HomeMy WebLinkAbout012-91TOWN OF NANTUCKET /p` -��
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
�&6 0-0 CtA�j __I-0, �99z
To: Parties in interest and others
concerned with t-he Decision of-th-e
Board of Appeals in Application No.:
of:
40142::# 0o(f(Ja� C /CQtD J7�"0s),fe
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 aneK et)SIQj)
Temporary Permit under Zoning By -Law Section 139 -26H with no
twenty (20) day appeal period required.
Lilvdloc F. G t'111 0-Q Ulce -- Chairman
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
2 72
t&x C�
BoA Form 1 -89
Owner's name(s):
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
-TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING Date
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
CASE NoU4L-,--4--
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
National Boulevard Bank of Chicago,
Arthur Farlow Life Insurance Trust
Trustee
Mailing address: c/o David Moretti N.P.P. Suite 64 Nantucket, MA 02554
Applicant's name:
Mailing address:
Same
Same
Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number 49 -94
Street address: 97 Sankaty Avenue
Registry Land Ct Plan, Plan Bk & Pg or Plan File Lot
Date lot acquired: Deed Ref 135, 18 Zoning district LUG -3
Uses on lot - commercial: None x or MCD ?-
- number of: dwellings 0 duplex 0 apartments 0 rental rooms 0
Building date(s): all pre -8/72? N/A or
Building Permit appl'n. Nos
None
C of O?
Case Nos. all BoA applications, lawsuits: 079 -88, 091 -87, 119 -87, 041 -89
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 nonconforming use). If appeal per 139 -3�A
& B _ , attach decision or order appealed. OK to attach addendum .
SEE RIDER A, ANNEXED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN BY THIS REFERENCE.
This application shall not be construed as an abandonment of rights, if any, still
remaining under the previously aranted variance, ac nyyi;fi
Items enclosed as part of this Application: order l addendum
2
Locus map_ Site plan• showing present . +planned structures
Floor plans present proposed— elevations (IIDC aapproved ?_)
Listings lot area : frontage setbacks_ GCI2 parking data
Assessor- certifie�ddressee Iist 4 sets mailing labels 2 sets,
200 fee payable to Town of Nantucket prooL 'cap' covenant
(If an appeal, ask Town Clerk t-o'senBldg 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: I{iai %/� L.'���� %C (!!.� Applicant Attorney /agent
3(If not bwne6r ov owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
FOR BoA OFFICE USE
Application copies recd: 4 v Or— for BoA on by
One_.copy filed with Town Clerk on—bW� by �.�.Gi) complete? —
One copy each to Planning,Bd and Building Dept -z by
$200 fee check given Town Treasurer on -b�m by(& waived'? -
Hearing notice postedl A � mailed1/� I & M
Hearing on_
_/__J_ on/__J_ cont'd tom _/_, ��_ withdrawn ?_/�_
Decision due by__/__/_ made _J_ filed TC_/_/_ mailed__J__/_
See related cases lawsuits other
n 7
RIDER A
0
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF OF
NATIONAL BOULEVARD BANK OF CHICAGO
Re-- establishment of VARIANCE dated August 30, 1988, File No.
79 -88, as MODIFIED on August 9, 1989, File No. 041 -89. If
granted, Applicant will be able to rely on the rights granted under
the prior VARIANCE and MODIFICATION, subject to the same
conditions, notwithstanding the lapse of more than one year since
the date of granting. The VARIANCE to be re- established, copies of
which are enclosed, granted relief from the minimum lot size and
frontage requirements, allowing 84 Baxter Road to be treated and
used as a separate buildable and saleable lot from 97 Sankaty
Avenue, on the following conditions:
(1 ) no secondary dwelling unit on either of the lots ( limiting
the use to one dwelling per lot),
(2) no construction or placement of any building on the 2.4
acre lot within 50 feet of a wetland,
(3) no further expansion of the structures on 84 Baxter Road
without further relief from the Board, and
(4) ground cover on each lot shall be limited to 1355 square
feet per lot, the existing ground cover on 84 Baxter Road.
