Loading...
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