HomeMy Public PortalAboutZoning Board of Appeals -- 2002-09-10 Minutes TOWN OF BREWSTER
PUBLIC MEETING
MINUTES OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Tuesday, September 10, 2002
7:00 P.M
Brewster Town Office Building
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M.
Mr. Freeman welcomed new Board members Herbert Lach and John Nixon.
The minutes of the meeting of August 13, 2002, were approved as reviewed.
02-33. Harwich Ecumenical Council for the Homeless, Inc. (Yankee
Drive Townhouse), Yankee Drive and Route 137, Map 26, Lot 1A-1.
Request a modification of a comprehensive permit under M.G.L. Chap. 40B, Secs.
20-23, to allow the transfer of the permit from SM Realty Trust and Yankee Drive
II Realty Trust to the Harwich Ecumenical Council for the Homeless, Inc. (HECH);
to authorize the conversion from a home ownership project to a rental project;
to designate HECH as the owner/manager of the project and the party ,
responsible for maintenance of the property; and to reduce the percentage of
affordable units to 50 (%) per cent.
Mr. Freeman relayed a message from Attorney Kevin Kirrane that missing
documentation; including a pro forma, site approval, and funding sources, could
not be supplied in time for the hearing.. Mr. Kirrane proposed that the Board
grant approval of the comprehensive permit modification conditional upon receipt
of the required documentation. The request was denied.
Mr. Thibodeau moved to continue the case until the November meeting, 2"d by
Mr. Harrison, Board all in favor.
02-28. Continuance of Mark Gerard, 35 Capt. Dunbar Rd., Map 7, Lot
13. Request a special permit under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. VIII, Sec. 179-
25 (B), to add a second floor with balcony, a first floor bay window, and to
enclose a covered porch in a pre-existing, non-conforming dwelling within fifty
(50) feet of an area subject to flooding.
Hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson and MacGregor; Ms. McInerney; Messrs.
Stewart and Thibodeau.
Dr. Mark Gerard authorized a neighbor Mr. Keith Ash to appear on his behalf.
1
{
3 The remaining item to complete is the first floor bay window. Members of the
Board and Mr. Ash summarized the history of the renovations from 1999. Dr.
Gerard was not aware that special permits expired. In response to Board
questions, Mr. Ash said that the upper bedroom was extended approx. four (4)
feet, the deck above the living room was extended almost two (2) feet, and the
porch enclosure was constructed within the existing roof line and pilings. Before
g -and-after photographs of the work were reviewed.
Mr. Freeman read excerpts from Mr. Robert M. Perry's letter of August 13, 2002,
'4 and noted that an Order of Conditions (#SE 91161) was issued by the
Conservation Commission on September 3, 2002.
Board members raised question regarding flood plain conditions, abutters'
,n
concerns, and access standards for fire and emergency vehicles.
�3
Discussion was opened to public input. Ms. Elizabeth Taylor, resident, raised
the issue of protections and requirements for structures in flood plain areas.
Board members discussed the matter in some detail, including a proposal to skirt
structures with lattice work to allow storm surge pass-through. Proposals to
'= revise flood plain regulations have been submitted to the fall Town Meeting. No
further comment heard, discussion closed to public input.
3
' Mr. Ash assured the Board that approvals and reviews required by the Historic
District Committee, Conservation Commission, Fire Department, and Health
Department (building inspector's letter of May 15, 2002) had been met. Mr. Ash
r}
said that the access road was maintained by residents.
is
Mr. Jackson moved to grant a special permit in case #02-28, 2nd by Mr. Stewart,
Board all in favor.
02-34. Wild Care, Inc., 84 Underpass Rd., Map 26, Lot 7. Request a
variance under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. IV, Sec. 179-11.B, Table 1,
{s
"Agriculture," No. 6, for the operation of a veterinary hospital on a parcel of land
containing less than 120,000 sq. ft.
G Hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, Harrison, Jackson, MacGregor, and
Thibodeau. Representing Wild Care, Inc., were Lester Murphy, Esq., and Chris
Holland.
�I
Wild Care., Inc., is a non-profit treatment center for wild animals, excluding
i marine life. It receives funding through donations, grants, and other fund-
raising activities. The center needed approx. three (3) acres in the R-L or R-M
zones for its operations, but found a location in the C-H zone without the
required 120,000 sq. ft.
i$
,z 2
i3
4i
The center is applying for a variance due to soil conditions with wetlands to the
north, south, and west. It is not immediately adjacent to any residences. A
nearby veterinary hospital received Board of Appeals approval approx. ten (10)
years ago.
