HomeMy WebLinkAbout063-91060 3 - �./
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Date: Nov. 20 19 91
To: Parties in Interest and.Others concerned with the
Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the
following:
Applicaticn No.: 063-91
Owner/Applicant: RICHARD ELDRIDGE
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS i,.1hich has
this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town
Clerk.
Ln Appeal from this Decision may --ba taken pursuant to
Section 17 of Chapter 40A, Vai-Q---,chuse-t1-1L-.s General Laws.
A ny action Dpeaiing tna Deci S4 0-
'.jU C t :tee
'y v
'fas
an c0m-pia n co:,_ wi t'h' - m rr-
this day's date. Notice of the action with a cow of t" h e
com;D -laint and certified cony of the Decision :rust e g i N, en
tip T w n C 11 e rk. Sc -a s t. o r e c e i -v e
(20)"d-ay-s. n
Robert J% )�ei�hter, Ch'a`i-man
cc: To,•n Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
South Beach Street
Nantucket, Mass. 02554
Map 73 -4 -2 11 New Street, Siasconset
Parcel 67 353/214
Map 73 -4 -2 13 New Street, Siasconset
Parcel 69 357/285
R -1
At a Public Hearing of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS held at
1:00 P.M., Friday, October 18, 1991, in the Town and County
Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the
Application of RICHARD ELDRIDGE, of 18 King Street, Siasconset,
Mass., Board of Appeals File No. 063 -91, the Board made the
following Decision?
1. Applicant appealed as a party aggrieved by the inability to
obtain an enforcement action and seeking a reversal under §139 -
31A of the Zoning Bylaw of a Decision of the Building
Commissioner, dated August 11, 1991, for alleged violations of
the conditions of relief imposed in Board of Appeals File No.
019 -88A and 019 -88B, upon the then property owners, Sconset
Enterprises and Kenneth Coffin, Inc., and Applicant therein,
Sconset Casino Association, and their successor in interest,
Siasconset Casino Association, Inc., paragraph 9, specifically
that the tennis courts are on the property are not surrounded by
security -type fencing as required under paragraph 9(3) in that
the fence is not constructed as approved by the Historic District
Commission, vegetative screening is not planted and maintained as
required by paragraph 9(7), uses are being made of the premises
in addition to those permitted under the Decision, and the hours
of operation are in excess of those permitted under paragraph
9(4) of the Decision. The premises are located at 11 NEW STREET,
SIASCONSET, Assessor's Map 73.4.2, parcel 67, as shown in Plan
Book 11, page 10, and 13 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Map
73.4.2, parcel 69, as shown in Plan Book 17, page 123, Lot 1.
The property is zoned R -1.
2. The Board's Decision is based upon the Application and
materials filed therewith, the evidence presented at the Hearing,
numerous letters in support of the Application from abutters, and
no recommendation from the Planning Board.
3. Applicant presented evidence at the Hearing that, although
the tennis courts were being played on only during the hours
between 8:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M., the premises were being
maintained and cleaned outside of those hours, specifically
earlier in the morning. The terms of the existing Special
Permit, paragraph 9(4) limit court play to the hours between 8:00
A.M. and 8:00 P.M.
Application No. 063 -91 Decision
4. In addition, Applicant stated that he had pointed out to the
Zoning Enforcement Officer /Building Commissioner other alleged
discrepancies between the premises and the uses being made of the
property and the conditions of the existing Special Permit,
specifically the requirement for "Vegetative screening, by
double -row, densely-plaited privet or equivalent," as required by
paragraph 9(7) of the Special Permit, and he presented
photographs showing the present state of the hedge, and parking
of more than two cars per tennis court on the lot, as specified
in paragraph 9(6) of the Special Permit.
5. Several abutters spoke on behalf of the Application and
voiced similar complaints concerning the hours of operation,
parking, noise, use of the courts for tournaments (which brings
spectators to the site) and group, and children's lessons, and the
condition of the hedge surrounding the premises.
6. The Owner of the property stated that it was fully complying
with the letter of the Special Permit in all particulars, that
that was the finding of the Building Commissioner after
inspection, and that a reversal of the Decision of the Building
Commissioner would require the Board to find that his Decision
was arbitrary and capricious. Further, the owner argued that the
Appeal before the Board did not re -open the terms of the original
Special Permit to reconsideration; the Board's authority was
limited to the basis for the Appeal and whether the conditions of
the original Permit were being violated. To satisfy one concern
of the abutters, the owner agreed to limit all operations on the
courts, not just play, to the hours between 8 A.M. and 8 P.M.,
and that additiorWprivet would be planted.
7. While the Board may be sympathetic to the complaints of the
abutters and desire to provide them a remedy, it is constrained
by the limits of its power and can not act beyond those limits.
The Board reluctantly agrees that on an Appeal from a Decision of
the Building Commissioner denying a request for an enforcement
action for alleged violations of the conditions of a Special
Permit, the Board is not free to re -open the terms of the Permit
for revision but can only decide whether the Building
Commissioner's Decision was incorrect as to whether owner was
complying with the conditions of the Permit.