APPLICATION OF
NATIONAL BOULEVARD BANK OF CHICAGO, TRUSTEE
RE- ESTABLISHMENT OF' VARIANCE
84 Baxter Road, S.iasconset
EXISTING
LOT AREA FRONTAGE GROUND COVER
11,227 SF 90' 1355
97 Sankaty Road, S.iasconset
FRONTAGE
EXISTING
GROUND COVER
2.4 acres 396.4 vacant
e--
N
NANTUCKST ZONING
BOARD OF APPRALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACRUSETTS 02554
August -30, 1988
File No. ()7 9-- W
To: Parties in interest and others
Re: Decision in the Application of
(00 l*)'0rlac {sp cj(,ecne qa�ar)Ic ce CkQ'Ci40 'Tyusfin� c6 'tom
,art -hUr - marl o c,� Ca �'eSwCU►�sz, 'r11 c1 s-r
Enclosed is the decision of the Board of Appeals which has
this day been filed with the Nantucket Town Clerk.
An appeal from this decision may be taken pursuant to
Section 17 of Chapter 40A,,Massachusetts General Laws. Any
action appealing the decision must be brought by filing a
complaint in court within twent_y_.,(") days after this
date. Notice of the action with a'copy of the complaint
and certified copy of the decision must be given to the
Town Clerk so as to be received within such twenty (20)
days.
cc: Building Commissioner
Planning Board
Town Clerk
William R. Sherman, Chairman
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS
DECISION:
The Nantucket Board of Appeals at a public meeting held on Friday, August 5,
1988, at 1:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, Massachusetts, made
the following decision upon the application of National Boulevard Bank of Chicago,
Trustee of the Arthur C. Farlow Life Insurance Trust, u /d /t dated June 15, 1962,
(079 -88) address 400 -410 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611.
1. Applicant sought a VARIANCE pursuant to 139 -32A from the minimum lot
size and frontage requirements of 139 -16, Intensity Regulations, of the Nantucket
Zoning By -Law. The relief sought would allow the Applicant to treat as separate
buildable lots, the two (2) existing nonconforming, abutting lots held in common
ownership. Alternatively, the Applicant offered a reconfiguration of the lots that
would create two more evenly sized lots. The Board chose not to require the recon-
figuration.
2. The locus is made up of tw.o.. (2)-:`parcels of land shown as Assessor's
Parcel 49 -37 and Parcel 49 -94 and described in a deed recorded in Book 135, Page 18
at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. The properties are located, respectively, at
84 Baxter Road and 97 Sankaty Avenue. Parcel 37 contains approximately 9355 square
feet, and Parcel 94 contains approximately 103,645 square feet of area. Both parcels
are within the L.U.G. -3 Zoning District, but they form the boundary of such zone with
the less restrictive R -2 District. Indeed, it was represented by Applicant's counsel
that according to some Zoning Plans, a portion of Parcel 94 is within the R -2 zone.
Nevertheless, the L.U.G. District requires a minimum lot size of 120,000 square feet
and minimum frontage of 200 feet. Parcel 37 is nonconforming as to both of these;
Parcel 94 is nonconforming as to lot area only.
Parcel 37 also has the benefit of a Special Permit (091 -87) dated Septem-
ber 4, 1987, for alteration of the pre - existing single family dwelling and garage
located thereon.
3. Our findings are based upon the application papers, plans accompanying
the application and plans, copies, representations and testimony presented at the
hearing.
