Loading...
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 (019 -84), seeking to have a permit withdrawn from The Tavern, which it abuts.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.