Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout019-88April 12, 1991 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: o/9 -g8 I, Joanne M. Holdgate, duly elected Clerk of the Town of Nantucket, hereby certify pursuant to MA. GENERAL LAWS Chapter 40A, SECTION 11 that an Appeal of these related Special Permits, 019 -88A and 019 -88B, was taken to the Superior Court as Case #88 -10; and that the parties by stipulation dated April 10a , 1991 have dismissed such Appeal with prejudice, as a pears from the Superior Court Clerk's Certificate dated April /, 1991, all appearing on the foregoing documents. oanne M. Holdgate Clerk COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Nantucket, ss Superior Court No. 88 -10 BYRON J. BROWN AND MARIE BROWN, Plaintiffs, ,%r, WI!,LIAM R. SHERMAN, ANDREW J. LEDDY, JR. AND C. 14ARSHALL BEALE, AS THEY ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET, SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION, KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC., SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC., Defendants. CLERK'S CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that a stipulation dismissing this case with prejudice was filed by the parties on April Iq , 1991 and entered on Aprilfq , 1991, in the above - entitled action. 1 Dated at Nantucket this j`� day of April, 1991. Clerk /Magistrate COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Nantucket, ss **** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * BYRON J. BROWN AND MARIE BROWN, * Plaintiffs, * V. * WILLIAM R. SHERMAN, ANDREW J. LEDDY, JR. AND C. MARSHALL BEALE, AS THEY ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET, SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION, KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC., SCONSET ENTERPRISES,* * INC., Defendants. * **** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Superior Court No. 88 -10 STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE The undersigned hereby stipulate pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 41 to discontinue the above - entitled action and to dismiss the complaint with prejudice. Dated at Nantucket this 19 day of April, 1991. Byron J. Brown and Marie Brown Plaintiffs heir Attorney Paul Killeen, Esq. Sherburne, Powers and Needham, Esqs. One Beacon Street Boston, Massachusetts 02108 617/523 -2700 William R. Sherman, Andrew J. Leddy, Jr. and C. Marshall Beale, as they are members of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals heir Attorney PaO k- >1� �- 91V Paul R. DeRensis, Esq. Deutsch, Williams, Brooks, DeRensis, Holland and Drachman, Esqs. 99 Summer Street Boston, Massachusetts 02110 617/951 -2300 EFV #16 /stipulation SHERBURNE, POWERS & NEEDHAM COUNSELLORS AT LAW JOHN H. SHERBURNE (19191959) WALTER POWERS (19191977) DANIEL NEEDHAM (19191971) F. STANTON DELAND (19461985) ROBERT F. WHITE DANIEL NEEDHAM, JR. WILLIAM D. WEEKS JOHN T. OOLUNS STEPHEN A. HOPKINS KARLJ. HIRSHMAN THEODORE L. TILLOTSON ROBERT E. McWALTER C. THOMAS SWAIM JAMES POLLOCK WILLIAM V. TRIPP III STEPHEN S. YOUNG ANTHONY E. BATTELLE WILLIAM F. MACHEN JACOB C. DIEMERT SAMAYLA DODEK DEUTCH W. ROBERT ALLISON PHILIPJ. NOTOPOULOS HAROLD W. POTTER. JR. COUNSEL JOHN J. FINNEGAN JOHN L. DALY JOHN J. NOLAN PAULE.TROY MARK SCHONFELD JAMES D. SMEALLIE PAUL KILLEEN CYNTHIA A. CLAFF RICHARD M. YANOFSKY JAMES E. M.DERMOTT ROBERT V. LIZZA SUSAN F. SCHIPPER J. CHARLES CARLSON ROBERT M.RUZZO MIRIAM R. GOLDSTEIN JOHNJ.MONAGHAN MARGARET J. PALLADINO MARK C. MICHALOWSKI DAVID SCOTT SLOAN MIRKM J. McKENDALL OF COUNSEL F. WILLIAM ANDRES JOHN BARR DOLAN HEAL HOLLAND Ms. Joanne Holdgate Town Clerk Town Building Nantucket, MA 02554 ONE BEACON STREET BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02108 TELEPHONE(617)523 -2700 TELECOPIER (617) 523 -6650 TELEx 948067 March 2, 1988 IN NANTUCKET 18 BROAD STREET NANTUCKET MASSACHUSETTS 02554 TELEPHONE (617) 228 -5400 IN CONCORD. 97 LOWE.L ROAD CONCORD, MAssAcHusETTs 01742 TELEVHoNe(617)369 -1611 Re: Byron J Brown and Marie Brown v. William R. Sherman, et al Dear Ms. Holdgate: Enclosed herewith please find a copy with the Nantucket Superior Court in the which I am herewith delivering to you in provisions of M.G.L.c. 40A, Section 17. the filing of this appeal to the attenti, Appeals and Town Counsel? of the complaint filed above - captioned action, accordance with the Will you kindly bring Dn of the Zoning Board of Thank you for your attention to this matter. Respectfully, BYRON J. AND MARIE BROWN By their attorneys, SHERBURNE, POWERS & NEEDHAM aul Ki l en One Beacon Street Boston, Massachusetts 02108 ( 61177 )) 523 -2700 Nantucket TYPE OR USE BALL POINT PEN —BEAR DOWN FIRMLY MASSACHUSETTS TRIAL COURT SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT CIVIL ACTION COVER SHEET C, SS. (To be filed with each Complaint) NO. PLAINTIFF(S) Byron J. Brown and Marie Brown ATTORNEY(S) (Firm Name, Address, Tel.) Paul F Theodore L. Tillotson, Sherburne, Needham, Boston, MA 02108 B &0611) 523 -2700 DEFENDANT(S) William R. Sherman, et al lleen I ATTORNEY(S) (If known) Powers & Place an ® in one box only ORIGIN 1. F01 Complaint ❑ 4. F04 Dist. Ct. Appeal c.231, s.97 ❑ 2. F02 Removal to Sup. Ct. c.231, s.104 ❑ 5. F05 Reactivated after Rescript; Relief from judgment /order (Mass. R. Clv. P. 60) ❑ 3. F03 Retransfer to Sup. Ct. c.231, s.102C Place an ® in one box only ❑ 1. NATURE OF ACTION ❑ 2. During jury trial or non -jury hearing ❑ 3. CONTRACT ❑ 4. REAL PROPERTY ❑ 5. MISCELLANEOUS ❑ A01 Services, labor and materials ❑ C01 Land taking (eminent domain) ❑ E02 Appeal from administrative agency, G.L. c.30A E] A02 Goods sold and delivered CO2 Zoning appeal, G.L. c.40A ❑ E03 Action against Commonwealth or C] A03 Commercial paper CO3 Dispute concerning title Municipality, G.L. c.258 ❑ A08 Sale or lease of real estate ❑ C04 Foreclosure of mortgage ❑ E04 Taxpayer suit, G.L. c.40 s.53 ❑ A99 Other (specify) ❑ C99 Other (specify) ❑ E05 Confirmation of arbitration awards, G.L. c.251 TORT EQUITABLE REMEDIES ❑ E06 Massachusetts Antitrust Act, ❑ B03 Motor vehicle negligence- personal E] D01 Specific performance of contract E08 G.L. c.93 Appointment of receiver injury/property damage