N
4, In support of Applicant's request for
VARIANCE under 139 -32 we rind,
as follows: to soil conditions,
shape, topography
A. Owing to circumstances relating district,
a strict application
enerally the zoning sub -
of the land, but not affecting g size and frontage requirements will work a
or enforcement of the minimum lot therwise on Applicant. The
financial or Chicago, Illinois.
stantial hardship. is a trust having a Trustee located in tion of zoning in
Applicant at the incep
separate ownership
placement of the two lots into their seP that the
d state identities and allowed for the con-
placement however,
Nantucket could have preserved
on each lot. We are informed, sale of
2 dwelling a separation of title except by
sttuction of two provide for such
trust instrument does not p arcels, Applicant
the parcels for value. of title of the tWO P
one or other of the commonality
Notwithstanding separate identities
voluntary waiver of the lots September of 1987,
Indeed, in Sep
asserts that there has been eration of law only. without reference
and that any merger is by P
and was granted a Special Permit for Parcel 3
Applicant sought allow, with -
whether however, zoning would
to Parcel 94. merger has occurred, ro erty. The
a merg on the property.
Notwithstandingi a second dwelling square
the construction of reach 3390 q
out benefit of relief, resulting struct.vres could lawfully 11 ownership as
- required to be in "same
combined ground cover of all would be req
however,
feet. The second dwelling, impractical given the condition of the
that of the first. This situation is imp
a wetland area,
running north
topography, hic plan submitted, e of Par -
As shown on the topographic and the western edge
e of Parcel 94 Also, the
and south, exists along
the eastern edge parcels.
a natural barrier between the two providing
cel 37. This wetland forms a on parallel streets p
lots have different addresses and
strict application
of the zoning requirements would
Therefore, a h sical conditions
separate access. of ownership inconsistent with the P Y the purposes of
al commonality ranted,
impose a leg shaping the relief hereby g
carefully parcels to be treated as one.
present. Moreover, by requiring the two P will not
the By -law can be furthered without with appropriate conditions,
B. Our granting relief hereby, not cause detriment
he Zoning By-law's intent and purpose and will
derogate from t on it. By
to the public good* present have two dwelling
the property can p of the
As stated above, two dwellings, we can insure that use
total of presently allowed. Because of
limiting the property to a that which is p
premises will be no more intense than
Page 2
resently be employed for a new
the size of the property,
a septic system may p We may
he existing dwelling on Parcel 37 is connected to T °� sewer. however, by
dwelling; t round waters,
against intrusions of toxins into our g We may
better insure ag stem by any future dwelling.
conditioning relief on use of the sewer system
controlling the size of the
of the By -Law by
the allowable ground cover on
also further the purpose B limiting We can
structures on these undersized
lot, the existing ground cover on Parcel 37,
each to 1355
square feet p
accomplish this goal. with the past and with other
accomp concern with consistency
Finally, we have a an building from the wet -
a fifty (50) feet setback of Y on the aban-
B imposing relief upon local boards. Y conditioning tem-
ublic interest. By due to expire in Sep
lands, we can further this P tember, 1987,
donment of Applicant's Special Permit of Sep comprehensive
ber, 1988, we
can be better assured that this decision will be the
limits of zoning relief in effect. this Board voted
upon a motion duly made and seconded, and ONE (1)
5. THEREFORE, P Leggett)
FOUR (4) in favor (R. Leichter,
W. Sherman, D. Waine and D.
to grant Applicant relief by
VARIANCE from the minimum of
opposed (C. M. Beale) Law to allow the lots substan-
'ze and frontage requirements of 139 -161of the' BY- 49 and known as 84 Baxter
size
tially as shown
as Assessor's Parcels 37 and 94'° anda97 Sankaty Avenue (containing
9355 square feet)
Road (containing approximately arate buildable and saleable
approximately 2.4 acres) to be treated and used as sep
p CONDITIONS: unit on either of the
lots, upon the following or secondary dwelling
(1) no secondary dwelling
the use to one dwelling per lot),
lots (limiting
building on the 2.4 acre lot
(2) no construction or placement of any
within fifty (50) feet of a wetlands,
(3) any dwelling placed or constructed on the 2.4 acre lot must tie into
public sewer system prior to its being used, square feet lot
(4) no further expansion of the structures on the 935
without further relief by the Board, and
Page 3
(5) Applicant's substantial use of the relief granted hereby shall be
deemed an abandonment of the Special Permit 091 -87,
dated September 4, 1987, Case
and such Permit shall, in that event, have no further force and effect, notwith-
standing its prior use or recording.