8. By unanimous vote (Leichter, Williams, Balas, Waine and
O'Mara in favor) the Board reverses the Decision of the Building
Commissioner only as it applies to the hedge surrounding the
property and finds that the owner has not complied with the
conditions of the existing Special Permit, paragraphs 5 and 9(7),
for "[v]egetative screening, by double -row, densely - planted
privet or equivalent," to be planted and maintained around the
2
Application No. 063 -91
perimeter of the lot, and, in all other res
the Building Commissioner is sustaine-
Date: L - !9w
�JXI'Afi
Linda F. Williams
Dale Maine
Decision
s the Decision of
.� Leichter
Ann Balas
v
Mic a O'Mara
koc I - Ic - ct f A
,e� e�,4'
�T-
3
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
South Beach Street
Nantucket, Mass. 02554
NOTICE
op//
A Public Hearing of the BOARD OF APPEALS will be held at
1:00 P.M., Friday, October 18, 1991, in the Town and County
Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the
Application of:
RICHARD ELDRIDGE
Board of Appeals File No. 063 -91
Applicant is appealing as a party aggrieved by the inability
to obtain an enforcement action and seeking a reversal under
§139 -31A of the Zoning Bylaw of a Decision of the Building
Commissioner, dated August 11, 1991, for alleged violations of
the conditions of relief imposed in Board of Appeals File No.
019 -88A and 019 -88B, upon the then property owners, Sconset
Enterprises and Kenneth Coffin, Inc., and Applicant therein,
Sconset Casino Association, and their successor in interest,
Siasconset Casino Association, Inc., paragraph 9, specifically
that the courts are not surrounded by security -type fencing as
required under paragraph 9(3) in that the fence is not
constructed as approved by the Historic District Commission,
vegetative screening is not planted and maintained as required by
paragraph 9(7), uses are being made of the premises in addition
to those permitted under the Decision, and the hours of operation
are in excess of those permitted under paragraph 9(4) of the
Decision.
The premises are located at 11 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET,
Assessor's Map 73.4.2, parcel 67, as shown in Plan Book 11, page
10, and 13 NEW STREET, SIASCONSET, Assessor's Map 73.4.2, parcel
69, as shown in Plan Book 17, page 123, Lot 1. The property is
zoned R -1.
G / _
Robert J. Lelchter., Chairman
Ili
40elaeal
BoA Form 1 -89 DTANTUCXET ZONING DOARD Or APPEAL)
TOT.'R? 11ND COUN'iY 'DUILDING Date
.1-1 cr.sE.�o.C�� -�
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
Owner's name(s):
Mailing address:
Applicant's name
Mailing address:
Location of lot:
Street address:
RMIAPPROW
WE &W-WAYM�--lWAMITMA
i
Registry Land Ct Plan, Plan
/I/14ost-, 1o1l8
Date lot acquired:, "_al:l--ij;
p and parcel numberr)3.
&
Pq or Plan I•'ile y/3NeCO- i
U -A)zw. 3 3 �� 2
d Ref5CT2-"1w•W :i�strict �
Uses on lot - commercial: None K or ��till1 r� )2 itCD?
- number of: dwellings_ duplex_ apartments_ rental roon's_
Building date(s): all pre -8/72? _ or C of 0 ?_p
Building Permit appl' n. Nos.
Case Nos. all BoA applications, lawsuits:
State fully all zoning relief sought and respective Code sections
and subsections, speCaf:ically what you propose compared to present•
and what grounds you urge for BuA to make each finding per Section
139 -32A if Variance, 139 -30A ii a Special Porwi.t (and 139 :)A
if to alter or extend a nonco11- orming use) . If appoitl. per 139 -3)A
& II attach decision or orders appealed. OK to c;tach addei;duml.
ZA
Items enclosed as part of this Application: order.l addendum2
Locus map_ Site plan___ showing present •t -pla sled st::uci:ures
Floor plans present proposed_ cl.evations (iiDC iipproved ?_)
Listings lot area frontage setbacks _ GCR _ parking data
Assessor- certifiecddressee Y1
200 4 sets ma.liiul labels Z set _
200 fee payable to Town of N,�nt:ucket proofs 'cap' covenant
Bldg (If an appeal, ask Town Cler): to send Cumrru record to DoA.)
I certify that the requested information submitted is substantially
complete and true to the best of my knowledge, under the pails and
penalties of perjury.
SIGNATURE:- / - Applicant 1z Attorney /agent
3(If not owner or owner Is attorney, enclose proof of authority)
FOR BoA OFFICE USE
Application copies recd: 4 "or_ for BoA on-W-/Z/-/-?,/ by-
One copy filed with Town Clerk un__j/Z&Z by L(ttiti complete ?_
One copy each to Planning Bcl and Building I7ept��% t�yc_
$200 fee check given TT/own Treasurer on__/__/_ LyL42. waived ?_
Hearing notice posted f mailed��/� I & M� /�, lam / �L
Hearing(s) on^/_/_ cont'd to_/_/_, �_/, withdrawn ?_ /_/_
Decision due bye_/_ ntade��_ filed TC_/_/Y mailed--J--/
Snn rnl Atnrl 1 a .rc I i to nY'I.
S
OI
ADDENDUM A
Applicant is appealing as a party aggrieved by the inability
to obtain an enforcement action and seeking a reversal under
§139 -31A of the Zoning Bylaw of a Decision of the Building
Commissioner, dated August 11, 1991, for alleged violations of
the conditions of relief imposed in Board of Appeals File No.
019 -88A and 019 -88B, upon the then property owners, Sconset
Enterprises and Kenneth Coffin, Inc., and Applicant therein,
Sconset Casino Association, and their successor in interest,
Siasconset Casino Association, Inc., paragraph 9, specifically
that the courts are not surrounded by security -type fencing as
required under paragraph 9(3) in that the fence is not
constructed as approved by the Historic District Commission,
vegetative screening is not planted and maintained as required by
paragraph 9(7), uses are being made of the premises in addition
to those permitted under the Decision, and the hours of operation
are in excess of those permitted under paragraph 9(4) of the
Decision.