Other negligence - personal injury D02 [-I D02 Reach and apply, G.L. c.214, ❑ E09 General contractor's surety bond, ❑ B04 s.3(6) -(9) G.L. c.149, ss.29, 29a property damage ❑ D06 Contribution or indemnification ❑ E10 Summary process appeal ❑ BOS B05 Products liability Products liability al ❑ D07 Imposition of trust ❑ E11 Workman's Compensation ❑ ❑ B06 Malpractice -other ❑ D08 Minority stockholder's suit ❑ E12 Small Claims Appeal (specify) ❑ D10 Accounting ❑ E13 Labor Dispute ❑ B08. Wrongful death, G.L. c.229, s.2A ❑ D12 Dissolution of partnership ❑ E14 Chapter 123A Petition — SDP ❑ B15 Defamation (libel - slander) ❑ D13 Declaratory judgment, G.L. c.231A ❑ E15 Abuse Petition, G.L. c.209A ❑ B99 Other (specify) ❑ D99 Other (specify) ❑ E16 Auto Surcharge Appeal ❑ E17 Civil Rights Act, G.L. c.12, ss.11 H -1 ❑ E99 Other (specify) SUPERIOR COURT RULE 29. Requirement of statement as to money damages to prEvent the transfer of civil actions to District or Municipal Court Departments. 1. Superior Court Rule 29, as amended requires the statement of money damages on the reverse side be completed. 2. Failure to complete the statement, where appropriate, will result in transfer of this action (Superior Court Rule 29(2). RE USE DISPOSITION A. Judgment Entered ❑ 1. Before jury trial or non -jury hearing ❑ 2. During jury trial or non -jury hearing ❑ 3. After jury verdict ❑ 4. After court finding ❑ 5. After post trial motion B. No Judgment Entered ❑ 6. Transferred to District Court under G.L. c.231, sl02C Disposition date DATE: RECEIVED BY: DATE: DISP ENTERED BY: DATE: CLERK'S OFFICE COPY mtc003 -07/84 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Nantucket, ss. Superior Court Department Of The Trial Court C.A. No.' C' **** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DESCRIPTION OF ACTION 1. This is an appeal pursuant to M.G.L.c. 40A, Section 17 from related decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Nantucket granting to the defendants Siasconset Casino Association, Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc. and Sconset Enterprises, Inc. relief in the form of special permits for the construction and operation of tennis courts to be located on a certain parcel of land located in the Siasconset section of Nantucket. * BYRON J. BROWN AND MARIE BROWN, * Plaintiffs, * V. * WILLIAM R. SHERMAN, ANDREW J. LEDDY, JR. AND C. MARSHALL BEALE, AS THEY ARE THE MEMBERS OF THE * COMPLAINT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET, SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION, KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC., SCONSET ENTERPRISES,* INC., * Defendants. * **** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** DESCRIPTION OF ACTION 1. This is an appeal pursuant to M.G.L.c. 40A, Section 17 from related decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Nantucket granting to the defendants Siasconset Casino Association, Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc. and Sconset Enterprises, Inc. relief in the form of special permits for the construction and operation of tennis courts to be located on a certain parcel of land located in the Siasconset section of Nantucket. PARTIES 2. Plaintiffs, Byron J. and Marie Brown are husband and wife, who reside at 17700 Karen Drive, Encino, California 91316. 3. The defendant William R. Sherman is the duly appointed Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Nantucket and resides at 15 Gay Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 4. The defendant Andrew J. Leddy, Jr. is a duly appointed member of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Nantucket and resides at King's Way, Nantucket, Massachusetts. 5. The defendant C. Marshall Beale is a duly appointed member of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Nantucket and resides at 17 Primrose Lane, Nantucket, Massachusetts. 6. The defendant Siasconset Casino Association ( "Casino "), is a non - profit organization organized under the laws of Massachusetts with a principal place of business and /or a principal location for meetings located in Nantucket, Massachusetts, and a mailin g address of P.O. Box 315, Siasconset, Massachusetts. 7. Defendant Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc. ( "Coffin ") is a corporation organized under the 'Laws of Massachusetts, having its principal offices at 13 New Street, Siasconset, Massachusetts. 8. Sconset Enterprises, Inc. (" Sconset Enterprises ") is a corporation organized under the laws of Massachusetts, having its principal offices at 11 New Street, Siasconset, Massachusetts. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 9. Plaintiffs are the owners of premises located at 16 King -2- Street, in the Siasconset section of Nantucket. They are persons aggrieved by the decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals further described herein. 10. On or about January of 1988, Casino caused to be filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals, on its own behalf, and on behalf of the defendants Coffin and Sconset Enterprises an application seeking an exception by special permit, authorizing the construction in a residential district, upon the land owned by the plaintiffs of four tennis courts, to be used by Casino in conjunction with eight (8) existing courts for the private recreational activity of its members. 11. On or about February 16, 1988, the Zoning Board of Appeals held a hearing upon the application filed by and on behalf of the defendants. The plaintiff appeared at said hearing, and opposed the granting of any relief upon the application. 12. On or about February 16, 1988, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant to the defendants special permits under Sections 139 -SB(1) and 139 -18E, purporting to authorize construction of the tennis courts and associated parking spaces. 