HomeMy WebLinkAbout009-89oe-_ - T?
NANTUCKET ZONING
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, 1ASSACHUSETTS 02554
February 21 , 1989
File No. 009 -89
To: Parties in interest and others
Re: Decision in the Application of
NANTUCKET SAVINGS BANK
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 (20) 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.
William R. Sherman, Chairman
cc: Building Commissioner
Planning Board
Town Clerk
NANTUCKET ZONING
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
At a public hearing on Friday, February 10, 1989, at
1:00 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, on
the Application (009 -89) of NANTUCKET SAVINGS BANK having
an address at 104 Pleasant Street, Nantucket, MA 02554,
the Nantucket zoning Board of Appeals made the following
DECISION:
1. Applicant seeks a Special Permit under Section 139 -16C
of the zoning Bylaw to reduce the side lot line setback
distance from the required 10 feet down to 5 feet to
validate the existing siting of a recently constructed
two - family residence. The premises are at 3 Surfside Drive
and Dias Way, Assessor's Parcel 67- 252.1, Land Court Plan
26439 -S, Lot 100, zoned Residential -10.
2. Our findings are based upon the Application papers
including 'as- built' plot plan dated 1/12/89, viewing,
correspondence, elevations and floor plans, topographical
map, and representations and testimony received at our
hearing.
3. Applicant's 13,863 -SF triangular lot was layed out as a
corner lot with 180.91' frontage on Surfside Drive and
161.98' frontage on Dias Way. Either frontage more than
meets the 75 -foot minimum frontage required by Section
139 -16A. Minimum lot size, per that Section, is 10,000 SF
and required front -yard setback is 20 feet. According to
the plans submitted with the application for Building
Permit 6213 -88 of 7/25/88, the 2 -story duplex dwelling was
to be constructed with its front facing Dias Way and with
the full 20 -foot setback from the Dias Way street line. As
required by Section 139- 8A(3), the single front -entry door
provided for access in common to each of the dwelling
units of the duplex. on the side toward Surfside Drive and
opening onto a porch are two entry doors for access to the
respective units.
4. We find that the 20 -foot front -yard setback is required
from the street line of Dias Way, rather than Surfside
Drive. Since the setback intrusion is into the front yard
and not a side yard, the relief sought by Special Permit
is not available to validate the siting and must be
denied.
5. From the 'as- built' plan, it appears that at least two
of the three bounds defining the triangular lot were found
in place. The builder who sited the duplex foundation said
that he could not find the remaining bound, at the
File No. 009 -89
intersection of the two streets. Rather than find this
corner by simply measuring the intersecting lot lines from
the two available bounds, he said that he noticed a piece
of surveyor's tape near the intersection and relied on
this as well as the grass verge for setting the batter
boards. Because Parcel 252 across Dias Way was in
nonconforming commercial use, he wanted to site the house
so as to preserve a backyard to the rear of the house,
away from that property. He thought he was siting the
house's front building line with an 11 -foot setback from
Dias Way to obtain that backyard.
6. Unfortunately, the front building line proved to be 5
feet back from the street line and the front -entry stoop
even extends across it into Dias Way. Provisions were made
for parking in front of the house, treating Dias Way as
part of the lot.
7. Counsel for Applicant submitted plans showing the
front -entry door lowered so that the stoop could be
removed, leaving the intrusion into the front -yard just 15
feet. Then, by removing one of the two side doors and
making interior re- arrangements for the other to be the
entry giving access in common to both duplex units,
counsel would have us find that house presents its side,
not its front, to Dias Way. According to the DeGennaro
case, Land Court No. 125148 decided 5/25/88, the front of
a house is to be determined by its main orientation, a
question of fact in the first instance for the Building
Commissioner. In any event, we are not able to find that
such superficial changes change the house's front to a
side.
8. To grant relief by Special Permit would not be in
harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning
Bylaw but contradictory to its basic concerns in requiring
setbacks, particularly from the street line. A most
unfortunate precedent would be claimed by others similarly
inobservant of the setback requirements. Neighbors rightly
opposed relief, particularly those having use of Dias Way.
9. We realize that correction of the zoning violation by
relocating the structure out of the setback will be
expensive and, in that sense, a hardship, especially as a
basement has been constructed under the house.
Nonetheless, we are unable to find such condition upon
relief as to warrant its grant in this case.
10. Upon motion to grant relief (with certain conditions
as to parking off - street in the rear yard and plantings or
fence along Dias Way), the vote was two in favor (O'Mara
and Dooley) and 3 (the rest) opposed. Accordingly, relief
is DENIED.
- 2 -
File No. 009 -89
Dated February 21, 1989
(acs will m R Sherman
i z
Peter Dooley Mic 1 J. ,:O' Mg-vra
David J Leg t
- 3 -
NO'_:'J CE
A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS jaill be held on
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1989 at 1:00 p.m. in the Town and County
Building, Federal and Broad Streets, Nantucket, on the Appli-
cation of NANTUCKET SABINGS BANK (009 -89) seeping a SPECIAL PERMIT
under SECTION 139 -16C to reduce the required sid<, lot setback
distance from 1.0 to 5 feet to validate an existing duplex
structure sited five feet from the side lot line. The premises are
located at 3 SURFSIDE DRIVE, Assessor's Parcel 67- 252.1, L..,.:' Court
Plan 26939 -S, Lot 100, zoned RESIDENTIAL -10.
William R. Sherman, Chairman
BOARD OF APPEALS
BoA Form 1 -89
Owner's name(s):
Mailing address:
Applicant's name:
Mailing address:
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Date
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
CASE No 021zl_
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
Nantucket Savings Bank
104 Pleasant Street, Nantucket, D'fA 02554
same
same
Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number
Street address:
3 Surfside Drive
67 - 252.1
Registry Land Ct Plan, Plan Bk & Pg or Plan File 2643A -s Lotloo
Date lot acquired: �� 88 Deed Ref 13,696 Zoning district R -10
Uses on lot - commercial: None X or
MCD ?no
- number of: dwellings 1 duplex x apartments rental rooms
Building date(s): all pre -8/72? or C of O? N,
Building Permit appl'n. Nos. 6213 -88 7/25/88
Case Nos. all BoA applications, lawsuits:
State fully all zoning relief sought and respective Code sections
and subsections, specifically what you propose compared to present
and what grounds you urge for BoA to make each finding per Section
139 -32A if Variance, 139 -30A x if a Special Permit (and 139 -33A
if to alter or extend a nonconforming use). If appeal per 139 -31A
& B _ , attach decision or order appealed. OK to attach addendum .
Grant of Special Permit to reduce the side lot setback distance
from 10 to 5 feet in R -10 District to validate an existing structure
5 feet from side lot line, as allowed by Section 139 -16C.
Items enclosed as part of this Application: orderl addendum2
Locus map X Site plan x showing present x +planned structures
Floor plans present proposed elevatis (HDC approved ?_)
Listings lot area frontage setbacks GCR parking data
Assessor- certifieU addressee ist 4 sets X mailing labels 2 setsxx
200 fee payable to Town of Nantucket x proof 'cap' covenant
(If an appeal, ask Town Clerk to send Bldg Comr record to BoA.)
I certify that the requested information submitted is substantially
complete and true to the best of my knowledge, under the pains and
penalties of perjury. 9�
SIGNATURE: `11, Applicant At nrn y /agent X
C. Richard Loftin
3
(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
,mnn a..r nrvT_or i4CF.