August 12, 1991
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Mr. Richard Eldridge
King Street
Siasconset, MA 02564
Dear Mr. Eldridge,
TOWN BUILDING ANNEX
10 SOUTH BEACH STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 Ronald J. Santos
Telephone 508- 228 -7222 Building Commissioner
Tele Fax 508- 228 -7249
In response to your letter of August 11, 1991, regarding the
Sconset Casino tennis courts - Certificate of Use. I have viewed the
property and find that the planting is adequate as stated in the permit
issued by the Board of Appeals. At this time I can not find any basis
to revoke the Certificate of Use.
If I can be of further assistance, please don't hesitate to contact
me at the office.
Sincerely,
e Rona antos
Building Commissioner
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
ackcode —L431
RECEIVED --6'1- -2 ,2
APPLICATION WILL NOT BED
DEEMED COMPLETE UNTIL
BUILDING APPLICATION NUMBEF.
REVIEWED BY BUILDING
APPLICATION FOR
INSPECTOR
PLAN EXAMINATION AND
BUILDING PERMIT
IMPORTANT - Applicant to complete all Items In Sections: 1,2,3,4, and
OWNERS NAME:
-4S ref 17
/S
SSG GIB -�7h�
Last First Middle Initial
S e-w,&,
L
LOCATION
OF
No. No. Street Village
-7 3 !�
BUILDING
Assessor's Map No.
Assessor's Parcel
No.
2. TYPE AND COST OF BUILDING - All applicants complete Parts A -D
A. TYPE OF IMPROVEMENT
D. PROPOSED USE - (For "Demolition" most recent use)
❑ New Building
Residential
Nonresidential
❑ Addition (If residential, enter number
❑ One Family
❑ Amusement, recreational
of new housing units added,
❑ Church, other religious
if any, in Part D, 13)
❑ Two or more family - Enter
❑ Industrial
❑ Alteration (See 2 above)
number of untils
❑ Parking garage
❑ Repair, replacement
❑ Transient Hotel, Motel or
❑ Service station, repair garage
❑Demolition (If multifamily residential,
dormitory; or INTERVAL
❑ Hospital, institutional
enter number of units in
OWNERSHIP - enter number of units
❑ Office, bank, professional
building in Part D, 13)
G Public utility
❑ Moving (relocation)
❑ Gara e
g
❑ School, library, other educational
❑ Foundation only
❑ Carport
❑ Other - Specify ,7 T. -/YNI S
❑ Stores, mercantile
❑ Ta ; towers
r- he d
B. 0 ERSHIP
- Specify
nvate (individual, corporation,
Cn r '% -S
nonprofit institution, etc.)
❑ Public (Federal, State, or local
government)
C. COST � � �/ �D
omit cents
E. DIMENSIONS
r
2-0 /
�S(O
Dimensions (New) of
� X
Dimensions of
Cost of: a. Structure
Dwelling or Additior�y ', Additional Structures:
b. Electrical
No. of Stories: ,�
r�:,.-;�
" Garage:
c. Plumbing
First Floor Area:
Accessory Bldg.
d. Heating
Second Floor Area:
Swimming Pool:
e. Other
Third Floor Area:
Other:
�a
TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENT
Total Floor Area:
BUILDING INSPECTOR'S ESTIMATE
Full Cellar Area:
3. SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS
OF BUILDING For new buildings and additions, complete Parts E -N
for Demolition, complete only Part 1., for all others skip to 4.
F. PRINCIPLE TYPE OF FRAME
H. TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL
K. ACCESSORY HEAT SOURCE
• Masonry (wall bearing) n�'f
❑ Public or private company_
No. of fireplaces
• Wood frame
❑Private (septic tank, etc.)
No. of Wood Stoves
No. of Coal Stoves
❑ Structural steel
Solar Collector
• Reinforced concrete
I. TYp� OF WATER SUPPLY
Other:
El Other - Specify
Public or private company
f� Private (well, cistern)
L. SMOKE DETECTORS
No. of Dectectors I
G. PRINCIPLE TYPE OF HEATING
Type (Battery or AC)
J. SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
I =] Gas
See Plan for Location
❑ Air Conditioning /�
N/^ -
F1 Oil /`�
^/ 1
C; Electricity
❑ Heat Pump
M. RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ONLY
❑ Central Vacuum
Number of Bedrooms
I J Coal
❑ Other
Number of Bathrooms
I J Other - Specify
dull __ Partial
4. , ZONING COMPLIANCE To be completed by all applicants
Applicant is required to submit a registered plot plan with application, showing location of all structures.
Zoning District: ' x I I Total Land Area: t F6
Frontage on Street: a/' & k Lot No.
Plan Book No. and Page: P/ 'e< 7 jyj 12 5 � Land Court Plan No.
Date Lot Purchased: // g 0 Certificate No. ��tt
Name of Previous Owner:
SUBDIVISION INFORMATION
Name of Owner:
Date of Plan Approval:
Type of Approval: ANR AR
Planning Board File No.
Is the Subdivision subject to a Covenant: YES
Is a Release required: YES NO
Has Plan been filed with the Registry of Deeds? YES .
If YES: Plan Book and Page No. Date
NO
NO
TIME SHARING
INFORMATION
Is there a declaration of
Covenants and Restrictiors of
Interval Ownership noted on
your Title or Deed?
