HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-04-13
ry
...
7:0:: ,~
U--:;;I;'~....-:-r~J ,--.-- - - ----~~
~ rrr~
CLA-L l(~ Ir
~~Y-o
k~
.~ ~;c~
. waUtJ-.
o-v
...
~ 2&14
.
a
. ~~ i\ .
...
~
Meeting of the zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993 at 1:00p.m.
in the Selectmen's Hearing Room, Town and County Building,
Nantucket, Ma 02554
Application no. 068-921 Clover Developmentl Cedar Grovel Tillotson
was a continuation of the case. Attorney Ted Tillotson said the
case will be tried May 10,1993.
Motion was made to continue the application until June 4,1993 and
the time would be extended to June 15,1993. Motion was seconded by
Ann Balas. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
Application no. 026-93 I Clarification Marv and Jamie Marksl Toombs
Court/Reade Attorney Arthur Reade for the applicant. Mr. Reade
said he had substantial discussion with the Nantucket Land Council.
They had contemplated filing an appeal. As a result, Mr. Reade said
he had worked out an arrangement with their counsel ,attorney Peter
Finn in Boston, and the Decison should be modified with 2
conditions that are more restrictive than the Decision drafted
earlier. Necessary is the insertion of a condition that there be
not more than 100 game birds. The prepared game waste products will
be removed weekly and disposed of in correct manner. Mr. Dale said
he requested modification of the Decision. Mr. Dale asked if there
is any discussion on the Modification from the Board. Robert
Leichter said he felt this was a good effort that saves money and
saves time. Spencer Cowan, Zoning Board Administrator, said that he
appreciates what they are trying to accomplish, however, this is a
modification and requires the statutory required public notice. Ron
Santos, Building Commissioner, said that he did agree with Spencer
Cowan, something he did not often do. Mr. Cowan said that he felt
this was a dangerous precedent. Mr. Santos said the applicant must
advertise. Mr. Santos said it must come up for a legal hearing.
Attorney Arthur Reade said there is a strong policy of the law in
favor of the settling of cases. "If you are denying the request
you are sending a message to the applicants to file an appeal. Time
is lost by the applicant and money is lost by the Town on legal
fees to no good purpose. If you dont allow the applicant to work
this out you are forcing this sinerio," said Mr. Reade. He
referred to the Tenaco oil case that was a situation in which the
city council of Springfield granted a special Permit. The Supreme
Court held this is dirty pool. The clear purpose of the notice is
so that the opposing applicants have had a chance to have their
opinions heard. If there is no opposing opponent then people should
be encouraged and not discouraged to settle. Nancy Sevrens said
that if the appeals period has run they voluntarily surrendered
their rights. " No matter what action this Board takes it can not
order Ronnie (the Building Commissioner) to do what it wants."
Attorney Reade said," We are not asking the Board to order Ronnie
to do anything. Ronnie, you are asking the Board for a modification
not a clarification." Ron Santos said, " If its a Modification then
modify it." Robert Leichter asked is it possible to agree in
private? We have an agreement in private already. Arthur Reade
said this is the land council's concern. Modification by voluntary
agreement takes away any of the concern. It is a modification not
ff
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
a clarification. Spencer Cowan said he thinks there is another way
to take care of this. One way is an easement. Mr. Cowan said he
felt other ways to accomplish this should be explored. This is a
very bad way to do this without notice . Ann Balas said she thought
there should be notice on this. Attorney Reade said that we have
a Decision on this that enables us to do this so we will not be
back. Mr. Reade said, " The point is if you don't grant a
modification you are setting a precedent all right that will come
back to haunt you. What you are doing is forcing people who are
agreed to go further. The Board of Appeals will not let cases be
settled in a rational manner without some sort of legal process."
Motion was made by Robert Hourihan to add 2 restrictions to the
Decision:
1. 100 live game birds will be allowed on the property.
2. The orgers (intestines,etc.) will be hauled off properly and
disposed of properly.
Linda Holland said that she talked to the Marks. She said she felt
that on the basis of the scientific data they could do what they
want. It's unfortunate to force people to go through the legal
steps. Motion was seconded. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
The Board at this time is Michael O'Mara, Michael Angelastro, Ann
Balas, Linda Williams, and Nancy Sevrens. Ann Balas is Acting
Chairman.
