The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About045-88r , TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 May �3 , 1988 Re: Decision in the Application of CHRISTOPHER L. MAURY AND ANN B. MAURY (045 -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. cc: Building Commissioner Planning Board Town Clerk � r da l William R. Sherman, Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 1 C- TnTT. The NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS, acting at a Public Hearing held on FRIDAY, APRIL 29, 1988, at 1:30 P.M., at the Town and County Building, Nantucket, enters the following Decision upon the Application of CHRISTOPHER L. MAURY and ANN B. MAURY (045 -88) . 1. The Applicants request a VARIANCE from Nantucket Zoning By -law Section 139- 7.A(3) (a) (Secondary Dwelling in Garage - Spacing Requirement) , to validate the existing siting of a garage with second -floor secondary- dwelling apartment, not having the required 12 - _g ^ ^' front -t.o -rear spacing between it a-nd the principal dwelling upon the lot; alternatively, relief as to Section 139- 7.A(3) (b) with a deck connecting the principal and secondary dwellings. The Premises are located at 22 MEADOW VIEW DRIVE (Assessor's Parcel 56 -140) , Land Court Plan 14830 -U, Lot 87, and are zoned RESIDENTIAL -2. 2. Based upon the application, the site plan presented to us at. the hearing, and other evidence heard by us, this Board finds that the Premises consist of a lot with convex road frontage, as shown upon the site plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Applicants constructed a single - family dwelling, and later (pursuant to Building Permit No. 2982 -83, issued on September 16, 1983) a garage. Because of t- hen - applicable provisions of Section 139 -27 (the "building cap ", now expired), the Applicants provided that the garage, as permitted by 2982 -83, would not contain living quarters. However, they applied for a permit under Section 139 -27, and were placed in the waiting list thereunder. When they became entitled to a permit, they proceeded to insert a kitchen and convert the garage apartment into a secondary dwelling. 3. As we have noted in other cases of curved road frontage (for example, Von Kampen, 102 -86; McNally, 022 -82), practical difficulties affect the application of the 12 -foot front -to -rear spacing requirement where frontage is sharply curved. Although the cited cases involved concave frontage, not convex as here, we think that similar concerns apply. Approaching the Premises from the east, as traffic travels from Town, the garage appears to be in front of the main dwelling; the road curves away along the lot, leaving the buildings roughly the same distance from the street line. 4. As a further basis for relief, we note that, when the buildings in question were constructed, it was the position of the then Building Inspector to consider the 12 -foot spacing requirement to be met if the buildings were 12 feet apart, without regard to requiring front -to -rear spacing. Since the Applicants built under that regime, a more rigorous interpretation, as now taken by the Building Department as to new applications, would be of questionable equity to them. 5. This Board previously considered the matter of the siting -2- of the garage in 075 -86, and granted variance relief from the side yard setback requirement. That decision, which we otherwise ratify and confirm, contains language stating our assumption that the garage- apartment contained no kitchen. That assumption is now corrected, and in the light of our decision herein is of no further concern. 6. Under these circumstances, we find that, owing to circumstances relating to the shape of the Premises and especially affecting the Premises but not affecting generally the zoning district in which they are located (consisting of the curved frontage as shown on Exhibit A), a literal enforcement of the provisions of the by -law would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the Applicants (.in that the garage apartment could not be used as a secondary dwelling), and that desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the by -law (in that we find that the aesthetic effect of the building location is substantially alleviated by the convex road frontage). 