Yes No
DIMENSIONS ,
Distance from Property Lines: FRONT Zy REAR S LEFT RIGHT
Distance between Principal and Secondary Dwelling: (12ft. minimum.)
` t ! f
Height of structure above finish grade: N /0 E /D S �d W 16
Number of off - street parkig spaces: Enclosed On -site
GROUND COVER
Principal Dwelling:
Secondary Dwelling
Addition:
Garage:
Accessory Building:
Swimming Pool:
Other: % Z
5
Total: / �� 77 Z-4 r 7- SF.
Allowable: =? qLo SF.
b y SreU_4 per.
MISCELLANEOUS
Was a request to "Determing Applicability of the Wetland Protection Act" filed with the Nantucket Cosnervation Committee? YES NO
If answered YES, inclde "Order of Conditions" with application.
What date was the "Order of Conditions" with application.
What date was the "Order of Conditions" filed with the Registry of Deeds?
Is the property located withing a Flood Hazard district? YES NO 1
Was a Variance or Special Permit granted by the Board of Apeals? YES NO
If answered YES, what date was the decision filed with the Town Clerk? _—
FOR BUILDING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
Minimum Lot Size:
Frontage on Street:
Front Yard:
Additional Comments:
Date:
Ground Cover Ratio: _
Side and Rear Setback:
APPROVED BY
Zoning Officer
3. Continued
N. ENERGY CONSERVATION Type
Foundation or Floor insulation
Wall Insulation
Ceiling or Roof Insulation
Window Glazing: Insulated Glass —
Doors: Insulated Yes No —
Percentage of Window Area to Wall Area:
Maximum BTU loss per hour of structure:
,A (h— Thickness R Value
Double Glass Storm
Weatherstripped: Yes No
(Do not fill in if % of window to wall area is less than 20 %)
O. STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BUILDING
Applicant is required to submit complete structural framing plans with application due to the complexity of the structure, if the following infc,,-ation
is insufficiant for proper plan review.
Foundation
Footing size: Footing reinforcing:
Wall material: Wall thickness:
Wall height Wall reinforcing:
Pier or column size: Pier or column spacing:
Pier or column footing size: Pier or column reinforcing:
No. of crawl space vents: Crawl space: ❑ Full ❑ Partial
FRAMING: Main Carrying members: Size:
Support Spacing:
First Floor Framing
Second Floor Framing
Ceiling Framing
Roof Framing
Roof Truss
Joist size: Maximum Span: Maximum Spacing:
Joist size: Maximum Span: Maximum Spacing:
Maximum Span: Maximum Spacing:
Joist size: -
Rafter size: Maximum Span: Maximum Spacing:
Applicant must submit design calculations for all wood trusses stamped by a Registered Profession Engineer.
INTERIOR FINISH Walls
Bedrooms
Living Room
Family Room
Dining Room
Bathroom
Utility Room
Special (specify)
Attic
Cellar
EXTERIOR FINISH
Wall Material
Roof Material
Roof Type
NOTES AND DATE (For Department Use)
Floors
Ceiling
—
FEE CALCUALTIONS
5. IDENTIF4CATION - To be completed b all applicants
Plans Review Required
Name
Mialing address - Number, street, city, and State
HISTORIC DISTRICS COMMISSION
Zip Code
17, ph. e No.
i.
Owner or
Lessee
Sial Co�t�- �•+� 1..
te✓
ff �� Li IC_i++ r�
OZ S-& lk
Ls 7
.4 /N/J1� �OOL
2"
t t �S�d�. �(i %nr�
�• 6. 9S X
6 6 6 CF 1f t /
.
Builder's License
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
General
Contractor
47-wc�
6 C!v
BOARD OF APPEALS
p
Q19- e R lq—
3.
Contractor
Signature
SECONDARY DWELLING APPROVAL (Planning Board)
Date
FIRE CHIEF
4.
Architect or
Engineer
OVER -THE -ROAD (Board of Selectmen)
RELEASE FORM (Planning Board)
hereby certify that the proposed work is authorized by the ownerof record and that I have been authorized by the owner to make this application as
his authorized gent and we agree to conform to all applicable laws of this jurisdiction.
Signatu
plic nt Addre�
DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE
6. PLAN REVIEW RECORD - For Office Use
Plans Review Required
HISTORIC DISTRICS COMMISSION
o
G j
SEPTIC
SEWER
WATER WELL COMPLETION REPORT
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
BOARD OF APPEALS
p
Q19- e R lq—
a, e
SECONDARY DWELLING APPROVAL (Planning Board)
FIRE CHIEF
OVER -THE -ROAD (Board of Selectmen)
RELEASE FORM (Planning Board)
ROAD OPENING PERMIT (DPW)
PLUMBING
ELECTRICAL
7. VALIDATION
Building 7 �/�
Permit number
Building
Permit issued
Dale of
Reissuance
Building �X-
Permit Fee 3yv -
Date of Issuance of
Certificale of Occupancy
FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
Use Group
Fire Grading
Live Loading
Occupancy Load
Census No. G
Approved by: t
Building Inspector
i
Whereas the neighborhood surrounding the recently
added tennis courts has suffered increased noise;
constant trespass from stray tennis ball retrieval;
increased traffic and parking; and in general the
neighbors have lost quiet enjoyment of their own
property, the following,exceptions to the 16 February
1988,variance are noted:
FIN
1. There are three not two new tennis courts.
2. There are not ten foot, or higher; green
woven wire fences surrounding the courts.
