Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutZoning Board of Appeals -- 2003-06-10 Minutes TOWN OF BREWSTER PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, June 10, 2003 7:00 P.M. Brewster Town Office Building Mr. Freeman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.m. The minutes of May 13, 2003, were approved as amended. Mr. Freeman reported that the affordable housing committee had produced a draft of guidelines, and that copies to the Board members were forthcoming. 02-40. Continuance of Chill ingsworth,, Inc. (Patricia and Robert Rabin), 2421 Main St., Map 15, Lots 74 and 75, requested a special permit under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. IV, Sec. 179-11, Table 1, Item 3, to operate a pastry and gourmet food shop in a V-B district. Mr. Freeman reported that the applicants had withdrawn their application. Timothy Brady, East Cape Engineering, said the Rabins withdrew because no tables and chairs would be provided at the new food shop, making a special permit unnecessary. The Board approved the withdrawal on a motion by Mr. Harrison, 2nd by Mr. Nixon, Board all in favor. 03-20. Putter-A-Round, Inc. (Frank Prete), 81 Underpass Rd., Map 27, Lot 15-1, requested a special permit under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. IV, Sec. 179-11, Table 1, Item 34, for the reconstruction of an existing miniature golf course. Mr. Timothy Brady, East Cape Engineering, represented the applicant. Hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, Harrison, and Jackson; Ms. McInerney; and Mr. Nixon. i Mr. Brady described the facility. A concrete drain runs under the land. Two- thirds of the lot is in a buffer zone. The major building is a ticket booth with an apartment above. There are no unusual features other than undulations for the golf holes. Concrete slabs underlie the golf holes. Water in artificial streams is circulated by pumps. Supplies are stored in a replica of a grist mill. The septic system is adequate. The facility is located more than 500 ft. from a residential area, and the facility is completely shut down in the off-season. The Development Plan Review Committee (DPRC) approved the concept today. The Corridor Overlay, Conservation Commission, and Planning Board reviews are in progress. The reconstruction will follow the original footprint with some deviations. The number of parking spaces will increase. Abutters across the road were concerned about parking. Mr. Brady believed some type of sign might prevent illegal parking on those lots. The Board asked about the possibility of continuing the case pending the results of the hearings before other boards. Other issues such as fencing, vending machine use, lighting, trash disposal, and effects of the facility on the buffer zone might have to be resolved before the Board can render a fully informed decision. Mr. Brady hoped the Board would render a decision tonight, contingent upon approval by the other boards. But several Board members concurred with the need to continue the case. Mr. Brady requested continuation of the case to the August meeting. Mr. Harrison so moved, 2nd by Mr. Nixon, Board all in favor. 02-37. Continuance: Judith and Theodore Brown, 225 Rocky Hill Rd., Map 27, Lot 22-1, requested a special permit in appeal of the zoning inspector's decision under Secs. 8 and 15, Mass. General Law, Chap. 40A, to continue the operation of a landscaping business in an R-L district. Mr. Freeman asked Mr. Wood, the Browns' attorney, if he had met with Building Inspector Staley as the Board had directed during the April continuation. Mr. Woods demurred and said he had "spoken" to Mr. Staley after the meeting. He sent a formal letter to Mr. Staley yesterday. He said that Mr. Staley replied that, "It's a business." Mr. Woods raised again the argument that the business was essentially floraculture and that the issue had started with the complaint of a disgruntled 2 employee. He distributed photos of what he described as floraculture activity to Board members. He described Mr. Brown's activities further as "recycling," and that piles of mulch, wood, and dirt were part of that activity as well as for personal and business use. He referred again to the pre-existing shed where the clerical employees work and asserted that it was a home occupation allowed in a residential zone. The landscaping personnel come to work at 7: 30 A.M. and leave the premises by 7:45 A.M. Mr. Woods said the fire department complaint about the furnace had been resolved by shutting the furnace down. Whether it will be used again depends on this Board's decision. He said again that the case was not a special permit or a variance one. It was perhaps a technical violation with no harm to the Town. Mr. Freeman remarked that this was the third continuation since the initial November 2002 meeting. The applicant has not requested a variance. Running a business in an RL district is a violation of the zoning law. Mr. Woods once again asserted that home occupations and floraculture were allowed. He agreed that none of the buildings had a special permit; hence, the building inspector's cease-and-desist order. He agreed with Mr. Freeman that illegal uses of property are not subject to the statute of limitations. Mr. Harrison remarked that information relevant to Mr. Woods' argument for a home occupation is still lacking; there was no evidence presented for such activities, such as square footage of use. The use of vehicles in such an activity is unclear. There are no hard facts describing the use of five (5) pick-up trucks for floraculture use. Mr. Woods has not presented any relevant case law to support the appeal. Mr. Nixon was disappointed in the lack of progress. During a visit to the property yesterday, he noted that there were eight (4) vehicles and four (4) employees working there. Mr. Lach opined that the "Government" was obligated to prove its case against Mr. Brown's appeal of the building inspector's decision. He believed that Mr. Brown's activities were permitted "agricultural" ones. Mr. Jackson disliked interfering with a person's livelihood, but the Board has asked for relevant information repeatedly, and there has been no response. 