HomeMy WebLinkAbout063-901 ,
D� ,3 - '=�®
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Date: December. 19 , 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.: 063 -90
Owner /Applicant:
Roger J. Roche
Richard H. Brooks, Ann S. Killen and
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has
this day been filed in the office of 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 an 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 Toian Clerk so as to be received is ithi. such TNENTY
(20) days.
William R. Sherman, Acting Chairman
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
F
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
South Beach Street
Nantucket, Mass. 02554
Map 41, parcel 220
L.C. Plan 14393 -B, Lot 7
1 Pilgrim Road, Nantucket
R -1
At a public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on
October 19, 1990, continued until November 16, 1990, and further
continued by agreement to December 13, 1990, all hearings
commencing at 1:00 P. M. in the Town and County Building, Broad
Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the Application of RICHARD
H. BROOKS, ANN S. KILLEN, and ROGER J. ROCHE, all c/o Reade &
Alger, P.C., 6 Young's Way, Nantucket, Massachusetts,
(Application No. 063 -90), the Board made the following DECISION:
1. Applicants alleged that the owner of the premises, HOWARD J.
JELLEME, had violated provisions of the Zoning By -Law by (1)
building and expanding a nonconforming structure without a
permit, and (2) expanding a pre- existing, nonconforming carpentry
business on the premises by maintaining heavy equipment,
interstate trucks, trailers, storing solid fill, loam and gravel,
and by converting an existing building to a maintenance garage
and filed complaints with the Building Commissioner seeking to
have him order the violations to cease.
2. On August 21, 1990, the Building Commissioner decided that
the use of the premises and business had not been expanded in
violation of the Zoning By -Law.
3. Applicants timely appealed under Section 139 -31 of the
Zoning By -Law from a decision of the Building Commissioner
denying Applicants' complaint and requested the Board to order
the Building Commissioner to undertake enforcement action against
JELLEME and TOSCANA CORPORATION, the occupants of the premises,
for the allegedly illegal expansion of the pre- existing,
nonconforming use and to cease and desist from the expanded
present use of the premises at 1 Pilgrim Road, Nantucket.
4. The Board's decision is based upon the Application and
papers and documents filed therewith, including the record of the
decision of the Building Commissioner from which this appeal is
taken, the evidence, oral and documentary, presented at the
hearings by the Applicants and JELLEME, statements from abutters
and concerned citizens, photographs of the locus submitted by
both Applicants and the owner of the premises, affidavits and
memoranda submitted on behalf of the Applicants and owner by
respective counsel, letters in support of the application,
letters opposed to the application, and a favorable
recommendation by the Planning Board.
5. Applicants agreed that the use of the premises as a
carpentry shop was a lawful pre- existing, nonconforming use,
which has existed continuously since 1972, but argued that a
Application 063 -90
BROOKS /KILLEN /ROCHE
substantial expansion of said use had occurred since the
adoption of zoning, and that the expansion exceeded that which
otherwise might be permissible without a Special Permit under
the standards set forth in Town of Bridgewater v. Chuckran, 217
NE2d 726 (1966) and Powers v Building Inspector of'Barnstable,
296 NE2d 49 (1973).
6. Applicants allege that JELLEME violated the provisions of
Section 139 -33(A) by constructing a concrete pad in August, 1990,
upon which trucking and maintenance operations are conducted and
an addition to the maintenance building in 1975 without a Special
Permit.
7. The Applicants presented evidence that the use in 1972, the
date of the adoption of zoning on Nantucket, was for JELLEME's
carpentry business and included the storage of building
materials, both inside a building on the premises and outside,
and for parking vehicles used in connection with the business,
including pick -up trucks, a van, a six wheel stake and platform
truck used to haul building materials, and a three ton crane.
8. Applicants further presented evidence that the business
conducted by JELLEME as a general contractor in 1972 was
predominantly a carpentry business for residential and commercial
construction, that some heavy construction, including masonry and
steel work, was subcontracted to others, and that the vehicles
used in connection with the business were sometimes maintained at
a garage off site.
9. According to Applicants' evidence, early in the 19801s, the
business expanded into new areas of construction, including
landscape construction, storage of sand, gravel, hardening, loam,
and crushed stone, interstate shipping, excavation and
installation of precast concrete products, and maintenance of the
heavy equipment used in the new ventures. This addition occurred
when and after TOSCANA CORPORATION, a Massachusetts corporation
then partially owned by Mr. Jelleme, moved its operations to the
premises.
10. After an inspection by the Building Commissioner, made in
response to the complaints filed with the Building Commissioner,
specified in paragraph 1 hereof, the storage of sand, gravel,
loam, and precast concrete products was halted on the premises
and those types of material were moved to another location at the
request of the Building Commissioner.
11. At present, the use of the premises, according to evidence
presented by both the Applicants and JELLEME, is for the storage
of building materials and supplies for construction and for
Application 063 -90
BROOKS /KILLEN/ROCHE
parking and maintenance of the vehicles used in connection with
said construction and that the hours of operation of the business
reflect the operating schedule of the ferry providing service to
and from the island.
12. The vehicles presently using the premises as a base of
operations include eighteen wheel trucks, five dump trucks, two
cranes (at least one of which has a forty -five ton capacity), and
five front -end loader /bulldozers and those vehicles are deployed
to building sites from there using neighborhood roads, some of
which are unpaved, resulting in substantial noise and dust.
13. According to JELLEME's evidence, in the years immediately
preceding the 1972 adoption of zoning, he was engaged in the
business of all phases of heavy general contracting, including
trucking of construction and building materials on and off
island, house building, commercial construction, excavation,
foundation work, underpinning, deep foundation work, construction
of marine piers and bridges, steel erection, crane work, building
moving, and maintenance of his vehicles and that those uses have
continued without interruption to the present. The only phases
of construction in which JELLEME was not engaged were electrical
and plumbing, and the work subcontracted was work which JELLEME
could have performed but for the demands of other contemporaneous
projects.
14. JELLEME presented evidence that the businesses currently on
the premises employed seventeen people in 1972, rose to twenty in
the 1980's, and currently have 16 employees and evidence of some
of the projects in which it was involved in the early 1970's,
including construction of major commercial and municipal
buildings, construction of a church steeple, and excavation of a
basement under a stone church.
15. According to JELLEME, it has always attempted to use state -
of- the -art equipment on its projects, and the change in the
equipment between 1972 and the present reflects the differences
in the kinds of equipment available for use, the changes in
construction methods now used on residential and commercial
construction projects, changes in the types of vehicles which
can be transported on the ferry, and the increase in the demand
for services in 1972 and the peak demands of the late 1980's
during the building boom on the island.
16. According to JELLEME, the entire area of the property has
at all relevant times been used for the storage of materials and
components for projects on which JELLEME and /or TOSCANA were
engaged, the hours of operation reflect, as they did in 1972,
the operating schedule of the ferry service to and from the
Application 063 -90
BROOKS /KILLEN /ROCHE
island, and the business has always been a source of noise and
dust as an unfortunate but inevitable consequence of the .
equipment and condition of the roads and proximity of dwellings
in the area.
17. According to JELLEME, the 1975 addition to the maintenance
garage was constructed under a validly issued Building Permit
and, therefore, is protected by the provisions of Section 139-
25(,)(2) & (3) of the Zoning By -Law.
18. The Board finds that the construction of the concrete pad
does not violate Section 139• -33(A) in that it is not a
"structure" within the meaning of the Section 139 -2 of the Zoning
By -Law, and therefore may be constructed without a Special
Permit.