Application 020-93/ Allan and Harriette Fox/ Greenleaf Road / Reade
Michael Angelastro said that he and Neil have done substantial
business in the past. He wanted to make his past association part
of the record. Mr. Angelastro said that if anyone had an objection
or if anyone has a problem with his sitting on the Board, then he
would step down. No one had any obj ections so Mr. Angelastro
remained on the Board for this application.
Ann Balas, Chairman, said that this is going to be lengthy
application. Attorney Arthur Reade represented the applicant. He
said," Here is the situation." He went on to discuss the
application as a request for relief by Variance under s 139-32A
from the requirements of intensity regulations. They are in
violation of the minimum lot area and the maximum ground cover
ratio. The lot contains 77,413 approximately square feet and a
minimum of 80,000 SF is required. The premises have a ground cover
ratio of 4.48% which equals 3,468 SF. A maximum ground cover of 4%
is allowed or 3,097 SF. The address of the property is 18 Greenleaf
Road off of Eel Point Road. He showed a plan on the blackkboard
to the Board and said that this plan is the official plan of
record. The subdivision consists of the remaining 5 lots identical
size. Mr. Reade said that the applicant's first problem comes up
2
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
after they built a house on their property. The lot contains
77,413 SF. Michael Brackman did the survey. 80,000 is the lot area
that is required. This is not a conforoming lot. What has happened
with the lots is that Lot 66 has a lot all in separate ownership.
" So the first part of what we are asking is a variance to relieve
our lot 66 of the 80,000 SF that is required", said Attorney Reade.
As to the basis for granting the Variance, Mr. Reade gave a past
case. Mr. Reade said that in terms of recourse they have been
through the whole process. Attorney Reade said the second point
is the ground cover of the existing structure. Neil Parent, the
architect, is here today to help explain as to how the ground cover
has come up to what it is today. Michael Angelastro asked about the
ground cover. Michae O'Mara asked when the house was built? Arthur
Reade said 1990. " When was the certificate of occupancy given?"
asked Linda Williams. Arthur Reade said, " We need a co thats why
we are before you." Neil Parent said that he didn' t normally
appear before the Board. I'm not a lawyer. Mr. Parent talks about
the ground cover. He said that he met with the Buiding
Commissioner. Mr. Parent said the Building Commissioner differed
with him. "I did not agree with him. I went back and recalculated
the ground cover. I amended the original application. Mr. Santos
told me to be very careful." Nantucket Surveyors included all of
the porch in the ground cover so it is over ground cover. All of
the work was started prior to the changes in the language. In the
November, 1990 town meeting during most of the time of the
permitting process it was allowed. Mr. Parent went by the
applicable By Laws at the time. " I feel I am still in compliance."
Mr. Fox is here, he is a lawyer from Washington not Massachusetts.
Arthur Reade handed out pictures of the house. The pictures show
this is an unenclosed porch. Linda Williams said that given the
correct square footage of the lot, you are over by 269 SF and that
includes the porch. If you were to exclude the porch we are over
any way you look at it. Mr. Fox said," We have been here over 20
years. All I can say from my perspective is we have hired all these
people. I never knew there were all these problems. Ann Balas asked
Ron Santos, " Would you like to make any comments on this?" Mr.
Santos said they may have been under the new zoning law. When the
Planning Board stamped it it was 80,000 SF. The By-Law is at
least effective on the day it is voted. The house ground cover
would apply under the old By-Law. The total ground cover has to be
computed under old By-Law. Acting Chairman Ann Balas asked what
the Planning Board had to say about it. Mr. Cowan said they did not
meet on it. Ms. Balas asked if anyone in the audience had a
comment. Ms. Balas said we have to talk about validating the lot
and being over on ground cover. Mike Angelastro said," We can't
let someone hang out there because of an error made 20 years ago.
I don't think we should vote for this." Nancy Sevrens commented
that there is one lot out there that hasn't been built on. " Could
that lot be used to justify everybody's lot line?" Ms. Sevrens
said if there is a remedy she would like to see it happen. She
3
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
asked if all the people could see if they can purchase that lot.
