that these are separate
businesses with separate areas of operation on the locus is inaccurate.
The vehicle repair services are provided from a garage facility, but also include ancillary
sheds and the exterior storage equipment, materials, and vehicles (including vehicles being
repaired and old vehicles beings used for parts). The commercial activities include working on
all manner of motor vehicles and engines, both inside the shop, and outside if necessary for large
vehicles, like large construction equipment, fire trucks, buses, and similar. Occasionally non-
repairable cars are crushed on site for disposal off-site. The shop has bays, lifts and a variety of
hydraulic and mechanical equipment. This use generally has 1-2 employees engaged in repair-
related work, as well as ancillary office and administrative activities. The shop is generally open
to the public from 8 am until 5 pm, seven days a week, with operations starting at 7 am and
running until 6 pm or later if needed for specialized equipment or for commercial and municipal
equipment on unconventional deadlines. There can be dozens of vehicles and pieces of
equipment in the repair rotation at any given time. Appellant also works on and repairs personal
vehicles and vehicles related to other parts of the business at this location. Although the shop
and equipment have been modernized and grown in volume over time, the operations are
essentially the same as in 1972.
The transportation services are provided primarily through operating tour and charter
vehicles, including 3 full-sized buses, which are stored and maintained outside. This use
generally has 2-3 employees driving tours and private charters off site, as well as doing ancillary
office work on site. Although tours are generally given during the day, the vehicles often come
and go from the locus early in the morning and late in the evening when chartered for events,
such as night weddings, or to get to other modes of transport, like late or early ferries. This use
is year round, seven days a week, although it peaks during the wedding and tourist seasons
Although the vehicles and equipment have been enlarged and modernized since 1972, this use
has seen a reduction in recent years. Previously the Appellant had more than 10 buses that were
used to provide contract school bus service for the Town of Nantucket and to run a private
regular route shuttle service. Further, the Appellant also previously operated 10-12 vehicles as
rental cars and taxis from the locus, but no longer does so.
The general trucking services provided from the locus result in the exterior storage and
maintenance of related equipment and materials, which are sold or delivered from the locus or
from off-site. Since the 1960's, the equipment has included 15 or more pieces, including several
trucks, 10-wheel dump trucks, bulldozers, farm tractors, trailer trucks with various trailers, a line
truck with an auger, several large army surplus trucks, and various attachments, such as plows.
Today, Appellant uses a backhoe, a front end loader, dump trucks, several semi-trucks with
various trailers, a utility truck, several flatbed trucks, a loader, a mini-loader, a mini-excavator, a
bobcat, an excavator, several fork-lifts, various truck and tractor attachments, and similar.
This equipment is used to engage in general trucking and excavation services to and from
Nantucket and within Nantucket. The vehicles start and end their runs at the locus, although not
necessarily in the same day. Sometimes they bring materials to the locus from suppliers or from
job sites; other times they deliver materials from the locus to off-site locations for use, sale or
disposal; other times they both pick up and drop off a wide variety of loads at off-site locations.
Examples include delivering supplies from off-island to local business and contractors, hauling
junk cars and bulk items from the locus or from off-site (including cars crushed as part of the
vehicle repair services), hauling brush to and from the locus, hauling dirt and aggregate to and
from the locus, hauling firewood to and from the locus, hauling septic and masonry supplies to
and from the locus, and hauling construction and demolition debris to or from the Town Dump
(but not to the locus). Additionally, the equipment is used off-site to dig foundations, install
septic or drainage systems, trench utility tie-ins, grade land and roads, install driveways, clear
brush, make grade changes, demolish buildings, install poles, plow snow, deliver fire wood, and
deliver various goods and materials. Chester Barrett, Jr. and his father performed substantial
excavation and trucking activities as early as the 1930s and especially in the 1960s and 1970s,
such as digging and grading the Madaket boat yard and large parts of downtown Nantucket.
Later, the lot was used by Dick Arnold Trucking in the 70s and then Mr. Barrett co-operated the
North Atlantic Transfer Corporation, a general trucking company, with Richard Hillger from the
locus from 1982 until 2002 (although these dates were not the beginning or end of such uses).
3
However, the use ofthe locus does not include operating a borrow pit or other excavation of the
locus, or any processing of materials on site (e.g., crushing stone, mulching trees, sifting fill).
As part ofthese activities, some related materials are stored on, sold at, or delivered from
the locus, including pre-cast septic systems, pipes, blocks, bricks, stones, flues, sand, fill, loam,
gravel and other aggregates, shells, mulch, firewood, brush, and salvaged items. In addition to
the Appellant's own vehicles and materials, the locus has also been used to store masonry
supplies and vehicles of others.
This use is year-round, seven days a week, but fluctuates seasonally and with the market.
It has involved as many as six or more people, but is currently performed by 2-3 people. It
should be noted that these same employees who drive these trucks and do the related off-site
work also operate the yard and participate in the other commercial activities from the locus, like
driving tours and charters, and do other intermittent unrelated off-site work, such as carpentry.
Although the majority of commercial activities occur primarily off-site, some
small contractors and masons, generally driving pick-up trucks sized vehicles, have and
do come to the locus to pick up relatively small amounts of materials for foundations,
driveways, driveway aprons, chimneys, septic systems, drainage systems, and similar
(larger amounts are usually delivered off-site by Appellant, and may come from the locus
or may be delivered directly from off-site). Also, just as the Appellant does, these
customers may also come to the locus to drop off small amounts of materials from a job-
site, such as fill or brush related to an excavation. Having more than six such customers
come to the site in a single day would be a high volume day. If fact, the volume of
consumer traffic is far lower today that it would have been in the 1970's and 1980's when
the locus was used for a fire wood cooperative, which generated much more consumer
traffic, and when more of the local contractors were smaller operators.
