Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout075-90I d 75 - 4}?7 TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Date: December 10 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.: 075 -90 Owner /Applicant: Walter C. Wilson and Nancy N. Wilson Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town Clerk. An Aooeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to Section 17 of Chapter 0A, , assachusetts General L -=w-=. Any action appealing the Decision must be brougnt by filing an comp.•lai t In court itiltnln Tvi -.'QTY ; C �yS after this day's date. Notice of the action with a copy of t,':e cam lai:,� and cert��-ed coot' of the Decision m:s- �:e given p :� • to the Town Clerk so as to be received within such 'TViENl T cc: Town Clerk Planning Board Building Commissioner BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 DECISION: The BOARD OF APPEALS at a PUBLIC HEARING on Friday, November 16, 1990, at 1:00 p.m. at the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the following DECISION on the application of WALTER C. WILSON and NANCY N. WILSON (075 -90) with an address of 333 Clay Street, Suite 300, Houston, Texas 77002. 1. The Applicants seek a Variance pursuant to Section 139 -32A of the Zoning Code to relocate an existing single - family dwelling away from the eroding Sankaty bluff and to legitimize their non - conforming lot which was created after the enactment of the Nantucket Zoning By -Law in July, 1972. The Premises are located at 21 SANKATY HEAD ROAD, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 48 -004, Lot 3, Land Court Plan No. 23903 -B at the Nantucket Registry District for the Land Court and zoned LIMITED USE GENERAL -3. 2. Our findings are based upon the application papers, correspondence, plans, representations and testimony received at our hearing on November 16, 1990. The subject lot was created on September 27, 1982 when the Nantucket Planning Board endorsed Page One a plan "Approval Not Required" pursuant to Section 81P of the Subdivision Control Law, M.G.L. c.41. The subject lot includes approximately 90,604 square feet of area and 91.39 feet of frontage along Sankaty Head Road. The minimum area requirements for the LUG -3 zoning district are 120,000 square feet and minimum frontage requirements for this zoning district are 200 square feet and the subject lot is non - conforming as to minimum area and minimum frontage requirements. We take notice of the fact that the subject lot is bounded on its easterly side by the Sankaty bluff and the Atlantic Ocean and the bluff is undergoing serious erosion which threatens to destabilize houses in Siasconset along the bluff. The Applicant proposes to move the existing single - family dwelling on the subject lot away from the Sankaty Bluff, to the west in accordance with the site plan submitted with the application. The current footprint of the dwelling will not change tihrl the house is moved. The Applicant seeks a Variance to move the house from its existing location -..o the new location. We note that the recently amended Nantucket By -Law now provides for a definition of "Front Yard" which, in effect, requires that a house in the LUG -3 zoning district be set back 35 feet from any street adjoining the lot. The Applicants, therefore, seek a Variance from the 35 foot frontyard setback requirement along their southerly lot line. The Applicants also seek a Variance from area and frontage intensity requirements so as to legitimize their existing lot. Page Two 3. We find that the Applicants' subject lot was created by the Planning Board on September 27, 1982 and, at the time of its creation, did not meet the minimum area and minimum frontage requirements for the LUG -3 zoning district of the Nantucket Zoning By -Law. We are, therefore, unwilling to grant Variance relief to "legitimize" these area and frontage non - conformities. The Board does note, however, that the Massachusetts Zoning Enabling Act, M.G.L. c.40A, section 7, as amended, provides that no enforcement action is available to the Town unless it is commenced within 10 years next after the alleged zoning violation and, accordingly, the area and frontage non - conformities at issue will be "cured" under the Statute as of September 27, 1992. We note further that a recent Massachusetts Land Court decision McKenzie v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wayland et al, Misc. Case No. 131524, states that any changes to the existing footprint of the house after the 10 year statute of limitations expires-Yna-� require a Special Permit based upon a finding by this Board that "such change, extension or alteration is not substantially more detrimental than the existing non - conforming structure to the neighborhood." We find further that the on -going erosion of the Sankaty bluff constitutes circumstances relating to the soil conditions and topography of the subject lot which do not affect generally the LUG -3 zoning district, that a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning By -Law would involve a Page Three substantial hardship to the Applicants, and Variance relief may be granted to the Applicants to enable them to relocate the existing single- family dwelling on the subject lot to its new location without undermining the intent of the Nantucket Zoning By -Law on the conditions set forth herein. We find further that the same circumstances allow this Board to grant Variance relief from the frontyard setback requirements of 35 feet along the southerly boundary of the lot. We specifically grant to the Applicants such Variance relief so as to enable them to obtain a Building Permit from the Nantucket Building Commissioner to relocate the subject dwelling as proposed on the condition that the existing footprint of the house remains the same in its new location. Any changes, extensions or expansions of the house footprint Tnay require Special Permit relief after the 10 year statute of limitations expires on September 27, 199. 