3. Sound and visual barriers of double row, dense
privet plantings are not in existence around
the courts perimeters.
4. What barriers do exist are not dense, in
good condition, and are not well maintained.
5. Adjacent to the courts is a "green" being
used for classes, clinics and as a playground
further aggravating the disturbances.
6. Parking has been added in excess of the agreed
allotment increasing the magnitude of the
problem.
At all times the variance addressed the neighborhood's
concerns of additional noise, traffic and level of activity
but these transgressions, nr improper following of the
specific conditions, have severely limited the neighbors
enjoyment of.their own property.
Therefore, because conditions of the aforementioned
variance are not in compliance, the neighbors, by signature
hereto, request an injunction to prohibit continued useage
of the offending courts. Further these signees would like
an investigation into the reasons the courts were granted
a permit without following the variance. Finally the neighbors
announce their intention to seek all appropriate remedies
at law to correct the violations, return the neighborhood to
its previous state and seek damages for the disturbances
caused by offensive noise levels.
I, r
Mr..'�am Daume
Siasconset.Casino
New Street
Siasconset, Mass. 02564
August 8, 1991"
Re. New Tennis Courts
Dear Mr. Daume:
Several citizens of 'Sconset who own property abutting
your three new tennis courts met last week to discuss the
many problems the courts are causing.
First, it is the opinion of an attorney that the courts
could be closed. Not only do they qualify as a nuisance,
many of the abutting property-.owners never received proper
notice of the Casino's plans and intentions or the hearings
that were held. In addition, the finished courts do not
comply with either the:initial drawings that were provided
or the permit that was granted. It is not clear if the plans
were intentionally or erroneously misleading, but they were.
In spite of these problems, we-:-are interested in constructive
solutions rather than legal actions. We have several demands
we would like to be broughtbefore your board as soon as'possible.
If we can work these out in a civilized manner, we believe every-
one can be reasonably happy and thousands of dollars in legal
fees can be put to better use.
The following are our demands:
(1) A wooden fence that is as sound proof as possible should
be built around the courts at least nine (9) feet high. This
..will eliminate the visibility of players and reduce noise.
(2) The chain link fence should be raised three(3) feet to
reduce the number of balls escaping the courts.
(3) The hours of use at these courts should be restricted to
9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. Monday through Friday and 10 :00 A.M. to
3:00 P.M. on Sunday.
(4) Signs limiting the hours of play should be posted -and '
enforced.
(5) Signs prohibiting ball retrieval on private property.,
should be'post•d and enforced.
(6) Court maintenance should be done during the playing hours,
not before.
(7) Signs should be posted requesting players to reduce pro-
fanity and yelling.
EDWARD FOLEY VAIIGHAN
KEN-N F. DALE
MELISSA D. PHU.BRIcg
RACHEL G. HOBART
STISAN JoNEs Tom
VAuGHAN, DALE AND PHII.sRiGK
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
P.O. BOX 659
WHALER'S LATE
NAA'Tu=, MASS 02554
TM (508) 228.4455
F M 1508) 228.3070
August 12, 1991
Dr. Gene M. Kangley
17 New Street
Siasconset, MA 02564
Dear Dr. Kangley:
Mr. Daume has turned your letter of August 8, 1991 over to
me as counsel for the Casino.
The Casino always remains concerned about being a good
neighbor. The removal of the Coffin trucking business. I
believe. has substantially improved the general area. I regret
that you have problems with the tennis courts.
We have posted signs and have insisted that our membership
not. go on private property in trying to retrieve balls. To the
degree that we can control offensive language we also try to do
that.
We believe that we have met a] I of the requirements of the
Town of Nantucket as to the use of the property. If there are
any we have fallen short on, I am sure the Casino will act in
the proper manner.
Beyond that we will have to respectfully decline to meet
your demands.
V;ry'~t �u l y yours,
EPV /pgm -�
BoA357FAH 285
DEED
'SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC., a Delaware corporation, having its
usual place of business in Nantucket, Massachusetts, for
consideration paid, in the amount of $15,345.00, grants to
SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION, INC., a Massachusetts corporation,
having its usual place of business at New Street, Siasconset,
Massachusetts 02564, with QUITCLAIM COVENANTS,
That certain parcel of. land, situated in Nantucket, Nantucket
County, Massachusetts, now known and numbered as 13 New Street,
Siasconset, bounded and described as follows:
SOUTHERLY by New Street, twenty and 05 /100 (20.05) feet;
WESTERLY eighty and 04/100 (80.04) feet, and
SOUTHWESTERLY forty -six and 45/100 (46.45) feet, by Lot 6
upon a plan hereinafter mentioned;
SOUTHERLY by lands now or formerly of Mendal C. Redding
and now or formerly of Josephine Torrey,
forty -nine and 83/100 (49.83) feet;
WESTERLY by lands now or formerly of Josephine Torrey
and now or formerly of James F. and Mary C.
Egan, one hundred twenty -nine and 12/100
(129.12) feet;
NORTHERLY by lands now or formerly of Richard Eldridge
and now or formerly of Claire F. Brown and
Mary M. Sullivan, one hundred fourteen and
70/100 (114.70) feet; and
EASTERLY by land now or formerly of Eleanor W. Coffin,
two hundred sixty -four and 38/100 (264.38)
feet.
Said land is shown as Lot 1 upon a plan by Schofield Brothers,
Inc., dated January 22, 1970, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in
Plan Book 17, Page 123, and contains 19,868 square feet, more or
less, according to said plan.
