HomeMy WebLinkAbout37-16 7 Primrose LaneDate: December 21, 2016
To: Parties in Interest and Others concerned with the Decision of
The BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the following:
Application No.s: 037 -16
Current Owner /Applicant: CHC DEVELOPMENT, LLC
Property Description
7 PRIMROSE LANE
Map 40 Parcel 65
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has this
day been filed with 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 a
complaint in Land 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 Town Clerk so
as to be received within such TWENTY (20) days.
Eleanor W. Antonietti,
Zoning Administrator
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner /Zoning Enforcement Officer
PLEASE NOTE: MOST SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES HAVE A TIME LIMIT AND
WILL EXPIRE IF NOT ACTED UPON ACCORDING TO NANTUCKET ZONING BY -LAW
SECTION 139 -30 (SPECIAL PERMITS); SECTION 139 -32 (VARIANCES). ANY
QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OFFICE AT
508 - 325 -7587.
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
2 Fairgrounds Road
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
Assessor's Map 40, Parcel 65
7 Primrose Lane
Limited Use General — 2 (LUG -2)
DECISION:
Certificate of Title No. 25497
Land Court Plan 40657 -A
Lot 6
1. At a public hearing of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, on Thursday, December
8, 2016, at 1:00 PM, (continued from a public hearing held on Thursday, November 10, 2016), in
the First Floor Community Room of the Public Safety Facility at Four Fairgrounds Road,
Nantucket, Massachusetts, the Board made the following decision on the application of CHC
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, c/o Cohen & Cohen Law, PC, 34 Main Street, PO Box 786,
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554, File No. 037 -16:
2. Appellant brings an appeal pursuant to Nantucket Zoning Bylaw Sections 139 -29 and
139 -31 of the decisions of the Building Inspector to 1) deny a request to amend a building
permit, and 2) revoke said permit. Specifically, Applicant requests that the Zoning Board of
Appeals overturn the decisions of the Building Inspector by making a determination that the
unenclosed roofed over area of a pool cabana is a porch or gazebo, and, therefore does not count
towards ground cover. To the extent necessary, and in the alternative, Applicant seeks Variance
relief pursuant to Section 139 -32 from the definition of ground cover pursuant to 139 -2.A and/or
ground cover requirements pursuant to 139 -16. The Locus is situated at 7 Primrose Avenue, is
shown on Assessor's Map 40 as Parcel 65, as Lot 6 upon Land Court Plan 40657 -A. Evidence of
owner's title is registered on Certificate of Title No. 25497 at the Nantucket County District of
the Land Court. The site is zoned Limited Use General 2 (LUG -2).
3. Our decision is based upon the application and accompanying materials, representations,
and testimony received at our public hearing. There was no Planning Board recommendation on
the basis that no matters of planning concern were presented. There were no letters in favor of or
in opposition to the application.
4. Attorney Steven Cohen and architect Chip Webster represented the Applicant at both
hearings. Attorney Cohen explained to the Board that the Appellant is requesting that the Board
overturn the Decision of the Building Commissioner ( "Commissioner "), or, in the alternative
requesting relief by Variance to allow an overage in ground cover that would result if the
Commissioner's finding is upheld. In a letter dated September 14, 2016, the Commissioner
denied a request to amend and revoked Building Permit No. 405 -16 pursuant to Section 139 -26.F
which reads:
The Building Inspector may revoke any permit issued under the provisions of this chapter in case
of any false statement or misrepresentation of fact in the application on which the permit was
based or for any other cause set forth in this chapter.
2
5. In the above - referenced letter, the Commissioner states that the portion of the structure
under scrutiny could not be considered to be either an unenclosed porch or an unenclosed
breezeway. He further asserts that the subject structure is one structure for zoning and building
code purposes and, as such, the entire structure with a 360 square foot footprint should count
towards ground cover. This finding puts the overall ground cover of the locus in excess of the
allowed 4% ground cover ratio. See TABLE below for detailed breakdown:
Structure
Bldg Permit #
Ground Cover per As- Built*
GC per Bldg. Comm. Ltr.
Primary DU
1338 -15
2,103± SF
2,098 SF
Secondary DU
1602 -15
1,064± SF
1,065 SF
Storage Shed/Pool Cabana 405 -16
191± SF
360 SF
TOTAL GC =
3,358± SF or 3.94%
3,523 SF or 4.13%
Maximum GCR
= 4% of 85,268 SFlot area —
Maximum allowable GC = 3,410.7 SF
*As shown on plan entitled "As -Built Plot Plan - #7 Primrose Lane in Nantucket,
Massachusetts ", prepared by Nantucket Surveyors, LLC, dated September 15, 2016, and
attached herewith as "Exhibit A ".
5. The definition of GROUND COVER pursuant to Section 139 -2.A is:
The horizontal area of a lot covered at grade by structures, together with those portions of any
overhangs which contain enclosed interior space; excluding tents, retaining walls, substantially
below grade finished or unfinished space, decks and unenclosed porches, gazebos, platforms and
steps, game playing courts at grade, exterior in- ground residential swimming pools, chimneys,
bulkheads, bay and bow windows, unenclosed breezeways**, air conditioning units, fuel tanks,
roof eaves, trash bins, and not more than one accessory detached shed covering an area not to
exceed more than 200 square feet at grade.
