HomeMy WebLinkAbout083-92TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Date: October 1� 1 1992
To: Parties in Interest and.Others concerned with the
Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the
following:
Application No.: 083 -92
Owner /Applicant: EDMUND J. CORRY AND JUDITH M. CORRY
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS which has
this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town
Clerk.
An Appeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to
Section 17 of Chapter 40A_ Massa husetts General Laws.
Any action appealing the Decision must--be brought by
filing an complaint in court within TWENTY (20) days after
this day's date. Notice of the action with a copy of the
complaint and certified copy of the Decision must be given
to the Town Clerk so as to be received within such TWENTY
(20) days.
Dale W. Waine - Chairman
cc: Town Clerk _
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
;- I
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
Decision:
At a public hearing of the Nantucket Board of Appeals, duly
held on September 11, 1992, at 1:00 P.M., at the Town and County
Building, Federal and Broad Streets, Nantucket, the Board made
the following decision upon the application of EDMOND J. CORRY
and JUDITH M. CORRY (083 -92), c/o Reade & Alger Professional
Corporation, Post Office Box 2669, Nantucket, Massachusetts
02584, relating to premises situated at 33 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE,
Madaket (Assessor's Parcel 60.3.1 -186), shown as Lots 41 -46,
inclusive, Block 26, upon Land Court Plan 2408 -V (the "Locus "):
1. The applicants have requested relief of several
different types in order to validate extension of the deck of the
dwelling upon the Locus to its present location, about seven feet
from the southerly boundary of the Locus with New Hampshire
Avenue. Required front yard setback in this Residential -2 zoning
district is now 30 feet. The forms of relief proposed by the
applicants are:
(a) A special permit under Nantucket Zoning By -law
Section 139 -33.A, for the extension of an existing structure
which violates a setback distance so as to not make the
nonconforming distance more nonconforming, with regard to the
existing deck.
(b) A variance under Section 139 -32, to reduce the
required setback from New Hampshire Avenue from thirty feet to
seven feet in order to validate the siting of the existing deck.
(c) A finding that New Hampshire Avenue" is not a
"street" as defined in the Nantucket Zoning by -law and that front
yard setback need not be maintained from it, together with a
special permit, as provided for Residential -2 zoning districts
under By -law Section 139- 16.C(1), to reduce the ten -foot setback
from the southerly line of the Locus to five feet.
(d) A determination that the Locus, as a lot of record
in separate ownership from all adjacent land continuously since
prior to the advent of zoning in Nantucket in 1972, is exempt
from all setback requirements pursuant to applicable language of
Massachusetts General Laws, c. 40A, §6.
2. The relevant zoning and building history of the Locus
is as follows, as presented by the applicants in their
application and at our public hearing:
(a) The Locus was, when the Nantucket zoning by -law
was adopted, a vacant lot in separate ownership from all adjacent
-1-
land, and has not thereafter come into common ownership with any
abutting parcel.
(b) At the effective date of the Nantucket zoning
by -law, pursuant to its approval by the Attorney General on July
27, 1972, under the former provisions of General Laws, c. 40A, as
it existed prior to the adoption of c. 808 of the Acts of 1975,
the Locus was zoned as Residential, with minimum lot size of
5,000 square feet 'and no setback requirements. (The Locus
contains about 12,000 square feet of lot area, as defined in the
by -law.)
(c) On April 10, 1973, a building permit for the
construction of a dwelling upon the Locus was issued by the
Nantucket Building Inspector. The plans submitted therewith
showed a proposed deck, to be situated up to about ten feet from
the southerly line of the Locus, along its boundary with New
Hampshire Avenue. The applicants do not know exactly when this
dwelling was completed.
(d) Meanwhile, the Locus was later rezoned as
Residential -2, with minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet.
Initially, front yard setback was 20 feet, and side and rear yard
setback were three feet. Later, these setback requirements were
amended to the present 30 feet for front yard and 10 feet for
side and rear yard. The applicants bought the Locus on January
30, 1981.
