HomeMy WebLinkAbout005-90Form 3 -89
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
January R(P , 1sp0
To: Parties in interest and others
concerned with the decision of the
Board of Appeals in Application No. 005 -90
of• Ira H. Pasten, Trustee of Eel Point Road Realty Trust
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 day's 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.
r I Willi m R. Sherman, Chairman
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
Board of Appeals
'Town of Nantucket
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
DECISION.
The Zoning Board of Appeals, at a public hearing held on
Friday, January 19, 1990, at 1:00 P.M. in the Town and County
Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, made the
following Decision upon the Application of = ra- H. Pasten,
Trustee of Eel Point Road Realty Trust u /d /t dated December 29,
1977 and registered as Document No. 18998 at the Nantucket
Registry District for the Land Court (File No. 005 -90).
1. The Applicant requested a modification of a Variance
granted under Nantucket Zoning By -Law Section 139 -32.A. from the
12 foot front -to -back spacing requirements for secondary
dwellings found in Section 139- 7.A.(2)(b) in order to allow an
addition to the front of the existing westerly dwelling unit.
Variance relief was originally granted to the Applicant on
October 4, 1978 (now recorded as Document No. 20182 at said
Registry District), in reliance upon which Applicant constructed
two dwelling units substantially in conformity with the plans
submitted to the Board at that time. The Nantucket Building
Commissioner issued a Certificate of Occupancy for those
structures on November 2, 1979. The premises are located at 111
Eel Point Road (Assessors Map No. 23, Parcel 30) and are shown
as Lot 19 on Land Court Plan No. 13887 -S as evidenced by the
Applicant's Certificate of Title No. 8164 at said Registry
District. The premises are zoned Limited Use General - 2.
2. The Board's findings are based upon the application and
accompanying documents, the original variance decision and the
records of the Board of Appeals with respect thereto,
photographs of the premises submitted by the Applicant and
testimony and representations made at the public hearing.
3. The topographic conditions that existed at the time of
the original variance grant are still present on the premises.
Namely, it is a long and narrow lot, with a significant drop in
elevation from the top of the bank where the houses are located
toward the road. In addition, the existence of the structures,
validly situated as a result of the 1978 decision by this Board,
specifically affect only this property and do not generally
affect the neighborhood or the zoning district.
4. 'The Applicant stated that the addition is needed to
accommodate their growing extended family and an elderly
relative who requires sleeping quarters on the first floor
level. To deny this request for expanded living space would
create a substantial hardship for the Applicant given that the
original configuration (without any front-to-back spacing) was
permitted in the first instance by this Board's 1978 variance.
5. As shown by the photographs and the plans presented at
the public hearing, the structures are situated more than 350
feet from Eel Point Road. At this distance the perception of
the structures from the road is that the facades already are
aligned. The proposed addition, while it will cause the facades
to be truly aligned, will not significantly alter the public's
perception regarding the front -to -back spacing of the (,
sturctures. /;71 ;r- :11 �, f t I
i
6. The Nantucket Planning Board, after reviewing the
application, recommended that the requested relief be granted.
Accordingly, we find that this relief can be granted without
detriment to the public good and without nullifying or
substantially derogating from the interest or purposes protected
by the by -law.
7. By UNAMINOUS vote, we hereby grant the requested relief
by modifying the existing variance to allow the Applicant to add
onto the secondary dwelling in substantial conformity with the
plans submitted to the Board, a reduced copy of the first floor
plan of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
DATED: January 2(p, 1990
Nantucket, MA 02554
i
William R. Sherman
David J. Leggett
1 �
- Dale W. Waine
(��Id ja � "I �, I q JO J&— 4 � _��
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
December 18, 1989
NOTICE
A public hearing of the Board of Appeals will be held
on Friday, January 19, 1989, at 1:00 P.M. in the Town
and County Building, Federal and Broad Streets, Nantucket,
on the Application of:
IRA H. PASTEN, as TRUSTEE of the EEL POINT REALTY TRUST
Board of Appeals File No. 00.5-90
seeking a modification of the 025 -78 Variance granted in
1978, said to have authorized the existing side -by -side
siting of a principal and a secondary dwelling attached by
a porch, so as to allow addition of a "den /study" and
bath at the front of the secondary dwelling bringing its
front building line into alinement with the principal
dwelling. The ground cover of the one dwelling shall
remain 20% smaller than the other's.
