HomeMy WebLinkAbout076-88NANTVCKST SONIN
BOARD O! AVPWU
NJWTOC "'P, MOBACKU821
File No. ( O & -8g)
To: Parties in interest and others
Re: Decision in the Application of
c . Loves "3asso.no a✓)cA Donald M
• � I s
988
Enclosed is the decision of the Board of Appeals which has
this day been filed with the Nantucket Town Clerk.
An appeal from this decision may be taken pursuant to
Section 17 of Chapter 40A,,Massachusetts General Laws. Any
action appealing the decision must be brought by filing a
complaint in court within twenty ' 2a) days after this
date. Notice of the action with a Copy of the complaint
and certified copy of the decision must be given to the
Town Clerk so as to be received within such twenty (20)
days.
/ - - ;g
William R. Sherman, Chairman
cc: Building commissioner
Planning Board
Town Clerk
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
At a public hearing on Friday, August 5, 1988, at
12:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, on
the Application (076 -88) of C. LOUIS BASSANO and DONALD M.
VanGREENBY having an address respectively at 377 Foxwood
Road, Union, NJ and 215 Clark Road, Lowell, MA, the
Nantucket zoning Board of Appeals made the following
DECISION:
1. Applicants appeal pursuant to zoning Bylaw Section
139 -31A & B seeking reversal of the order or decision of
the Building Commissioner on 6/29/88 reinstating Building
Permit 6029 -88 issued to Daniel P. O'Keefe for
construction of a single - family dwelling. The lot on which
the dwelling would be built is at 28 Wanoma Way (also
known as Atlantic Boulevard) at the corner formed with
Mayhew Road, Tom Nevers, Assessor's Parcel 92.4 -213, Land
Court Plan 5004 -D, Lot 147, zoned Limited Use General -3.
2. For purposes of hearing, this Application was
consolidated with a continued hearing on Daniel P. O'Keefe
application 058 -88 seeking variance relief for the same
lot. In that application, the owner is identified as Jane
T. Lamb, whereas the Assessor's records showed title in
Cornelius F. O'Keefe, III and Gerry A. O'Keefe. Moreover,
we received letter of 6/16/88 - -fr6m Mrs. Jane T. Lamb
stating that Daniel O'Keefe did not have title, but we
also received copy of conditional release and grant to him
showing a 3/18/86 signature of Jane T. Lamb. After
decision was made in the present Application 076 -88, the
O'Keefe application 058 -88 was, with this Board's
approval, withdrawn without prejudice. Accordingly, our
decision here is without finding as to title in the lot or
the merits of the O'Keefe request for front -yard variance
relief.
3. Our findings are based upon the record in this
Application and in application 058 -88, and the Building
Commissioner's file for the lot (which was proferred at
the hearing), including extensive correspondence, petition
and testimony of numerous persons concerned with this
matter. 1965 -1967 tax receipts for the lot are of record
but no evidence was offered which would allow us to find
that the lot is or is not buildable. We are not able,
therefore, to validate reinstatement of the building
permit by the Building Commissioner. We properly do
address Applicants' claim that the Building Commissioner
erred in measuring the required 35 -foot front -yard setback
from Mayhew Road. And we do make the threshold finding
that Applicants are proper parties to make their timely
appeal.
4. The corner lot at issue has an area of 5000 SF, by
contrast to the 120,000 SF minimum lot area required in
LUG -3. Frontage, if taken on Mayhew Road, is 50 feet,
whereas minimum frontage in LUG -3 is 200 feet. Frontage on
Wanoma Way is 100 feet. Unless the lot was held in
ownership separate from that of other land since prior to
the mid -1972 effective date of the zoning Bylaw (and thus
is a "lot of record "), the lot is not buildable. If it is
a "lot of record ", however, a building ground cover of up
to 1500 SF is allowed. (See footnote to Section 139 -16A
which provides "grandfathering" broader than the State
zoning statute.)
5. Applicants urge that the the proposed 3- bedroom
dwelling faces Wanoma Way and that its appearance leaves
no doubt that the "main orientation" of the house is
toward Wanoma Way. The petitions state the position that
the "architectural front" of the house faces Wanoma Way,
apparently referring to the extensive fenestration,
central entry door and relatively elaborate detailing
which characterize that side of the house, by contrast to
the relatively plain gable end of the house with
off - center entry facing Mayhew Road. The Wanoma entry is
across a wide deck which projects toward the street,
whereas the Mayhew entry is across a small deck which, in
plan view, squares off the southwest corner of the house.