(e) A Certificate of Occupancy was issued for the
dwelling upon the Locus by the Nantucket Building Inspector on
February 12, 1990.
(f) In early 1990, after the issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy, a contractor engaged by the applicants
demolished the deck of the dwelling upon the Locus and replaced
it with a new deck, situated as close as about seven feet to the
line of New Hampshire Avenue, as shown upon the plan attached
hereto as Exhibit A.
3. The applicants inform us that they had no idea that
their contractor had not secured a building permit for the new
deck until after it was finished; nor did they realize the
existence of any attendant zoning issues.
4. New Hampshire Avenue appears as a street upon the
relevant Land Court plans and Assessor's map; however, an
examination of the site shows that, beyond the applicants'
driveway, it is not constructed and, because of wetlands
constraints (it traverses an area of coastal dunes) undoubtedly
will never be opened up for travel. The portion of "New
Hampshire Avenue" lying seven feet from the applicants' deck is
indistinguishable from adjacent dunelands.
-2-
5. No neighborhood opposition to the applicants' request
for relief was received; one neighbor spoke in favor of it. The
Planning Board recommendation was unfavorable.
6. Based upon the foregoing unusual history, the
application, materials submitted with the application, and
testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing, a
majority of the Board finds that, owing to circumstances relating
to the soil conditions and topography of the Locus (in that the
portion of the Locus between the dwelling and New Hampshire
Avenue, and the adjacent portion of New Hampshire Avenue itself,
are dunelands not susceptible of development) and especially
affecting the Locus but not affecting generally the Residential -2
zoning district, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the
zoning by -law would involve substantial hardship, financial or
otherwise (the demolition of the existing deck), to the
applicants, and that desirable relief may be granted without
substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying
or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the
by -law. The Board further finds that the dwelling and former
deck upon the Locus conformed to zoning requirements when built,
and later became nonconforming as a result of zoning changes; and
that the 1990 alteration, insofar as it did not make the
nonconforming setback more nonconforming, will not be
substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood.
7. Accordingly, based upon a finding that New Hampshire
Avenue is a street, by a vote of four members in favor and one
( Balas) opposed, the Board grants relief by variance under
Section 139 -32.A from front yard setback requirements to confirm
and validate the location of the existing dwelling and deck upon
the Locus, as shown upon Exhibit A hereto.
8. The applicants withdrew at our hearing all of their
other requests for relief, and such withdrawal, without
prejudice, was allowed by a unanimo vote of the Board.
IN
Dated:
ejw /18 /CORRYBOA
992 Dale W. Waine
AM 61A
Anr}°} G. Balas
Linda . William
�i)
Mi
1� 1 ) ael J. ' ara
P. �C.I�
William P. Hourihan
� OCR • , (, i
-3- S
�ssTT�rG�
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
10 South Beach Street
Nantucket, Mass. 02554
NOTICEAU
A Public Hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals will be held
at 1:00 P.M., Friday, September 11, 1992, in the Town and County
Building, Broad Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, on the
Application of:
EDMUND J. CORRY and JUDITH M. CORRY
Board of Appeals File No. 083 -92
Applicant is seeking relief by Variance under §139 -32A from the
requirements of §139 -16A (Intensity regulations - setbacks) or a
Special Permit under §139 -33A to validate the alteration and
extension of a nonconforming structure and the siting of an
existing deck within a required setback. The building is
nonconforming as to setback, being 16± feet from the lot line
abutting New Hampshire Avenue, and the deck is 7± feet from the
same lot line at its closest point. The structure is on a lot
which has 12,500 S.F. A minimum lot size of 20,000 S.F. and
thirty (30) foot front yard and ten (10) foot side /rear yard
setbacks are required in the district. If New Hampshire Avenue
is not a "Street" as defined in §139 -2 of the Bylaw, then the lot
lacks the required seventy -five (75) feet of frontage and a
side /rear setback would be required. If New Hampshire Avenue is
a "Street ", then the lot would have adequate frontage and a front
setback would be required. In addition and in the alternative,
if New Hampshire Avenue is not a "Street ", Applicant requests
relief by Special Permit under §139- 16C(1) to reduce the required
side /rear setback from the lot line abutting New Hampshire Avenue
from ten (10) feet to five (5) feet. In the alternative,
Applicant requests a finding that the lot is protected by the
provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40A, §6, and is exempt from any
increase in yard requirement adopted after the date on which this
lot came into separate ownership from all contiguous parcels,
which was before the adoption of zoning on Nantucket, and,
therefore, no relief is required.
