HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-May-29MINUTES
Board of Appeals
A Public Meeting of the Board of Appeals for the purpose of
making decisions only was held on May 29, 1984 in the Town and
County Building, Federal and Broad Streets, Nantucket, at 1:30 p.m.
Present were Andrew Leddy, Chairman and Linda Williams and Harold
Taylor, Alternates.
The matter before the BOARD this afternoon was the Application
of NANTUCKET ISLAND PRODUCTS, CO. INC. (019 -84), seeking to have a
permit withdrawn from The Tavern, which it abuts.
Ms. Williams asked, was it the enlargement or the seating
which triggers the parking requirement. Section 6(B) states, any
enlargement. It is a good point: any expansion becomes ridiculous,
a staircase, a bathroom; however, this was obviously a substantial
addition but not a change in seating capacity.
The Building Inspector felt there was no need for a permit
because there was no increase in seating. He was backed by Town
Council. Mr. Tillotsin, Esq., for Nantucket Island Products, says
The Tavern is on a single lot; Mr. Holmes, Esq., for The Tavern,
says Straight Wharf is one lot.
There is a legal question: does one look at the building or
at ground cover ratio to agree on enlargement. The Chairman, Mr.
Leddy, recommends looking at the building, not ground cover, because
ground cover can be added to at 5% a year without triggering the
parking requirement, that is, the owner needs take no responsibility
for traffic. 26 parking spaces should be provided.
The Tavern is outside the Old Historic District and has no
Variance. Therefore, the Building Inspector's permit was illegal.
It has a non - conforming use because it provides no parking. See
Section 7(I) of the Zoning By -Law.
Mr. Tillotsin argued that a Variance was needed as a waiver
of parking and a Special Permit was also needed for the non- conform-
ing expansion.
Mr. Taylor observed that to undo construction was a very
big step.
-2-
May 29, 1984, Cont.
In February, an interior work permit was given. When exterior work
was begun, Norman Chaleki pulled the permit. Holmes and Hays were
notified that a Variance was needed. Mr. Chaleki said seating capacity
was his criteria. An illegal criteria. And building went full steam
ahead knowing the project was being contested.
Ms. Williams observed that implicit in allowing the complaint
is the directive: tear it down. Chairman replied, not necessarily:
occupancy of new areas could be revoked until The Tavern comes in
for a Variance and a Special Permit. The first application with
drawings and blueprints was being withdrawn, the Chairman was told
on the phone or on the street. Wayne Holmes pulled the whole file
from Andrew Leddy's office, while he was out.
It was the illegal expansion which triggered the parking
requirement and closed the new area.
There was a substantial external enlargement, which is with-
in the setback requirements: that is not the argument. Captain
Tobey's does definitely have a legal stand as an aggrieved party.
Linda Williams suggested the BOARD approve Lesck's appeal
and restrict the use of certain areas until the appropriate pro-
cedures had been followed. The question was, who would do the
policing? Probably,the Building Inspector, Norman Chaleki.
The Chairman said he needed 10 days for legal research to
define the relief: a stop order plus the conditions under which
use can continue. The recommendation was made that 5 days be
allowed for the correction of the violation. The argument is: there
was a misinterpretation of the By -Laws and the Building Inspector's
ruling should be overturned.
DECISION: Enlargement triggered parking requirement which
should be met or appealed at a hearing of the BOARD; also needed
is a Special Permit under Section 7(I). Therefore, the Building
Inspector is directed to pull the building permit and occupancy
permit and close off new areas to use until Sherburne seeks and
gains appropriate relief from this BOARD.
There being no further business before the BOARD, this
meeting was ADJOURNED.