Based on the above facts, Appellant requests that the ZEO's Order be overturned on the
grounds that the commercial activities on the locus are grandfathered as preexisting the adoption
of Nantucket's Zoning By-Law, and that and development of the uses of the locus do not require
relief by Special Permit under Section 139-33(A)(4) or otherwise. The well-established test for
whether current operations of a grandfathered use constitute a "change or substantial extension"
that subject the use to current zoning laws, and thus require relief, is the "Powers Test" from
Powers v. Building Inspector of Barnstable, 363 Mass. 648 (1973). The Powers Test provides
that relief is necessary if 1) there is a change in the nature and purpose of the use, 2) there is a
difference in quality or character, as well as degree of the use, and 3) there is a different effect on
the neighborhood. Based on the application of this test by courts to analogous cases, the current
use of the locus does trigger any prong of the Powers Test and does not require relief.
The case law provides that ordinary and reasonably adapted changes to a grandfathered
use do not change its nature or purpose, including increases in the volume of the business,
increases in the number of customers, increases volume and variety of goods sold, and increases
in the frequency of the use. Further, changes in operations to improve efficiency, either by use
of improved equipment or methods, are not changes in the nature and purpose, including
replacing, upgrading and modernizing equipment or materials, and mechanizing manual
4
operations. In contrast, courts have found that some changes of a use are changes in nature and
purpose that are not protected and would require further relief under the Powers Test, including
changing employee housing to office space, changing a storage facility to a shipping and
receiving facility, adding nightclubs to a hotel that offered bingo and movies, altering a
contractor's mixing yard into a ready-mix concrete manufacturing and supply center, changing a
grocery store into a beauty parlor, changing a facility for oxygen tanks to a facility for ice cream
cones and straws, adding a fuel business to an ice warehouse, and adding stone crushing
equipment to an excavation quarry.
In this case, the nature and purpose of the commercial use on the locus has not changed
or expanded in a manner that would trigger this prong of the Powers Test. Since prior to the
adoptions of the Zoning By-law in 1972, the locus has continuously been used to store and sell
the types of goods and materials stored and sold now, has been used as a home base for the same
types of vehicles and equipment, and has been used for the same types of commercial and
administrative activities, as above. While the material lines may have altered or expanded to
give customers more choices and meet current tastes, regulations, and technologies; the
operations may have been organized to allow for efficient storage and access to materials; the
equipment may have been modernized and upgraded; and frequency of the use may be more
regular, nothing about the current operations is of a different nature or purpose than those
preceding 1972.
The case law, while noting that the second prong of the Powers Test is very similar to the
first prong, also provides that ordinary and reasonably adapted changes to a grandfathered use do
not change its quality, character and degree so as re require relief. These include increases in
the volume of sales, increases in the number of products manufactured on a site, increases in the
number of trucks and buses stored on a site or a change in the type of vehicles, and storage of
fuel products to the storage of petroleum derived materials. In contrast, courts have found that
some changes of a use are changes in quality, character or degree that are not protected and
would require further relief under the Powers Test, including changing from a vehicle dealership
to a vehicle maintenance and service facility, changing from a food store that carried beer to an
all alcohol store, changing from a grocery store to a catering service, changing from a hotel with
activities for seniors to a hotel with 3 nightclubs and a game room where the vast majority of
revenue went from room charges to alcohol sales, changing from a truck and second-hand
furniture storage facility to a shipping and receiving warehouse incidental to a manufacturing
and wholesale operation, thirty-fold increase in sand and gravel production that doubled the area
in active use at a borrow pit with vast increases in traffic and heavy equipment, ten-fold
increases in the size of a dairy herd and doubling the land size of a dairy farm, change from
trucking incidental to furniture sales to freight hauling business, and a change from replacing
windows and minor body repair in a garage for relatives to a commercial auto repair business
using industrial equipment unlike that used before.
It is worth noting that a mere increase in the amount of business done, even a great
increase, is not a change in the degree that requires relief, but an increased use not attributable to
the growth ofthe original nonconforming uses would require relief. For example, the courts
have held that a pre-existing junk yard could not be limited to the size of its operations at the
time the use became nonconforming. However, changes in character and quality that had
5
increased the degree of use would require relief, such as a change from a business to moor and
make incidental repairs for four to five boats to a full marina, or a change from a wholesale oil
sales and storage facility for clients to an oil distribution center for other oil companies.
In this case, the use of the locus has not changed in character, quality, or degree that
would that would trigger this prong of the Powers Test. The locus is not used for new business
activities, and any increases in the amount or type of vehicles, materials, customers or shipments,
as above, are attributable to the growth of the original nonconforming uses and not comparable
to the increases in scale which required relief in other cases.
Court has also held that changes in use that have a negative impact on a neighborhood,
are not always a different effect on the neighborhood in the effect on a neighborhood under the
third prong of the Powers Test. That is, a use that produces dust, fumes, traffic, and noise, or
modest changes in hours of operation do not have a different effect on the neighborhood that
would require relief if the pre-existing uses similarly produced dust, fumes, traffic, and noise,
and had reasonably similar hours of operation. However, where a change results in new and
substantially increased noise, odor or traffic problems, or substantially different hours of
operation, then the change may require relief under the Powers Test.