19. The Board finds that the present uses being made of the
property include the storage of construction materials, including
crushed stone, for JELLEME's and TOSCANA's construction projects,
which includes landscape construction as well as the other kinds
of businesses specified in paragraph 13 hereof, and use by and
maintenance of the vehicles employed by those companies. The
Board specifically finds that sand, gravel, loam, and precast
concrete products are not stored on the premises and that neither
JELLEME nor TOSCANA are engaged in the landscape planting
business on the premises.
20. The property owner, JELLEME, has the burden of establishing
the requisite similarity between the current use and the original
nonconforming use under the standard set forth in Cape Resorts
Hotels v Alcoholic Licensing Board of Falmouth, 385 Mass. 205
(at 212), 431 NE2d 213 (1982), and to satisfy that burden, it
must prove that it satisfies all three of the standards
articulated in Chuckran and Powers.
21. The Board finds that the current use of the premises as
found to exist by this Board in paragraph 19 hereof reflects the
nature and purpose of the use prevailing when zoning took effect
on Nantucket.
22. The Board finds that the current use of the premises as
found to exist by this Board in paragraph 19 hereof
does not differ in quality or character, as well as degree of
use, from the use prevailing when zoning took effect on
Nantucket.
23. The Board finds that the current use of the premises as
found to exist by the Board in paragraph 19 hereof is not
different in kind in its effect on the neighborhood from the use
Application 063 -90
BROOKS /KILLEN /ROCHE
prevailing when zoning took effect on Nantucket.
24. On a motion made to grant the relief requested by the
Applicants and to overturn the decision of the Building
Commissioner, the Board voted in favor, 3 -2 (Balas,-Beale, and
Sherman in favor; Waine and Williams opposed), and, therefore,
having failed to obtain the four (4) affirmative votes required
by Section 139- 31(E)(3) of the Zoning By -Law, the motion failed
and the decision of the Building Commissioner is not overturned.
Date:. -��
/t�_ �I/jz
. j
Wi liam R. Sherman
nda F. Williams
Ann Balas
C. Marshall Beal
e W. Waine
Form 6 -89
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
File No. (%?3 -�
Assessor's Parcel L41 - o2A O
THIS AGREEMENT TO EXTEND THE TIME LIMIT FOR THE BOARD OF
APPEALS TO MAKE A DECISION (or to hold a public hearing or
take other action) concerns the Application of:
Pursuant to the provisions of the Acts of 1987, Chapter
498, amending the Sate Zoning Act, Chapter 40A of the
Massachusetts General Laws, Applicant(s) /petitioner(s) and
the Board of Appeals hereby agree to extend the time limit
for a public hearing V-"-On the Application, or
- for a decision t""' of the Board, or
- for any other action
by the Board,
(whether such Application is an appeal ✓ from the
decision of any administrative official, a petition for
a Special Permit , or for a Variance or for any
extension modification or renewal thereof);
to the NEW TIME LIMIT of midnight on �/�2 -��/ l ! 0�� /V
but not earlier than a time limit set y statute or bylaw.
The Applicant(s), or the attorney or agent for
Applicant(s) represented to be duly authorized to act in
this matter for Applicant(s), in executing this Agreement
waives any rights under the Nantucket zoning Bylaw and the
State Zoning Act, as amended, to the extent, but only to
the extent, inconsi tent with this Agreement.
,0144� G• wAaj
`l G
Effect4Lve c1ate of Agreement
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
Agreement filed in the office of the Town Clerk:
Date Town Clerk
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Nantucket, Mass. 02554
September 19, 1990
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
A public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals will be held
on Friday, October 19, 1990, at 1:00 P. M. in the Town and County
Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the
Application of:
RICHARD H. BROOKS, ANN S. KILLEN, and ROGER J. ROCHE
Board of Appeals File No. 003 -90
Applicants are appealing from a Decision of the Building_
Commissioner denying Applicants' request that the Building,` �t Y1 l3ci'3
Commissioner undertake enforcement action against the present use
of the premises at 1 Pilgrim Road, Nantucket. Applicants allege
that the owner of the premises, HOWARD J. JELLEME, has violated
the provisions of the Zoning By -Law by (1) building and expanding
a non - conforming structure without a permit; and (2) expanding a
pre- existing, non - conforming carpentry business on the premises
by maintaining heavy equipment, trucks, trailers, storing solid
fill, loam and gravel, and by converting an existing building to
a maintenance garage. The Building Commissioner maintains that
the use of the premises and business have not been expanded.
The premises are located at 1 Pilgrim Road, Assessor's Map 41,
parcel 220, as shown on Land Court Plan 14393 -B, Lot 7, in the
Nantucket Registry District. The property is zoned R -1.
Linda F. Williams, Chairman
0
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Date
BoA Form 1 -89 ,rO� �p COUNTY BUILDING �,..((,,,, Q�
NANTUCKET, MA 02554 CASE No Q:D - -<
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
Owner's name(s):
Mailing address:
Applicant's name:
ddress:
Howard M. jelleme
15 Fair Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Richard H. Brooks, Ann S. Killen and Ro er J. Ro he
c/o Reade & Alger P.0
Mailing a ------ ---- -- 41 -220
Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number
Street address:
1 Pilgrim Road
14393 -B Lot 7
Cert district R_ �
4 6 66 peed Ref 5?1� Zoning
Date lot acquired: ��__. MCD? Yes
Uses on lot - commercial• None _ orHeaw enuipment,trucking. etc.
number of: dwellings0 duplex _.2- apartments rental rooms 0
nu C of 0?
Building date(s): all pre -8/72? No or
Building Permit app
1'n. Nos. 461 -74; 564 -74; 166 -73
Case Nos. all BoA applications, lawsuits:
State fully all zoning relief sought andre ccomparedetoepresent
and subsections, specifically what you propose er Section
and what grounds you urge for A to make special Permit per 139 -33A
139 -32A if Variance, 139 -30A if a Suse If appeal per 139 -31A
if to alter or extend a nonconforming .)OK to attach addendum .
& B X , attach decision or order appealed
409"fi.� Land Ct Plan,
See attached addendum.
02584
s enclosed as part of this Application: orderl X addendum2X
Item resent +planned structures
X Site plan showing p HDC app
Locus map elevations ( roved._)
Floor plans present proposed GCR parking data
setbacks labels 2 sets X
Listings lot area frontage covenant
Assessor - certified addressee ist 4 sets X f lingcap'
8200 fee payable to Town of Nantucket X proof s record to BoA.)
1(If an appeal, ask Town Clerk to sen3 Bldg
I certify that the requested information knowledge, submitted s
nderthebpainslandy
complete and true to the best of my knowleedge,
penalties of p 7 rY• / Agent
Applicant Atfor ap IcAnt/aptlants
SIGNATURE:
3(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
BoA Form 1 -II9 NANTUCKET
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS D to
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING
NANTUCKET, MA 02554 CASE No. --
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
Owner's names) : Howard M. Jelleme
Mailing address: 15 Fair Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Applicant's name• • Richard H Brooks, Ann S Killen and Roger J Roche
Mailing address: c/o Reade & Alger P 2F�9 Nantucket,- 02584
Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number 41 -220
Street address: 1 Pilgrim Road
14393 -B Lot 7
--wp Land Ct Plan, ert
Date lot acquired: 4� 66 Deed Ref CS?.1S Zoning district R -1
Hea i nt, trucking. ec.
Uses on lot - commercial: None _ or �'�'� � MCD? Yes
- number of: dwellings duplex 0 apartments0 rental rooms 0
Building date(s): all pre -8/72? No or C of 0?
Building Permit appl'n. Nos. 461 -74; 564 -74; 166 -73
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 aSpec;al Permit (and 139 -33�A
if to alter or extend a noncon.ormin g use If appeal
& B X , attach decision or order appealed. OK to attach addendum .
See attached addendum.