Dated:" VS"t' 36, 1988 ;
IN FAVOR:
William �,r Sherman ' ^
Dajid Legge
ert Lei t r
a ne
OPPOSED:
C. Marsh 1 Beale
Page 4
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS -02554
US`-t 1989
File No. Oql -13q
To: Parties in interest and others
rn o o,
Re: Decision in the Application of
IBS A-T! ON
04 ++ e
Enclosed is the decision of the Board of Appeals which has this
day been filed with the Nantucket Town Clerk.
An appeal from this decision may be taken pursuant to Section 17
of Chapter 40A, Massachusetts General Laws. Any action appealing
the decision must be brought by filing a complaint in court
within twenty (20) days after this date. Notice of the action
with a copy of the complaint and certified copy of the decision
must be given to the Town Clerk so as to be received within such
twenty (20) days.
cc: Building Commissioner
Planning Board
Town Clerk
~A
William R. Sherman, Chairman
BOARD OF. APPEALS
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
RE: Modification of Variance granted by Decision dated August 30,
1988 1.
At a public hearing held on Friday, July 12, 1989 at 1:00 pm
in the Town and County Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, the Board
made the following decision on the Application of National
Boulevard Bank of Chicago, Trustee of the Arthur Farlow Life
Insurance Trust (041 -89).
Applicant sought relief pursuant to Sections 139 -32A and 139 -
29D(3) to MODIFY, in part. a previously granted Variance. Our
Decision of August 30, 1988, granting the Variance, specifically
requires, as condition number (3) of its granting, that "any
dwelling placed or constructed on the 2.4 acre lot must tie into
the public sewer system prior to its being used." Applicant seeks
to remove the aforesaid condition number (3).
As grounds for the requested relief, Applicant argues that the
condition is one which cannot be met, through no fault of
Applicant. The Board takes notice of DEQE Administrative Order 782
which prohibits the Town from allowing the suggested sewer
connection at present and for an indefinite time hereafter.
Moreover, Applicant provided evidence that the connection to the
Baxter Road sewer line (it was represented that there is no sewer
in front of the lot on Sankaty Road) would require it to perform
the work within a wetland in order to lay the sewer pipe. -
We find that the continued imposition of the said condition
(3 ) would cause an undue hardship upon the Applicant in that it
would render useless the relief which- was originally granted to
make the lot buildable. That hardship would continue until the
sewer moratorium was lifted, if lifted. We find this to be an
unnecessary burden if the lot can and does comply with all local
and state regulations for the construction and use of an on -site
septic system. That the connection to sewer will disrupt the the- -
existing wetland is more properly an issue for the Conservation
Commission. However, it would not be consistent with our, purposes
and intent to require the Applicant to disrupt the wetlands area
and to bear the burdens of the process of obtaining the appropriate
permission for such a task for a conditons which is unfulfillable.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted
UNANIMOUSLY to modify its Decision of August 30,1988, and which is
recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds in Book 327 at Page
285, to eliminate condition (3), thereof, which requires the
connection to the public sewer for any dwelling on the 2r..4 acre
lot at 97 Sankaty Avenue. Our findings and decision are based upon
the Application papers, and the plans submitted therewith,
subsequent to the application and at the Hearing, as well as the
arguments and representations 'received at our July 21, 1989
Hearing. I
All of the other terms, conditions and provisions of the
Variance granted by our Decision dated August 30, 1989, shall
remain in full force and effect. I
Dated:
�%9
MCI
Upon the yetit.ion of ;J®shua,_Posuer. ;et al, alleging :that:.