* *The definition of BREEZEWAY pursuant to Section 139 -2.A is:
An abovegrade structure connecting two buildings. When used to connect a primary dwelling and
secondary dwelling, any such breezeway shall be a minimum length of 10 feet. Sub -grade
connections of any structures on a lot shall not be regulated by this chapter.
6. The applicant's representative explained to the Board that the subject structure is two
enclosed spaces with an entirely unenclosed porch or gazebo. One of the enclosed spaces is a
mechanical shed and the other enclosed space is used for storage and to house a bathroom. The
connecting overhang is a roofed over unenclosed area created exclusively for recreational
purposes to allow for shaded sitting and viewing. He maintained that the zoning code exempts
roofed overhangs which are not enclosed areas at grade or above grade and, as such, this
unenclosed area should be considered exempt. He further explained that they were seeking a
determination that a portion of the subject structure fits the definition of "porch" according to
"Building with Nantucket in Mind" (see definition below) and, as such, should not be counted as
ground cover.
Porch. In early buildings, the internal entry with staircase; later, a Nantucket term
for the service ell; in recent times, a structure attached to a building to shelter an
entrance or to serve as a semi - enclosed, usually roofed and generally open sided.
3
7. At the initial hearing on November 8, 2016, the sitting Board members noted that there is
plumbing and perhaps a kitchen in one of the two "sheds ". The Board requested more
information regarding exactly what plans were submitted with Building Permit No. 405 -16 and
the amendment thereto, in addition to information from Building Commissioner Steve Butler
who was unable to be present at the November 8th hearing. Commissioner Butler was present at
the December 10th hearing to explain his rationale for denying the requested amendment. He
affirmed that, as shown from the elevations on plans approved by the Historic District
Commission in connection with Certificates of Appropriateness No.s 64242 and 66400 that the
structure has neither an unenclosed porch nor an unenclosed breezeway and should be
considered as one structure. He urged the Board to uphold his decision and to deny the appeal.
8. After hearing testimony from the applicant's representatives and Commissioner Butler,
the Board arrived at a consensus that the "unenclosed area" of the pool structure does not meet
the criteria for a structure exempt from counting towards ground cover, such as an unenclosed
porch, unenclosed breezeway, or a gazebo, and that said structure constitutes a substantially
enclosed space.
9. Therefore, after a discussion with the Applicant's representatives and the Commissioner,
the sitting members of the Board found that, when applying the plain language of the statute, it
is their understanding that, pursuant to the definition of ground cover as the horizontal area of a lot
covered at grade by structures [ ... ], the area of the structure that is the subject of the appeal should
be counted towards the calculation of the parcel's total ground cover ratio. The classification of
the space does not fall within an exception to ground cover within the expressed language of the
By -law. The Board made two motions to address both the Appeal of the Commissioner's
decision to deny the amendment and revoke Building Permit No. 405 -16 and the alternative
request for relief by Variance.
10. A MOTION was made and duly seconded to uphold the determination of the Building
Commissioner that the open portion of the pool cabana would constitute ground cover. The vote
in favor of the motion was UNANIMOUS and, therefore, the APPEAL IS DENIED.
11. A MOTION was made and duly seconded to grant the VARIANCE pursuant to
Nantucket Zoning By -law Section 139 -32, for relief from the definition of ground cover pursuant
to 139 -2.A and/or ground cover requirements pursuant to 139 -16. The MOTION DID NOT
CARRY by virtue of a UNANIMOUS vote (0 in favor, 5 opposed). Therefore, the requested
VARIANCE IS DENIED.
$! NATVRL PAGE, TQ, FQLLQW
4
Assessor's Map 40, Parcel 65
7 Primrose Lane
Limited Use General — 2 (LUG -2)
Dated:
2016
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Nantucket, ss
Certificate of Title No. 25497
Land Court Plan 40657 -A
Lot 6
11(x:' =!
A e44-,e, 0
Michael J.,9' ara
/ L/
Geoffrey Thayer
James Mondani
On the 22— nj day of _DQCP_rnl r , 2016, before me, the undersigned notary public,
personally appeared one of the above -named
members of the Zoning Board of Nantucket, Massachusetts, personally known to me to be the
person whose name is signed on the preceding document, and acknowledged that he signed the
foregoing instrument voluntarily for the purposes therein expressed.
DCRIS C STRANGv' Notar§ Public:
Notary Public My Commission Expires: v py 2020
Massachusetts
Commission Expires Oct 9. 2020
"EXHIBIT A"
(.K+C9i7 J NJti V'19(IBiV'�'YfSI KSUSMOVJONYJSSOid. J55UT .SJD":N.)GYJLd(Y.:Z[9£:iJf�i
m�
E Z
Zq
v.�z� ° cwiZ�a •• � z �
r7 N }
°
Ep4
r
\
1 1
k
\
p\
�-
W5
v
\
i
m°
agog
H
ty
N h Ec��[7i
J �{{mmF- ♦ pp
Y �W¢¢�yy
�oyyD 2�i
<�CC -
A9
O C
rc�woN �_{55
�U Z�Fi Uia�i ��SFZS Z
(.K+C9i7 J NJti V'19(IBiV'�'YfSI KSUSMOVJONYJSSOid. J55UT .SJD":N.)GYJLd(Y.:Z[9£:iJf�i