Items enclosed as part of this Application: orderl X addendum2X
Locus map X Site plan_ showing present +plannHDC approved?_)
Floor plans present proposed_ elevations ( pP
Listings lot area frontage setbagks GCRT_ parking data
1200 ssessor- certifier addressee i.st 4 sets_ ma�ling labels 2 sets X
(If aneappeal, ask Town clerk ntocsenc -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 p j ry.
SIGNATURE: Applicant — AtforrapX' PMEs /aTPe lants
3(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
FOR BOA OFFICE USE
Application copies recd: 4_ or for BOA on_J�— by
One copy filed with Town Clerk on_J__/ b — Y complete? —
One copy each to Planning Bd and Building Dept_J__/_ by
$200 fee check given Town Treasurer on_/�— by waived? —
Hearing notice posted,_/— mailed —/_ I & M-
Hearing(s) on__J___J— cont'd to _l__j __I__j— withdrawn ? _J_ /—
i�— filed TC_ -_/�— mailed��—
Decision due by_,/�— madeJ
See related cases
lawsuits other
ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION BY
RICHARD H. BROOKS, ANN S. KILLEN AND ROGER J. ROCHE
The applicants, Richard H. Brooks, Ann S. Killen and Roger
J. Roche, bring this proceeding pursuant to Massachusetts General
Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 8, and Nantucket Zoning By -law, Section
139 -31, in order to appeal from a decision by the Building
Commissioner dated August 21, 1990, which tacitly denied the
applicants' request that the Building Commissioner undertake
enforcement action against the present use of the subject premises
(the "Locus ").
On August 1, 1990, the applicants filed complaints with the
Building Commissioner, reciting that Howard J. Jelleme, the owner
of the Locus ( "Jelleme "), was violating the provisions of the
By -law by (1) building and expanding a nonconforming structure
without a permit, and (2) expanding a nonconforming, pre- existing
carpentry business upon the Locus by maintaining heavy equipment,
trucks, interstate trailers, storing landfill, loam, gravel and
supplies, and converting an existing building to a maintenance
garage. On August 6, 1990, the applicants supplemented their
complaint by a writing addressed to the Building Commissioner.
On August 13, 1990, the applicants further supplemented their
complaint by a letter from their counsel to the Building
Commissioner.
By letter dated August 21, 1990, addressed to the applicants'
counsel, the Building Commissioner, as stated above, tacitly denied
the complaint, stating his opinion that Jelleme had not expanded
his use of the Locus.
The applicant, Richard H. Brooks, is the owner of a parcel
immediately abutting the Locus; the applicants, Ann S. Killen and
Roger J. Roche, are property owners in the immediate neighborhood.
The applicants are aggrieved by the refusal of the Building
Commissioner to commence enforcement action against Jelleme, and
bring this proceeding in order to appeal therefrom.
The applicants concede that Jelleme's use of the Locus as a
carpentry shop antedates the 1972 effective date of the Nantucket
zoning by -law, and has existed continuously throughout this period.
Minor building work done in the 1970's, pursuant to Building
Permits 166 -73, 461 -74 and 564 -74, continued this pre- existing
use as a carpentry shop. However, about 1980, the scope and
nature of the nonconforming use of the Locus changed, with formation
of a new business (Toscana Corporation) which was involved in
excavating, landscaping, heavy equipment and storage of related
materials. Since then, a gradual expansion has occurred, with
use as a trucking terminal for interstate tractor - trailers as
well. No building permits have been secured in connection with
any of this expansion in use.
The applicants request that the Board act to allow their
appeal and to order the Building Commissioner to commence enforcement
rIt
action against Jelleme for the illegal expansion of the pre- existing,
nonconforming use of the Locus, and to require Jelleme to cease
and desist from the expanded use.
kah #27 /BROOKS
August 21, 1990
Mr. Arthur Reade
Reade & Alger, P.C.
4 Youngs Way
Nantucket, MA 02554
Dear Mr. Reade,
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 508- 228 -7222
Tele Fax 508- 228 -7249
Ronald J. Santos
Building Commissioner
I have reviewed your letter dated August 13, 1990 regarding
Howard Jelleme, Inc. located on Pilgrim Road, Map 41 Parcel 220.
It is my opinion that Mr. Jelleme has not expanded the use of his
property or business.
contractors Jelleme
on Nantucket one
lsland sincelargest
the largest) general his business began. I can remember back to the _ business than he doesltodayad more
trucks and personnel involved with his
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly
at 228 -7222.
Very truly yours,
Ronald J. /ant:o
Building Commissioner
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
How received:
Telephone( )
Personal
Letter( )
]BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Tcicphone 228.6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
Complainarit's Name:
Complainant's Address: _
:Complaint received by; t
VIOLATIONS OF: '
1b—
W; o
ti
Complaint No
Dater —S2- t - 1� 0
Time:lLI A.M.
—
Telephone No.
/--Chapter 139 Zoning Ordinances, Town of Nantucket
1--CMR•780 Aff'Ammended Mass. State Building Code
Sanitary Code, Art. 2
Complaint reported ag!ainat;, f
! Nah:e i`sf . ; !• H lif
e sel }l
m arid• Howard Jell
eme I
Addreai'a:' IA:mIrlgr�j:Road.
' Locatibn;of i t•! coia, pla � '• i :�: .!
lit
n. r
P1 I
P1 I
tI !. • • : r
r atu�a:;o� cdri lain.t;:;�
1 • zes
• � ently ! bui ding` i
t.�,►r.
!$ opj w!(t. a' p�ruiit . I
}; on: site..] `i }� IIterstate; semi
a•r s ore. ,on t e .si e.
�i1 }e''and !
Ri�ha:r
K d B
P 8t;
; w year , spout
t
f ' view 'd;
!,;!• ,ias attempt It
InvestigationtYes( )- No()
antucket, Ma. TeZ'- $- 22R_141R
•Maps 4 .. . Lott% � 22
Signature of Complainants: _
TWO COMPLAINTS
expanding a non - conforming use on the-North side of •the'carpent y
'2) expansion of non - conforming pre - exisiting carpentry busines
low ng ac s: eavy..equipmen ana ruc use an re maintain d
a
trailers use the site, . Landfill,•loam,gravel and supplies
ui ng usage converted—to a maintenance ara e.
ooks have ersonall met with Howard Jelleme severaltimesdin0 s.
the violation. He assured us he was 'doing his best to relocat
O.Lan o,dig in permanently rather than move.
Inveatigated by:
c
How received:
Telephone( )
Personalm
Letter( )
]BUILDING, DEPARTMENT
TOWN hUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 228 -6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
Complaint No
Date: 9, -[-- 5'(:�
Time IA
Telephone No.
a Complainant's Name:
_ � c h•a�r,� e -��S
Complainant's Address: _
r.�. _
.Complaint received by: T ��
VIOLATIONS OF:
yChapter 139 Zoning Ordinances, Town of Nantucket
d yCMR' 780 A f'Ammended Mass. State Building ode
g
Sanitary Code, Art. 2
Complaint rep rted against:
Rake t
i o � i;�' lem arid, Howard Jelleme I
Addrea`s :' t�!.pi�gr ml; Road, antucket, Ma. Tel.�S -�� t _
Locatiiin`,o'f + E :i ht R
. r � � ` ' i• +��,� i ,ri.i,; r��; � P# 41 Loth 220
Signatura of Com
.. ;. Plairsants:
TWO COMPLAINTS
� atuXp' o� cdee Iaint:
1 • Fxesent 1 �j bui di
f i.' �.. 'and jexpanding a non -con o
' f rming use on the ,North side of the carpent y
Jqhopj wtQ�t: a' pbrmi t • 12) expansion of non-conforming pre- exisiting carpentry busines
I!;one site f'iijnterstate: se g ac s: eavy .equipmen an ruc use an --- are main ain d
> trailers use the site. Landfill, loam, gravel and supplies
:a.r� s ore. on t e ,s1 e. i ui
I ' tt.. (r ng usage converts to a ma ntenance 'garage. n the
Ari:k °K�11�e%'and Iti�ha�rd B ooks hav2--Personal l met with Howard Jell
the• P 8t:. ew ear mid O's.
i Y ;a out the violation. ems several times in_
He assured us he was doing his best to relocat
:;,A,, ;; as
a;s ; 1. et d !� ari., attempto ,dig in permanently rather than move. `
Investigationtyea
() No )'
'Investigated by;
1y
}
How received.- Telephone( )
Personal( )
Letter( )
Complainant's Name:
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
,2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telcphone 228 -6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
J�,� --e_
Complaint No.