The Brewster building department views the center as a commercial operation in
the R-L or R-M zone. Wild Care does not fit this model. All animals are kept
inside the facility. There are no appointments for pet owners or billings to
individuals. The wild animals under treatment are not noisy and have no
offensive odors, and there is no boarding of animals
The nearby Brewster Veterinary Hospital did not comply with zoning
requirements when it was opened. Mr. Murphy passed around letters from
abutters and police and fire agencies in support of Wild Care's request. He
believed that a variance could be granted without substantial detriment to the
neighborhood. There is also no derogation from the intent and purpose of the
bylaw. He believed that Wild Care more appropriately falls under "miscellaneous
business" in the zoning bylaws.
The Board asked for responses to five (5) questions in the Building
Commissioner's letter of May 30, 2002. The center is not solely concerned with
administrative functions, there is no outpatient treatment (animals are not
treated and released on the same day), animals are held for a short period of
time, and the operation differs substantially from a commercial veterinary facility.
It is also not an animal shelter.
Regarding the adequacy of the septic system (Brewster Board of Health letter of
August 19, 2002), Mr. Murphy stated that the landlord had filed an appeal with
the Board of Health, and that a two-bedroom apartment is expected to be
removed in the near future, which would bring the system into compliance with
daily discharge allowances.
Comment was opened to public input. David Mills, the landlord, reported that
the Health Department meeting was held over until October, and if the
apartment is not closed by then, that he will upgrade the septic system. Ms.
Elizabeth Taylor, resident, encouraged approval, noting that Wild Care was the
sole facility for wild land animal care on the Cape. A Harwich resident reported
satisfaction with Wild Care's quick response to his complaint about a sick and
distressed wild animal.
Board members debated questions related to variance criteria. Reference was
made to Building Comm. Thyng's May 30, 2002, letter, which raised the question
of which category Wild Care should be placed in, i.e., public education about
3
a3
If
3
'(2
animal care, agriculture, or veterinary hospital. Attorney Murphy believed there
was a precedent in the Board's granting of a use variance to nearby Brewster
Veterinary Hospital in 1992.
Discussion regarding the "substantial hardship" aspect of the variance request
continued. Attorney Murphy believed a hardship existed because the several
wetlands surrounding the facility prevented Wild Care from meeting the
minimum square footage requirement. Ms. Taylor, Planning Board chairperson,
strongly suggested a much broader educational aspect to Wild Care's operations:
volunteers and interns learning about animal care; posters, pamphlets, and other
printed information distributed to the public; and a 24-hour hotline. Mr. Harrison
believed any dimensional hardship as a result of the wetlands had little effect on
the facility's use and argued for a special permit under the combined categories
of education and agricultural use.
Motion made to close public input, 2"d, Board all in favor.
Mr. MacGregor moved to grant a variance in case #02-34, 2"d by Mr. Jackson.
Messrs. Freeman, Jackson, MacGregor, and Thibodeau voted in favor; Mr.
Harrison against. Variance granted.
The Board discussed Ms. McInerney's proposal that rules for hearing
comprehensive permit applications be adopted. Mr. Stewart said that the Board
should review Ms. Jillian Douglass' (Asst. Town Administrator) memo of July 30,
2002. Ms. McInerney read from her September 10, 2002, outline. The Board
generally agreed that rules should be adopted. One Board member expressed a
concern that the authority of the 40B law might be diluted and referred to the
Town of Norton's memo of July 12, 2002, to planning boards and selectmen.
The Board was reminded that the purpose of adopting comprehensive permit
rules was to smooth out the process for all parties. The Bourne Zoning Appeals
rules, for example, require applicants to provide clear reasons for all requested
waivers.
Discussion shifted to Ms. Douglass' memo and the proposal that the property
1
owner must be in residence where accessory apartments are proposed. Area
j housing prices are very high, and builders are only required to devote 10% of
buildable units to affordable housing to qualify for comprehensive permits.
Ninety per cent (90%) of the units can be offered at market rates.
4
One Board member pointed out that the section on "review fees" in Bourne's
ZBA rules is quite specific while Brewster's comprehensive permit application
makes only a passing reference to the topic in the prefatory.paragraph.
In addition, the Brewster Zoning Bylaws generally focus on restrictions and
prohibitions at a time when the Town needs to relax many bylaws in order to
encourage substantial development of 40B units.
It was agreed that an ad hoc committee consisting of Mr. Freeman, Ms.
McInerney, Mr. Nixon, and Mr. Stewart should meet to draft comprehensive
permit rules to recommend to the full Board.
Motion made to adjourn at 9:30 P.M., Znd, Board all in favor.
5
,��
,,,
;,
�$�
��
��
;x
n
.�
'�
.$
e7
t'
�2
4
f
�u
A4
�l
�fi.
k.
`i:
t�
`E
a
:,
�_