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