Date; � �90
Time• L A.M.
Telephone No,
Complainant's Address:
-
Complaint received by: d Z��
VIOLATIONS OF:
vChapter 139 Zoning Ordinancea, Town of Nantucket
4-'tMR•780 Atr'Ammended Mass. State Building Coda
t
—Sanitary Code, Art. 2
,Complaint: reprted a4ainat:
!
AHat �e t' ,f F � '�•Ht�r•' .�d t M:. , ;Pe3.j1 e m arid- d• Ho w
and Jelleme ddi reae I •
i' :i; �°I grJ. Road• Tel.
Locatibn` o �;► �'� �; antucket, Ma. -,5Q8= 228 -t� i a
, i c.ompZaiai'' .
: [ Map, 41
' �• r
�,r j ► ' t.�� i';`i:i �i '� Lot# 220
Signature of Come nts:
TWO COMPLAINTS
t
re" 'cdaiii
1 • " Fresen tli
,. i I i •j� tbui�idi � and expanding anon -co
t , nforming use on the :North side of the carpent y
i hopi w tt luut a:; P,�rmit. 2
' ) expansion of non- conformin
0 owin 9 P g pre- exisiting carpentry bus*
i; on? site.. '4 eavy .e ui men an
t {interstate semi trailers use the site. ruc use. an are main ain d
�ar� s ore. on a .si e, g converted Landfill, loam
ui 1n usage ,gravel and Supplies
r1�t'
Kill "'And.�i�ha- Books have ersonall met with to a maintenance garage. In e
the. Pt era year ;•a out Howard Jelleme several timesdin_0 s•
i ;.�:• the violation. He assured us he was doing his best to relocat
}vieweidlas an:, attempt Fo ,dig in permanently rather than move.
Investigation :ye8( )- No(
'Investigated by;
--
Richard H. Brooks
P.O.Box 418
West Chester Street
Nantucket, Ma. 02554
Town of Nantucket
Building Inspector Ronald Santos
Town Building Annex
Nantucket, Ma. 02554
August 6, 1990
Dear Ron,
I promised Steve I would follow -up my two complaints on
Howard M. Jelleme with more detail about complaint number 2.
This letter will explain the various enclosures I am submit-
ting.
It appears that Bernard felt that complaint number 1 was not
a violation since Howard was working at grade. I have a
great deal of respect for Bernard's ability and knowledge. I
have to respect his opinion on this. I thought that any ex-
pansion of a non - conforming use required board of appeals ap-
proval, even though a conforming use might not have to get a
building permit for a particular project. Complaint number 1
is not the most important issue to me anyway.
Complaint number 2 is extremely important. Please allow me
to give you some history and detail about the ongoing discus-
sions I have had with Howard Jelleme on this subject. The
Pilgrim Road site is shown in some advertisements as a West
Chester Street site. Mr. Jelleme's property has a small
frontage on West Chester Street, on the corner of West
Chester Street and Pilgrim Road. The two are interchangable
for the purpose of this complaint.
The violations began in December 1980. Howard Jelleme ap-
proached me at a December 1980 meeting on another subject.
He wanted to find out if I would object to his son Carl mov-
ing a small landscaping business to the site of Howard
Jelleme Builder. He said it would be a truck or two, a rub-
ber tire tractor, and a buldozer. He stated it would be tem-
porary until Carl found another location.
The first date that I noticed an increase in the amount of
Toscana
page 2
traffic and noise was when we opened the cottages in April of
1981. There appeared to be a large expansion of the business
after October 1980 when we closed our cottages, and prior to
April 1981 when they were reopened.
I have had ongoing discussions with Howard Jelleme on numer-
ous occasions about the expansion of his business into heavy
equipment, landscaping, tractors, interstate trucking, and
the storage of dirt, loam, fill, and gravel. We have also
discussed the fact that he did not run a maintenance facility
for trucks and equipment. Yet he has a full blown mainte-
nance opertaion going at this time. In our various meetings
Howard has asked that I be patient while he looks for a site
elsewhere for the heavy equipment and the business of
Toscana. I have not wished to hurt Howard, so I held off
over the years making a complaint. Howard and I have had
four sit down meetings, and several telephone conversations
on this subject spaning the period of late 1980 through 1989.
I have filed a complaint at this time because it is obvious
that Howard Jelleme does not intend to move the heavy equip-
ment business of Toscana from his carpentry builing site on
Pilgrim Road. The most recent expansion refered to incom-
plaint number 1 is evidence to me that he is just digging in
more, and has no intention to move. There is no doubt that
Howard Jelleme carpentery pre- existed zoning, and that Howard
Jelleme carpentry has every right to operate from this loca-
tion.
My case is stated as follows. Howard Jelleme Inc. held it-
self out in 1981 as repairs and restoration for residential
and commercial. Howard Jelleme Inc. listed a phone number
for their Fair Street address, as well as a phone number for
the shop on Pilgrim Road. It was clearly a carpentry busi-
ness at that time. I have enclosed a copy of 1981 Inquirer
and Mirror advertisement on Howard Jelleme Inc. The year is
shown as 1981 on the Will's Air schedule just below it. I
have selected that date because the first advertisements for
Toscana appeared in 1981. I could not find any earlier
Toscana ads. The second I & M. copy shows the first Toscana
Corp. advertisement. This Toscana ad lists only the Fair
Street telephone number. It shows a completely different
type of business than what Howard Jelleme held himself out
for. The sidewalk art show advertisement on the same page
shows an August 1981 date.
Toscana
page 3.
The first telephone listing for Toscana appeared in July
1982. I have enclosed a copy of the 1981 yellow page showing
no Toscana, and a copy of the July 1982 showing the first
Toscana listing.
Toscana Corp. was incorporated on 3- 16 -79, as a joint venture
of Howard Jelleme and Lydle Rickard. Toscana did not openly
operate from the Pilgrim Road site until early 1981. They
were apparently operating from a commercial property owned by
Mr. Rickard. The fact that Toscana Corp. was partially owned
by Mr. Rickard, who was not part of the Jelleme family,
clearly indicates that Toscana is not an expansion of a fam-
ily business at the traditional family site.
In 1983, Lydle Rickard apparently sold his interest to the
Jelleme family. There was a visible increase in truck and
heavy equipment activity in the year Mr. Rickard disposed of
his interest. This is evidenced by the fact that Mr. Rickard
was listed as an officer of the corporation on the December
31, 1982 report to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, yet he
was not listed on the December 31, 1983 report to the Com-
monwealth. I have enclosed copies of the annual reports for
1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, and 1985.
Toscana Corp., while incorporated in 1979, began to operate
visibily in the period 1981 to 1982 as evidenced by the tele-
phone book. The July 1981 telephone book does not have a
listing for Toscana. They were not holding themselves out to
do business in the early part of 1981, since the phone book
is published in July of 1981. The do appear in the 1982
phone book with a listing in the yellow pages, as well as the
white page section. It is interesting to note that they do
not list as a site for Toscana's operations anything on Pil-
grim Road. The phone book advertisement shows that Toscana
did not hold itself out as operating from the Pilgrim Road
site until the July 1986 telephone book.