1.. Certificate ;,of Title No. . 4846, issued by, .the :Registry
District .of .Nantucket, Count i stands _in,the names of petitioners
Arthur C. Farlow siid .Dor ®thy :D. F'arlow, now .Dorothy Farlow:
Rauch. This certificate covers Lot 1. as shown on Land Court
Plan No. 9710 -B.
2'.'`Certificate of Title No. 5013 issued by said Registry
District stands in the names of Petitioner ,Frederic W.. Ness.;
and Eleanor H. Ness_. This certificate covers Lot 2 as shown
on'Land Court Plan No. 9710 -B.,
3. Certificate of Title No. 4915 issued by said RegiO"'ry
District stands in the names of petitioner Frederic.W..Nese'
and Eleanor H. Ness. This certificate covers Lot 4 as shownt
on Land Court Plan No. 9710 -C.
S,
4. Certiffca.te;o£ Title Ne.`.8604 issued by „said Registry
District stands' in the names of petitioners Joshua Posner,
Bruce Posner and David Posner. This certificate covers Lot 6 and
7"on Land Court Plan No. 9710 -D.
5. Petitioners; National Boulevard Sank of Chicago.,
Trustee of ,the`'Arttiur C..Farlow Life Insurance Trust
Agreement being owner of Lots No' 'l and 2, shown on filed Plan
i
ending Re
P g S s�kxation Case Nm... 40329
6.. That there is a paper load :.or Way as shown on.said
plan_.running.Westeri.y from Atlantic Street, Northerly of Lot
1 on.. Land Court :plan 97,10 -D and Southerly of _ Lot 2 on Land
Court Case, ,,$ ;(pending),,_..That, your petitioners own
t4a fee, .to the: center line poi:.. pod way abutting their
respective properties. That said way has never been
locatedon the ground, has never been used as a way br for
any other purpose by any person or persons other than your
petitioners and their predecessors in title for well over
twenty years.
7. That there is a paper road or way as shown on said
plan running easterly and westerly from Atlantic Street,
southerly of Lots 2 and 4 and northerly of Lots d and 7.
That your petitioners own the fee.to the center line of
said May abutting their respective properties.
8.: Peti$iouers have caused .to be filed in the Engineering Department of the Land Court in Boston plan No.
9„ said Plan .: No. 9710,-F delineates: (1) the elimination
of the Way shcam an Land- C�� Foafn NO. 9710 -D 4n running West
from• Atlst�tja:. Street, No�rt y Court
Plan 9710 -D and south of Lot 2 on Pending Registration Case
No. 40329, and (2) the elimination of the way shown on Land
Court Plan No. 9710 -0 running East and west from Atlantic
Street, Southerly of x ot$ 2 and 4 and northerly of Lots
No. 6 and 7.
Petitioners pray that Plan No. 9710 -F be approved, that
Certificate Ito. 4846, Certificate too. 3013 and Certt ficats ,No.
4913, 8604 all be cancelled and new Certificates issue in,pccord
with Plan No. 9710-F. '7 '
After due proceedings, it is ORD,�,,.,.ERED: that Plsn No. 9 -710 -F
del.ineatin$s 'Y
1 the elimination of way as shown on Land Court P'�eln
(
Ito. 9710 _ p running ) west from Atlantic Street, northerly of;
Lot 1 and south of Lot 2 an pending registration Case No.
40329,
(2) the elimination of way shown on Land Court Plan
9710 -D rursning east and vest frow ,Atlantic Street south of
Lots 2 and 4 and northerly of Lots 4 and 7,
That said Plan No. 9710 -F be and is hereby approved.
gURTFga OAD$R p: that Certificate of Title No. 8604 be
cancelled and a aev Certificate �,lO�ff to�JoshuasPosner? Bab
shown on Land Court Plan N
posuer, and David Posner of Cambridge, in the County of
Middlesex and said Comonwealth.