The premises are located at 33 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE, Assessor's
Map 60.3.1, parcels 186 -191 (inclusive), as shown on Land Court
Plan 2408 -V, Lots 41 -46. The property is zoned R -2.
Dale Waine, Chairman
BoA Form 1 -89 NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Date
TOWN AND COUNTY BUILDING
NANTUCKET, MA 02554 CASE No.0Opp
3- Q-7
*PPL'CAmTnu vnn RELIEF
Owner's name(s): Edmund J. Corry and Judith M. Corr
Mailing address: c/o Reade & Alger P.C.,, P O Box 2669, Nantucket, MA 02584
Applicant's name: same
Mailing address: same
Location of lot: Assessor's map and parcel number 6031 - 186
Street address: 33 New Hampshire. Avenue 41-46 inclusive
Registry Land Ct Plan, Plan Bk & Pg or Plan File 2408 -y Lot Block 26
Cert. of Title 9551 Zoning district R -2
Date lot acquired: �Lj84 Read Aar —,—
Uses on lot - commercial: None X or MCD? —
- number of: dwellings 1 duplex No or C o f O? Yes — apartments— rental rooms —
Building date(s): all pre -8/72. No
Permit appl'n. Nos. 259 -73
Case Nos. all BOA applications, lawsuits:
State fully all zoningg relief sought and respective Code sections
and subsections, specifically what you propose compared to present
and what grounds you urge far BOA to make each finding per Section
139 -32A x if Variance, 139 -30A x if a Special Permit (and 139 -33A
if to alter or extend a nonconforming use). If appeal per 139 -3JA
& g — attach decision or order appealed. OK to attach addendum .
Applicant requests variance or special permit to alter or extend a pre- existing
nonconforming use to validate extension of deck seven feet from line of New Hampshire
Avenue, an unconstructed way, at its closest point. Required front yard setback in
this district is thirty feet. Alternatively, based upon finding that New Hampshire
Avenue is not a "street" as defined in Section 139 -2 of the by -law, applicant
requests a special permit to reduce side yard setback to five feet pursuant tot
Section 139- 16.C.(1) to validate extension of said deck. Required side yard
setback is 10 feet in this district.
Items enclosed as part of this Application: orderl addendum2
Locus map x Site plan x showing present�x +planned structre;
Floor plans present proposed elevations (HDapproved?
Listings lot area 'x frontage x setbacks x GCR x parking data
—
Assessor- certifie3 addressee ITst 4 sets x majll—ng labels 2 sets
200 fee payable to Town.of Nantucketx proof 'cap' covenant —
(If an appeal, ask Town Clerk to sen3 Bldg Comr 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 Pe uu�ry.
Applicant Attorney /agent x
SIGNATURE: —
3(If not owner or owner's attorney, enclose proof of authority)
FOR BOA OFFICE USE
Application copies rec d: 4 41 L or_ for BoA one Ybm
One copy filed with Town Clerk on /,�&Y complete? L�
one copy each to Planning Bd and Building Dept ��Y�
&ty/ %-� waived ?_
$200 fee check given Town Tr��ea //surer on �°' C}
Hearing notice posted ( j?- 1n & /�. 15��
Hearing(s) on_/ _/— con t'd to_/ _j_, — withdrawn ? —/—/_
Y��— filed TC_J�_ mailed��_
Decision due b made _/—
See related cases lawsuits other