13. Written decisions setting forth the action of the Board above described were filed in the office of the Town Clerk of the Town of Nantucket, on February 18, 1988. Purported corrective amendments to the decision, initialled by the Chairman of the Board, but not signed by a majority of the members thereof, were filed in the office of the Town Clerk on February 19, 1988. -3- Copies of the decisions and of the amendments thereto, certified by the Town Clerk, are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B. 14. The decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals upon the defendants' application exceed the authority of the Board, and are arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful, for the following reasons, inter alia: a. the use proposed by the defendants is not a "community recreational facility" within the meaning of Section 139- 8B(1); b. the use which the defendants propose for the property is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning bylaw which denotes this area as a residential district or with existing patterns of land use; C. the use proposed by the defendants is likely to be injurious, obnoxious, and a nuisance to the plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of their property, and to the surrounding neighborhood, by reason of the noise and traffic likely to be generated thereby, and is likely to diminish the value of the plaintiff's property. WHEREFORE the plaintiffs request that this court, after a hearing: 1. Enter judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, annulling and setting aside the decisions of the Zoning Board of Appeals from which appeal is taken; and 2. Award to the plaintiffs such other relief, legal or -4- equitable, as justice requires. By their attorneys, SHERBURNE, POWERS & NEEDHAM Paul'K leen Theodore L. Tillotson One Beacon Street Boston, Massachusetts 02108 (617) 523 -2700 -5- TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS CON �g -0FR? ,.+ NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 February 6 , 1988 Re: Decision upon!the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELD AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) Enclosed is a notice of the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed with the Town Clerk. Any appeal from this action shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of Chapter 40A of the General Laws, and shall be filed within twenty (20) days after this dale. l v �iefG -- William R. Sherman, Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, `1ASSACHUSETTS 027+ DECISION: g,_A -,`_ The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing h_-ld on TUESD" , c_ r,. 16, 1988 at 1;30 p. m.in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made ^e following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSCCIATICN FOR ITSELF AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) address 11 New Street, Siasconset, MA 02564. 1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION 139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative, Appl-icant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre - dating mid -1972 zoning by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 11 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -67, Deed Book 134, Page 210, and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1. 2. Our findilmgg are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers, viewing, correspondence, and plan (our Exhibit "A "), representations and testimony received at our hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019 -88A and�iO19-�W and separate relief,, with substantially the same set of conditions and, we trust, consistent interrelationships. 3. the overall plan proposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's 8- court tennis facility across New Street. Applicant is represented as a not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corporation). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Sconset and don- Sconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with some 8 -year backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion. Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to (019 -�8E3? -2- the public. No off- street parking is available for the present and Casino building. On- street parking is extremely limited in this neighborhood. 4.Lot 1 with 0.46 Acre area woJild have up to two tennis courts, e sized 36' x 76', spaced apart side -by -side symmetrically in the north_ri;-* portion of the lot out-side of required setbacks. Applicant undertake= =o provide off- street parking, t%.yo spaces per court. Parking on Lot 1 3u1= be placed in the mid - portion of the lot with about 69 -foot width. The existing driveway would, without change, provide access to such parkins area. 5. Applicant has undertaken to buy Lot A and represents that it is empowered by the owner (present and perhaps proposed) of Lot 1 to seek Special Permit relief for this tennis use under lease. Security -type fencing, typically of the plastic- coated, green woven -wire type 10' -12' high will (with Historic District Commission approval).surround the courts. Periimeter screening by double -row dense plantings of privet will be pro- vided and maintained to act as a sound and visual barrier reasonably to protect residential and restaurant abutters. Existing structures on the lot, generally non- conforming, will be removed before a court is construct- ed. No building will be added. 6: Neighborhood concern with hours of play was considered at length. In compromise, Applicant apparently accepts the limits of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with no lighting provided on the premises. Applicant's attention was called to Section 139 -20A barring offensive noise, etc. 7. Concern was expressed that Applicant take no action which would impair use of the 20 -foot wide entry drive into Lot 1 by the westerly abutter (Mrs. Ryan) who claims an easement and uses the driveway for park- ing on her lot. Extending northward from the northeast corner of Lot 1 is another easement or way apparently for the benefit of abutters to the east and west. Applicant accepts the re S triction that such easement or way not be used for vehicular access between Lot 1 and King Street to the north. � 019 -6513; -3- 3. tJith such undertakings, summarized in the conditions _,pon cant's use set forth below, we are able to make the necessary finc,_nL� : == Ze such Special Permit relief, namely, that it is in harmony with t!ne purpose and intent of the zoning chapter 139. The alternative relief Special Permit under Section 139 -33A requires additional findings, e.4., as to non - conforming use, not pursued here and accordingly to be denied. 