Wanoma Way is the main access road,for the neighborhood
from which most or all houses are said to have a full
front -yard setback. It is heavily travelled, whereas
Mayhew Road is said to be little more than a driveway
providing access to one house.
6. Applicants cite the Land Court's 5/25/88 decision
sustaining the DeGennaro appeal from this Board's decision
based upon a front -yard setback requirement from each
street. Judge Sullivan there held that:
- it is "only proper to give the word 'front' its
normal and ordinary meaning '
- "'front yard' means ... the yard between the street
and the front of the house. There can be only one front to
any building and consequently only one front yard."
- In the context of a house angled toward the abutting
street corner, the "main orientation" of the house sets
where the front yard is to be measured.
- Which is the front yard is "a question of fact,
which in the first instance is to be determined by the
Building Inspector when an application for a building
permit is filed with his office."
Judge Sullivan rejected the inference that a building
could have more than one main entrance. She ruled that the
Town's (failed) effort to clarify the front -yard
- 2 -
requirement by zoning amendment at the 1988 Town Meeting
should not be considered. We add that our zoning code
Section 139 -2 defines front yard as : "The area bounded by
the front building line, the front lot line and both side
lines." For the front yard to be on Mayhew, the frontage
on Wanoma must be the "side line ".
7. After the O'Keefe application for a building permit was
first approved by the Building Commissioner, he determined
that the front of the house would be on Wanoma Way and
thus in violation of zoning for lack of the 35 -foot front
yard setback required by Section 139 -16A. At that time,
the O'Keefe plans showed the main entrance from Wanoma Way
into a "vestibule" offering direct access to the bedroom
hallway as well as to the basement and to the second -floor
living areas. The entry toward Mayhew Road afforded direct
access to a first -floor bedroom. On 4/12/88, Daniel
O'Keefe assented and undertook to apply for permission by
variance for the proposed 10 -foot front -yard setback.
Sometime between 6/17/88 and 6/29/88, a revised
first -floor plan (undated photocopy marked our Exhibit
"A") relabelling that bedroom as "entry" and removing 2
closets for direct access to the vestibule (no longer
labeled) was furnished to the Building Commissioner. With
that change, the Building Commissioner on 6/29/88
reinstated the O'Keefe Building Permit. No change was made
in the exterior appearance (for which, approval must first
be secured from the Historic District Commission.) By
letter of 7/11/88, he advised Applicants' counsel of his
interpretation that the front entry is on Mayhew Road, and
declined to act upon what they urged to be a zoning
violation.
8. In terms of the DeGennaro decision noted above, we have
a revised determination by the Building Commissioner that
the front yard is to be measured from Mayhew Road.
Considering only the exterior of the proposed house, the
preponderance of the evidence of record is that the Wanoma
facade is, architecturally, the front. It faces the
principal of the two abutting streets, the one giving the
lot its 28 Wanoma Way address. Nonetheless, the revised
O'Keefe plan would have the Mayhew entry used principally,
thus the "main entrance ". (We note that the State zoning
statute, Section 3 of Chapter 40A, provides that: "No
zoning ordinance or by -law shall regulate or restrict the
interior area of a single family residential building."
Nonetheless, if the interior arrangement determines the
"front" and thus avoids a zoning violation, it could not
afterwards be changed to renew the zoning violation.)
9. Where a dwelling has an entry on each street side and
the Building Commissioner determines that one is the
principal or main entry, our vote is to support that
determination with the front yard on the street side of
- 3 -
the main entry.
lo. Upon a motion to sustain the Applicants' appeal and
reverse the Building Commissioner's decision in favor of
the O'Keefe Building Permit, 3 Board members (Sherman,
Beale and Balas) voted in favor and 2 (Leichter and
O'Mara) opposed. The Building Commissioner's decision is
accordingly sustained.
Dated August W, 1988
William R.,
_� ► 0, V
J. O'Mara
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
At a public hearing on Friday, August 5, 1988, at
12:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, on
the Application (076 -88) of C. LOUIS BASSANO and DONALD M.