All structures existing upon said Lot 1 are expressly excluded
herefrom.
Said land is conveyed subject to the following matters:
-1-
-... I
b
Y'. I
�w
w
.,rte
' BOOK0357ncE 286
(a) Provisions of a Ground Lease between ' Sconset
Enterprises, Inc., as Lessor, and Sconset Inn, Inc., as Lessee,
dated May 24, 1973, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book 142,
Page 57.
(b) Any and all rights of others which may exist in the
portions of the premises lying within New Street "12' Way" shown
upon said plan.
(c) Real estate taxes assessed by the Town of Nantucket for
the fiscal year 1991.
For title, see .deed of Raymond F. Wiley and Katherine M. Wiley
dated October 26, 1969, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Book
134, Page 200.
The purpose of this sale is to enable the Grantee, as a nonprofit
membership organization, to construct and utilize tennis courts
and customary appurtenances upon the Premises for the use of its
members and guests. The Grantee has also purchased certain
adjacent land of Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc., as shown upon a plan
with Nantucket Deeds in Plan Book 11, Page 10 (the "Coffin
Parcel "), by deed recorded in Book 353, Page 214, at the
Nantucket Registry of Deeds on October 18, 1990, with the stated
intent of constructing tennis courts thereon, also for the use of
its members and guests. No legal requirement is hereby imposed
that the Grantee construct any tennis courts upon either the
Premises or the Coffin Parcel at any time; however, it is the
express agreement and understanding of the Grantee that no
commercial use shall be made of either parcel. Without further
defining terms, the parties agree that among permitted uses are
tennis courts and appurtenances customary thereto, as well as
housing for the Grantee's employees. It is further understood
and agreed that housing constructed for such purpose may, from
time to time, be rented when not needed for the Grantee's
employees. If any Notice of Intended Sale is given pursuant to
the Right of First Refusal ,
��TMcFet— weed$ — }n Beer-- -,�ege , this restriction shall be
terminated upon the first to occur of (a) the conveyance of the
Premises pursuant thereto, or (b) the expiration of all rights of
the Grantor under said Right of First Refusal pursuant to any
Notice of Intended Sale, without the giving by the Grantor of any
Notice of Exercise thereunder. It is the further agreement and
understanding of the Grantee that the structures upon the Coffin
Parcel shall be removed therefrom by the Grantee, at its expense,
not later than May 31, 1991, that all debris, refuse and
materials shall also be removed therefrom by May 31, 1991, and
that thereafter both the Coffin Parcel and the Premises shall be
kept and maintained in a clean and neat condition.
-2-
6L
1-P mode,
B00K03MPAu287
In witness whereof, 'SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. has caused its
corporate seal to be hereto affixed and these presents to be
signed in its name and on its behalf by John B. Rhodes, its
President, and Pete F. Heller, its Treasurer, hereunto duly
authorized, this
day of December, 1990.
ISCONSV ENTERPR , IjdC.
13y:
B. Rhodes, President
Peter F. Heller,- Treasurer
STATE OF NEW YORK
CO a7 i`Y mC4?0 Xdb s s .
December , 1990
Then personally appeared the above -named John B. Rhodes,-.:
President of 'Sconset Enterprises, Inc., and Peter `,,, ;
Treasurer of ' Sconset Enterprises, Inc., and acknowledg'ec�ie
foregoing instrument to be the free act and deed of.. -- Soottrse
Enterprises, Inc., before me, ::'
NANTUCKET LAID BANK
CERTIFICATE
Paid $ 3 %---
L . Exempt
rJ' rdon•applk4ble
sW t 31 0
Dog
NANTUCKET t0CWTV -�
Recat'ved ark EvftnM
DEC 3A 1990 : �r•-� M.
4test n2.
Regisier
Y (mcp2 /sconset)
Nota y gi3!? £
Printed name: LewA GE7uArl",
My commission expires: x1311%d
-3-
LENA CENNAME
Notan, r, ►,i,c. State of New yo&
/I/v y/ 1645521
ell - ) - •C ,)ueonS
.......�..wn rxpires Jett. 31, 19.r_ 2
co ca
co
a> LAI
.G�
-�•'ll
_BOO H
J
W z
`�
X.(Ii
O Lil
bi
n
DEED
t /
Fenneth C. Coffin , Inc., a Massachusetts Corporation,
;r
;kith its principal place of.business in Siasconset, MA
for consideration of $255,000, paid, grants to Siasconset
'C.asino Association of New Street), Siasconset, MA; with
QUITCLAIM COVENANTS,
f
The* land with the buildings thereon in that part
of Nantucket, Nantucket County, Massachusetts, called
`Siasconset, described as follows:
PARCEL ONE
That certain parcel of land, with the buildings thereon
now known and numbered as 11 New Street, Siasconset, bounded
and described as follows:
o'`WESTERLY by land now or formerly of Albert F.
Egan, 266.05 feet;
`NORTHERLY by land now or formerly of Mark Johnson,
63.58 feet;
EASTERLY
by land now or formerly of Raymond Wiley,
in two courses, totalling 270.49 feet;
and
by New Street, 62.47 feet;-
Said land is shown on a plan of W.F. Swift, Surveyor, dated
June, 1936, recorded with Nantucket Deeds in Plan Book 11,
page 10, and is said to contain 16,566 square feet.