9. In granting conditional relief, we have been -rniTdful of the ".0 ` -- erous letters in support from neighbors and the concerns expressed by abutters opposed. The conditions are as follows: (1) No more than two tennis courts will be constructed on the lot as proposed. (2) Before a court ius constructed on the lot, all buildings, commercial and residential, shall be razed or removed, and no buildings shall be added. (3) The courts shall be surrounded by security -type fencing of a design having HDC approval. (4) Court play shall be limited to the daylight hours between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m• (5) No lighting shall be provided en the premises. (6) Off- street parking dimensionally conforming to Section 139 -18 shall be provided on the premises in the area described above, at the rate of two spaces per court, or off -site pursuant to Special Permit under Section 139 -18E. y (7) Vegetative screening, b double -row, densely - planted pri- vet or gquivalent, shall be planted and maintained inwardly of the interior lot lines around the perimeter of the lot, excluding frontage and entry drive area where low plantings are required for visibility and safety. (8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 6 entry for access to the Lot A parking area it shall be so used in lieu of having a 20 -foot (U19 -88B) -4- wide entry spaced eastwardly across the Lot A frontage- (9) No way shall be used fc,r vehicular access between t'-:e and King Street. 10. Subject to the foregoing undertakings and conditions, this Board by UNANIMOUS vote GRANTS to Applicant the requested SPECIAL under-SECTION 139 -8B(1) (but denies alternative relief under Section 139 -33A). Dated: February d , 1988 Nantucket, MA 02554 p/ William R. Sherman AAndrew J. eddy, Jr 4Mar al l Bea e BOARD OF APPEALS . TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 DECISION: The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing held on TUESDAY, FEBRUAR`_ 16, 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELF AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) address 13 New Street, Siasconset, MA 02564. 1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION 139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative, Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre- dating mid -1972 zoning by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 13 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -g69, Plan 17, Page 123, Lot 1, and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1. 2. Our findings are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers, viewing, correspondence, and plan (our Exhibit "A "), representations and testimony received at out hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019 -88A and 019 -88B and separate relief, with substantially the same set of condi- tions and, we trust, consistent inter- relationships. 3. The overall plan proposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's 8- court tennis facility across New Street. Applicant is represented as a not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corporation). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Sconset and non - Sconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with ome 8 -year backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion. Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to (019 -88B, modification, clarification and correction of site locaton) Paragraph 9 subsection (8) should read as follows: (8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 1 entry for access to the Lot A parking area it shall be so used in lieu of having a 20- foot g-\ TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 February ) d , 1908 Re: Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELF AND OWNER KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC. (019 -88A) Enclosed is a notice of the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed with the Town Clerk. Any appeal from this action shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of Chapter 40A of the General Laws, and shall be filed within twenty (2Q) days after this date. William R. Sherman, Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS BOARD OF APPEAC.S TOUIN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, 0255=+ DECISION: The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearinz held on T SDa'`, -F -- - -•- 169 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, - == following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO FOR ITSELF AND 01 -INER KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC. (019 -88A) address 13 Ne-.: =_• Siasconset, MA 02564. 1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTI ^N 139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative, Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT iinder SECTION 139 -33A to alter and eaten- the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre - dating mid-1972 zoning by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 13 NEB STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -069, Plan Book 17, Page 123, Lot 1, and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1. 2. Our findings are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers, view- ing, correspondence, and plan (ourl.Exhibit "A "), representations and testi- mony received at our hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019 -88A and 019 -?5B anO separate relief,with substantially the same set of conditions and, we trust, consistent in intenrelationships. 3. The overall plan pt?oposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's 8- court tennis facilityiiacr.oss;New Street. Applicant is represented as a not- for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corp- oration). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Siasconset and non - Siasconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with some 8 -year backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion. Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to the public. No off - street parking is available for the present tennis use and Casino building. On- street parking is extremely limited in this (0 19 -nSA) -2- neighborhood. �. The lot (Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -069, here -after referred Lot "A ") Faith 0.29A area would have up to two tennis courts, each s'z =- 36" x 78 ", spaced and alined end -to -end and symmetrically located the lot. Applicant undertakes to provide off- street parkinz, two space_ per court. Parking on Lot A would be placed off New Street between t�:e ` required front yard and the southernmost tennis court. A driveway of 20 foot width would provide access to the parking area, namely, the ex ing driveway on Lot 6 if legally available for that use, otherwise suc:' a driveway on or east of the Lot 6 centerline. Screening, low enough fcr safe egress from the lot, would extend across the frontage on N7ew Street, using plant material appropriate to the neighborhood. 5. Applicant has undertaken to buy Lot A and represents that it is empowered by the owner (present and perhaps proposed) of Lot 1 to seek Special Permit relief for this tennis use under lease. Security -type fencing, typically of the plastic- coated, green woven -►tire type 10' -12' high will (with Historic District Commission approval) surround the courts. Perimeter screening by double -row dense plantings of privet will be pro- vided and maintained to act as a sound and visual barrier reasonably to protect residential and restaurant abutters. Existing structures on the lot,, generally non - conforming, will be removed before a court is construct- ed. No J)uilding will be added. 6. Neighborhood concern with hours of play was considered at length. jr. compromise, Applicant apparently accepts the limits of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.. with no lighting provided onthe premises. Applicant's attention was called to Section 139 -20A barring offensive noise, etc. 7. In the event AppliLant can accommodate all required parking on Ldt 1 alone leaving the front of Lot A as open area, Applicant asks relief to do this by Special Permit under Section 139 -18E for such off -site parking. While such relief was not specifically applied for, we think it appropriate since the Application papers treated Lots A and 1 as one, and parking away from a street front is preferred. 8. With such undertakings, summarized in the conditions upon Apali- (019 -88A) -4- (8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 1 entry for access to the Lot A parking area it shall be so used in lieu of having a 20 -foot wide entry spaced eastwardly across the Lot A frontage. 10. Subject to the foregoing undertakings and conditions, this Board by UNANIMOUS vote GRANTS to Applicant the requested SPECIAL PER`1IT under SECTIONS 139 -8B(1) and 139 -18E (but denies alternative relief under Section 139 -33A). Dated: February 14, 1988 Nantucket, MA 02554 William R. Sherman Andre J. eddy, Jr. Q- V--A 1 C. Mars !all Beal BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN �OF ,'NANTUCKET NANTUCKET ' ,MASSACHUSETTS +02554 DECISION: ctqa pa c - U1r, 7�n prcyl& s I'k (.o (Y,\ 6q �'r f,� On- a The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing held on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 161 1988 at 1:30 p.m.in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the following�Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO(`ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELF AND OWNER KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC. (019 -88A) address 11 New Street, Siasconset, MA 02564. 1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION 139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative, Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre- dating mid -1972 zoning by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 11 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -067, Lot A and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1. 2. Our findings are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers, view- ing, correspondence, and plan (our Exhibit "A "), representations and testi- mony received at out hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019 -88A and 019 -88B and separate relief, with substantially the same set of conditions and, we trust, consistent in inter - relationships. 3. The overall plan proposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions up to four new tennis courts 5or use as an extension of Applicant's 8- court tennis facility across New Street. Applicant is represented as a not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corporation). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Siasconset and non - Siasconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with some 8 -year backlog for member §hip is given as one reason for considering expansion. Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to the public. No off - street parking is available for the present tennis use and Casino building. On- street parking is extremely limited in this (019 -88A, correctionof site location) Paragraph 4 should read as follows: 4. The lot (Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -067, here -after referred to as-Lot ",A ") with 0.29A area would have up to two tennes courts, each sized 36' x 78', spaced and alined end -to -end and symmetrically located within the lot. Applicant undertakes to provide off - street parking, two spaces per court. Parking on Lot A would be placed off New Street between the required front yard and the southernmost tennis court. A driveway of about 20 foot width would provide access:;to the parking area, namely, the exist- ing driveway on Lot 1 if legally available for that use, otherwise such a driveway on or east of the Lot A centerline. Screening, low enough for safe agress from the lot, would extend across the frontage on New Street, using plan{ material appropriate to%the neighborhood. xc,01 i�d�' TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 February , 1988 Re: Decision upon;-.the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELD AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) Enclosed is a notice of the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed with the Town Clerk. Any appeal from this action shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of Chapter 40A of the General Laws, and shall be filed within twenty (20) days after this dale. William R. Sherman, Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 DECISION: The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing held on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1988 at 1;30 p.m.in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELF AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) address 11 New Street, Siasconset, MA 02564. 