VanGREENBY having an address respectively at 377 Foxwood
Road, Union, NJ and 215 Clark Road, Lowell, MA, the
Nantucket zoning Board of Appeals made the following
DECISION:
1. Applicants appeal pursuant to zoning Bylaw Section
139 -31A & B seeking reversal of the order or decision of
the Building Commissioner on 6/29/88 reinstating Building
Permit 6029 -88 issued to Daniel P. O'Keefe for
construction of a single - family dwelling. The lot on which
the dwelling would be built is at 28 Wanoma Way (also
known as Atlantic Boulevard) at the corner formed with
Mayhew Road, Tom Nevers, Assessor's Parcel 92.4 -213, Land
Court Plan 5004 -D, Lot 147, zoned Limited Use General -3.
2. For purposes of hearing, this Application was'
consolidated with a continued hearing on Daniel P. O'Keefe
application 058 -88 seeking variance relief for the same
lot. In that application, the owner is identified as Jane
T. Lamb, whereas the Assessor's records showed title in
Cornelius F. O'Keefe, III and Gergy A. O'Keefe. Moreover,
we received letter of 6/16/$8 "frbm Mrs. Jane T. Lamb
stating that Daniel O'Keefe did not have title, but we
also received copy of conditional release and grant to him
showing a 3/18/86 signature of Jane T. Lamb. After
decision was made in the present Application 076 -88, the
O'Keefe application 058 -88 was, with this Board's
approval, withdrawn without prejudice. Accordingly, our
decision here is without finding as to title in the lot or
the merits of the O'Keefe request for front -yard variance
relief.
3. Our findings are based upon the record in this
Application and in application 058 -88, and the Building
Commissioner's file for the lot (which was proferred at
the hearing), including extensive correspondence, petition
and testimony of numerous persons concerned with this
matter. 1965 -1967 tax receipts for the lot are of record
but no evidence was offered which would allow us to find
that the lot is or is not buildable. We are not able,
therefore, to validate reinstatement of the building
permit by the Building Commissioner. We properly do
address Applicants' claim that the Building Commissioner
erred in measuring the required 35 -foot front -yard setback
from Mayhew Road. And we do make the threshold finding
OAW /
that Applicants are proper parties to make their timely
appeal.
4. The corner lot at issue has an area of 5000 SF, by
contrast to the 120,000 SF minimum lot area required in
LUG -3. Frontage, if taken on Mayhew Road, is 50 feet,
whereas minimum frontage in LUG -3 is 200 feet. Frontage on
Wanoma Way is 100 feet. Unless the lot was held in
ownership separate from that of other land since prior to
the mid -1972 effective date of the zoning Bylaw (and thus
is a "lot of record "), the lot is not buildable. If it is
a "lot of record ", however, a building ground cover of up
to 1500 SF is allowed. (See footnote to Section 139 -16A
which provides "grandfathering" broader than the State
zoning statute.)
5. Applicants urge that the the proposed 3- bedroom
dwelling faces Wanoma Way and that its appearance leaves
no doubt that the "main orientation" of the house is
toward Wanoma Way. The petitions state the position that
the "architectural front" of the house faces Wanoma Way,
apparently referring to the extensive fenestration,
central entry door and relatively elaborate detailing
which characterize that side of the house, by contrast to
the relatively plain gable end of the house with
off- center entry facing Mayhew Road. The Wanoma entry is
across a wide deck which projects toward the street,
whereas the.Mayhew entry is across a small deck which, in
plan view, squares off the southwest corner of the house.
Wanoma Way is the main access roadifor the neighborhood
from which most or all houses_ar4'said to have a full
front -yard setback. It is heavily travelled, whereas
Mayhew Road is said to be little more than a driveway
providing access to one house.
6. Applicants cite the Land Court's 5/25/88 decision
sustaining the DeGennaro appeal from this Board's decision
based upon a front -yard setback requirement from each
street. Judge Sullivan there held that:
- it is "only proper to give the word 'front' its
normal and ordinary meaning"
- "'front yard' means ... the yard between the street
and the front of the house. There can be only one front to
any building and consequently only one front yard."