Here, the effect on the neighborhood is not different in a manner that requires relief. For
example, the noise and odor from vehicle engines, from material loading/unloading, from
vehicles coming to and leaving the locus, from vehicle repairs and equipment, and from other
current commercial uses are all the same or similar types and levels of disturbances that were
attributable to the locus prior to 1972. While larger and more modern equipment is sometimes
used today, it is used for the same purposes and has the same types of impacts, if not less due to
modern efficiencies and reductions in frequency due to added capacity. Similarly, the hours of
operation of the locus have consistently been before and after regular business hours and
included work on the weekends because such hours are necessitated by the ferry schedule, the
schedules of contractor clients, the schedules of charter clients, and the needs of clients that
required weekend repairs, such as the Town (especially the Fire and School Departments) and
other heavy equipment users. While the current residential neighborhood has mostly grown up
around the Appellant (this area had few houses in 1972), Appellant has not materially changed
its impact.
The Appellant also notes that many of the complaints of the opposing abutters in Board
of Appeals File No. 187-07, were for disturbances that were not related to the commercial use of
the locus or of the use in question. For example, there were several complaints about increased
use of Somerset Road and Friendship Lane by large trucks, but this did not take into account that
trucks not related to the locus regularly use this area to by-pass more congested roads and that
the substantial development in this area, which has grown up around the Appellant, results in
more truck traffic for construction, utilities, heating fuel, and waste disposal trucks. Further, the
times of the complaints for truck noises and smells were more consistent with the tour and
charter business, which is not in question here. Other alleged disturbances on the locus were not
new, increased, or ongoing commercial activities, but temporary actions related to the clean-up
and organization ofthe locus. For example, although Appellant regularly stored vehicle parts
and hauled junk cars and equipment from the locus prior to 1972, it had also acquired a
6
substantial collection of residential and commercial vehicles on the locus. To remedy this,
Appellant crushed and removed scores of cars, trucks, buses, and similar, and also organized its
inventory, all in a short period of time. This project greatly increased the noise and traffic on the
locus beyond its normal business activities for a short period, but this use and disturbance is not
an ongoing commercial activity. Appellant also ground up old cement pads and old dead trees to
remove them from the locus, but Appellant does not regularly or commercially process materials,
such as crushing stone, shredding mulch, sifting fill, or batching cement or asphalt, nor does it
use the locus as a borrow pit or otherwise excavate the locus for commercial purposes. The
neighbors inaccurately attributed this increased the noise and traffic on the locus to an increase in
business and changes in use, but that is not the case.
Appellant requests that the ZEO's Order be overturned on the grounds that the
commercial activities on the locus are grandfathered as preexisting the adoption of Nantucket's
Zoning By-Law, and that and development of the uses of the locus do not require relief by
Special Permit under Section 139-33(A)(4) or otherwise.
Further, as this case is nearly identical that in Board of Appeals File No. 187-07,
Appellant requests a waiver ofthe filing fee.
F,\WpB\BARRETT\chester\ZBA\ZBAappea12nd.doc
7
FROM
FAX NO. : 5082283823 --------~,t;=E.:., 16 2008 01: 19PM P2
Tolephone 508-228-7225
Fax 508-228-7249
Notice of Zoning Code
'Violation
And
Order to Cease, Desist,
and Abate
Mr./Mrs./Ms. Chester Barrett, Jr., Trustee, and all persons having notice of this order:
As owner/occupant of the premises/structures located at 21 Somerset Rd. (Map# 56,
Parcel# 163), you are hereby notified that you are in violation ofthe Nantucket Zoning
Code ~13'9-33A(4) and arc ORDERED this date, 09/15/08, to:
,'ft."':
~4.~.',.::-.,;
: 'i;/'"
~\'
1. IMMEDIATELY CEASE AND DESIST all functions connected with this
violation on, or at, the above mentioned premises.
Snmmnry of
Violation
*139-33A(4): Expansion of pre-existing, nonconfomUng use
without the bel1efit of a special permit.
2. COMMENCE, within five (5) days, action to abate this violation pennanently.
Summary of Action
to AbJlte
Stop any and all of the expanded commercial uses of your
property, centering around trucking and excavation activities and
storage of materials related thereto, \.mtil such a time that the
appropriate permitting has been received.
Zoning violations may result infines of up fc' $300 per day, as allowed in ~139-2S of
the Zoning Code.
If you are aggrieved by this notice and order, you may show cause a<; to why you should
not be required to comply by Liling an appeal with the Nantucket Zoning Board of
Appeals, as specified in S 139~31 of the Zoning Code, within thirty (30) days of tlrls order.
s Silverstein
Zoning Enforcement Officer
Town of Nantucket
~
~
......
'l)
~
')
~
Z
-d'
Cd
~
~
~
J-<
II)
e
'='
CI:l
'-
Bk: 01117 Pg: 234
I~~~I~.~~I
Bk: 1117 Pg: 234 Page: 1 of 1
Doc: DO 12/17/200707:46 AM
QUITCLAIM DEED
I, Chester S. Barrett, .Jr. of21 Somerset Road, Nantucket, Nantucket County, Massachusetts
for consideration paid and in full consideration of ONE and 00/100 DOLLARS
grant to Chester S. Barrett, Jr. of 21 Somerset Road, Nantucket, Nantucket County,
Massachusetts, Trustee of the Barrett Family Trust, under declaration of trust dated October 17,
2006 as evidenced by the Trustee's Certificate recorded at Book 1054, Page 186.