The residents of the neighborhood have observed a substantial
increase in activity from 1981 through the present time. A
business that was primarly a carpentry construction is now a
crane service, interstate trucking, excavation,site work,
storage of buliding materials, and maintance of a large truck
Toscana
page 4.
and heavy equipment fleet. It is clearly a change of use
from the original use of Howard Jelleme when zoning came into
effect in 1972, as well as a change in use from December 1980
when Howard Jelleme first expressed a desire to me to have
Carl operate his landscaping business from the West Chester
Street /Pilgrim Road site.
I ask that you make a ruling that will evict
erations Toscana from the Pilgrim Road /West
site. I further request that you provide me
your decision on this matter.
Thank you for your help and assistance.
Sincerely,
Rich rd H. Brooks
RHB /sgb
enclosure
the expanded op-
Chester Street
with a copy of
ARTHUR I. READE, JR.
SARAH F ALGER
KENNETH A. GULLICKSEN
SUSAN H JONES
MARIANNE HANT.F.Y
RF.ADE & A LOEIZ
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SIX YOUNG'S WAY
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
(508) 228 -3128
FAX: (508) 228 -5630
August 13, 1990
Ronald J. Santos,
Building Commissioner
Town of Nantucket
East Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Dear Ron:
MAILING ADDBESS
POST OFFICE BOX 2669
NANTUCKET, MASS. 02584
I have been engaged as counsel by Richard H. Brooks, Ann
S. Killen and Roger J. Roche with regard to their complaints
against Howard M. Jelleme and Howard Jelleme, Inc., arising
from the unlawful expansion of the nonconforming use of the
Jelleme property at One Pilgrim Road (Assessor's Parcel 41 -220).
I am concerned with establishing agreement with you as
to the date of filing of these complaints, for purposes of
determining the start of the fourteen -day period within which
General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 7 requires you to act and
notify the complainants of your action. The complaints were
filed with you on August 1, 1990; however, it was stated at
that time by Mr. Brooks that he would supplement the complaints
with a narrative history. This supplemental letter was sent
to you by certified mail, and the receipt shows that it was
received on August 7. Since the complainants' submission was
not complete until August 7, I believe that it would be fair
to consider that the date upon which you were requested to
enforce the by -law should be considered to be August 7. Thus,
the fourteen -day period for you to act would expire on August
21, and, if the complainants are aggrieved by your action or
failure to act, their thirty -day appeal period would commence
at the close of business on August 21 and would expire on September
20. Please let me know if you concur in this analysis, or
if you believe that different dates should apply.
As stated in the complaint materials, my clients are deeply
concerned about these violations. A modest non - conforming
carpentry shop in a residential zone has gradually expanded
into an extensive and offensive yard for a heavy equipment
and trucking fleet. My clients have exhausted their patience
with the Jellemes, who, it is now apparent, have no intention
of moving this operation out. My clients are pleased to cooperate
in any way to provide you with testimony and other materials
to support the fact that this expansion has occurred over the
period from 1980 to the present. It is to be noted that no
READS & ALGER
PROFESSIONAL GORPORATION
Ronald J. Santos,
Building Commissioner
Page Two
August 13, 1990
building permits have been secured during this period, and
therefore the six -year protection period under Chapter 40A,
Section 7 does not apply. Furthermore, the ten -year protection
period under that statute applies only to actions to compel
removal, abandonment or alteration of buildings, not uses;
unlawful uses commenced at a time when they were prohibited
by applicable zoning requirements, without reliance upon a
validly- issued building permit, never achieve a status of protection
from zoning enforcement.
My clients and I look forward to working with you, and,
if it becomes necessary, with Town Counsel toward enforcement
of the zoning by -law against the illegal use of the subject
property.
Sin a el ,
l
hur I. eade, Jr.
AIR /dda
cc: Mr. Richard H. Brooks
Post Office Box 418
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Mrs. Ann S. Killen
10 Easy Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Mr. Roger J. Roche
9 Pilgrim Road
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
BOA Form 1 -f39 NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING DING
NANTUCKET, KA
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
owner's name(s):
Mailing address:
Applicant's name:
Howard M. Jelleme
15 Fair Street, Nantucket
R;rhard H. Brooks, Ann S. Killen and ]
Date
CASE NO. --- -
►a
Mailing address: c/o Reade & Al er P.C. Post
• arcel number 41 - 220
Location of lot: Assessor's map and p
Street address: 1 Pilgrim Road 14393 -B Lot 7
4,,9,y,t,jj* Land Ct Plan, Cert.
�� 66 Deed Ref
52.15 Zoning district R?_—
Date lot acquired: MCD ?Yes
Uses on lot - commercial: None or Heavy ern�zi ent,truckina..
number of: dwellings0 duplex 0 apartments0 rental rooms 0
- num C of 0?
Building date(s):
all pre -8/72? No or
Building Permit app
1' n . Nos. 461 -74. 564-74; 166 -73
Case Nos. all BOA app
lications, lawsuits:
State fully all zoning relief sought and res eccomparedetoepresent
and subsections, specifically what y er Section
and what grounds you urge for BOA to make each finding (and 139 -33A
139 -30A if a Special Permit ( per 139 -31A
139 -32A 1f Variance, use). If appeal p
if to alter or extend a norder appealed. OK to attach addendum -
& B X , attach decision or order appealed-
See attached addendum.
02584
enclosed as part of this Application: orderl X_ addenduc2X
Items enc showing p + lanned
X Site plan resent ( HDC approved ?_)
Locus map elevations
Floor plans present proposed _ GCR parking data
frontage setbacks ma 11, labels 2 sets X
Listings lot area 'cap' covenant
Assessor certified addressee 1st 4 sets; -oof
1200 fee payable
ask Town Clerk Nantucket X Comr's record to BOA.)
(If an appeal,
certify that the requested information submittedeistsubstantially
I knowledge,
complete and true to the best of my
penalties of p 7 ry• At //agqent X
Applicant for apx is nts /aprnlants
SIGNATURE:
3 ( If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION BY
RICHARD H. BROOKS, ANN S. KILLEN AND ROGER J. ROCHE
The applicants, Richard H. Brooks, Ann S. Killen and Roger
J. Roche, bring this proceeding pursuant to Massachusetts General
Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 8, and Nantucket Zoning By -law, Section
139 -31, in order to appeal from a decision by the Building
Commissioner dated August 21, 1990, which tacitly denied the
applicants' request that the Building Commissioner undertake
enforcement action against the present use of the subject premises
(the "Locus ").
On August 1, 1990, the applicants filed complaints with the
Building Commissioner, reciting that Howard J. Jelleme, the owner
of the Locus ( "Jelleme "), was violating the provisions of the
By -law by (1) building and expanding a nonconforming structure
without a permit, and (2) expanding a nonconforming, pre- existing
carpentry business upon the Locus by maintaining heavy equipment,
trucks, interstate trailers, storing landfill, loam, gravel and
supplies, and converting an existing building to a maintenance
garage. On August 6, 1990, the applicants supplemented their
complaint by a writing addressed to the Building Commissioner.
On August 13, 1990, the applicants further supplemented their
complaint by a letter from their counsel to the Building
Commissioner.
By letter dated August 21, 1990, addressed to the applicants'
counsel, the Building Commissioner, as stated above, tacitly denied
the complaint, stating his opinion that Jelleme had not expanded
his use of the Locus.
The applicant, Richard H. Brooks, is the owner of a parcel
immediately abutting the Locus; the applicants, Ann S. Killen and
Roger J. Roche, are property owners in the immediate neighborhood.