- In the context of a house angled toward the abutting
street corner, the "main orientation" of the house sets
where the front yard is to be measured.
- Which is the front yard is "a question of fact,
which in the first instance is to be determined by the
Building Inspector when an application for a building
permit is filed with his office."
Judge Sullivan rejected the inference that a building
could have more than one main entrance. She ruled that the
Town's (failed) effort to clarify the front -yard
L
requirement by zoning amendment at the 1988 Town Meeting
should not be considered. We add that our zoning code
Section 139 -2 defines front yard as : "The area bounded by
the front building line, the front lot line and both side
lines." For the front yard to be on Mayhew, the frontage
on Wanoma must be the "side line ".
7. After the O'Keefe application for a building permit was
first approved by the Building Commissioner, he determined
that the front of the house would be on Wanoma Way and
thus in violation of zoning for lack of the 35 -foot front
yard setback required by Section 139 -16A. At that time,
the O'Keefe plans showed the main entrance from Wanoma Way
into a "vestibule" offering direct access to the bedroom
hallway as well as to the basement and to the second -floor
living areas. The entry toward Mayhew Road afforded direct
access to a first -floor bedroom. On 4/12/88, Daniel
O'Keefe assented and undertook to apply for permission by
variance for the proposed 10 -foot front -yard setback.
Sometime between 6/17/88 and 6/29/88, a revised
first -floor plan (undated photocopy marked our Exhibit
"A") relabelling that bedroom as "entry" and removing 2
closets for direct access to the vestibule (no longer
labeled) was furnished to the Building Commissioner. With
that change, the Building Commissioner on 6/29/88
reinstated the O'Keefe Building Permit. No change was made
in the exterior appearance (for which, approval must first
be secured from the Historic District Commission.) By
letter of 7/11/88, he advised Applicants' counsel of his
interpretation that the front entX? is on Mayhew Road, and
declined to act upon what they urged to be a zoning
violation.
8. In terms of the DeGennaro decision noted above, we have
a revised determination by the Building Commissioner that
the front yard is to be measured from Mayhew Road.
Considering only the exterior of the proposed house, the
preponderance of the evidence of record is that the Wanoma
facade is, architecturally, the front. It faces the
principal of the two abutting streets, the one giving the
lot its 28 Wanoma Way address. Nonetheless, the revised
O'Keefe plan would have the Mayhew entry used principally,
thus the "main entrance ". (We note that the State zoning
statute, Section 3 of Chapter 40A, provides that: "No
zoning ordinance or by -law shall regulate or restrict the
interior area of a single family residential building."
Nonetheless, if the interior arrangement determines the
"front" and thus avoids a zoning violation, it could not
afterwards be changed to renew the zoning violation.)
9. Where a dwelling has an entry on each street side and
the Building Commissioner determines that one is the
principal or main entry, our vote is to support that
determination with the front yard on the street side of
- 3 -
the main entry.
lo. Upon a motion to sustain the Applicants' appeal and
reverse the Building commissioner's decision in favor of
the O'Keefe Building Permit, 3 Board members (Sherman,
Beale and Balas) voted in favor and 2 (Leichter and
O'Mara) opposed. The Building commissioner's decision is
accordingly sustained.
Dated August 30, 1988
�f
f
. �IZ
VAUGHAN, DALE AND PHILBRICK
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
EDWARD FOLEY VAUGHAN WHALER'S LANE
KEVIN F. DALE NANTUCKET, MASS 02554
MELISSA D. PHILBRICK
(617) 228 -4455
RACHEL G. HOBART July 6, 1988
Mr. William Sherman, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town and County Building
Broad Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
RE: Property located at 28 Wonoma Way, Nantucket
Dear Bill:
Enclosed is an appeal from the Building Inspector's issuance
of a building permit in connection with the above - referenced
property. I believe that the pending Board of Appeals
Application ( #58 -88) for this property will be withdrawn at
Friday's meeting because the permit has issued. My clients,
Louis Bassano and Donald VanGreenby object to the Building
Inspector's interpretation of the front yard setback requirement
as it applies to this property, and therefore have filed this
appeal from the decision of the Building Inspector. The mailing
labels will be forthcoming as soon as the abutters list is
available from the Assessors Office.