WITH QUITCLAIM COVENANTS
the land in said Nantucket together with all buildings thereon, situated in the western part of the
Town, bounded and described as follows: North, East ano Sonthby hiZhw!iY~ 8nd on the We~r
by land formerly of William B. Stevens, containing about three and one quarter acres. Being the
same property conveyed to Bertha M. Dunham by Walter M. Burdick by deed dated October 10,
1938, recorded with Nantucket Deeds Book 108, Page 536.
Said land is shown on a map drawn by Schofield Brothers, Inc., as Map 56, Parcel 163.
......
N
For title, see Estate of Chester S. Barrett, Nantucket Probate Docket No.: 3657 and Estate of
Marguerite Barrett, Nantucket Probate Docket No.: 3837, and Deed of Robert M. Barrett
r~corded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 134, Page 510.
~
o
o
~
Title has not been searched and is not being certified.
WITNESS my hand and s~al this ~_ day of ~~ ,2007.
NANTUCKET LAND BANK
. / CERTIACATE
J~~ /I~rft o Paid $
Chester S. Barrett, Jr. l~~j.
O~
;?tY10v' '1/.:' CJ1
;~~
STATE OF MASS.^.CHUSETfS
COUNTY OF _lJo..."'~
On this ~ day of ~..e..~ , 2007, before me, the undersigned notary
public, personally appeared Chester ~tt, Jr., prced to me through satisfactory evidence of
identification, which was M.k- ~ \ ~ to be the person whose name
is signed on the preceding/attached document, and acknowledged to me that he signed it
voluntarily for its stated purpose.
~ Notary Public
W Jennifer M.1CiIIn
. Commonwealth of Masaac:......
My COIl1misslon Explrel on 111W2012
xpires:
..I
.~
I
r
~I
,..
_.S1
uo....
-~
OJ&.
5l.
[
II'
..1..'-',,",.1-.1. '-'..I.. l."u.J.J.\.Y.VJ.'\..Vl. "VV '\.J.lU -.1 .LJ..LJ.t.UUJ.V .lY.lUP
I (It;V I VI L,
Town of Nantucket Web GIS
I
r--'<"--~~""-"'---~~~"-'j'~--
1 Prop 10 56 163 i
j Address 21 SOMERSET RD I
! OwnerBARRETI CHESTER S JR l
! C/O BARRElT CHESTER S j
, ~~ ~~MERSET RD I'
I NANTUCKET, MA 2554
i Sale Date
! Sale Price $0
I Book/Page 00134/510
) Lot Size
(
t
NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT
~
For general reference only: Important
caveats which must be considered when
using this data are available from the
j Nantucket GIS Coordinator.
ii' Disclaimer The Information displayed on this or
any other map produced by The Town of
I Nantucket is for reference purposes only. The
i Town of Nantucket does not guarantee the
! accuracy of the data. Users are responsible for
J determining the suitability for individual needs.
1 All information is from the Town of Nantucket
~ r.;t::lnnr~nhir Tnf'nrm~tinn C;vc:tt::lm (~T,' rf~t~h~C:t::l
Town of Nantucket, Mass
3 acres
Map Composed
http://host.appgeo.com/nantucketma/PrintableMap.aspx?Preserve= Width&Map Width=345... 8/31/2007
Town ofNantuckeFWe15 GIS - Printable Map
Page 1 of2
Town of Nantucket Web GIS
Prop ID
Address
Sale Date
Sale Price
Book/Page
Lot Size
56 163
21 SOMERSET RD
$0
00134/ 510
3 acres
NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT
For general reference only: Important
caveats which must be considered when
using this data are available from the
Nantucket GIS Coordinator.
Disclaimer The information displayed on this or
any other map produced by The Town of
Nantucket is for reference purposes only. The
Town of Nantucket does not guarantee the
accuracy of the data. Users are responsible for
determining the suitability for individual needs.
All Information is from the Town of Nantucket
r.:~(\nr;:l.nhir Tnf(\rm~tif\n C;;vc::h::.m (hIe:., rI;=t"~h~c:p.
11
fl
\ .
\
\
\
o .: lo.
t
l
>1
1
"\
J
24
.i
Town of Nantu
~6am!p~
http://host.appgeo.com/nantucketma/PrintableMap.aspx?Preserve=Width&Map Width=312... 7/18/2007
:tCi'
~} 0"0
Vi~ lYO-1.t:lCf,..r
J~\, J..~~t,s 'b",,,,",
..., " €'#
: ~
,1 /
" I
I ,
I I
I I
I /
/ ''\...."
y, i '\...
. .;../ I
1'1.~, !. .*
it il/ / ~ ~
~ I ,;; ,,/
/ /~; ~
('0, kt :~ / S49.~;~6T
<:~~)j}('"
'-..' ) ,r.
. /, :,'
~~ ' /fi / ~
'" ~N N'", S.HJNO/SS,,,,,,,, ~ ~ ": ~, !1
,l,JNno" NO ~0Hs S.. 96t '!Jd CJ, I ~ I
1St ><JOB O]Je NI NjJl"l :JNI1 J.J3~J.S ~ ~ f ~ J
I ~ I
, ,
"fO"/~~9_J~ J._~
L -6, SN'", NO N<<OHS S, >NO lJ.kJJs --..s----.: ,
, ~ I
I d I
. Q;::
" ~ I
, , ,
,--- es:
.i! , ~-..
ril ,..... fJ-
~ :
~ ~,
! ~\~'Q~ ~
/+rt},t> ~.