The premises are at 111 Eel Point Road, Assessor's Parcel
23 -003, Lot 19 of Land Court Plan 13887 -5, zoned Limited
Use General -2.
r-
William R. Sherman, Chairman
BoA Form 1 -89 NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING Date
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
CASE No a2��-
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
owner's name(s): Eel Point Road Realty Trust, Ira H. Pasten, Trustee
Mailing address: 32 Foster Street, Marblehead, MA 01945
Applicant's name: Same
Mailing address: Same
Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number
Street address: 111 Eel Point Road
23 - 03
Registry Land Ct Plan, MW)=XVW4X&bXXF1&ffXF13XX 13887 -5 Lot 19
Certificate of Title 8164
Date lot acquired: 12 29 77 IC�IIXXXXX7� Zonipg district LUG - 2
Uses on lot - commercial: None X or
MCD?
- number of: dwellings 2 duplex_ apartments_ rental rooms_
Building date(s): all pre -8/72? _ or 1978 C of O? yes
Building Permit appl'n. Nos. 954 -78
Case Nos. all BoA applications, lawsuits:025 -78 (copy of decision attached)
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 X if Variance, 139 -30A if a Special Permit (and 139 -33A
if to alter or extend a nonconforming use). If appeal per 139 -3�A
& II _ attach decision or order appealed. OI: to attach addendum -.
it
SEE ATTACHED ADDENDUM
0
Items enclosed as part of this Application: orderl addendum2 X
Locus map X Site plan_ showing present +planned "structures
Floor plans present X proposedX elevations _ (HDC approved?_)
Listings lot area frontage setbacks_ GCR X parking data
Assessor - certified addressee �t 4 sets majling labels 2 sets-
1200
fee payable to Town of Nantucket X proof 'cap' covenant
(If an appeal, ask Town Clerk to senU—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
peiialties o ZI rjury.
., wC "Applicant Attorney /agent X
SIGNATUR _
Melissa D. r ick, Att rney for Eel Point Realty Trust
(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
FOR BoA FFICE USE �fj y�1
Application copies reed: 4 or_ for BoA one o Cby
One copy filed with Town Clerk on by Ltf�— ),gcomplete?
One copy each to Planning Bd and Building Dept
i
$200 fee check given Town Treasurer on�rrL� 7by� waived ?_
Hearing notice posteU(�� mailed i rf I & ML/ �/2,
k (� �) c� v
Hearing(s) on_/_/_ cont'd to_/_/_, �_/_ withdrawn ?_/__J_
Decision due bye_/_ made__J__J_ filed TC_/_/_ mailed__J__J_
See related cases lawsuits other
Addendum to
Application of Eel Point Realty Trust,
Ira H. Pasten, Trustee
The Applicant seeks a modification of the variance granted
to him in 1978 by the Board of Appeals, which variance allowed
the siting of a secondary dwelling parallel to the primary
dwelling due to the unusual topographic conditions on the site.
A copy of the Board's 1978 decision is attached. In reliance on
and in accordance with that decision, the two residences were
built. A Certificate of Occupancy for the structures was issued
on November 2, 1979.
The site conditions which justified the original decision
remain unchanged. The Applicant is proposing to construct an
addition to one of the dwellings as shown on the attached plan.
The structures will meet the 20% size differential under the new
proposal. Given the distance of the structures from Eel Point
Road, the increased footprint will not change the apparent
alignment of the structures. The proposed addition does not
alter the impactof the original variance and thus should be
allowed.
RE: HARVEY L. PASTFN
BOARD 01' APPEALS - CASE NO. 025-78
1, NjjILICIyIjc G. I*t)%qIj Clerl, of the Tolvii of N;mtkicict
Comillolme; I It I I of NIZIssocl I I Is(, t Is, hereby certify I I mt 20 tlnys have
c
elapsed " i Ilco I he (Ivc i ,, ion i Ii I he :11,ovv cnpl i ollot] case has Iw('11 t'i 1 (',1
with this offi cc (;I copy of which is ;It t nch v(I 1wrot o) ;III(I no appeal
has hecn taken therefrom.