The applicants are aggrieved by the refusal of the Building
Commissioner to commence enforcement action against Jelleme, and
bring this proceeding in order to appeal therefrom.
The applicants concede that Jelleme's use of the Locus as a
carpentry shop antedates the 1972 effective date of the Nantucket
zoning by -law, and has existed continuously throughout this period.
Minor building work done in the 1970's, pursuant to Building
Permits 166 -73, 461 -74 and 564 -74, continued this pre- existing
use as a carpentry shop. However, about 1980, the scope and
nature of the nonconforming use of the Locus changed, with formation
of a new business (Toscana Corporation) which was involved in
excavating, landscaping, heavy equipment and storage of related
materials. Since then, a gradual expansion has occurred, with
use as a trucking terminal for interstate tractor - trailers as
well. No building permits have been secured in connection with
any of this expansion in use.
The applicants request that the Board act to allow their
appeal and to order the Building Commissioner to commence enforcement
action against Jelleme for the illegal expansion of the pre- existing,
nonconforming use of the Locus, and to require Jelleme to cease
and desist from the expanded use.
kah #27 /BROOKS
NOTICE
A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held on
FRIDAY, October 19, 1990, at 1:00 P.M. in the TOWN AND COUNTY
BUILDING, FEDERAL and BROAD STREETS, NANTUCKET, on the Application
of RICHARD H. BROOKS, ANN S. KILLEN and ROGER J. ROCHE ( -90) ,
seeking an appeal from the decision of the Building Commissioner
denying applicants' request that the Building Commissioner undertake
enforcement action against the present use of the premises located
at 1 Pilgrim Road, Nantucket. Applicants maintain that the owner
of the premises, HOWARD J. JELLEME has violated provisions of the
By -law by (1) building and expanding a nonconforming structure
without a permit; and (2) expanding a nonconforming, pre- existing
carpentry business upon the premises by maintaining heavy equipment,
trucks, interstate trailers, storing landfill, loan, gravel and
supplies, and converting an existing building to a maintenance
garage. The Building Commissioner maintains that such expansion
has not occurred.
The premises are located at 1 Pilgrim Road, (Assessor's
Parcel 41 -220), Land Court Plan 14393 -B, Lot 7, and are zoned
RESIDENTIAL -1.
Linda F. Williams, Chairperson
BOARD OF APPEALS
kah #27 /BROOKSI
August 21, 1990
Mr. Arthur Reade
Reade & Alger, P.C.
4 Youngs Way
Nantucket, MA 02554
Dear Mr. Reade,
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 508- 228 -7222
Tele Fax 508- 228 -7249
Ronald J. Santos
Building Commissioner
I have reviewed your letter dated August 13, 1990 regarding
Howard Jelleme, Inc. located on Pilgrim Road, Map 41 Parcel 220.
It is my opinion that Mr. Jelleme has not expanded the use of his
property or business. Mr. Jelleme has been one of the largest (if not
the largest) general contractors on Nantucket Island since his business
began. I can remember back to the year of 1965 when Mr. Jelleme had more
trucks and personnel involved with his business than he does today.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly
at 228 -7222.
Very truly yours,
Ronald J. antos
Building Commissioner
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
How received:
Telephone( )
Personal
Letter( )
Complainant's Name:
]BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 228 -6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
1, ►
Complainant's Address:
;Complaint received by: I
VIOLATIONS OF: ,
" Y
Complaint No.
Date:��
Time: lA.M.
Telephone No.
yChapter 139 Zoning Ordinances, Town of Nantucket:
yCMR• 780 A:C*Ammended Mass. State Building Code
Sanitary Code, Art. 2
,1 Co��m�"plaint rep9rted against :.
t 1Natne`�f. :Pel�
lem arid* Howard Jell--- I
' Addreaat' rfi��grm�Road, a el
T.
ntucket, Ma, �R- 27R -1L L
Lo'catibn` offaomp,laitt�i''' ► Ma
;.,. �P31 rim Rn ^d p(� 4
.r ►i ��,: Lott1
,.f tl # c�± .: c Signa turn of Complainants
' I �1 h.
k " i �M11iI, ' `;.i t' k4 TWO COMPLAINTS
• ' y
1• 1'�� 1�1 !' 1
ature o9. ,cdri� b lain.tt;
1 • �� uRresently uitldi Ig ; �x
and 1 pairding a non-conforming use
g on the North side of the carpent
Pi . �Wpt• a: p6rmjt • 1'2) ' expansion of non - conforming Pre - exisiting carpentry busines,
on: site..] `ijjIIter §tate se vy:.equipmen ana rue use an are maintain
mgt trailers use the site. s Landfill, loam, gravel and supplies
a•r� s ore. ,on t e .s e.
ui ng usage converte to a
Aria"K�i1e
'And 'Ri�ha:rd Books have maintenance garage. n the mid 80
►
the P fit: w year ;•about the violation. Helasstiredlus Howaid
'doingmhisral times in
r•
'best to relocate
viewei`d l+as an . q to, dig t di
P. g iri permanently rather than move.
InvestigatinntYesO No(
'Investigated by:
0
S.
jt
How received:
Telephone( )
Personal
Letter( )
Complainant's Name:
]BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 228 -6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
1, ►
Complainant's Address:
;Complaint received by: I
VIOLATIONS OF: ,
" Y
Complaint No.
Date:��
Time: lA.M.
Telephone No.
yChapter 139 Zoning Ordinances, Town of Nantucket:
yCMR• 780 A:C*Ammended Mass. State Building Code
Sanitary Code, Art. 2
,1 Co��m�"plaint rep9rted against :.
t 1Natne`�f. :Pel�
lem arid* Howard Jell--- I
' Addreaat' rfi��grm�Road, a el
T.
ntucket, Ma, �R- 27R -1L L
Lo'catibn` offaomp,laitt�i''' ► Ma
;.,. �P31 rim Rn ^d p(� 4
.r ►i ��,: Lott1
,.f tl # c�± .: c Signa turn of Complainants
' I �1 h.
k " i �M11iI, ' `;.i t' k4 TWO COMPLAINTS
• ' y
1• 1'�� 1�1 !' 1
ature o9. ,cdri� b lain.tt;
1 • �� uRresently uitldi Ig ; �x
and 1 pairding a non-conforming use
g on the North side of the carpent
Pi . �Wpt• a: p6rmjt • 1'2) ' expansion of non - conforming Pre - exisiting carpentry busines,
on: site..] `ijjIIter §tate se vy:.equipmen ana rue use an are maintain
mgt trailers use the site. s Landfill, loam, gravel and supplies
a•r� s ore. ,on t e .s e.
ui ng usage converte to a
Aria"K�i1e
'And 'Ri�ha:rd Books have maintenance garage. n the mid 80
►
the P fit: w year ;•about the violation. Helasstiredlus Howaid
'doingmhisral times in
r•
'best to relocate
viewei`d l+as an . q to, dig t di
P. g iri permanently rather than move.
InvestigatinntYesO No(
'Investigated by:
0
S.
BUILDING, DEPARTMENT
TOWN hUILDING ANNEX
2 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 228 -6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
How received:. Telephone( )
Q�
• Complaint No.
PersonalM —_
Date: e5
?. Letter() _
t ' Time: LIA ; IA A.M. �*>
} Telephone No.
r
Complainant's Name.
Complainant's Address:
Complaint received by:
VIOLATIONS OF:
4-Chapter 139 Zoning Ordinances, Town of Nantucket
1--CMR-780 A:I•'Ammended Hass. State Building Code
Sanitary Code, Art. 2
,t Complaint rep ?rted apainst:.
lids I rd. + J'eillle ,
i 4 in arid• Howard T1
,., a;i:F��1 r• e
e leme I Tel.