.j> /;p,l
- '\ !-,."\:./
,fft.ll,~1.68S .~ r I
..cIo'M 3A/~ 7j,~b:)----- ~ '. I
----------~ ~ I
M"'~"N /., ~. " 4"
-'. / hi
~f...(", " ~
~ ('.~.'t- I ~
--~,!r Jrll,,~
'\ ~S,' t " ~a
I I !~/ I /1II~
I Yt', {"
I :to-I I I
,-' ~~ ~! I .J.r06~
'-"- ~ I ~ ~~""<s
I :
, ,
, ,
, ,
I ,
, I
.):. I IW;)
I~ i I~
~ ; :
I ,
, I
;)11' I
"~~ ' :
ci I I
Q'j I I
Vi~ ] I
I :
, .
I ~
! I~
:~~.
r~;
, ""
:'-'.J:
1 051
1::5:
. I Q: p.
~ I ~I .
~ 1__:
'"l ;~: t-.
\~ \ ~
,'- ,
.~ 'I~:
~ Q:,
I~ \~:
~ ~ :
: I,):.
J !~I
: : ~
- / I
C "'''' M,....r;..N,.l , , C>
~~:~;~ ---------------------S:'1>i:C~@
70("9~, Olv........~.., ~'r_-<:. ---_____________ '''>:\:.('r~ ~
0" v:'~.,"_- _,''''.
--------: 101 Y'.. '" ~-<- "6>1 MS~".S g~1 " '
"'HaM'" ~~ ~. \ ,
"'HO MJ~ MOO'J" / ",;.1 "L6rr;, ON N,,,,, , .i
~~ :Ja 06107 It...
~~ 'OV)
. .
~~
.
~
~
~
~
~
.
~~ ~ 0-
~~~ ~
O~Cl ~
~~ ~- ~ ~
t:~o: ~
~e: ~
~~( ~
~
a,
AI'.",'L6GS
/,,-
:to'
~h
(.J~ ~ ~
~
- ".
~ ~ ~
... 1...i -
~
'" '.
~ , ~
s ~ ~
8
11
.
o
~
~-
Q~
~~
~
8
~
5
~
<
:;~
Q~
~~
r
"
~
~ ~I
..ti
~ ,
~
~
g;~
c,
~~
"
.th
iU~
~\J~~~
!l"'~l
~ ~ii~~
~ a~~~
~ ~;:~~
I~
J7:Je;/:J e;J1SJIi:JIVIr/'V
~
~~~
::s~~
~:r,
~,~
~:~~
'il~~
~~~
~ (
,IC40r
(HJ.O* ]791'/~~11)
.r6r"l
~~
~~ ~
~:: "C:
~-
~li "
ie ;;
~~
~I
ti
,
t,~
~~~
"'~~~
:t:t ._
~li",
~Q:t
~~;
ri/FFlOR[NCf t;lmN
1H~~S ::~9S ;~~~76
PLAN NO
5UIrI[RSEr NOUIN[{ TRUST
N/F'STANTON
MA;~:~Ni/;75 4::-;2J
PLAN NO.
~
"
~ .
1Il~:
~~~
~~~
~~~~
~~ ,
i~ ~
~ (
~
'"
, ~
ti ~ ~ ~
\r~.... Q
~~ g :t
~ l $ ~
. I~
. iIi~~
l i~( ~
~~ In ~ ~
~ ~ '.-
~ii(~~f
h~~~i~
~f ...~~ ~ ~
~ go"~~ ~
~id~~~ ~
h~~~i ~
, --i ·
r~... :it
~(!~ ~~
;iM IIIII~I
II;I! II1I11
;;
i
::;
Q ~~~
~1il:~Q:;
-'e~t;..:
~~~:8
z=cn~~
.::5~er;:V1~
c... ~NZ
'"
'"'
::c
u
~
!i
~
Town of Nantucket Web GIS - Printable Map
Town of Nantucket Web GIS
Page 1 of2
2-003
Prop 10
Address
Owner
Sale Date
Sale Price
Book/Page
Lot Size
56 163
21 SOMERSET RD
BARRETT CHESTER S JR
TRST
BARRETT FAMILY TRUST
21 SOMERSET RD
NANTUCKET, MA 2554
12/07/2006
$0
01054/0188
3 acres
NOT A LEGAL DOCUM ENT
For general reference only: Important
caveats which must be considered when
using this data are available from the
Nantucket GIS Coordinator.
DI~~lairlJ_~ The information displayed on this or
any other map produced by The Town of
Nantucket IS for reference purposes only. The
Town of Nantucket does not guarantee the
accuracy of the data. Users are responsible for
determining the slJltabillty (or 1I1d,Vlduili neelJs
All information IS from the Town of Nantucket
r::;D(Vlr;.lnhir Tnfnrrn:~t-i"'H' <::\/c.:l"prr' rr::.rc;, dAtAr",;H'::o::.>
O.
Town of Nantucket, Mass
Map Composec
http://host.appgeo.com/nantucketmalPrintableMap.aspx?Preserve=Width&Map Width=432... 7/11/2008
Town of Nantucket Web GIS - Printable Map
Page I of2
Town of Nantucket Web GIS
Prop ID
Address
Owner
Sale Date
Sale Price
Book/Page
Lot Size
56 163
21 SOMERSET RD
BARRETT CHESTER S JR
cia BARRETT CHESTER S
JR TR
21 SOMERSET RD
NANTUCKET, MA 2554
$0
00134/ 510
. 3 acres
l<f?e--
NOT A LEGAL DOC:Uf\1ENT
FOr reference only: Important
caveats which must be considered when
using this data art: available from the
Nantucket GIS Coordinator.