Attorney Reade said that is assuming she wants to sell it. Nancy
Sevrens said, .. I admit this is a very extreme solution." Mr. Fox
said that he has spoken to the owner and they have no desire to do
this. Ann Balas said that Nancy Sevrens' point is there is a
suggestion but you have looked into this. Michael O'Mara said that
he didn' t think there is a down side to this proposal to the
community.
Motion was made by Michael Angelastro that we validate lot 66. Ms.
Balas asked if the 77413 SF is what the Board is validating. Yes.
Linda Williams seconded the motion. Voting in favor were Ann
Balas, Linda Williams, Michael Angelastro and Michael 0 'Mara. Nancy
Sevrens not voting? The motion passed.
The Board now discusses the ground cover issue for this
application. Michael Angelastro questioned the size of the garage
as 469 SF. That is correct. The premises have a ground cover of
3,468 SF or 4.48% Michael Angelastro asked why did you apply for
an occupancy permit now and not before? Ann Balas asked if the
house was incomplete and the applicant moved in without a
certificate of Occupancy? If you can exclued the whole porch you
can limit the square footage to 3154 SF. Mr. Santos said if the
applicant encloses the top of a porch, has a roof over it or if has
a wall, it is considered ground cover. Nothing says it has to be
living space. Ann Balas said the Board can remove square footage.
Linda Williams said she was not going to try to be a designer and
chop people's houses up. Michael O'Mara said he was willing to
support it. Ms. Balas said that she had a problem in that it is
over the ground cover any way you look at it. Michael Angelastro
said that it is his understanding that this area is not included.
Building Commissioner, Ron Santos, talked about ground cover. He
said it is a very complicated issue, very hard to follow thru.
Linda Williams said she felt the Board should validate the house as
it sits. Ms. Sevrens said that if she was understanding the
situation, .. it's the garage that kicks this thing over. So why are
we talking about overhangs and porches?" Ms. Williams said this
had a buildng permit for this garage validly issued building
permit. Nobody agreed on this. Now we are trying to make sense out
of something that does not make sense. Attorney Reade said this is
a request for a Variance and not an appeal of the building
commmissioner's decision. Mr. Reade said clearly the house was
built under the bylaw at that time. Mr. Parent said that for 15
years he's practiced here. Mr. Parent said, .. I've never had a
house come before the Board. Based on the information I had before
me it met all the requirements." Mr. Angelastro said in this
particular house there's living space above it. Ms. Williams said
she would like comment on this overhang and whether it counts as
ground cover. Ann Balas asked about an overhang in workshop
situation.
4
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
Linda Williams made a motion to validate the ground cover. Michael
Angelastro seconded the motion. Nancy Sevrens said she was going
to vote against this. " We've already validated a lot. We're now
put in the position that the owner is caught in a morass. He is
going to get a legal lot out of this. I really again say that he
may have built it in good faith, but somewhere along the line you
have to say I'm not validating professional mistakes." Ms.
Williams said, " I'm not going to start chopping parts off of this
house." Ann Balas said, " Before I call the question, do you want
to continue or do we take the vote?" Attorney Arthur Reade asked,"
Can I talk to my client?" Ms. Balas said, " Yes." Mr. Reade left
to speak with his clients. Arthur Reade said that he wanted more
time to discuss it. " I've been advised that the vote may not go
with me." Ms. Balas said that there is a chance that it may not.
Mr. Fox said that he was duped and this is not ignorance of the
law. There is a thing called equity. He said he is a guy who is
in a bad situation. Mr. Fox said this is very expensive.
Michael Angelastro said he wanted to withdraw his second. Linda
Williams asked why are we continuing? Linda Williams if we vote on
it we are still in the same situation. Michael Angelastro asked,"
What is being included in ground cover and what is not? Ron Santos
said to revert it back to set figure the Board can deal with.
Linda Williams made a motion to withdraw. Mr. Read asked for a
continuance until May 7,1993. Michael Angelastro motioned for a
continuance. Linda Williams seconded the motion. All in favor.
UNANIMOUS.
The Board at this time is Michael O'Mara, Michael Angelastro, Dale
Wiane, Linda Williams and Nancy Sevrens.
Application no. 021-93/ Malcolm and Mary Kay Condon/ Oranqe Street/
Reade This is a request for relief by Special Permit under s 139-
33A to allow the alteration and extension of a structure which is
said to be nonconforming. The building does not comply with current
requirements as to front yard setback and is a commercial use in a
residential district. This application is on the Stumble Inn. This
is a lodging house. There is an additional dwelling on the lot.