For title reference, see Deed dated September 7, 1984, recorded at the
Nantucket Registry of Deeds in Book 2 /g', Page 1641, and by Deed dated
October 18, 1990, recorded in Book ,353 , Page ?La.
The property conveyed hereby does not constitute all or substantially all of
the assets of Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc., in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Executed and sealed this 18th day of October, 1990.
T 18 1990 t � o • clook
and a minutes -C M
Received And Entered with
Nantucket County Deed
Book page
Attest •
Register
KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC.
By: p
Joy .L.- Coffin, PeAident and
Treasurer
By -
Davi M. Coffin, Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
NANTUCKET S.S. OCTOBER 18, 1990
Then personally appeared Joyce L. Coffin, President
and Treasurer of Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc. and acknowledged
the foregoing instrument to be the free act and deed of
Kenneth C. Coffin, Inc., before me.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
DECISION:
-
C�'� ✓e�.-f- -edi
W 1 t-�n ��''- S►
i r. w-t
The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing held on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY
16, 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the
following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION
FOR ITSELF AND OWNER SCONSET ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B) address 13 New
Street, Siasconset, MA 02564.
1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION
139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two
tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative,
Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend
the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre- dating mid -1972 zoning
by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 13 NEW STREET,
SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -069_, Plan 17, Page 123, Lot 1, and
zoned RESIDENTIAL -1.
2. Our findings are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers,
viewing, correspondence, and plan (our Exhibit "A "), representations and
testimony received at out hearing. Because two different lots, owners and
legal relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original
Application papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019 -88A
and 019 -88B and separate relief, with substantially the same set of condi-
tians,and, we trust, consistent inter - relationships.
3. The overall plan proposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions
Up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's 8-
court tennis facility across New Street. Applicant is represented as a
not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a
corporation). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Sconset
and non - Sconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or
bike to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with ome 8 -year
backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion.
Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to
(019 -88B; modification, clarification and correction of site location)
Paragraph 9 subsection (8) should read as follows:
(8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 1 entry for access
to the Lot A parking area it shall be so used in lieu of having a 20
foot ...5
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
February e , 1988
Re: Decision upon;t -he Application of
SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION FOR ITSELD AND OWNER SCONSET
ENTERPRISES, INC. (019 -88B)
Enclosed is a notice of the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS
which has this day been filed with the Town Clerk.
Any appeal from this action shall be made pursuant to Section
17 of Chapter 40A of the General Laws, and shall be filed
wib.hin twenty (20) days after this date.
r
William R. Sherman, Chairman
BOARD OF APPEALS
(019 -88B)
-4-
wide entry spaced eastwardly across the Lot A frontage.
(9);No!�w ,A}b. ghal,,I .die „used,,for, vehicular: a6co-ss,�between the,,lob
and King Street.
10. Subject to the foregoing undertakings and conditions, this
Board by UNANIMOUS vote GRANTS to Applicant the requested SPECIAL PERMIT
underri:SECTION 139 -8B(1) (but denies alternative relief under Section I. )
139 -33A).
Dated: February /� , 1988
Nantucket, MA 02554
William R. Sherman
Andrew J. eddy, Jr
C. Mar hall Bea e
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
DECISION:
The BOARD OF APPEALS, at a Public Hearing held on TUESDAY, FEBRUARY
16, 1988 at 1:30 p.m. in the Town and County Building, Nantucket, made the
following Decision upon the Application of SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION
FOR ITSELF AND OWNER KENNETH C. COFFIN, INC. (019 -88A) address 13 New St.
Siasconset, MA 02564.
1. Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under Zoning By -Law SECTION
139 -8B(1) to allow, as a use -by exception, the use of no more than two
tennis courts on the premises without any buildings. In the alternative,
Applicant seeks a SPECIAL PERMIT under SECTION 139 -33A to alter and extend
the existing use said to be non - conforming and pre- dating midi -972 zoning
by adding such tennis courts. The premises are located at 13 NEW STREET,
SIASCONSET, Assessor's Parcel 73.4.2 -069, Plan Book 17, Page 123, Lot 1,
and zoned RESIDENTIAL -1.
2. Our findings are based upon the 019 -88 Application papers, view-
ing, corresp6ndence2 and plan (our;-.Exhibit "A "), representations and testi-
mony received at our hearing. Because two different lots, owners and legal
relationships of Applicant to them are involved in the original Application
papers, we are obliged to render separate decisions 019u88A and 019 -88B
and separate relief,with substantially the same set of conditions and,
we trust, consistent in interrelationships.
3. The overall plan pt,oposed by Applicant per Exhibit "A" envisions
up to four new tennis courts for use as an extension of Applicant's:'8-
court tennis facilityltacr.oss:;New Street. Applicant is represented as a
not - for - profit, non - commercial private membership association (not a corp-
oration). Its membership is characterized as about 50:50 Siasconset and
non - Siasconset residents, the former generally being able to walk or bike
to the present tennis court complex. A waiting list with some 8 -year
backlog for membership is given as one reason for considering expansion.
Applicant would be opposed to any requirement that new courts be open to
the public. No off - street parking is available for the present tennis use
and Casino building. On- street packing is extremely limited in this
•(019 -88A)
1911
cant's use set forth below,�;;we are able to make the necessary finding
for such Special Permit relief, namely, that it is in harmony with the
general purpose and intent of the zoning chapter 139. The alternative
relief by Special Permit under Section 139 -33A required additional findings,
e.g., as to non - conforming use, not pursued ;here and accordingly to be
denied.