` �'1 H
HaP 41 Lot(/ 220
!. r `
Signatura of Com
t w k {
F! {
TWO COMPLAINTS
' 1•a' of Cdai
1.. n
iVjA,jbuildi and e
expanding anon -confo
p� . $1Qt: a. pmt, 1
carpent y
+' s I
of non-conforming
:sii�nterstate:se g
I.si e
gravel and supplies
B o
maintenance '
out t
the violation, me several times in
`'!� "
was doing his best to relocat
an.., ttempt to ,dig in permanently rather than move.
xi it"
Investigationlye8(� No(
_________ )` Investigated by;
How received:
Telephone( )
Personal( )
Letter( )
Complaina:it's Name:
Complainant's Address:
:Complaint received by:
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
12 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Telephone 228 -6800 ext. 230
COMPLAINT SHEET
Complaint No.
Date : -E -90
Time•LA,M.
Telephone No,
4 Z.S3z
VIOIATIONS OF:
vChapter 139 Zoning Ordinances, Town of Nantucket
4--tMR•780 Atr•Ammended Mass. State Building Code
M
Sanitary Code, Art. 2
Complaint rep,rted ag!ainst:{
! ' • tiatue :'sf F i �•HWS � �t2' . + :Te�l�l m -
S` . e arid• Howard Jelleme I •
Address :` �^ ;;!� �grfu� Road, antucket Tel.
i t , Ma . -
i ' f �:!
Lo !';
ca tibn, of comp
Maps 41
(.r Ii -..� t# 220
F ';'�`�I•e Signature of C ,
ompla-iaants
► t _ �� ! . ; f ; TWO COMPLAINTS
atuta� of• cdmpleintt;
1• Fzesently
� f 443, F �! and Oxpanding anon- conforming use on the
' North side of the carpent y
�. ��op! w4t'` (t'tut, a:; p?rniiit . 2 ) expansion
e .
of non - conforming pre- exisitin
i;on >site..`•4 t se ° owing ac s: eavy.equipmen an g carpentry busines
t i {lAtersta.e trailers use the site, ruc
�a.r s ore. si e• use an are main ain d
e .on e • t Landfill, loam
Aiziti K�17!ei'`andiha�rd B u1 ing usage converte to a maintenanceravel and supplies
e p st ? year ;a out�thes have ersonall garage.in 11 e mid 0 s.
met with Howard Jelleme several times in
violation. He assured us he was 'doing
',as g his best to relocat
�. 1� .. an:, attempt o ,di
gin permanently rather than move.
Invests :Yes °tiara !
g O No( .
_ 'Invests AP -4 b
g y:
N
Richard H. Brooks
P.O.Box 418
West Chester Street
Nantucket, Ma. 02554
Town of Nantucket
Building Inspector Ronald Santos
Town Building Annex
Nantucket, Ma. 02554
August 6, 1990
Dear Ron,
I promised Steve I would follow -up my two complaints on
Howard M. Jelleme with more detail about complaint number 2.
This letter will explain the various enclosures I am submit-
ting.
It appears that Bernard felt that complaint number 1 was not
a violation since Howard was working at grade. I have a
great deal of respect for Bernard's ability and knowledge. I
have to respect his opinion on this. I thought that any ex-
pansion of a non - conforming use required board of appeals ap-
proval, even though a conforming use might not have to get a
building permit for a particular project. Complaint number 1
is not the most important issue to me anyway.
Complaint number 2 is extremely important. Please allow me
to give you some history and detail about the ongoing discus-
sions I have had with Howard Jelleme on this subject. The
Pilgrim Road site is shown in some advertisements as a West
Chester Street site. Mr. Jelleme's property has a small
frontage on West Chester Street, on the corner of West
Chester Street and Pilgrim Road. The two are interchangable
for the purpose of this complaint.
The violations began in December 1980. Howard Jelleme ap-
proached me at a December 1980 meeting on another subject.
He wanted to find out if I would object to his son Carl mov-
ing a small landscaping business to the site of Howard
Jelleme Builder. He said it would be a truck or two, a rub-
ber tire tractor, and a buldozer. He stated it would be tem-
porary until Carl found another location.
The first date that I noticed an increase in the amount of
Toscana
page 2
traffic and noise was when we opened the cottages in April of
1981. There appeared to be a large expansion of the business
after October 1980 when we closed our cottages, and prior to
April 1981 when they were reopened.
I have had ongoing discussions with Howard Jelleme on numer-
ous occasions about the expansion of his business into heavy
equipment, landscaping, tractors, interstate trucking, and
the storage of dirt, loam, fill, and gravel. We have also
discussed the fact that he did not run a maintenance facility
for trucks and equipment. Yet he has a full blown mainte-
nance opertaion going at this time. In our various meetings
Howard has asked that I be patient while he looks for a site
elsewhere for the heavy equipment and the business of
Toscana. I have not wished to hurt Howard, so I held off
over the years making a complaint. Howard and I have had
four sit down meetings, and several telephone conversations
on this subject spaning the period of late 1980 through 1989.
I have filed a complaint at this time because it is obvious
that Howard Jelleme does not intend to move the heavy equip-
ment business of Toscana from his carpentry builing site on
Pilgrim Road. The most recent expansion refered to in com-
plaint number 1 is evidence to me that he is just digging in
more, and has no intention to move. There is no doubt that
Howard Jelleme carpentery pre- existed zoning, and that Howard
Jelleme carpentry has every right to operate from this loca-
tion.
My case is stated as follows. Howard Jelleme Inc. held it-
self out in 1981 as repairs and restoration for residential
and commercial. Howard Jelleme Inc. listed a phone number
for their Fair Street address, as well as a phone number for
the shop on Pilgrim Road. It was clearly a carpentry busi-
ness at that time. I have enclosed a copy of 1981 Inquirer
and Mirror advertisement on Howard Jelleme Inc. The year is
shown as 1981 on the Will's Air schedule just below it. I
have selected that date because the first advertisements for
Toscana appeared in 1981. I could not find tany
f arlieoscana
Toscana ads. The second I & M. copy shows
Corp. advertisement. This Toscana ad lists only the Fair
Street telephone number. It shows a completely different
type of business than what Howard Jelleme held himself out
for. The sidewalk art show advertisement on the same page
shows an August 1981 date.
Toscana
page 3.
The first telephone listing for Toscana appeared in July
1982. I have enclosed a copy of the 1981 yellow page showing
no Toscana, and a copy of the July 1982 showing the first
Toscana listing.
Toscana Corp. was incorporated on 3- 16 -79, as a joint venture
of Howard Jelleme and Lydle Rickard. Toscana did not openly
operate from the Pilgrim Road site until early 1981. They
were apparently operating from a commercial property owned by
Mr. Rickard. The fact that Toscana Corp. was partially owned
by Mr. Rickard, who was not part of the Jelleme family,
clearly indicates that Toscana is not an expansion of a fam-
ily business at the traditional family site.
In 1983, Lydle Rickard apparently sold his interest to the
Jelleme family. There was a visible increase in truck and
heavy equipment activity in the year Mr. Rickard disposed of
his interest. This is evidenced by the fact that Mr. Rickard
was listed as an officer of the corporation on the December
31, 1982 report to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, yet he
was not listed on the December 31, 1983 report to the Com-
monwealth. I have enclosed copies of the annual reports for
1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, and 1985.
Toscana Corp., while incorporated in 1979, began to operate
visibily in the period 1981 to 1982 as evidenced by the tele-
phone book. The July 1981 telephone book does not have a
listing for Toscana. They were not holding themselves out to
do business in the early part of 1981, since the phone book
is published in July of 1981. The do appear in the 1982
phone book with a listing in the yellow pages, as well as the
white page section. It is interesting to note that they do
not list as a site for Toscana's operations anything on Pil-
grim Road. The phone book advertisement shows that Toscana
did not hold itself out as operating from the Pilgrim Road
site until the July 1986 telephone book.