1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION 139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. in the alternative, Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre - dating mid -1972 zoning by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 11 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -67, Deed Book 134, Page 210, and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1. 2. Our findiingg are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers; viewing, correspondence, and plan (our Exhibit "A "), representations and testimony received at our hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application papers, we are obliged to renuer separate decisions 019 -88A athdoO19+8$B and separate relief, with substantially the same set of conditions and, we trust, consistent interrelationships. 3. the overall plan proposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's 8- court tennis facility across New Street. Applicant is represented as a not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corporation). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Sconset and don- Sconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with some 8 -year backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion. Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to (019 -88B) -2- the public. No off - street parking is available for the present tennis use and Casino building. On- street parking is extremely limited in this neighborhood. 4.Lot 1 with 0.46 Acre area would have up to two tennis courts, each sized 36' x 76', spaced apart side -by -side symmetrically in the northerly portion of the lot oufside of required setbacks. Applicant undertakes to provide off - street parking,, t ?yo spaces per court. Parking on Lot 1 would be placed in the mid - portion of the lot with about 69 -foot width. The existing driveway would, without change, provide access to such parking area. S. Applicant has undertaken to buy Lot A and represents that it is empowered by the owner (present and perhaps proposed) of Lot 1 to seek Special Permit relief for this tennis use under lease. Security -type fencing, typically of the plastic- coated, green woven -wire type 10' -12' high will (with Historic District Commission approval),surround the courts. Perimeter screening by double -row dense plantings of privet will be pro- vided and maintained to act as a sound and visual barrier reasonably to protect residential and restaurant abutters. Existing structures on the lot, generally non - conforming, will be removed before a court is construct- ed. No building will be added. 6. Neighborhood concern with hours of play was considered h,t length. In compromise, Applicant apparently accepts the limits of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., with no lighting provided on the premises. Applicant's attention was called to Section 139 -20A barring offensive noise, etc. 7. Concern was expressed that Applicant take no action which would impair use of the 20 -foot wide entry drive into Lot 1 by the westerly abutter (Mrs. Ryan) who claims an easement and uses the driveway for park- ing on her lot. Extending northward from the northeast corner of Lot 1 is another easement or way apparently for the benefit of abutters to the east and west. Applicant accepts the re -S triction that such easement or way not be used for vehicular access between Lot 1 and King Street to the north. (019 -88B) -3- S. With such undertakings, summarized in the conditions upon Appli- cant's use set forth below, we are able to make the necessary finding for such Special Permit relief, namely, that it is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning chapter 139. The alternative.!relief by Special Permit under Section 139 -33A requires additional findings, e.g., as to non - conforming use, not pursued here and accordingly to be denied. 9. In granting conditional relief, we have been -rni -ndful of the num- erous letters in support from neighbors and the concerns expressed by abutters opposed. The conditions are as follows: (1) No more than two tennis courts will be constructed on the lot as proposed. (2) Before a court is constructed on the lot, all buildings, commercial and residential, shall be razed or removed, and no buildings shall be added. (3) The courts shall be surrounded by security -type fencing of a design having HDC approval. (4) Court play shall be limited to the daylight hours between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (5) No lighting shall be provided on thP. premises. (6) Off- street narking dimensionally conforming to Section 139 -18 shall be provided on the premises in the area described above, at the rate of two spaces. per court, or off -site pursuant to Special Permit under Section 139 -18E. (7) Vegetative screening, by double -row, densely - planted pri- vet or gquiValent, shall be planted and maintained inwardly of the interior lot lines around the perimeter of the lot, exdluding frontage and entry drive area where low plantinks are required for visibility and safety. (8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 6 entry for access to the Lot A parking area it shall be so used in lieu of hairing a 20 -foot (0119 -888) -4- wide entry spaced eastwardly across the Lot A frontage. (9) No:wA} shall be,used for vehicular access between the lot and King Street. 