HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-June-15BOARD OF APPEALS
Nantucket, Massachusetts
MINUTES of the June 15, 1984 Hearing.
A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS was held at 1:30 p.m. on
June 15, 1984, Friday, in the Town and County Building courtroom. Present were:
Andrew J. Leddy, Jr., Chairman, Lydle Rickard and Eileen Cahoon, Regular Members,
Linda Williams and C. Harold Taylor, Alternate Members. The Chairman introduced
himself and the members of the Board and spoke of the procedure of the meeting;
first those in favor of an application would be given a chance to speak and then
those opposed. He requested that comments be kept brief and non - repetitive.
The first matter to come before the Board (one of two held over un-
heard from the very long meeting of the previous Friday) was the Application of
HOLLAND and VAUGHAN (042 -84) seeking a Special Permit under Section 7(I)(1)(the
extension of a pre - existing, non - conforming use) and Section 6(B)(parking re-
quirements) of the Zoning By -Law, or a Variance. The Applicants wish to connect
two buildings on Whaler's Lane and add two floors to one of them, the small shed,
or tear down the shed and erect another building also to be connected to the
existing law offices. The Chairman did not sit on this Application: Linda Williams
sat in his place.
Mr. Holland called Sara Alger to speak for Foley Vaughan. She told
the Board the two buildings under consideration were non- conforming as to side
and setback. The little, old shed was an eyesore which they would prefer to
tear down. They need more office space as they are severely crowded with the
existing staff. Design Associates has complete plans.
Two letters in favor of the project were read: one from John Welch
of the Nantucket Historical Society stated it was sure to be tastefully done
and would improve the site. Paul Madden's comments were similar.
Mike Driscoll spoke in opposition commenting they had received a
Variance for the restaurant over the protest of the Steamship Authority and had
been granted illegal permission for the waiver of parking (legal only in the
Old Historic District). If they want another Variance, why not close the
restaurant. Mr. Driscoll requested a copy of the decision on this application.
The Planning Board did not recommend favorable action in this matter,
and it was taken UNDER ADVISEMENT pending a viewing.
%!a Y�
�
C�2� 14T\,6r1\
-2-
June 15, 1984
The second new Application to carne before the Board was that of
MDDERN CONTINENTAL ENTERPRISES (043 -84) seeking a Special Permit under Section
4(C)(2)(11) of the Zoning By -Law in order to erect an asphalt manufacturing
plant for temporary use only, while under contract to repair Nantucket Reads.
The plant would be located at Hinsdale and Nobadeer Roads. The regular Board
sat on this case.
Richard Glidden, Esq. spoke for Bruce McGregor. He told the Board,
this area is zoned Residential- Coitmercial and is the only area in which asphalt
plants are allowed. It is 1000 feet to the closest residence and abuts the
airport. Effort was made to chose the least offensive site. All know: we need
the services but not in our back yards. This plant would be solely for the
purpose of fulfilling an existing contract with the town to pave some 17 streets.
There would be no digging, no third parties: the hours would be 7:00a.m. to 5:00
p.m. It has to be approved by the appropriate Massachusetts bodies; they would
accept a restriction of having the only access by the northernmost road, not
Hinsdale Road, not Old South Road, only Nobadeer Farm Road and Milestone Road.
Mr. Glidden excused himself and brought back an "improved" plan of the area.
The contract starts September 15, 1984 and runs for 18 months, only. The plant
would be taken down after that. Contract B has a section on road improvements
for the Town of Nantucket: these 17 streets are "Phase Two" of the Town road
improvement program. Modern Continental has signed the contract and is waiting.
The proposed plant is at least 800 feet outside the Aquafer. There will be a
20,000 gallon tank of petroleum products on top of the ground and a 25,000 gallon
tank of bituminous also. on chassis, EPA approved, portable.
There were many questions. David Worth was concerned about the
tanks possibly rupturing. They would be willing to construct earthen dams around
the tanks and line the bottoms, in case of rupture.
Yes, there is Federal money in the project.
John Roe was assured there was no need for arrangement for disposal
of waste because there is no waste.
Jim Lentowski wanted to know if the Fire Chief had been notified;
Richard Glidden said they could delay until that is done or it could be a cond-
ition of the Permit.