Di$clqlmcr Tr~f:: =r;furn1ZttlOn diSpL0:yed on th~s or
any other pr()duced by The rown of
Nantucket is reference purposes only. The
T<f>ts'n r"f Nantucket DOCS not guarantee the
of the datiL responsible for
the in<]lvioued needs,
A.U!$; frO(tl tho. Town Of N0nttKket
'-,:~/k,r-";~")hl( fltf^l'?n~\hnfl .>:':t)<.:::t~Hn fGlr,::\ !"L,~t::4h~~<:t::'
Town of Nantucket, Mass
Map Composed
http://host.appgeo.cOIn/nantucketma/Printab leMap.aspx?Preserve=Wi dth&Map W idth=864... 8/3 1/2007
~
/~:>
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
f)Q~
) "t.
~g
00 ..:
............0
.~
Affidavit of Chester Barrett, Jr.
I, Chester Barrett Jr., depose and say:
1. I am a resident of Nantucket, Massachusetts, residing and working at 21 Somerset Road (Locus).
2. My family runs several businesses from the locus, including a motor vehicle repair and service center, a
sight-seeing tour company, and a general trucking and excavation company. In the past, we also ran
other discontinued enterprises from the locus, such as a car rental company, and a taxi company.
3. The trucking and excavation aspect of the business has operated from the locus since the late 1930s. My
father hauled dirt, shoveled by hand, to excavate, grade or fill properties at various locations on the
island, and over the years we have done everything from small residential jobs to major commercial
jobs, like the Madaket boat yard and the land at Salem and Washington Street downtown in the late
1960s. Sometimes the fill came from my land and other times we the fill would come from another site.
4. The trucking business grew steadily in the 1960s to include 15 or more pieces of equipment operated by
4-6 people at any time. The equipment included several trucks, a 10-wheel dump trucks, bulldozers,
farm -style tractors, trailer trucks with various trailers, and a line truck with an auger. We engaged in
trucking services that included hauling dirt, delivering masonry and related materials for foundations and
septic systems, delivering fire wood, hauling junk and old cars, clearing brush, grading land, plowing
snow, installing telephone poles, and otherwise. We also stored many related items on the locus, such as
cement blocks, bricks, gravel, septic systems, pipes, and salvaged items.
5. The trucking and excavation business is only slightly larger than it was prior to the enactment of
Nantucket's Zoning Bylaws in 1972. As a small family-owned and operated business, we still average
4-6 people working in the trucking and excavation aspect of the business on days when we are doing that
kind of work. As in the 1960s, this number can increase on an unusual day, such as plowing after a
major snow storm, but can also drop to days when there is no one doing trucking work (my boys engage
in carpentry and other vocations to supplement these days). We now have about 25 pieces of trucking-
related equipment, although some of the Army-surplus equipment we used previously has been replaced
with modem versions designed to do the same tasks more effectively. We also stock mostly the same
materials on the lot, as needed, such as gravel, loam, cement (bags and blocks), and similar, although the
old septic systems built from cement blocks have been replaced by pre-cast concrete tanks. .
6. The disturbance to my neighbors related to the trucking business has not changed since the 1960s.
Ironically, I began a major clean up of the locus a few years ago that may be the source of the complaint
against me. That is, we have been crushing and removing a substantial amount of junk from the locus,
including 30 or more old buses, tons on scrap metal, and 100 or more old cars. This temporary clean up
project is not a new commercial activity and does not represent an increase in the commercial activities
of my trucking and excavation company.
Executed under penalties of perjury this L day of ~, 2007.
~/~ ()~ j
r
Chester Barrett, Jr.
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
On this 1L day of (jC r , 2007, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Chester
Barrett, Jr., proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were
At /I 5 rat.e Z/J to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached
document, and who swore or affirmed to me that the contents of the document are truthful and accurate to the
best of his knowledge and belief.
~~
Notary Public
Printed name:
My commission expires:
F:\ WpB\BARREffichester\ZBA \AffidavitChesterBarrett.DOC
~ STEVEN LYLE COHEN
~ NObJr,' Public
;~>t~ .~COO'iTlOnWeallh' 01 .Massach~setts
m My Comrf1lsslonExplres
March 2, 2012
2
Affidavit of Richard E. Hilll!er. Jr.
I, Richard E. Hillger, JI., depose and say:
1. I currently reside at 26 Jackson Pond Road, New Hampton, New Hampshire.
2. I visited Nantucket seasonally from 1951 to 1968, when I moved to Nantucket year-round. My longest
address was at 3 South Shore Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts, from 1974 to 2002.
3. I have personal knowledge of the activities at 21 Somerset Road (locus) and of the trucking related
.activities of the Barrett family since the 1970s.
4. As part of my business, I was a frequent visitor to the locus from the 1970s until I left Nantucket in
2002. In fact, from 1982 until 2002, I was business partners with Chester Barrett, Jr., in the North
Atlantic Transfer Corporation, which operated as a general trucking company from the locus during that
time. We plowed snow, hauled dirt, junk and wood, and specialized in delivering building supplies,
especially masonry supplies, which were sold to contractors from the locus. Chester also supplied
gravel, loam, and other materials related to grading land and installing foundations and septic systems.
To my knowledge, Chester has continued these trucking and excavation activities thought his family
business run from the locus.