1-0. Subject to the foregoing undertakings and conditions, this Board by UNANIMOUS vote GRANTS to Applicant the requested SPECIAL PER','IT under:SECTION 139 -8B(1) (but denies alternative relief under Section 139 -33A). Dated: February /� , 1988 Nantucket, MA 02554 William R. Sherman Andrew J. eddy, Jr 4Mar all Bea e BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 DECISION: YY)od l f ed - CvV✓e.Cr+e&, omq e W 1-t-1 N rv-o�- 5 l-c The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing held on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 161 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELF AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) address 13 New Street, Siasconset, MA 02564. 1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION 139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative, Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre- dating mid -1972 zoning by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 13 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2-069_, Plan 17, Page 123, Lot'1, and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1. 2. Our findings are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers, viewing, correspondence, and plan (our Exhibit "A "), representations and testimony received at out hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019 -88A and 019 -88B and separate relief, with substantially the same set of condi- tions and, we trust, consistent inter - relationships. 3. The overall plan proposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's 8- court tennis facility across New Street. Applicant is represented as a not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corporation). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Sconset and non - Sconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with ome 8 -year backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion. Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to (019 -88B, modification, clarification and correction of site location) Paragraph 9 subsection (8) should read as follows: (8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 1 entry for access to the Lot A parking area it shall be so used in lieu of having a 20 foot ... `�� 00 " TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 February 16, 1988 Ron: iSantos Building Commissioner Town of Nantucket Annex Re: Weisskopf, 113 Baxter Rd. BOA file 020 -88, Assessor's Parcel 48 -011 Dear Mr. Santos; This will confirm that the Board of Appeals on Friday, Febru- ary 5, 1988, at its regular public hearing took up a request for emergency relief from Ms. Angela,1C. Weisskopf. This was done in response to her counsel's letter of 2/1/88 under zoning Code Section 139 -26H. We have scheduled for 2/19/88 the hearing, after notice to the public, of her application 020 -88 for variance relief. We are persuaded, however, that emergency relief is necessary because of rapid erosion-of the bank at the ocean side of her (and other Baxter Road) property. Proper development of the Baxter road community will not occur if ocean -dide homes are allowed to topple over the bank. It appears probable that variance relief will soon be availa- ble to Ms. Weisskopf, subject to appropriate conditions after public submissions. See our Whitehead file 002 -88. Accotidingly, pursuant to Section 139 -26H, you are authorized to issue a temporary permit for the non - conforming structure and use resulting with t.elocation of house into the required 30 -foot front yard setback. The decision to issue the permit is, of course, yours. this Board recommends maintaining a 15 -foot setback. If the -2- front deck is kept as is, the front building line of the house (on its new foundation) would likely be setback about 29 feet from the street line. Applicant's counsel assures us that Ms. Weisskopf accepts the risk that a valid variance may not be granted or its conditions onerous. We are mindful of concerns about siltation during house relocation and run -off and catch -basin clean -up afterwards. The temporary permit is authorized for the remainder of 1988, unless further extended by this Board, and shall be super - ceded when and if a Building Permit is issued pursuant to a variance grant. By copy of this letter, comments of the DPW and Con Com are invited for our 2/17/ hearing. William R. Sherman Chairman Board of Appeals cc: J. Fitzgerald, Esq. Conservation Commission Department of Public Works Planning Board Town Clerk V/ Copy to abutter's to be mailed with variance decision 0 TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Fe.bruar.y 19 1988 . Re: Decision in the Application of ANGELA CAVENESS WEISSKOPF (020 -88) Enclosed is a notice of the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed with the Town Clerk. Any appeal from this action shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of Chapter 40A of the General Laws, and shall be filed within twenty (20) days after this date. J7`N�.YekJ O`• � � ; Andrew-J.- LeWy Jr. ` Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS cc: Building Commissioner Planning Board Town Clerk TONN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS .02554 DECISION: : In- the.matter of the-Application of ANGELA CAVENESS WEISSKOPF .(0.20 -88), -at a,. meeting of the Board of Appeals held at 1:30 P.M. on Friday, February 19, 1988, at the Town and County Building, Nantucket, MA the Board enters the following Decision and makes the following findings: 1. This is an Application for Variance relief from Section 137 -16A, Intensity Regulations, to relocate an existing single- Eamily residence nearer to Baxter Road within the front yard set -back requirement. Our authorization has been given for Applicant to obtain a temporary permit pursuant to Section 139 -26H due to imminent risk that the house will topple due to erosion. The premises are located at 113 Baxter Road, Siasconset, Assessor's Parcel 48 -011, zoned Residential -2. 