Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout055-90V, o S 5 - (72D TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Date: November ` , 19 90 To: Parties in Interest and.Others concerned with the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the following: Application No.: 055 -90 Owner /Applicant: ROBERT AND GRACE CADDELL Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk. An ADDea1 from this Decision may be taken pursuant to Section 17 of Chanter 40A, :`assachusetts General La s. Any action appealing the Decision must be brought by filing an com-olaint in court within TWENTY ( 20) days .._ ter this day's date. 'notice of the action with a copy of the 1 complaint and certified copy of the Decision must be ^iven to the Town Clerk so as to be received :within such i'V:-..TY (20) days. Lin' F. Williams, Chairman cc: Town Clerk Planning Board Building Commissioner 8. After substantial delays arising, in part, from the ill health and death of an attorney retained by Applicants to request a. variance for the height violation and, in part, from the plans being misplaced by an architectural firm, Applicants appeared before this Board in this proceeding. 9. From the plans submitted, the building is constructed substantially in accord with the plans approved by the H.D.C. and the Building Inspector, and the present Building Inspector stated that the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy issued in 1986 would only have been given if the H.D.C. had signed off on the Building Permit to indicate that the building had been constructed in compliance with the plans approved by that Commission. 10. Under the interpretation of the By -Law in effect at the time the permits were issued for the construction, the building would have been acceptable as conforming to the height requirement. 11. Upon a motion made to validate the house as constructed, subject to any additional sign off requirements necessary for issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Board voted 4 -1 (Williams, Sherman, O'Mara, and Leichter in favor; Beale opposed) to GRA'N.T the Variance requested by the Applicants. 12. The Bc:.ard finds that owing to circumstances relating to topography of the land and structure not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located, a literal enforcement of the height requirement of Section 139 -21 cf the Zoning By -Law would involve substantial hardship for the Applicants, and the desireable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the B y -Law. vat�d: ltld,),eS n`UI q� (c(4d William R. Sherman 1 C. Mac- hall Beale TOWN OF NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Nantucket, Mass. 02554 August 27, 1990 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals will be held on Friday, September 14, at 1:00 P. M. in the Town and County Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the Application of: ROBERT and GRACE CADDELL Board of Appeals File No. 055 -90 Applicant seeks a Variance under Section 139 -32A of the Zoning By -Law from the requirements of Section 139 -21 (Height limitations). The building exceeds the thirty (30) foot height limitation on at least one side, and the average height exceeds thirty (30) feet. The premises are located at 18 Eat Fire Springs Road, Assessor's Map 20, parcel 59, as shown on Land Court Plan 6283 -8, sheet 2, in the Nantucket Registry District. The property is zoned LUG -3. r` Linda F. Williams, Chairman 11 BCIA Form 1 -89 NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING Date NANTUCKET, MA 02554 CASE No. -� APPLICATION FOR RELIEF Owner's name(s) : k O 13 /kit -C" - Mailing address: f 041T r-(&-t Applicant's name: 4-f K Mailing address: C1 6 .)-o r Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number 2_0- S� Street address: 'S ffi fC Registry Land Ct Plan, Plan Bk & Pg or Plan File L Lot Date lot acquired: 2 Deed Ref Zoning district L(,l Uses on lot - commercial: None 4/-or MCD? /)z - number of: dwellings duplex apartments r rental rooms C Of O? r`y Building date(s): all pre -8/72? or Building Permit appl' n. Nos. 3 O 3 r -- n 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 _ if a Special Permit (and 139 -33A if to niter or extend a nonconforming use). If appeal per 139 -3A attach decision or order appealed. OK to attach addenduml. 13 `( If 6 Items enclosed as part of this Application: orderl addendum2 Locus map Site plan showing present +p.lanned "structures Floor plans present proposed elevations (HDC approved ?_) Listings lot area frontage setbacks GCR parking data Assessor - certifies— addressee 1st 4 sets ma�l ni g labels 2 sets_ 200 fee payable to Town of Nantucket proof 'cap' covenant (If an appeal, ask Town Clerk to send Bldg Comr's 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 . SIGNATURE: plicant � Attorney/agent _ 3(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority) -OR B� _,OIFF 91�- rE CCI 1j, :s ° / | | ! ' Robert and Grace Caddell 18 Eat Fire Springs Rd. Nantucket, Ma. 02554 � August 15, 1990 Board of Appeals Nantucket Ma. 02554 Dear Board Members: The following account is a synopsis of problems associated with building our year-round home on the island, and the events leading up to our requesting a height variance to our home. We started submitting our plans to the H.D.C. in January of 1983 and received their approval on Sept. 27, 1983. After submitting these plans to the Building Dept. we received our- building permit on Oct. 19, 1983 Our building program proceeded slowly as it seemed that some of the subcontractors that I was able to obtain were not the most dependable and the rather severe winter weather conditions made the project even more difficult. Around March of 1984, M. Chaleki, the Building Inspector, apparently received a complaint from unknown parties that our building was not appropriate. He requested that I have the plans that I had drawn, submitted and approved, be redrawn by a licensed architect. Before this was done, he approved our adding on a den directly below a second story dining room in order to balance off the appearance of the house. I assume that this had been suggested to him by whomever had complained, but whatever was required we were willing to do. We thus submitted the vellum that I had drawn and revised, to a licensed architect on the Cape. They copied my plans and I submitted their drawings to Mr. Chaleki on or about the first of March 1984. I`m not exactly sure, but in the 1984 March/April time-frame, Mr. Chaleki and Mr. Blair came out and placed a Stop Work tag on the house for being too high. This was on a Thursday, as I recail, for the next day I went to the Inspector's office to find out what I could do. Mr. Chaleki was off island and when I met with him on the following Monday, he said we were O.K. and it was permissible to proceed with construction. After receiving his approval to proceed, we continued on to obtaining our rough framing, plumbing, and electrical inspections on 9/25/84. 