7. The Applicants also own the adjacent Lot 86. They offer, and we hereby impose as a condition for the relief hereby granted, that a resolution be imposed on Lot 86, limiting construction thereon to one single - family dwelling, with no additional dwelling or dwelling unit. 8. Accordingly, this Board grants relief by VARIANCE to validate the siting of the garage containing a secondary dwelling -3- unit upon the Premises as shown on Exhibit A, by UNANIMOUS vote, upon the conditions herein contained. Dated: Dated: 1 1988 William R. Sherman t--i2— V / ( ,,, j �- Dorothy D. )Vollans (Pa-aVtJ Dale W. Wa.ine CEAM NOTICE A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held on FRIDAY, APRIL 29, 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING, FEDERAL AND BROAD STREETS, NANTUCKET, on the Application of CHRISTOPHER L. MAURY (045 -88) seeking a VARIANCE from SECTION 139- 7A(3)(a) to validate the existing siting of a garage with second -floor secondary - dwelling apartment relative to the principal dwelling as to required 12 -foot front -to -rear spacing between them, alternatively, relief as to SECTION 139- 7A(3)(b) with a deck connecting the principal and secondary dwellings. The premises are located at 22 MEADOW VIEW DRIVE (Assessor's Parcel 56 -140), Land Court Plan 14830 -U, Lot 87, and are zoned RESIDENTIAL -2. William R. Sherman, Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS 130A Form 1 -87 No.. O4� APPLICATION NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ( "BOA ") Owner's name(s): Christopher L. Maury Mailing address: c/o Reade & Alger Prof. Corp Post Office Box 2669 Nantucket, Mass. 02584 Applicant's name Mailing address: Location of lot(s): Assessor's map and parcel: 56 -140 Street address 22 Meadow View Drive Registry LC PL, P6. BK 6e 6, Pig Fi 14830 -U Lot -87 Deed ref-Cert. 8006 Subdivision Endorsed /—/ 75ANR? No Date lot(s) acquired: 7_/22/ 77 Zoning district Residential -2 Number of dwelling units on lot(s): Two Rental guest rooms No Commercial use on lot(s): None. MCD? No. Building date(s): all pre -172 zoning? No or Building permit application Nos. and dates C of 0 ?ttsey Case No(s). or dates all prior BOA applications: 075 -86 State fully all zoning relief sought together with all respective Code sections and subsections, specifically, what you propose compared with present and what grounds you urge, for BOA to make each finding per Section 139 -32A if Variance, -30A Lf Special Permit, -33A if to alter or extend non - conforming use, or to reverse Building Inspector by;Appeal per -31A & B: Applicant requests a Viriance from Zoning By -Law Section 139- 7.A(3)(a) (Secondary Dwelling Ahove Detached Garage) to validate the location of a garage containing a dwelling unit with regard to the rerniirement that the garage be located at least twelve feet in front of the front building line of the principal dwelling. The premises are located on a curved road and the method nF computation of the above requirement is in doubt. In the alternative, the applicant requests relief to permit the structures to be connected by a deck to conform with Section 139- 7(a)(_)(b). Applicant further requests ratification of relief in Case Enclosures forming part of this Application: Supplement be above Site /Blot plan(s) _X with present /proposed structures Locus map x Floor plans present /proposed Appeal.record' Needed: areas frontage setbacks CCR% parking data Assessor's certified addressee list (4 sets) x Mailing •labeis)(2:.s6ts)�x Fee check for $150.00 payable to Town of Nantucket x "Cap" covenant I certify that the requested information submitted is substantially complete and true to he best of my knowledge, under pains and penalties'of perjury.j Signature:, Z Applicant Attorney /agent x (If not owner, show basis for authority_'Ito- apply:): FOI OFFICE USE Application copies received: 4`(or only ) for BOA Y/&/d �by One copy given Town Clerk /l� by Complete? One copy sent to Planning Board and to Building Dept. y $150.00 check given Town 'lreasu er Z /�by {�' Notices of hearing posted /Lacmailed� /Z/_ published Ilearing(s) held on _ /_ /_ continued to _ /_ /_, _ /_ /_ withdrawn? Decision made _ /_ /_ filed with Town Clerk — /_ /_ mailed //�� See related files: application - / /litigation - other N 0 T I C E A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held on FRIDAY, APRIL 29, 1988, at 1:30 P.M. , in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, in the application of CHRISTOPHER L. MAURY ( -88), seeking a VARIANCE from Zoning By -Law Section 139- 7.A(3)(2) (Secondary Dwelling Above Detached Garage), to validate the location of an existing garage containing a dwelling unit, on a lot with curved frontage, with regard to the requirement that the garage be located at least twelve feet in front of the front building line of the principal dwelling. Applicant seeks relief in the alternative to connect the garage to the principal dwelling by a deck under Section 139- 7.A(3)(3), and ratification of the decision in Board of Appeals Case No. 075 -86. The premises are located at 22 MEADOW VIEW DRIVE (Assessor's Parcel 56 -140) , Land Court Plan 14830 -U, Lot 87, and are zoned as RESIDENTIAL -2. William R..Sherman, Chairman BOARD OF APPEALS