2. Based upon the Application materials, vie rings, correspondence andtestimony presented at the public hearing, the Board finds that the property is situate on the S:i.asconset bluff and subject to serious and immediate erosion problems which threaten the exstance of the house as currently situated. In order to save the house, it is necessary to allow its relocation away from the bluff as quickly as possible. The Board finds that the erosion problem is a circumstance relating to soil_conditions,.shape and topography of the land and especially affecting such lot and structure, but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located. A literal enforcement of the `full front yard set - back` would involve a substantial hardship to the petitioner by the likely earlier loss of the house. With the conditions noted below, the requested relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from., the intent .or purpose of such - by -law:. 3. Responsive to abutter concerns and giving respect ... to the favorable recommendations of the Planning board and Conservation Commission, we impose the following conditions: (a) During consruction, siltation control "fences' will be deployed on the lot; (b) Any lot contour changes shall be such as to avoid increased run -off; (c) In the event; siltation of near -by catch basins occurs, Applicant will have them cleaned after construction; ( ci) he grade of ne�a site location shall not be changed; and (e) The Temporary Permit, if any, shall be replaced Frith a Building Permit, when issued, subject to the conditions of this Variance grant. 4. For the reasons set forth above., the Board of Appeals by unanimous vote Grants to Applicant the requested Variance relief from the front yard set -back requirement, Section 139 -16A, to relocate the house so that neither the house not its deck or other structure is closer than eleven (11) feet from Baxter Road, subject to the foregoing conditions. Dated: February 19, 1988 Andrew J. Leddy, Jr. C. M rshall B ale 1 _ /'' 1 _ ' ,'_ �. -� f` � iii, / ; � ,• Dorothy D. Vollans 7 ' NOTICE A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING, FEDERAL AND BROAD STREETS, NANTUCKET, on the Applica- tion of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION, for itself and owners KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC., and SCONSET ENTERPRISES (019 -88) seeking a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -8B(1) to permit a pri- vate club not conducted for profit to construct four tennis courts on the locus or, in the alternative, for a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to expand a pre- existing non - conforming use by adding four tennis courts to the eight currently used by the club and remove 3 rental cottages. No off - street parking is proposed. The premises are located at 11 and 13 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessors Parcels 73.42 -67 and 69, Deed Book 218, Page 164 and Book 134, Page 201 respectively and zoned RESIDENTIAL -OLD- HISTORIC. t William R. Sherman, Chairman': BOARD OF APPEALS l I,(1A F n L -..7 Ho.. V� AIIPLZCAT10N NANTUCKI "T 7,0N f NC BOARI) OF AITHALS ( "IWA" ) (1) Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc. (2) Sconset Enterprises Owner's Hanle(:;): "I'liling address: (1) 11 New St., Siasconset, MA 02564 (2) 13 New St., Siasconet, \I)I)Li_cailL's name Siasconset Casino `1Ii.ljllg address: c/o E.F. Vaughan, Whaler's Lane, Nantucket, MA 02554 Location of. Lol(s): Assessor's neap and parcel. - -7342 Parcels 67 and 69 — — Str.eet address 11 and 13 New Street, Siasconset, MA 02564 Ref;i.stry I,C PI,, P[ 1310 I'(;, ['l, l'I• Lot Deed ref .(1)216/164 Subdivision — I ---- _- - - - - - - - - - — Vlldor;;ed - -- — — ANR? lrite acquired: u n d e r loll.f di-strict ROH _ '41111ber of dwell i.11g units on Lot (• j J6 FEE ('\CMVVL'i'> -- Rental f, n e s t rooms _ ;onune rr. i. a l use oil to L (s) : _3 Rental taa Cotes on---13—New Street MCU? Itu i I(I i ng da to (s ) : a l l pre -' 72 zon i -lig, [. �� - - -or litli.ldinf; permit appl_icati-orl Nos. and elates C of 07 �•.rlc� No(s) or elates all Ilrior [tOA applicati-ons: _- - -_ - -_ - - - - - -- t_:1Cr fully all zoning r.el_i.ef soiight. Lof ethet.- wiAh rll.l respective Code sections rind subsections, specifically, iahat: you propose compared with present and What- grounds you urge, for BOA to make each f i.rldhl. !, per Section 139-32A if Variance, -30A i_f Sj)CCi.al Permit, -33A if Lo alter or extend non- conforming use, or to reverse I3iii_Lding L Spector by- „Appeal per -31A & fl: _Applicant seeks a Special. Permit under the Nantucket Zoning By -Law Section _.139 -8B(1) jrivate club not conducted for profit) to allow the premises to be used for four tennis courts or in the alternative applicant seeks a Special Permit under - Section 139- 33Ato- expand a pre - existing -non- conforming use by adding additional tennis — courts. I'Inclosures forming part of this Application: Supplement to above Site /plot plart(s) __ with present /proposed structures _ Locus map X_ Floor plans present: / proposeed _ Appeal . record > J �� TL (? T1D�11 N . N.� Needed: arCaS� J -- fr'on Lag (2 F) i —V setback:iS a, -St (Cic 'JUC /, ark in /v£ W I g dta to �eyu zREtl Assessor ceut:rfied addressee List (1I ;ietS) X Mail.l_llfy 'Lrlbels, (2._sets)— X Fee check for $150.00 payable Lo Town of N<tnt.ucket X "Cap” covenant I certify Uiat. the requested i_rlfol-MaLion submitted is subst._InLially compl.eLe and truce tC- LWe best- (It my knowledge, under pains and penal.L:i.es of perjury: i (;nature: _1 - - - -- Appl i.caut - -- ttorne� agent _ t �- �•[f� not owner, show bas's for aulhorit.yLo apply:) EDWARD POLE.Y VAIIGIIAN IQVIN P DAm MELISSA 1) P1111,11111GK RAGIIItL C. IIOIIAKT J VAUGHAN, I)AI,I'. AND P1111,11KICK A'I 'I'OIZNMIS A'r LAW W11ALfR'S LANE NANTII(;I(I °,l', MASS 02554 !6171 22A 44',3 January 7_1, 1988 Ronald J. Santos, Building Inspector Town of Nantucket. Town Bui.ldinq Annex Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 Dear Ron: This will confirm our conversation regarding the Siasconset Cas1no. .I raised with you the question of whether the Casino, which wishes to construct four tennis courts at. 11 and 13 New Street. in Siasconset, would be required to provide parking. You advised me that under t-he c.I_)rrent 'Zoning By -haw, where no building is .involved, the proposed work does not fall within any of the categories that mandate parking and that, therefore, t.tlere are no parking requirements for this project.. Thank you i_or your help in this matter. EFV /chc Very truly yours,