9 C In Oct. of 1985, the building was complete and we requested our final inspection. The inspection was made and following four minor "pick-ups", a reinspection was made and the house was approved. At that time, the inspectors took our building permit with them. Later I found that the final inspection had not been signed off, and as a result a second final inspection was made in June of 1990 and the building permit signed off. . Following the final inspection made in 1985, we requested occupancy permit and was informed that there was a problem with the building height. We were shown a letter that had been written to the H.D.C. on March 27, 1984 by Mr. Chaleki stating that the building was over 30' high. We found no answer in the file for his request for clarification and subsequent checks made with the H.D.C. office revealed that they had received the letter from the Building Department but there was no record of their having answered it. ` Another letter (copy attached) was written by Mr. Borchert to the H.D.C. on Oct. 109 1985. In this letter he claimed that the average height of the house was 34' to 35'. The H.D.C. answer to this is also enclosed, and herein they state that they had approved the four sides of the house to be 30',30'1 30`, and 38' respectively. I told Mr. Borchert that he was wrong in his average height of 34' to 35' and that I had measured the building several times and it was within the H.D.C. requirements. I still do not know how he reached that conclusion. On the way out of the office, I expressed my concern to the receptionist and her comment was that people were in homes that had not received their Occupancy Permit since before 1978. There-is not excuse for me not proceeding to get the matter straightened out at that time, but I had been subjected to so many frustrations over the past three years that I just wanted to get into my home. Approximately one year later, in Oct. of 1986, I again went into the Building Department to see if there was not some way of getting my Occupancy Permit based on their measuring the house and checking to see if I was within the approved 30', 30',30' and 38'. The answer was no, and they issued a Temporary Occupancy permit for 3 months during which period I would apply for a variance to provision 139-21. I was advised to obtain legal council. The only lawyer I was acquainted with was Mike Driscoll and I went to him with my files to date to ask his assistance. Mike said he would take care oVit and that there should be no problem as I had complied with the approVed plans. Unfortunately Mike's health was in poor condition, and he was only able to work part-time. As time went on, we exceeded the allotted 3 months ° .° terminating in January of 1987 for the temporary occupancy. I checkpd with him several times and each time he assured me that it would be taken care of until in January of 1988 he died. I waited approximately 2 months and then spoke with Mrs. Driscoll about obtaining my file back. She assured me that she was gradually getting the'incomplete paper work sorted out. About two months later (May-June '88), she found part of my file bu' unfortunately not all. To start over, I requested copies of the plans from the architectural firm in Hyannis. Then came the next problem. In the process of moving their office, they lost track of both my original vellum and the master that they had made from it. Finally after another six months had gone by, they informed me that the-file of both masters could not`be located and that the only way to duplicate it was to obtain the Building Department's copy and a new master could be made from it. There was an extra copy of the architectural drawn plan in the Building Department's file. which they allowed me to take to have a new master made. I arranged a meeting with Mr. Santos in May 1990 and he was very cooperative in advising me as to what was required before submitting a request for the variance to section 139- 21. We had a Licensed Architectural Engineer measure the house and certify as to the height of the building, which plans I am now submitting. ' In conclusion, we humbly petition your lenience in permitting us the height variance requested. From the very beginning, we have attempted to follow the rules and regulations as directed. Sincerely, Robert an Grace Caddell 0 BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN & COUNTY BUILDING NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Telephone 228 -0588 March 27, 1984 Historic District Commission Town of Nantucket Nantucket, Massachusetts Dear Members: N Enclosed are photographs of Mr. Robert Caddell's house on Eat Fire Springs Road in Wauwinet. The-height limitation of thirty feet may have been violated if the three story elevation can be seen from a public way. ii I would -appreciate your investigating this matter and advising this office if I should include the three story elevation in my calculations.. y�ry t Norman W. Chaleki Building Inspector NWC /mw I _;•'1111t7i �;� TOWN 13UILDING ANNEX 2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Telephone 228 -0588 Historic DistricC Commission Town Building Nantucket, NA 02554 Dear Members, October 10, 1985 Mr. Robert Caddell of Rat Fire Springs Road has requested a Certificate of Occupancy. I have determined that the average height of the house is' 34' or 35' and therefore higher than the zoning limit of 30'. Your approvals for the house were: 12310 4 -13 -83 12796 9 -27 -83 13218 2 -8 -84 ,'iease let me know if the Caddell house meets the requirements of the Historic District Commission. Thank -You, Carl Borchert Building Inspector I Enclosures: 1) Locus Map 2) Previous Letter IIWC..to H.D.C. dated March 27, 1.984 CB /ckw ,ANTU��� HISTORIC DISTRICTS COMMISSION 3 �� MISSION %t F •^ NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS �Ap�RA•iE�,;�, Telephone 228 -2729 October 16, 1985 EMO FROM: HISTORIC DISTRICTS COMMISSION CARL BORCHERT, BUILDING INSPECTOR Pon receipt of your letter of October 10,1985, he Commission members checked the Certificates f Appropriateness for the house of Mr. Robert Caddell on Eat Fire Springs Road and found hat the records indicate approval at 30130130138, thich is an average of 32 feet. 'he height at which you have determined the %fuse has been built is not, therefore, according 17 the HDC approval. I[ease let us know if we may provide any further i iformation. A one Mensini S ,cretary a Im "��FO • i