DATF 1)
NI"itle I Yll I-I-'Y'
Town Clerk
I C'n
petition of Ilarvey L. - I e
the InllluLes eeting Of S I)telliber,
In the " o r tile III
,latter of tile visited
025-7S: File Board reviewed tile members had 11), 1978 and received the r(-'I)()rts of
the locus.
the jocul, toI)()gl"
w, al 1Y (le"!1•111"led tila
as IT
,encr,
-2-
Ln the matter of the petition of Alice Carey Williams, 02/1 -78:
'Pit(, Board reviewed the minutes of the meeting of September 19,
' 1978 and reviewed the history of the subdivision and conveyance
made therefrom.
After clue deliberation the Board found:
1. The petitioner hits it hardship in that the lot as purchased
was a non - conforming lot and was though to he guaranteed as to use
and dimension for a period of seven years. The decision was an-
nulled by the decision of the Massachusetts courts, and the use
factor, only, was preserved;
`2. The petitioner would suffer a substantial hardship in the
event the use of this lot ware (Jellied being that. she would suffer
the loss of substantial funds.
On motion made by Member I1:11'tsch and seconded by Member Hyde,
it was unanimously voted to grant the variance.
,i =fify'
In the matter of the petition of David Murray et ux, 026 -78:
The Board reviewed the minutes of the meeting of September 19, 1978
and received the report of the inspection of the property.
After clue deliberation the Board found:
1. The relief sought by the petitioner could he I;ranted with-
out any detriment to neighborhood properties and wiLhin the scope
of relief :uit.ici.paLed by the by -law;
2. The garage addiLion would contain uo 1ivi -nl; area and would
not afl•ecl. the density 1':cctors ill this area; and,
3. The petitioner has a bill'(] ship _in that his personal pro -
perty is without adequate safeguard and his delivery of fuel oil
cannot he maiirtained wi -thout other faciIiLies as now exist on the
property.
On motion of Member Ilyde and seconded by Member Bartsch, it
was unanimously voted i:o gr:uiL the vari nce.
/-7 n the matter of the petition of Harvey L. Pas Len, Trustee,
: The Board reviewed l.1W minutes of the meeting of September
19, 1978 and received the reports of the members who had visited
the locus.
It was generally determined that the locus has it Lopographio
-2-
Ti
feature ifui (III e i.0 that Ch area in LIWI locus has a severe drop in
elevation as the locus distances from the edge of the bank. It is
sufficieatL in depth of elevation to prevent a view of the water
and beach area from the area of the proposed seeond dwelling unit
were it located according t.o the code.
L) addition, the history of t:he application and guest for per=
'nits experienced by l:he pel.i(Aoner makes it likely that substantial
financial hardship has resulted Lo (hem. The procedure Suffered
by l.he petitioner ha
part. s bean burdensome and is without fault on their
After due deliberat; ie,at I.hc: Board found:
l - The locus has a pccuIi ;m and unitpae l:opographic siLualion
in tha L the site rodut•os i n r I eva t i oil as i 1 recedes from the c l i f f
;urd beach area.; Lhus, I he 1111.1110V ;uvay the• building is tocaLed the
less the view of the %Vltle•r and hc•uth. This is a situation in the
imanediate area bill, is no( repeated in flit• :;a;rronndin +[ ;area:: of the
neighborhood;
" . Al the t inx• the pt•1 it loners made Lht•ia' inil ial a WI) licaLioil
for a dui ldint{ i>armi L , I hr proposed placenieul, of the sLrucLure was
allowed• 1'hc time iilLerval and wlexplained delays without the
fault of i.he petitioner is ;t ba
ship; and, sis for substant:i ;11 financial hard-
The area of the locus is a sparsely populated and little
area of Dionis.
developed 1'he nearest dwelling unit is consider-
this removed ier and will staffer no dianinution of value in the event
t.hi_s relief is grant( suffer
No delriment will be experienced by any
surrouudi -all; propea'LY ownc`a' iu
1,110 event Lhis rel iel' is granted.
On mol.ion of Member 1S ;u Lseh, seconded by Member Hyde, It was
un;urimotlsly voted l.h ;tl the vatriauc'e be granted.
►fit. CL"� OL,&
lo� 417V �4.00 P11m
4A.6— C T. t- o-ftKEtL
0-4� . -T , Q
i
-3-
i�
rt
ro
m
n m
r
�
O 0
�
oo to
�
ri
3 I
>
O
Z
', 04
U
z
C) IJ 1r
�� l7
w
OC
5-' n
rV
oC�
0
n
y
H
7.
e ,
tj
0
y
H
Z
0