If you have any questions prior to the hearing on August 5,
please do not hesitate to give me a call.
sincerely,
MDP /md
Enclosure:
cc: Joanne Holdgate, Town Clerkl✓
Ronald Santos, Building Inspector
Mr. C. Louis Bassano
Mr. Donald M. VanGreenby
Ms. Jane T. Lamb
Mr. Daniel P. O'Keefe
Arthur I. Reade, Jr. Esquire
/��u[Z `H• l�
IWA Form 1 -87 No.. -
APPELCATION
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ( "BOA ")
)wner's name(s): Jane T. Lamb AND Daniel P. O'Keefe
yailing address: Wauwinet Road, Nantucket, MA 57 Polpis Road, Nantucket, MA
Applicant's name : C. Louis Bassano AND Donald M. VanGreenby
`failing address: 377 Foxwood Road, Union, New Jersey 215 Clark Road, Lowell, MA
Location of lot(s): Assessor's map and parcel: 92.4 - 213
Street address 28 Wonoma Way, Nantucket
Cert.
Registry LC PL, PL BK & PG, PL FL 5004 -D Lot 147 xU8ied ref . 13050
Subdivision Endorsed / / ANR?
Date lot(s) acquired: 6 /10/ 86 Zoning district LUG III
Number of dwelling units on lot(s): 1 Rental guest rooms NONE
(:ommercial use on lot(s): NONE MCD? NO
Building date(s): all pre -'72 zoning? None or
Building permit application Nos. and dates 6029 -88 C of 07
Case No(s). or dates all prior BOA applications: 58 -88 (withdrawn)
Mate 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 if Special Permit, -33A if to alter or extend non - conforming
use, or to reverse Building Inspector by,,- Appeal per -31A & B:
SEE EXHIBIT A
I
Enclosures forming part of this Application: Supplement to above
Site /plot plan(s) with present /proposed structures
Locus map Floor plans present /proposed Appeal record
Needed: areas frontage setbacks GCRZ parking data
Assessor's certified addressee list (4 sets) Mailing - labels) (2 -sets)
Fee check for $150.00 payable to Town of Nantucket "Cap" covenant
I certify that the requested information submitted is substantially complete
and true o the b of y knowledg , under pains and penalties'of perjury.
`)ignature :7 Applicant Attorney/agent
`
(If not owner, show basis for authority =toapply:) ,
EXHIBIT A
The applicants, C. Louis Bassano and Donald M. VanGreenby,
are abutters of the property known as 28 Wonoma Way. Mr.
Bassano holds title to property on Mayhew Road identified on Tax
Map 92.4 as parcels 191 -194, 208 -210, and 215 -219 inclusive.
Mr. VanGreenby holds title to property shown on Tax Map 92.4 as
parcel 301. Pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Sections 8 and 15
and Section 139 -31A and 31B of the Nantucket Zoning Code, the
applicants, being aggrieved by the decision of the Building
Inspector on June 29,1988, to revive building pemit No. 6029 -88
for a house to be constructed at 28 Wonoma Way, hereby file this
appeal. The Building Inspector has erred in measuring the front
yard setback from Mayhew Road when in fact the house, despite
minor changes in the interior floor plans, still faces Wonoma
Way. The decision of the court in the DeGennaro case requires
that the Building Inspector assess the "main orientation of the
house" in determining which yard shall be the front for the
purposes of front yard setbacks. The appearance of the house in
this instance leaves no doubt that its "main orientation" is
toward Wonoma Way and therefore a 35' setback from Wonoma Way
must be provided.
NOTICE
A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held
on FRIDAY, AUGUST 5, 1988 at 12:30 p.m. in the TOWN AND COUNTY
BUILDING, FEDERAL AND BROAD STREETS, NANTUCKET, on the Appli-
cation of C. LOUIS BASSANO AND DONANLD M. VAN GREENBY (076 -88)
seeking REVERSAL of an order or decision of the Building
Commissioner dated 6/29/88 reinstating Building.Permit 6029 -88
issued to lot owner Jane T. Lamb and /or Daniel P. O'Keefe
for construction of a single - family dwelling. The lot is at
28 WONOMA WAY at its intersection with MAYHEW DRIVE, Assessor's
Parcel 92.4 -213, Land Court Plan 5004 -D, Lot 147, zoned
LIMITED USE GENERAL -3. To be heard with O'Keefe application
058 -88 continued to 8/5/88.