3 Discussion was opened to public input. Ms. Elizabeth Taylor, Planning Board Chairperson, said that identifying Mr. Brown's business as a home occupation does not fit the intent of the bylaw. His activities are quite high level for a residential area. They also do not qualify because they're not taking place in the Browns' home, but rather in an accessory building. No further comments heard, discussion was closed to public input. The Board discussed the matter further. Members reiterated the need for supportive data and case law. The Board asked that Mr. Freeman set up a meeting with Messrs. Staley, Thyng, and Woods within the next two (2) weeks. Mr. Harrison moved to continue the case to July 8tn, 2Id by Mr. Nixon, Board all in favor. 03-21. George and Lorraine Martin, 169 Paine's Creek Rd., Map 22, Lot 54, requested a special permit under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. VIII, Sec. 179- 25 (B), to raze and reconstruct a single family dwelling. The Martins were present with their attorney Mr. Mark Boudreau. Hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, Harrison, MacGregor; Ms. McInerney; and Mr. Stewart. The Martins have owned the property for about eight (8) years and intend to build a two-bedroom house in place of the cottage, which is 367 ft. from the road. It will be 25 ft. high. The roadway will be graded. No setbacks will be encroached. There is no garage in the plans. The porch will be rebuilt. The Board asked about boundary lines and size of the lot -- 2 acres. Mr. Freeman read from the Building Department's letter. Mr. Stewart asked if the rear cottage was occupied recently. The applicant said it has been occupied recently. The Board and applicants compared the footprint of the current dwelling and the proposed one. The Martins stated they were just enlarging the porch; otherwise, it's the same footprint. The new house will be their residence, and the other will be for rental. They agreed not to subdivide the property. Discussion was opened to public input. Ms. Elizabeth Taylor, chairperson of the Planning Board, asked about bank delineation of the inland banks and bank stability. The Conservation Commission will be queried. No further comments heard, discussion was closed to public input. Mr. Harrison moved to grant the special permit with the caveat of no subdividing, 2"d by Mr. Stewart. The motion failed, 3-2. 4 MAIN Discussion was re-opened to public input. Mr. Boudreau said the Martins would rather not have that condition. Discussion was closed to public input. Mr. Harrison moved to grant the special permit without conditions, 2"d by Mr. MacGregor, Board voted 4-1 in favor. 03-22. Daniel and Martina Conlon, 25 Dennison Rd., Map 5, Lot 68, requested a special permit under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. VIII, Sec. 179-25 (B), to make additions and alterations to an existing dwelling. The Conlons and Tony Pond, agent, were present. Hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, Jackson, Lach; Ms. McInerney; and Mr. Stewart. The existing four-bedroom house dates from 1953. There will be a new dining area and the breezeway will be expanded, among other things. The front setback is 35 ft., and the rear setback is 62 ft. The small windows on the end do not meet the building code and will be replaced. The bedrooms will then be better ventilated and conform to code. The new additions will result in a building height of 27.8 ft. The roof over the front stoop will extend out 3 ft., with a 30.5 ft. front setback. The septic system is adequate for four bedrooms. Alterations will increase the footprint by 1.5%. Three neighbors addressed letters of support to the Board. Mr. Pond passed them and photos around. The Board expressed general approval of the plans. Members did not see any intensification of nonconformance. Discussion was opened to public input. Steve Holmes, 35 Dennison Rd., expressed approval of the project. No further comment heard, discussion was closed to public input. Mr. Stewart moved to approve the special permit, 2nd by Mr. Lach, Board all in favor. 03-23. Hortensia Amaro, 24 Capt. Connolly Rd., Map 51, Lot 58, requested a special permit under Art. V, Sec. 179-16, Table 2, Note 14, to build an approx. 570 sq. ft. accessory apartment for use by family members in the basement of the residence. Ms. Amaro was present. Hearing this case were Messrs. Lach, MacGregor, Nixon; Ms. Mcinerney; and Mr. Stewart. 5 Ms. Amaro described her plans and the need for the apartment, which will occupy a portion of the basement. One Board member asked about health department certification, which will be required when the building permit is applied for. Discussion was opened to public input. None heard, discussion was closed to public input. Mr. Stewart moved to grant the special permit, 2nd by Mr. MacGregor, Board all in favor. Mr. Freeman reviewed the usual conditions for an accessory apartment with Ms. Amaro. 03-24. Jason and Raquel Ellis, 302 Stony Brook Rd., Map 21, Lot 72, requested a special permit under Brewster Zoning Bylaw, Art. V, Sec. 179-16, Table 2, to renovate an existing accessory structure. Jason and Raquel Ellis were present. Hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, Harrison, Jackson, Lach, and Nixon. The Ellises have just purchased the property. There is an existing cottage and studio. The bay window was changed to double-hung. The property has already been sub-divided. They will occupy the existing dwelling for a couple of years and then rebuild on the studio lot. The studio will be used for hobbies. There is no plumbing in it. Discussion was opened to public input. Ms. Elilzabeth Taylor, chairperson of the Planning Board thought it was a sensible project. No further comment heard, discussion was closed to public input. Mr. Harrison moved to grant the special permit, 2nd by Mr. Lach, Board all in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. 6