•� Y
.,i
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Date: March 5 1991
To: Parties in Interest and.OthPrs concerned with the
Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the
following:
Application No.: 012 -91 and 013 -91
Owner /Applicant: National Boulevard Bank of Chicaao, a /k /a
Boulevard Bank of Chicaao, Trustee of the Arthur C. Farlow
Life Insurance Trust, u /d /t June 15, 1962
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has
this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town
Clerk.
An !ppeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to
Section 17 of Chaoter 40A, `assachusetts General Laitis.
T:':y act-ion upp eal_ng tiie °cs_vn .:lust ✓? '_ /o ic1 l by
i Ang an c0m—o .�
l__ LIJ. ..
_t _n -r n-* t :1 .._ t !" tTi \ ^vJ .1 cy
this day's date. Notice of the action with a copy of the
com ,Dlci..t a, ^,d certified copy of the ✓ecision gist be given
to t� "s? -ri n Clerk so as - �� recei :'ed iii :..:in ` uch �i: �'1
(20) Gays.
Willi -am R-. Sherman, Vice- Chairman
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
DECISION:
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
The Nantucket Board of Appeals, acting at a public hearing
held on FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1991 at 1:00 P.M. at the Town and County
Building, Nantucket, made the following Decision upon the Application
of NATIONAL BOULEVARD BANK OF CHICAGO A /K /A BOULEVARD BANK OF
CHICAGO, TRUSTEE OF THE ARTHUR C. FARLOW LIFE INSURANCE TRUST, u /d /t
dated June 15, 1962 (012 -91) and (013 -91):
1. The Applicant has sought the re- establishment of a
Variance previously granted by our Decision of August 3G, 1988
(079 -88), Modified in part and otherwise re- affirmed by our Decision
of August 9, 1989 (041 -89) and which has since expired because of the
Applicant's failing to have exercised the Variance within one year of
ifs being granted. Applicant here seeks a new or renewed Variance from
the minimum lot size and frontage requirements of the By -Law, so as
to allow the Applicant to treat as separate buildable lots the
premises subject of (012 -91) (vacant land) at 97 SANKATY ROAD,
Assessor's Map 49, Parcel 94, and premises, subject of (013 -91)
(including a dwelling and a garage) at 84 Baxter Road, Assessor's Map
49, Parcel 37. Applicant offers in its Application to submit to the
Same conditions previously imposed by the prior Variance, as
modified. The property is situated in the LIMITED USE GENERAL -3
District, but abuts on two sides the less restrictive R -2 District.
2. Our findings are based upon he Application papers,
addenda to the Application, including site plans and floor plans,
copies, representations and testimony presented a the hearing. The
recommendation of the Planning Board was favorable, and no opposition
was heard at the public hearing or otherwise.
3. We note that there has been no material physical change to
the premises since our findings in (079 -88) and (041 -89), and we give
some deference to the findings of the Board in those prior
proceedings. In support of this request for Variance relief, we find
as follows:
A. Owing to circumstances relating to the soil
conditions, shape and topography of the property, but not generally
affecting the zoning district, a strict application or enforcement of
the minimum lot size and frontage requirements will work a
substantial hardship, financially or otherwise upon the Applicant.
Applicant is a trust having a trustee located in Chicago,
Illinois. The placement of the two lots into separate ownership at
the inception of zoning in Nantucket could have preserved the
separate identities of these two properties, as it did for many
(012 -91 and 013 -91) -2-
neighboring lots. such action would have allowed for the construction
of two dwellings on each lot. We are reminded by Applicant of
difficulties of such an arrangement under the Trust provisions. (We
take note that the old Zoning By -Law wasnot explicit in its
explanation of the statutory time limitations for variances, an
oversight which has been cured.)