They want to enlarge the dwelling area. Attorney Arthure Reade is
representing the applicant. He said the only reason they are before
the Board is in order to provide the parking. The number is the
same. There was relief from parking requirement prior to 1986 in
Zoning Board of Appeals file number 124-86. No parking was
available. Nancy Sevrens said we have an apartment which is a
dwellng unit. The apartment will be enlarged. The Board discussed
the HDC plans. Mr. Reade said there will be 2 bedrooms in the
apartment. Mark Poor talks and shows plans 1000 sf of ground
cover. No problem with ground cover. Dale Waine asked if there is
anyone here for or against.
5
Meeting of the zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
Motion was made to grant the relief based upon the HDC plans to
enlarge. Relief was conditional upon no further expansion. Michael
Angelastro seconded the motion. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
Application no. 027-93 / Nantucket Cottaqe Hospital/ Gouin
Villiaqe/ was a request for relief by Special Permit under s139-33A
to allow the alteration and extension of a structure and uses which
are said to be nonconforming.
Motion was made to continue the meeting until June 25,1993 and
extended until July 31,1992. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS.
The Board is now Robert Hourihan, Linda Williams, Robert Leichter,
Dale Waine, and Michael O'Mara.
Application no. 028-93 / Joseph Arno/ McPherson/ Easy Street/
Fitzqerald was a request for relief by Special Permit under s 139-
18B, 139-20C, and 139-33A. This was to allow the alteration and
extension of a structure and its uses which are said to be
nonconforming. The premises are located at 27 Easy street. The
attorney for the applicant is Julie Fitzgerald. Ms. Fitzgerald
said this was a request to modify the property. There are
stuctural improvements to the property. Ms. Fitzgerald asked the
Board to look at the plans. Dale Waine asked how many livable
square feet there are on the second floor. The current uses on the
premises include one dwelling and one retail store containing 652
SF and five off-street parking spaces and one loading facility
would be required by those uses. Mr. Waine was told that there were
470 SF for unit number one. Dale Waine said we are here because
neighbors have a problem with the intensity. Ms. Fitzgerald said
that one neighbor would prefer this to be a single family
residence. Dale Waine said, " I feel the intensity is a little
high. I would rather see the property upgraded." Linda Williams
said that going back to one major rental unit is ridiculous. The
first floor is 2404 SF. Robert Leichter said you are adding 2
parking spaces. Spencer Cowan said parking is based on the square
footage in retail use. Mr. Mcpherson said, "These Boards cause
more problems than they solve. During our negotiations it was
difficult for me. I can't describe what it is I'm trying to do
here. It's not that I have set 3 units in concrete. Not at all. I
would like to have the flexibility to have 3 and 2. I want to have
the flexiblilty to make everybody happy on the first floor." Linda
Williams said there would be no employees parking on the site at
any time. Michael O'Mara said he might be willing to restrict the
apartment to the manager. Mr. McPherson said that he has created
pictures to give you a feel for this. He discussed the loading
zone. He said the abutter, Florence Ingall, has a car that fits
nicely into her driveway. Widening the sidewalk was suggested
because the amount of people walking from the steamship is so many
that they walk in the street. The Board asked for the units layout.
6
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
Ms. Williams said nothing precludes you from coming back here to
ask for a modification. Dale Waine he would like to see no food
service. He would like to see it retail or office. Attorney
Fi tzgerald said that there is parking for 2 units. 17 spaces
required with 3 units one space on premises. They need relief with
a maximum of 16 spaces.
Linda Williams motioned to grant relief. The relief includes:
1. The requested loading zone.
2. 2 retail units on the first floor.
3. Not more than 2 living units on the second floor.
4. No food service establishment.
5. No parking permits issued for the employees.
6. Delivery times will not be at boat times year round. They
will not be within ~ hour scheduled departure time.
7. No expansion of the ground cover.
Ms. Williams said that she needed to know what the total ground
cover is. 2443 SF is the ground cover. Motion was seconded by
Robert Hourihan. Any further discussion? Ann Balas asked if this
was open and the neighbors spoke? Yes . Ms. Balas said she did not
see the neighbors here today. Dale Waine said the Board listened to
a lot of comments. Spencer Cowan asked what would the required
parking would be on square footage. 3 retail to 2 said Ms.