5. While some of the supplies were only stored temporarily at the locus prior to delivery or were gathered
from off-locus sites, we maintained an inventory on the locus too. It would vary, but there were often 70
or 80 pallets of cement block and dozens of pallets of bags of cement mix on the locus.
6. The Barretts have continually stored trucking and excavation equipment and materials on the locus, as
well as cement blocks, gravel, dirt, and similar materials. During the time of my involvement, there
were 15 or so pieces of heavy equipment and usually 2-3 people involved in trucking activities.
Executed under penalties of perjury this 5 day of July, 200
---
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
July 5, 2007
On this 26 day of June, 2007, before me, the undersigned notary pUbl~erSOnallY Richard E. Hillger,
proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were AJj >'7trte I//. to be the
person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and who swore or affirmed to me that the
contents ofthe document are truthful and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief.
~~
Notary Public ~ STEVEN LYLE COHEN
M .. '. ~~ Notary Public
y commISSIOn expIres, ,,~...: .~conlmonwealthofMassactl{jsetts
. J~ /f My Commission Expires
/ t March 2. 2012
Affidavit of Wayne Morris
I, Wayne Morris, depose and say:
1. I reside at 58 Somerset Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts.
2. I have personal knowledge of the activities at 21 Somerset Road (locus) and of the trucking related
activities of the Barrett family since 1969 (which is when met Nancy Barrett, whom I later married in
1973).
3. I have been a mason since 1969. Between 1969 and 1972, Chester S. Barrett, Jr., hired me several times
to provide the labor to install block foundations on commercial jobs on which Mr. Barrett had excavated
the foundation and supplied the materials from his yard at 21 Somerset Road.
4. I was in the United States Marine Corps from 1972 - 1974 and returned to Nantucket after that time to
be a mason.
5. In 1976, I went into business for myself as a full service mason and rented space on the Southerly
portion of 21 Somerset Road to store my materials. These included cement block, bricks, mortar, bags
of cement, flu liners, sand, gravel, and other masonry supplies and equipment.
6. These materials are similar to what Mr. Barrett already had on the land prior to 1972, and has had since.
7. I moved to my own shop in 1984, but to my knowledge the Barretts have continued to stored their
trucking and excavation equipment and materials on the locus and have engaged in the same commercial
activities since, including selling masonry supplies.
Executed under penalties of perjury this 26 day of June, 2007
~+I1t~
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
July 17, 2007
On this 26 day of June, 2007, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally Wayne Morris,
proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were to be the
person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and who swore or affirmed to me that the
contents of the document are truthful and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief.
~
~
Notary Public
My commission expires:
~ STEVEN LYLE COHEN
j ~~ ] ~ Notary Public
I, ,;' /. nCommonweaJt~ of, Massachusetts
~\th,.:r My CommiSSion Expires
~r March 2, 2012
F:\ WpB\BARREffichester\ TruckingZBA \AffidavitMorris ,DOC
Affidavit of James Mauser
I, James Mauser., depose and say:
1. I reside at 18 Keel Lane, Nantucket.
2. I have had personal knowledge of the activities at 21 Somerset Road (locus) since the 1970s, since and
before my sister married Chester Barrett, Jr.
3. I am a mason by trade, and since 1984 I have stored masonry supplies and materials at the locus. There
include brick, cement blocks, flu tiles, stones, and similar.
4, While I am not a part of the Barrett's business, I have observed that they have had numerous pieces of
heavy e~l.~ipment and trucks on the locus, and that the locus has acted as a storage/staging area for the
sale and delivery of masonry supplies and materials for use off site.
Executed under penalties of perjury this 8 ~Att, 2007
v:...~1
^ /1
l \....----- I [, -, - -..,
'I .
J ames..Mauser
\J
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
August 8, 2007
On this 8th day of August, 2007, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally James Mauser,
proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were //4 1/ *~ to be the
person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and who 'swore or affirmed to me that the
contents ofthe document are truthful and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief.
~';Ldu-
Notary Public
My commission expires:
F:\ WpB\BARRETI\chester\ZBA \AffidavitMauser,DOC
~ STEVEN LYLE COHEN
~~ ). Notary Public
~ ~commollwealth of Massachusetts
,II My Commission Expires
/' March 2, 2012
Affidavit of GeoT1?:e R. Manchester
I, George R. Manchester, depose and say:
1. I reside at 12 Boyton Lane, Nantucket, Massachusetts. From the early 1950s until 1997, I previously
lived at 11 Somerset Road and then 7 Somerset Road.
2. I have personal knowledge of the activities at 21 Somerset Road (locus) and of the trucking related
activities of the Barrett family since the 1950s.
3. As a childhood friend of Chester Barrett Jr., and later as an employee, I have been a frequent visitor to
the locus. I personally observed Chester Barrett, Jr., and his father before him, and his sons since, store
and operate trucking related equipment and materials on the locus, in the 1950s and since.
4. In the 1960s, I personally drove trucks and plows, and engaged in other trucking related activities for the
Barretts.
5. As a child in the 50s, I would ride along with the trucks as they filled and dumped dirt, delivered cement
block and wood, and engaged in other trucking activities.
6. I have personal knowledge that the Barretts hauled fill and other materials when Walter Beinecke filled
the down town marina in the 1960s.
7. The Barretts have continually stored their trucking and excavation equipment and materials on the locus,
as well as cement blocks, gravel, dirt, and other materials.
Executed under penalties of perjury this 26 day of June, 2007
~~ ~.If/~..
George .Manchester
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
June 26, 2007
On this 26 day of June, 2007, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally George R.