4. For the reasons set forth herein, the BOARD, by UNANIMOUS VOTE, hereby GRANTS the requested Variance so as to allow the relocation of the subject house, as proposed; and so as to waive the 35 foot frontyard setback requirement from the street to the south of the subject lot, and so as to enable the Applicants to obtain a Building Permit from the Nantucket Building Commissioner to allow such relocation. The BOARD by UNANIMOUS VOTE, hereby DENIES the requested Variance so as to legitimize the area and frontage non - conformities affecting the Page Four subject lot. Dated: December 1990 (� Linda F. Williams �' l G2 -d•� /�t�a�Pk am A. .-Sher an Rt&ert Lei:chter Q . C.— 4e0 \,;,z I b I ( q 9 0 J/o- 1 e(--,Ovk Page Five TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Septemberp?p, 1991 To: Parties in interest and others concerned with the Decision of the Board of Appeals in Application No.: 075 -90 of: Walter C Wilson and Nancy N. Wilson Enclosed is the Decision of the Board of Appeals which has this day been filed with the Nantucket Town Clerk. This Decision provides a Clarification (not a Modification) or authorizes a Temporary Permit under Zoning By -Law Section 139 -26H with no twenty (20) day appeal period required. cc: Town Clerk Planning Board Building Commissioner .� .. BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF NANTUCKET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS CLARIFICATION OF DECISION: The BOARD OF APPEALS at a PUBLIC HEARING on Friday, September 13, 1991, at 1:00 p.m. at the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the following CLARIFICATION of DECISION on the Application of Walter C. Wilson and Nancy N. Wilson (075 -90) with an address of 333 Clay Street, Suite 300, Houston, Texas 77002. 1. The Applicants seek a clarification of the variance relief the Board granted on December 10, 1990 in Case No. 075 -90. In that Decision, the Board granted unanimously a Variance to the Applicants to allow the relocation of the Applicants' house away from the Sankaty Bluff to the west in accordance with the site plans submitted, to waive the 35 foot frontyard setback requirement from the street to the south of the subject lot, and to enable the Applicants to obtain a Building Permit from the Nantucket Building Commissioner to allow such relocation. The premises are located at 21 SANKATY HEAD AVENUE, SIASCONSET, ASSESSOR'S MAP 48 -004, Lot 3, Land Court Plan No. 23903 -B at the Nantucket Registry District for the Land Court and zoned LIMITED USE GENERAL -3. 2. The Board noted in its Decision No. 075 -90 that the lot includes approximately 90,604 square feet of area and 91.39 feet of frontage along Sankaty Head Road and the minimum area and minimum frontage requirements for lots in the LUG -3 Zoning District are 120,000 square feet and 200 feet, respectively. The Board noted further that the subject lot was created on Sept-ember-27, 1902 when the Nantucket Planning Board endorsed the plan for the lot "Approval Not Required" pursuant to Section 81(P) of the Subdivision Control Law, M.G.L. c.41. Technically, these area and frontage non - conformities were created after the enactment of the Zoning By -Law and constitute zoning violations. In its prior Decision, the Board was not inclined to "legitimize" these area and frontage non - conformities but noted that under the Massachusetts Zoning Enabling Act, M.G.L. c.40A, section 7, as amended, "... no enforcement action is available to the Town unless it is commenced within ten (10) years next after the alleged zoning violation and, accordingly, the area and frontage non - conformities at issue will be "cured" under the statute as of September 27, 1992." Because these zoning violations affecting the lot currently exist, the Page One Nantucket Building Commissioner refuses to issue a Building Permit to the Applicants to relocate their house as requested and to make renovations to the relocated house on the condition that the existing footprint of the house remains the same and there is no increase in zoning non - conformities. The Building Commissioner's point is well taken and the Board agrees that, in general, no building permits should issue until zoning violations have been eliminated. In this particular case, however, the Board made specific findings to support the issuance of a Variance to the Applicants to relocate the house and we reaffirm our directive to the Nantucket Building Commissioner to issue a Building Permit to allow such relocation and to allow the Applicants to renovate the relocated house without expanding its existing footprint and without increasing any zoning non - conformities which affect the lot. The Board's grant of Variance relief to the Applicants in effect "legitimizes" the lot for the limited purpose of relocation and renovation as stated herein. Any enlargement of the existing footprint of the house or construction of new buildings on the lot will require relief from this Board