Fitzgerald. Mr. Cowan said the applicant would be are adding on
253 SF. The addition itself only adds one maybe two spaces. Linda
Williams reads motion again. 2 retail on first. No real estate
offices because it is auto intensive. 2243 SF. Dale Waine no
parking permits for the tenants residential or employees. Linda
Williams amends the motion. Building is to be in substantial
confomrity to the plans. Dale Waine said the maximum ground cover
2450SF. Exhibit A part of Decision. Robert Hourihan seconded the
amendment to the motion. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
The Board at this time is Michael Angelastro, Linda williams, Dale
waine, Robert Leichter,and Michael O'Mara.
Application no.30-93/ Bruce and Diane Ritter/ Baxter Road/ Loftin
This was a request for relief by Special Permit under zoning
section 139-33A to allow the reconstruction and extension of a
dwelling which is nonconforming. The premises are in violation of
the front yard setback and the lot has less than the required lot
area. Richard Loftin is the attorney for the appl icant. The house
is 6.5' from the front lot line. The minimum setback is 30'. The
lot contains 15,100 S.F. where a 20,000SF area is required.
Attorney Loftin said that the applicant wishes to demolish the
existing house and replace it with a new house on a different
footprint. Mr. Loftin said if the applicant rebuilt on the
proposed footprint it would not increase the existing nonconfority.
Mr. Cowan, Zoning Board Administrator said that what Mr. Loftin was
7
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
suggesting is a 'finding' that the applicant is not increasing the
nonconfomity. Dale Wiane, Chairman, asked if there anyone who wants
to speak. Juliet Hunter speaks in favor of the application. Bruce
Perry, Conservation commission Administrator, said he was there to
reinforce the ConCom ruling. Linda Williams said you want it
farther away than it is. Dale Waine said, " You want it across the
street." Mr. Cowan said the line of the bank has changed. Mr.
Perry said there was evidence that the bank is eroding. Photos
were submitted. Two other abutters were present in support of this.
Robert Hourihan asked if the house is being demolished ? Ron
Santos, Building Commissioner, said if the structure is not there
then you are not in 33 A. Dale Waine said the applicant is not
here to get away with anything. Mr. Cowan said in the recent
structure of the Bylaw does not apply to this. Under state law this
may fall within an exception. If it does not increase the
nonconformity of the structure the Bylaw does not apply. Dale Waine
said, "If we grant relief and you go to the Building Commisssioner
and he won't give you a building permit then you will be back here
before us anyway. Ron Santos said he will look at what Mr. Loftin
has done here. Mr. Waine said that the Board can only give him a
Special Permit and not a Variance. Dale Waine said this is one of
the few instances that we can give a Permit to. Mr.Santos said the
plans were given back to reconfigure. Mr. Waine asked if these
were the same set of plans moved back? Robert Leichter asked if
there were any attempt to make the house wider or anything? No,
this is the same plan moved back. This is a much more typical
design. Spreading it out over the whole property did not seem to be
the way to go. Michael Angelastro said the people of Sconset wanted
differeny zoning. I'm not voting for this . You've got plenty of
room. Michael Angelastro said ," If you are knocking it down then
I agree with Mr. Santos." Attorney Loftin said that as long as the
demolition is part of a plan we have a decision from this board
that allows this. Robert Leichter asked, "What about this space? No
effort was made to make this thing fit." Mr. Loftin said, " What
puzzles me about this is all of these are in violation of the front
yard setback. Dale Wiane said the area was there. They all predate
zoning. Michael O'Mara said, " You might want to go back to the
drawing board. Attorney Loftin asked, " Can you give me more
guidance? Dale Waine asked Mr. Cowan if the board needed to vote
on one issue? Mr. Cowan said that a 'finding' under Goldhirsch is
needed if you are increasing the nonconformity. The applicant has
modified the plan to site the proposed new house further from the
lot line in order to maintain a 30 foot separation between the
dwellling and the edge of the pavement. The house will be 20 feet
from the property line more or less. The area of the new footprint
would be substantially less than the area of the existing footprint
within the setback for the existing house on the lot.