Manchester, proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were /fin ;;1-
to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and who swore or affirmed to me
that the contents of the document are truthful and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief.
.%~~
Notary Public
My commission expires:
F:\W pB\BARRET1\chester\ TruckingZBA \AffidavitManchester.DOC
~ STEVEN 1_',,-::: .;Of-iEN
~~ ) Notarv P"olic
W~commonwealtil' of Massachusetts
V . My Commission Expires
. . , March 2, 2012
Affidavit of Robert McGradv
I, Robert McGrady, depose and say:
1. I reside at 123 Hummock Pond Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts and have lived there or nearby all my
life.
2. I have personal knowledge and observations of the activities at 21 Somerset Road (locus) and of the
trucking related activities of the Barrett family since the 1950s.
3. As a childhood friend of Chester Barrett Jr., I was a frequent visitor to the locus. I personally observed
Chester Barrett, Jr., and his father before him, and his sons since, store and operate trucking related
equipment and materials on the locus, in the 1950s and since.
4. To my recollection, and apart from their other businesses, it is my estimation that the Barretts have
continually stored 20 or so trucks and pieces of trucking and excavation related heavy equipment on the
locus, as well as cement blocks, septic tank pieces, gravel, dirt, and other materials.
5. In the 1960s, I personally drove snowplows for the Barretts.
6. In the 1960s the Barretts used their line truck to drive telephone poles in my yard to act as a frame for a
barn.
Executed under penalties of peIjury this 22 day of June, 2007
~
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
June 22,2007
On this 22 day of June, 2007, before me, the undersigned notary public, persona~lj Robert McGrady,
proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were At d ~>~ ?tJ/St?17S" :z:-~
to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding or attached document, and who swore or affirmed to me
that the contents of the document are truthful and accurate to the best of his knowledge and belief.
C?~~
~liC
My commission expires:
~ STEVEN LYLE COHEN
~~ } Notary Public
, ~commOnwealth of Massachusetts
~~ KH~/r My Commission Expires
~_;.-r March 2,2012
June 27, 2007
A ttys. Arthur
6 Young's Way
Box 2669
Nantucket, MA
Reade and Stephen Cohen
02584
Regarding:
In response to neighborhood complaints
against the operation of large trucks
by Chester Barrett & sons
Gentlemen:
We have lived in the neighborhood for ten years
but have known Chester and his family for about 25 years,
since the early eo's.
We worked for Chester (in the eO's) - driving snowplows
and school buses and chopping, loading, and delivering
firewood from his land when he had leased a portion of it
to the Wood Co-op so that island families might purchase
wood for their stoves and fireplaces at less cost than was
being charged by .other commercial operations.
We have always known Chester and his sons to be hard-working,
talented, and conscientious drivers and mechanics - not just
an asset to the community - the core of the community.
As a young adult, I (Bruce) worked with Chester through
long winter nights - driving his trucks to plow snow on the
roads of Nantucket and at Nantucket Memorial :l\3,:rport;. .
, ~
I also drove Chester's bUses to safely deliv~pi' ~(1ildr.oo~~:
"I i~'
Nantucket's public schools. And we have alw~lYs!f1known
Chester and his family to be ready and willing ~b lend a
, '.'.),!
helping hand. ""'~~""l.,.~..,
~
I
~p.,>.~*~~",-_""c~,-<"-"<,
;. '. ~
l,.;
;: ~:.
~
0<-. ~f
"":
The Barretts are the kindest, gentlest, most giving
people anyone could ever hope to live next door to.
We have been very fortunate to know them.
Sometimes in the evening we hear one large truck
rumble by. It's the sound of answered prayer
for our neighbors' well-being and we simply say
to one another, "Scotty'S home."
Sincerely,
~ /.~ CfJTX::LCDuon
Bruce and Carol Cowan
e Somerset Road
P. O. Box 77
Nantucket, MA 02554
50S. 22S .1444
cc: Chester Barrett
FROt1
FAX NO. :5082283823
Oct. 03 2007 02:11PM P1
. '<' .... '. ,:)
'''. _.' . ".
~ '. - .' .')1
'. .
.:'; J'J!.
Yahoo! Mail - barrett_ cnterprises@yahoo.com
Page 1 of 1
~HOO'~MAIL
. C~.t\t,,;i~
Print - Close Window
From:
"Breda" <jcb@lnantucket.l1et>
To: barrett,enterprlses@yahoo.com
Subject: Trevor let me now what you think???
Date:
Tue, 2 Oct 200711:56:39 -0400
board of appeals f1l1e no 087-07 chester barrett
Dear Chair & members of the zoning boards.
I feel inclined to write in defense of the Barrett family at 21 Somerset road.
We live at and own 56 and 54 Meadowview drive which backs up to 21 Somerset road.We
have lived here for the last 6 years . and have no complaints of noise at 21 Somerset, if
anything we have seen vast improvements and find our neighbors at 21 Somerset very
considerate who have owned that property for generations,We much prefer to hear the
occasional beep of a truck backing up . than to have a sub division on there land ,wnich I am
sure could happen if the zoning board turns down there appeal for a special permit.lf that was
to happen ,the next thing you would see is Meadowview and Somerset being paved over and
I am sure the noise of the traffic, would be far greater than what we hear now.
Sincerely yours
Jim Byrne and Breda Riggs
"us.f509.mail.vnhoo.com/vm/Showl ,ett.er?hox=Tnhox&MsnTd=4\ 76 1599757 ~X167... 10/2/2007