� d
William R. Sherman, Chair,
BOARD OF APPEALS
IWA 'Dorm 1 -87
ARPEICA'rION
NAN "rUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ( "BOA ")
�y- ail
�lwner's name(s): ,lane T. Lamb AND Daniel P. O'Keefe
`tailing address: Wauwinet Road, Nantucket, MA 57 Polpis Road, Nantucket, MA
Appl i_cant' S name : C. Louis Bassano AND Donald M. VanGreenby
`ailing address: 377 Foxwood Road, Union, New Jersey 215 Clark Road, Lowell, MA
I.ocation of lot(s): Assessor's map and parcel: 92.4 - 213
Street address 28 Wonoma Way, Nantucket
Registry LC PL, PL BK & PG, PL FL 5004 -1) L.ot 147 xbeied ref. 13050
Subdivision Endorsed / / ANR`I
Unite lot(s) acquired: 6 /10/ 86 Zoning district LUG III
Number of dwelling units on lot(s): 1 Rental guest rooms NONE
( :0111111erCial use on lot(s): NONE MCI)? NO
Iiiiilding date(s): all pre -'72 zoning? None or
Building permit application Nos. and dates 6029 -88 C of 07
Case No(s). or dates all prior BOA applications: 58 -88 (withdrawn)
';Late 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 if Special Permit, -33A if to alter or extend non- conforming
use, or to reverse Building Inspector by,,- Appeal per -31A & B:
SEE EXHIBIT A
FFIC- 10SUreS forming part of this Application: Supplement bo above
Site /Blot plan(s) with present /proposed structures
Locus map Floor plans present /proposed Appeal record
Needed: areas frontage _ setbacks GUZ parking data
Assessor's certified addressee list (4 sets) Hailing label's) (2- s0ts)__
Fee check for $150.00 payable to Town of Nantucket 'Cap" covenant
I certify that the requested information submitted is substantially complete
and trues o the be-s- of uy knowledg under pains and penalties of perjury.:
signature: G Applicant Attorney /agent X
If not owner_ -qhow hagi c Fnr
EXHIBIT A
The applicants, C. Louis Bassano and Donald M. VanGreenby,
are abutters of the property known as 28 Wonoma Way. Mr.
Bassano holds title to property on Mayhew Road identified on Tax
Map 92.4 as parcels 191 -194, 208 -210, and 215 -219 inclusive.
Mr. VanGreenby holds title to property shown on Tax Map 92.4 as
parcel 301. Pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Sections 8 and 15
and Section 139 -31A and 31B of the Nantucket Zoning Code, the
applicants, being aggrieved by the decision of the Building
Inspector on June 29,1988, to revive building pemit No. 6029 -88
for a house to be constructed at 28 Wonoma Way, hereby file this
appeal. The Building Inspector has erred in measuring the front
yard setback from Mayhew Road when in fact the house, despite
minor changes in the interior floor plans, still faces Wonoma
Way. The decision of the court in the DeGennaro case requires
that the Building Inspector assess the "main orientation of the
house" in determining which yard shall be the front for the
purposes of front yard setbacks. The appearance of the house in
this instance leaves no doubt that its "main orientation" is
toward Wonoma Way and therefore a 35' setback from Wonoma Way
must be provided.
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 228 -6800 ext. 230
I, Daniel P. O'Keefe, was informed that the Permit issued to me
V6029 -88 was issued in violation to the Zoning By -Laws of Chapter
139-16.
I will apply to the Board of Appeals for a Variance or Special
Permit and receive permission for front yard set back before starting
construction on the structure.
Signed this day_ --A Ig _
Daniel P. O'Keefe
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Nantucket, S.S. Date April 12, 1988
Then personally appeared the above named
Daniel P. O'Keefe
and acknowledged. the foregoing instrument
to be his free act and deed, before me
Stephanie F. Haddock, Notary Public
.My Commission Expires Ma y 27,, 1994
Building Permit # 6029 -88 is allowed to continue with the revised plans
submitted to the Building Department.
Ronald J. Santos
Building Commissioner
June 29, 1988