Motion was made by Linda Williams that the proposed plan was not
increasing the nonconformi ty . Motion was seconded by Michael
8
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
O'Mara. Ann Balas said," This (vote) is not to automatically give
this a special permit?" Answer was no. Dale Waine asked if the
Board had any further discussion. 4 members voted in favor. They
were Dale Waine, Linda Williams, Robert Leichter, and Michael
O'Mara. One member was opposed, Michael Angelastro. Motion passed.
The Board at this time is Michael O'Mara, Robert Hourihan, Dale
waine, Linda Williams and Nancy Sevrens.
Appllicaton no. 32-93/ Millard/Shue (Union street) 8~ Union/
Glidden was continued to the June 15,1993 meeting. Richard Glidden
represented the applicant. Mr. Cowan said the Board is extending
the time for action not continuing the case.
Motin was made by Linda Williams and seconded by Dale Waine.
Application no.037-93/Bonnie and Peter McCausland/ 13 Lincoln
Avenue was a request for relief by Special Permit under section
139-33A to allow the alteration and extensionof the cottage as
shown on the plans submitted to the Board which have received a
certificate of Appropriateness No. 23953 from the Nantucket
Historic Districts Commission.
Motion was made by Robert Leichter to approve the relief. Motion
seconded by Ann Balas. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
The Board at this time is Ann Balas, Linda Williams, Dale Waine,
Robert Leichter, and Michael O'Mara.
Application no.038/93/ Kathleen A. Brosnan/ 5 and 7 West Creek
Road/ Philbrick was a request for relief by Modification under
s139-29E of an existing Special Permit granted in ZBA file no.075-
91. The relief is for operation of a take-out food establishment
for bakery goods. Attorney Melissa Philbrick represented the
applicant. Ms. Philbrick said that in 1991 the relief for parking
spaces did not provide for any addition to the parking.
Ann Balas said the applicant still has the take-out and same type
of use. The reason the applicant is before the Board is that she
wishes to change the plan from the original plan approved in 1991
to another plan. The premises would require no more parking spaces
than the number that was originally provided in 1991. Ms. Philbrick
conforms to the side yard setback. The addition is one story. Ron
Santos asked are they going to supply the screen? When the
original relief was granted, they both were under the same
ownership. This is a one story addition. It is HDC approved. The
The idea is similiar to Fast Forward. Mr. Santos said they are in
separate ownership. Attorney Philbrick said that in 1991 she
withdrew that request for inside seating. Mr. Cowan said the hours
were to allow for bookkeeping and that the pUblic hours were to be
one thing and private were another. Dale Waine asked how many
employees there were? Attorney Philbrick said the Board needed to
9
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
restate the conditions. Ms. Balas said she voted against it the
last time. Ms. Balas asked, " What do we have here?" Do we have
a take-out and baking? Mr. Santos said there could be no outside
seating. Smaller establishments have picnic tables and umbrellas.
Ms. Philbrick said this is an argumentative point between me, ron,
and the owner. " I can see if they wanted to set a bench out
front." This is not outside seating. Dale Waine said that Henry's
is becoming a problem now. Ms. Balas said that no seats is
consistent with the inside.
Linda Williams motioned to grant relief subject to no outside
seating and in accordance with exhibit A and B. The floor plan
restate conditions as appropriate. Robert Leichter seconded the
motion. All voated in favor. UNANIMOUS
Application 039-93/ John Bartlett and Barbara Bartlett /
Modification/ 4 North Road. Siasconset was a request for relief by
Modification under s139-29E of an existing Special Permit, granted
in ZBA file 108-92 under s139-33A, allowing the lateration of the
dwelling and relocation of the garage on the premises. The
applicants want to move the agarage to a different location on the
property than originally proposed, remove the decks which would be
in violation of the required setbacks. The modification is to
substitute the old plan for the new one.
Linda Williams motioneed to approve relief, substituting this
exhibit A ,the new plan. Ann Balas seconded the motion. All voted
in favor. UNANIMOUS
The Board for the next application is Ann Balas, Linda williams,
Dale Wiane, Robert Leichter, and Michael O'Mara.
Application 040-93/ John Brazilian/ 21 Bank Street John Brazilian
could not be at this meeting. Motion was made for a continuance by
Michael Angelastro. Motion was seconded by Linda Williams. All
voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
The Board at this time is Michael Angelastro, Linda Williams, Dale
Waine, Robert Leichter and Michael O'Mara.