The residents of the neighborhood have observed a substantial
increase in activity from 1981 through the present time. A
business that was primarly a carpentry construction is now a
crane service, interstate trucking, excavation,site work,
storage of buliding materials, and maintance of a large truck
Toscana
page 4.
and heavy equipment fleet. It is clearly a change of use
from the original use of Howard Jelleme when zoning came into
effect in 1972, as well as a change in use from December 1980
when Howard Jelleme first expressed a desire to me to have
Carl operate his landscaping business from the West Chester
Street /Pilgrim Road site.
I ask that you make a ruling that will evict
erations Toscana from the Pilgrim Road /West
site. I further request that you provide me
your decision on this matter.
Thank you for your help and assistance.
Sincerely,
Rich rd H. Brooks
RHB /sgb
enclosure
the expanded op-
Chester Street
with a copy of
AI?TIiUB I. 13EA13E, Jl -
SARAH R ALGEE
KENNET11 A. GULLICKSEN
SUSAN H JONES
MART A NNE. ITANT•F•Y
IMADE & ALGEA
PROFESSIONAL CORPORA71ON
SIX YOUNG'S WAY
NANTUCKET, X_kSSAC)HuSETTS 02554
(508) 228 -3128
FAX: (508) 228-5630
August 13, 1990
Ronald J. Santos,
Building Commissioner
Town of Nantucket
East Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Dear Ron:
MAILING ADDRESS
POST OFFICE BOX 2669
NANTUCKET, MASS. 02584
I have been engaged as counsel by Richard H. Brooks, Ann
S. Killen and Roger J. Roche with regard to their complaints
against Howard M. Jelleme and Howard Jelleme, Inc., arising
from the unlawful expansion of the nonconforming use of the
Jelleme property at One Pilgrim Road (Assessor's Parcel 41 -220).
I am concerned with establishing agreement with you as
to the date of filing of these complaints, for purposes of
determining the start of the fourteen -day period within which
General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 7 requires you to act and
notify the complainants of your action. The complaints were
filed with you on August 1, 1990; however, it was stated at
that time by Mr. Brooks that he would supplement the complaints
with a narrative history. This supplemental letter was sent
to you by certified mail, and the receipt shows that it was
received on August 7. Since the complainants' submission was
not complete until August 7, I believe that it would be fair
to consider that the date upon which you were requested to
enforce the by -law should be considered to be August 7. Thus,
the fourteen -day period for you to act would expire on August
21, and, if the complainants are aggrieved by your action or
failure to act, their thirty -day appeal period would commence
at the close of business on August 21 and would expire on September
20. Please let me know if you concur in this analysis, or
if you believe that different dates should apply.
As stated in the complaint materials, my clients are deeply
concerned about these violations. A modest non - conforming
carpentry shop in a residential zone has gradually expanded
into an extensive and offensive yard for a heavy equipment
and trucking fleet. My clients have exhausted their patience
with the Jellemes, who, it is now apparent, have no intention
of moving this operation out. My clients are pleased to cooperate
in any way to provide you with testimony and other materials
to support the fact that this expansion has occurred over the
period from 1980 to the present. It is to be noted that no
BEADS & AI OFH
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Ronald J. Santos,
Building Commissioner
Page Two
August 13, 1990
building permits have been secured during this period, and
therefore the six -year protection period under Chapter 40A,
on
Section 7 does not apply. Furthermore, the ten -year p r
period under that statute applies only to actions to compel
removal, abandonment or alteration of buildings, not uses;
unlawful uses commenced at a time when they were prohibited
by applicable zoning requirements, without reliance upon a
validly- issued building permit, never achieve a status of protection
from zoning enforcement.
My clients and I look forward to working with you, and,
if it becomes necessary, with Town Counsel toward enforcement
of the zoning by -law against the illegal use of the subject
property.
Sin a el ,
Ahur I. *eade,.
AIR /dda
cc: Mr. Richard H. Brooks
Post Office Box 418
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Mrs. Ann S. Killen
10 Easy Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Mr. Roger J. Roche
9 Pilgrim Road
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Date: November 9 , 1990
To: Parties in Interest and.Others concerned with the
Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the
following:
Application No.: 064 -90 (Modification of 027 -90)
Owner /Applicant:
MTDT(1 rPrTYFTPA_ ,TR_. TRTT4TF.7 OF HARBORVIEW
SHOPKEEPERS TRUST, AND THE TOWN OF NANTUCKET, LESSEE
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has
this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town
Clerk.
An Anneal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to
Section 1-7 of Chapter 40A, :Massachusetts General lia-v's.
r':ny action appealing the Decision must bee brought bV
filing an co plan iii cci -t rilt1 -_n -1-1? ii \Tl1 (220) day s of per
this day's Fate. Notice of the action with a copy of the
Complaint a. ^.d certified copy of the Decision ^ sue be gi.en
to t'"1°_ 7cwn Clerk so as to be .received within such
(20) days.
r
Linda F. -Killiams, Chairman
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Nantucket, Mass. 02554
Map 42.4.2 10 South Beach Street, Nantucket
Parcels 27 and 70
R -C
At a Public Hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals held
October 19, 1990, at 1:00 P. M., in the Town and County Building,
Nantucket Massachusetts, on the Application of MARIO TEXEIRA,
3R., Trustee of Harborview Shopkeepers Trust, and the TOWN OF
NANTUCKET, Town w County Building, Nantucket, Massachusetts,
Application 064 -90, the Zoning Board of Appeals made the
following DECISION:
1. Applicants sought a Modification of an existing Special
Permit granted under Sections 139 -186 and 139 -33A of the
Zoning By -Law permitting an alteration of a pre - existing,
non - conforming use and relief from parking requirements.
The existing Special Permit was granted in Board of Appeals
027 -9t:). The Applicant requests modification of the Special
Permit to eliminate the condition restricting four (4) of
the parking spaces for use by employees or heads of
departments housed in the building, one (1) space per
department for those departments not having use of municipal
vehicles. Applicant seeks to have all spaces, except the
five (5) reserved for municipal vehicles, restricted for use
by individuals (who are not full -time municipal employees)
stopping to do business in the building. Applicant also
seeks a waiver of the application fee.
c.
The Board's de-is.on is based upon the Appllcation and
Papers and documnents filed therewith, the evidence, oral snd
documentary, presented at the hearing, a letter in
opposition to the request, and a recommendation from the
Planning Board for partial modification to reduce the number
of reserved spaces from four (4) to two (2).
3. According to the information supplied by the Applicants, the
Town would be required to provide as many parking spaces for
State employees as it provides for Municipal employees,
which would require four (4) State employee spaces if the
conditions in the existing Special Permit remained in
effect.
4. Applicants also stated that there were four (4) municipal
vehicles used by the offices which would be occupying the
building.
5. Upon a motion made to modify the conditions of the Special
Permit by deleting subparagraph 13 (B) and inserting
therefor the following: "Parking shall be restricted to
provide four (4) spares for municipal vehicles, all other
spaces to be limited to one hour parking too fexwrG
using the building ", the Board voted 4 -1 (Sherman,
O'Mara, Waine, and Leichter.in favor; Williams opposed) to
GRANT the Modification of the Special Permit as moved.
h. The Board finds that the modification, as conditioned by the
Board, is not substantially more detrimental than the prior
situation and would be in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the Zoning By -Law.
Dated: Nvvprr� 9 lrQ
CkAl d, Noo.9,�99�
William R. Sherm
ale W. Waine
%ate