Augie Rams admitted he had an "axe to grind ", but he wanted to
speak out against all these plants now. There was "no way" materials could be
-3-
June 15, 1984
stored safely above ground; in his opinion, people were not doing their homework,
as he had. The town was getting a "snow job ". They knew they needed a permit;
the cart is before the horse.
Greg Stone wondered has temporary the plant would turn out to be;
suppose there were other contracts. Mr. Rickard observed, if the Board grants a
permit, the Board would have to assume it would be permanent.
Mike Driscoll cannented that the mess of sewer lines in town would
not be helped by this plant because it is tied to only one job. Also, the talk
has been about trucks and noise, not about fumes. Mr. Driscoll is worried about
the air.
Jack Renieri was told that an Environmental Impact Statement was
being filed with the NEPA.
The Planning Board made a favorable recommendation only if there
was no use of Hinsdale Road, proper environmental precautions regarding air and
ground were met and it was for a temporary use only.
The following people were strongly opposed: MaryAnn Egan, William
Reis, Phyllis Smith, Joan Bunting, Greg Stone.
This Application was taken UNDER ADVISEMM\U.
The decision on HDLDCATE and COLLETTI (037 -84) was postponed while
Mr. Rickard seeks legal counsel as to a possible conflict of interest. Mike
Driscoll brought a letter to the attention of the Board and it was announced
that Casey, Fenn and King, a Boston law firm, had protested the annission of
material on this case at last week's meeting.
The Application of MARIE LAMB (040 -84) was the next old business
which the Board considered.
Mr. Wayne Holmes, Esq. brought forth the EPA findings and the DEQ
findings. A letter of clarification from the Building Inspector, Norman Chaleki,
was read aloud. In part, he said that the concrete batching plant which he had
seen there when the elementary school was being built is not there now so there
is no continuation of a pre - existing, non- conforming use.
There were many letters from people opposed to this Application;
Emily R. Stark, Richard and Pat Anderson, David Halberstam, Tharan and Lee Dunn,
Deborah Johnston, Steve Marcuse, Alan _and Diane LaFrance, Sam Stark, Robert
as
June 15, 1984
McGrady, Clara McGrady, Mary Gardiner, W.A. Rock, Jr., Mr. Gasperillo, Mike Monks,
Marietta Christi, Mike Driscoll, Granger Frost, Dennis Metcalfe.
This Application was unanimously DENIED on the grounds that the
proposed change was not an extension of a non - conforming use and was indeed
substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood.
The Application of CRANBERRY CONSTRUCTION (041 -84) was the next old
business which the Board considered. Lydle Rickard was Acting Chairman on this
case as Andrew Leddy did not sit on it. The Application was unanimously DENIED.
Jim Lentowski spoke for the record of trucks using land owned by
their company as a staging area, that is, parking and working on machinery in
the front yard of, say, an employee's dorm. Any future approval should be strongly
worded, in his opinion, to avoid this.
The last item of old business to come before the Board was the
Application of Mitchell Management (044 -84). Mr. Rickard excused himself because
of conflict having had legal opinion that an alternate who had heard all the
testimony could take his place. Leddy, Williams and Taylor sat on this case.
Jack Reineri spoke as an agent for Mitchell Management. A third
scheme for on -site parking was brought forth. A lengthy discussion about the
parking problems in downtown 'Sconset ensued. A real dilemma: aesthetics or
parking spaces.
These points were discussed: the need for every possible parking
space in that area. HDC approved of a porch roof over the restaurant patio,
not an awning. Parking lot must be screened, but there is no increase in seating,
in fact, there will be improved, less crowded seating. There will be no take-
out window and no discothecque. It is a grandfathered restaurant.
A letter from Mrs. Donald A. Porter, a summer resident for 54 years,
was read. Linda Holland of the Planning Board and Jean Crabsey of the Civic League
took an active part in the discussion. Adelaide Porter was worried about people
backing out into Shell Street. No, never. And the 'Sconset Market wanted to go
on record as approving.
The Board GRANTED this Application unanimously, allowing a roofed
patio and requesting that the parking area be redesigned so that there are seven
spaces adjacent to the hedge. (An eighth space outside the hedge goes to the Town
There being no further business, she meeting was ADJOUR-N.