9. In granting conditional relief, we have been mindful of the
numerous letters in support from neighbors and the concerns expressed
by abutters opposed. The conditions are as follows:
(1) No more than two tennis courts will be constructed on--the
lot as proposed.
(2) Before a court is constructed on the lot, all buildings,
commercial and residential, shall be -Gazed or removed, and no buildings
shall be added.
(3) The courts shall be surrounded by security -type fencing
of a design having HDC approval.
(4) Coui{ plays shall be limited to the daylight hours between
8:00 a.m. and 8:OO;p.m..
(5) No lighting shall be provided on the premises.
(6) Off- street parking dimensionally conforming to Section
139 -18 shall be provided on the premises in the area described above, at
the rate of two spaces per court, or off -site pursuant to Special Permit
under Section 139 -18E.
(7) Vegetative screening, by double -row, densely - planted privet
or equivalent, shall be planted and maintained inwardly of the interior
lot line around the perimeter of the lot, excluding frontage and entry
drive area where low plantings are required for visibility and safety.
(019 -88A)
-4-
(8) If Applicant may lawfully use the Lot 1 entry for access
to the Lot A: parking area it shall be so used in lieu of having a 20 -foot
wide entry spaced eastwardly across the Lot A frontage.
10. Subject to the foregoing undertakings and conditions,this
Board by UNANIMOUS vote GRANTS to Applicant:the requested SPECIAL PERMIT
under SECTIONS1139 -8B(1) and 139 -18E (but denies alternative relief under
Section 139 -33A).
Dated: February %4, 1988
Nantucket, MA 02554
Gc� —
William R. Sherman
i
Andrew J. teddy, Jr.
k� 1
C. Marshall Beal
v
NANTUCKET PLANNING BOARD �9
BROAD STREET NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554 -3593 v
(617) 228 -9625
REPORT TO THE NANTUCKET BOARD OF APPEALS
9 February 1988
The following Board of Appeals applications were reviewed by the Planning Board
at its 8 February 1988 meeting, and the following recommendations made:
APPLICANT Siasconset Casino Association
LOCATION New Street, Siasconset
BOARD OF APPEALS FILE 019 -88
ZONING CODE SECTION 139 -8B(1) or 139 -33A
RELIEF REQUESTED Special Permit sought to construct four tennis
courts in central 'Sconset.
PERTINENT FACTS AND
ISSUES OF CONCERN
PLANNING POLICIES AND
CODE INTERPRETATIONS
AFFECTED BY APPLICATION
No off - street parking is proposed; applicant
suggests that Section 139 -181 parking schedule
excludes this use from a parking requirement.
Notwithstanding applicant's interpretation of
Section 139 -18I, tennis courts attract substantial
traffic. A major impact on New Street should be
expected.
SUGGESTED MITIGATING 1. Dense screening to protect abutters' property.
CONDITIONS SHOULD 2. Provision of at least two off - street parking
BOA FAVOR APPROVAL spaces to reduce traffic impacts on New Street.
Asphalt surfacing of parking spaces will produce
less noise in this residential area than would
1 gravel.
3. Prohibition against any court lighting.
BOARD RECOMMENDATION Favorable, subject to the above considerations
SIASCONSET CASINO ASSOCIATION
P.O. BOX 315, SIASCONSET, MASSACHUSETTS 02564
(617) 257-0566
January 29, :988
Dear Castro Neighbor:
You will shortly be receiving notice from the Nantucket Board of Appeals of a
hearing scheduled for February 16, 1988, at which they will review peand so of
the Siasconset Casino Association. I would like to outline our proposal
yo= S` =Fpocrt for it.
The thrust of our proposal is to build four additional soft, fast - -drying tennis
courts on a parcel of land across New Street from the Casino, just west of the
Chanticleer. Our objective in undertaking this project is to assure that the village
of Sconset will have a tennis court facility adequate for its needs for the next 20
to 30 years. It was that sort of foresight on the part of the Casino's founders that
gave us the facility which has contributed so much to the ambiance and appeal of
Sconset ever since. The existing facility is already cramped. For some years now
we have been restricting new membership to residents of Sconset, and even with
that limitation, we have roughly an eigh Stye r 1 it list which is
maintain steadily
growing. By adding these courts, the its
traditional role as an integral part of the Sconset community.
What prompts us to undertake this step now is an extremely generous offer which
has been made to donate a portion of the land in question to the Sconset Trust,
which in turn would lease that land at cost to the Casino. The only condition is
that the Casino must promptly determine whether or not to accept this offer. In
a separate portion of the land in question there are the maintenance buildings,
abandoned gas station, and heavy trucking operation n of Kent a Coffin, In the he
buildings will come down, the trucking will stop, parking
'll be
property will ri landscaped.
tfom the immediate neighbors. assure
Therthat ill be no lighting.
screened by privit
Making this move now is the last chance we will have to increase the number of
Casino tennis courts on nearly contiguous 'land.
lease feel free tot you will support he
in this effort. If you have any questions, p
Casino Board members listed below.
Sincerely,
Michael A. F. Roberts, President
CONTACTS: Michael A. F. Roberts
(o)1 -212- 698 -6592
(h)1-203-629-2326
Fred S. McRobie
(o)1- 914 -767 -7965
(h) 1 -203- 661 -8955
Lawrence C. McQuade
(o) 1 -2; 2- 14..1411
(h) 1- 212 - 570 -0009
F. Helmut Weymar
(0)1-609-924-6500
(h) 1 -609- 924 -4019
ZIi6