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,