given the zoning non - conformities which affect the lot. For the reasons set forth herein, the Board, by unanimous vote, hereby CLARIFIES the VARIANCE (075 -90) so as to enable the Applicants to obtain a duly issued Building Permit from the Nantucket Building Commissioner to allow for the relocation of the house away from the Sankaty Bluff and to allow for renovations to the relocated house on the condition that there is no increase in the existing footprint of the house and that no zoning non - conformities are increased or created. In all other respects, the Board reaffirms its Varian a Decision (075 -90) in this matter. /_2 A 1 I CERTIFY THAT 20 DAYS HAVE ELAPSED AFTER THE DECISION WAS FILED IN Tk6E OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK, AND THAT NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED, PERSUANT TO GENERAL LAWS AQ A SECTION 11 TV^ CLERK lVole•- ^10 -171 10fl- aw belay Dated: September o2_0_1 1991 Nantucket, MA _ Ld _ fZ� Asi Page Two TOWN OF NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 NOTICE A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held on FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 1990 at 1:00 P.M. in the Town and County Building, Federal and Broad Streets, Nantucket, on the Application of: WALTER C. WILSON AND NANCY N. WILSON Board of Appeals File No.: 075 -90 Applicants seek a VARIANCE under SECTION 139 -32A from the provisions of SECTION 139 -16A of the Zoning By -Law, to validate and confirm a lot created under the Subdivision Control Law in 1982, when a pre- zoning lot was allowed to be subdivided into two (2) lots due to the existence of a pre -1955 structure on each lot. The lot is non - conforming as to frontage having 91.39 feet (200 feet being required) and area, having 90,604 square feet (120,000 square feet being required). Applicants desire to move the existing dwelling because of erosion of he bluff, and they propose to move it to another location on the lot without any change in the footprint and it will be in compliance with applicable setback requirements for the district. The premises are located at 21 SANKATY HEAD ROAD, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Map 48, Parcel 4, as shown on Land Court Plan 23903 -B, Lot 3, and zoned LIMITED USE GENERAL-3. Linda F. Williams, Chairman BoA Form 1 -89 NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING NANTUCKET, MA 02554 APPLICATION FOR RELIEF Owner's name(s): Walter C. Wilson and Nancy N. Wilson 10 -26 -90 Date CASE No.G) �-- 1�0 Mailing address: 333 Clay Street, Suite 300, Houston, Texas 77002 Applicant's name: Mailing address: Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number 48 - Street address: 21 Sankaty Head Road, Siasconset 004 mnlatri Land Ct Plan, X%,d CX XjXr*xUgx)p2aW M7J 23903 -B Lot 3 Document No. Date lot acquired: 28 90 XKj0= ({f 5'519 Zonipg district LUG -3 Certificate No. 14581 Uses on lot -x e=x 1xA4=Rxxxxx0r residential MCD ?_ - number of: dwellings 1 duplex_ apartments_ rental rooms_ Building date(s): all pre -8/72? __yesor C of 0 ?_ Building Permit appl'n. Nos. none Case Nos. all BoA applications, lawsuits: 10 -87 (withdrawn) 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 alter or extend a noncon- orming use). If appeal per 139 -3JA & B , attach decision or order appealed. OK to attach addendum . See Addendum PI Items enclos d as part ohis Application: orderl addendum2_- Locus mapX Site plan X showing present +planned "structures Floor plans present proposed_ elevations (HDC approved? ) Listings lot area frontage setbacks_ GCR parking dataj� Assessor- certifie—ddressee fist 4 sets ma�ling labels 2 sets_ 200 fee payable to Town of Nantucket proof 'cap' covenant (If an appeal, ask Town Clerk to sennBldg 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 .jury. SIGNATURE: Applicant Attorney /acgent X • Rachel C. Ho a t, Esqu re 3(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority) FOR Bo OFFICE USE Application copies recd: 41/ or_ for BoA onF�y One copy filed with Town Clerk onz/-V r(by_ %_ -- complete ?kw5o One copy each to Planning Bd and Buildin Defb �/`� by� 200 fee check given Town Treasurer jo waived ?Hearing notice posYeO�/ 7Jmailed /Zu ����!/ Hearing(s) on _/_!!_ cont'd to--/ __/_, �_/_ withdrawn ?_/__/_ Decision due by_/_/_ made__/__/_ filed TC__/--/_ mailed _/_/_ See related cases lawsuits other_ Applicant seeks variance relief pursuant to Section 139 -32A to bless a lot validly created under the subdivision control law in 1982. A pre - zoning lot was subdivided into two (2) lots due to the existence of a pre -1955 structure on each lot. Applicants' lot has 91.39 feet of frontage and a lot area of approximately 90,604 square feet. The LUG -3 Zone requires 120,000 square feet of area and 200 feet of frontage. Applicants seek the validation of this lot due to their desire to move the existing structure on the premises away from the top of the bank. A copy of Land Court Plan No. 23903 -B showing the existing house is attached as Exhibit A. This lot along the bluff in Sconset continues to experience the significant amount of erosion that has affected this area in past years. The Applicants would like to safeguard their structure by moving as far away from the edge of the bank as possible. The Applicants propose to relocate the existing house, without any changes to the footprint and in compliance with the 35 -foot front yard setback and the 20 -foot side line setbacks as shown on Exhibit B.