Second, the combined ground cover of all allowable
structures on these properties could lawfully reach 3473 SF. We
acknowledge that this total is applicable only while property, as one
merged lot, is exempt for a period of five years from the requirements
for "lot area" established by the new definition excluding we -tands
which was voted at the November 1990 Town Meeting. Ary secondary
dwelling, however, would be required to be in "same" ownership as that
of the primary dwelling. This situation is impractical given the
condition of the topography and soil conditions of the lots.
As shown on the topographic plan submitted, a wetland
area, running north and south, exists along the eastern edge of Parcel
94 and the western edge of Parcel 37. This wetland forms a natural
barrier between the two parcels. Also, the lots have different
addresses and with frontage on parallel, public roads providing
separate and adequate access to each. Therefore, a strict application
of the zoning requirements would impose a legal commonality of
ownership, inconsistent with the physical conditions present.
Moreover, by carefully shaping the relief granted here, the purposes
of the By -Law can be furthered without the two parcels being treated
as one.
B. Our granting relief here, with conditions, will nod
derogate from he Zoning By -Law's intent and purpose and will not cause
detriment to the public good.
As stated above, the property can presently have two
dwellings on it. By limiting the property to a total of two dwellings,
we can insure that use of the premises will be no more intense than
that which is presently allowed. Additionally, by allowing the lots to
be separated, we reduce the likelihood of use of the secondary
dwelling as a guest cottage or servants quarters, thereby reducing
foot traffic between the existing dwelling and a new structure across
and disturbing the intervening wetland.
The purpose of the By -Law may be advanced, also by further
controlling the size of the structures on these undersized lots. By
limiting the allowable ground cover on each lot to 1355 SF (the
existing ground cover on Parcel 37, without further review by this
Board), we can better prevent construction which i5 inharmonious with
the neighborhood. Moreover, we find that the lots validated here are
not inharmonious in size with respectto those which are in the general
area between Sankaty Road and Sconset Bluff.
(012 -91 and 013 -91) -3-
C. Finally, we reiterate our concerns for consistency
with the past and with other local boards. By imposing a fifty (50)
foot setback from the wetlands on Parcel 94, we can further this
public interest recognized by the Conservation Commission. We also
find, and to the extent necessary, condition relief upon-the
abandonment of Applicant's Special Permit granted in September, 1987
(091 -87). By doing so, we axe better assured that this Decision sets
the comprehensive limits for the zoning relief in effect.
4. Therefore, upon a motion duly made and seconded, this
Board voted, four (4) in favor (Sherman, Williams, O'Mara and Dooley)
and one (1) opposed (Beale), to GRANT Applicant the renewal of relief
by VARIANCE under Zoning By -Law SECTION 139 -16A (minimum lot size and
frontage requirements), so as to allow the lots, substantially as
shown as Parcels 37 and 94, on Assessor's Map 49, being known as 84
Baxter Road and 97 Sankaty Road, to be used and treated as separate
buildable and saleable los, upon the following conditions:
(1) No secondary dwelling or second dwelling unit on
either of the lots (limitingfhe useto one (1) dwelling per lot;
(2) No construction or placement of any building on 97
Sankaty Road (parcel 94) within fifty (50) feet of a wetlands;
(3) No expansion ofELe structures at 84 Baxter Road (parcel
37), ground cover being limitedfo 1355 SF, without further relief by
this Board;
(4) Applicant's substantial use ofthe relief granted
hereby shall be deemed to confirm abandonment of the Special Permit
dated September 4, 1987 (091 -87), and such permit shall, in that
event, have no further force and effect, notwithstanding any prior use
or recording; and
(5) Ground cover af,97 Sankaty Road, Parcel 94, shall be
limited' 1355 SF.
Dated:
Nantucket, MA 02554
In Favor:
William R. Sherman
r
Linda F. Williams
r
Michael O'Mara
eter Dooley
Opposed:
C. Marshall Beale