Application no. 042-93/ Howard Simonton and Nancy Simonton/
Modification/8M Street. Madaket was a request for relief by
Modification under s139-29E of the existing variance and Special
Permit issued in ZBA File NO. 111-92. This was for a deck of not
more than 240SF and a shower enclosure at the rear of the dwelling,
both of which will comply with the requirements of s139-16A. Also
requested was relief to make renovations to the garage within its
current footprint. Dale Waine asked if the applicant has been to
the Building Department yet. Mr. Santos, Building Department
Commissioner, was present. Mr. Cowan, Zoning Board Administrator,
10
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
said that there should be no structure there to exceed 864 SF of
ground cover. Linda Williams asked what the ground cover is going
to be. Mr. Santos said he would not give a permit because of the
structure.
Motion was made by Michael Angelastro to grant the relief. Motion
was seconded by Linda Williams. All voted in favor. UNANIMOUS
Motion was made for a fee waiver by Linda Williams. Michael O'Mara
seconded the motion. Voting in favor were Linda Williams, Dale
Wiane, Robert LeiChter, and Michael O'Mara, Voting against was
Michael Angelastro.
The Board at this time is Nancy Sevrens, Robert Leichter, Dale
Wiane, Linda Williams, and Ann Balas.
ApPlication no. 041-93/ Robert Rosenthal/18 Cathcart Road/Variance
was a request for relief by Variance under s139-32A from the
requirements of s 139-16A to allow the construction of a 168SF
addition to an existing dwelling on the premises. The total ground
cover ratio for all existing structures on the lot is 6.8%. The
maximum allowed ground cover is 7%. The proposed ground cover ratio
would be 7.17%. What is the reason for this request? Mr.
Rosenthal said that he wants it. There is no financial hardship.
Dale Waine said this is not going to go. Spencer Cowan said the
applicant can withdraw the application. He said the applicant can
come back in 2 years. Mr. Rosenthal asked if he could introduce
what constitutes ground cover. What is ground cover? Mr. Santos
said he could submit a detailed plan. Mr. Santos said , "I am no
longer giving interpretation from hearsay. I will give an opinion
on a specific plan. It depends on the criteria." Mr. Rosenthal
said that 70 SF is what we are looking for. 3,334 SF is what we
want. Robert Leichter asked is this a new structure? No, the
structure is 12 years old. He wants to be over his ground cover.
1.1 acres is what is on record. 47916 SF is what is assessed.
Motion was made by Ann Balas for a continuance. Robert Leichter
asked why the applicant wanted a continuance. Linda Williams
seconded the motion. 2 in voted in favor. Nancy Sevrens and Dale
Waine voted in favor of a continuance. 3 voted against the motion.
They were Robert Leichter, Linda Williams, and Ann Balas. Motion
was lost.
A second motion was made to withdraw the application without p-
rejudice by Ann Balas and seconded by Linda Williams. All voted in
favor.
Application no. 043-93/ Downeyflake /18 Sparks Avenue/Kevin Dale was
a request for relief by Special Permit under s 139-9B and 139-20C
to allow use of the premises as a restaurant and take-out food
establishment. The applicant wants to waive up to four of .the
11
Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, April 13,1993,at 1:00 p.m.
asked how many seats could you put in there? 50 said Mr. Carson.
Ann Balas asked if there was anything from the Fire Department?
Motion was made by Linda Williams to grant relief. Robert Leichter
seconded the motion. The motion passes with a vote of 4 to 1 with
Ann Balas opposing. She feels the applicant is a MCD. The Board
grants a Special Permit waiving 3 off-street parking spaces and the
loading facility. The following conditions apply:
I. 16 off-street parking spaces.
2. Additional spaces for bicycles and mopeds.
3. Artificial or natural screening.
4. Hours are 6 a.m to 2:30 p.m.
5. No exterior seating.
6. No loading or unloading between the hours of 7a.m. and 3p.~.
7. Effort should be made to discourage parking in front of the.
premises parallel and adajacent to Sparks Avenue.
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was
adjourned at 5:15p.m.
Dale Waine. Chairman
Zoninq Board of Appeals
13