Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutZoning Board of Appeals -- 2006-09-14 MinutesPage 1 of 4 Date Approved 10-10-06 Vote 7-0-1 TOWN OF BREWSTER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS September 14, 2006 Meeting Minutes Chairman Harvey Freeman called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Members present were; Paul Kearney, Harvey Freeman, John Nixon, Arthur Stewart, and Bruce MacGregor, and Philip Jackson. NEW BUSINESS 06-25 David 7. Giller, Ocean Edge 660 Villages Drive, Map 27 Lot 39-5. The applicant seeks an Appeal of the Zoning Agents decision under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179 section 8 and 15. Regarding a cease and desist order for the golf course expansion at Ocean Edge. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, MacGregor, Nixon, Kearney and Stewart. The applicant, Mr. David Giller was present. Mr. John Mostyn and Mr. Robert McLaughlin were present representing Ocean Edge. Mr. Giller was asked to give a brief overview. At this time he presented 2 pieces of materials for the Boards information. Mr. tiller's concern was the process in which this expansion took place. He felt the homeowners had a lack of forum to be heard. He questioned the fact that a Special Permit issued so long ago should still be valid without review. He feels there was significant expansion. Since this was the process, he felt a cease and desist order was within his purview. He also mentioned that when the Conservation Commission reviewed the work on holes 17 and 18 notification was not forwarded to the association thus the homeowners were not informed. No Special Permit seems to exist as referenced by the Zoning Agent. Construction Management has been going on all summer; as late as 9Pm on weekends and Sundays. Mr. Giller noted 2 specific issues to be addressed; the input into the permitting process and the oversight and accountability of the management of Ocean Edge. Mr. Robert McLaughlin (attorney for Corcoran and Jennison) spoke of a letter from Mr. Giller dated June 12 requesting the cease and desist and of July 12 from Building Inspector Victor Staley rejecting that order as a vague demand with no specifics given. Point us to something in violation. ,What are we in violation of? Planned Unit Development of 1978 discussed 1200 units and open space. • 90 % of the upgrade is within the previous course, some movement to open space. • Procedure to regulate time and noise with construction is not a Board Issue. Discussion • Mr. Freeman noted that this is a public hearing to inform and understand but within the Zoning Boards scope of authority and jurisdiction. • Mr. Mostyn remarked that we are dealing with plans of 1978 and 1984. • Mr. Freeman said that the Conservation Commission had reviewed plans for the 4-5-6-7 holes. • Victor Staley (Brewster Building Commissioner) said that his letter stated specifically that no information was brought forward. The original permitting process was thoroughly researched with little information available. • Mr. MacGregor said that not having seen the plans, is the works are defined as green space or an area designated as a golf course. • Mr. Giller said that the 1984 map is not the current configuration. • Mr. MacGregor asked if they should legally be here. ZBA minutes 9-14-06 ~i • Mr. Giller said that Mr. Staley was referring to a Special Permit ' Special Permit exists, Page 2 of 4 • Mr. McLaughlin said that it was done with the Planning Board • with golf course covenant and no was a matter of right. m 1978. Not a Special Permit, it • Mr. Staley said that the original was in 1978 and amended in 1984. No • Mr. McLaughlin said that the golf course was there before that in 1960 • Mr. Staley said that Boards were vague at that time; they learned to be specific layout of fairways, applicants and Ocean Edge discussions were based on trust until shown differ • Mr. Freeman asked if they had a copy of the 1984 map. much more specific. All • Mr. McLaughlin said no golf course was a ently. • Mr. Mostyn said that open space was bein proved, just open space. • Mr. Freeman asked if this work infringed on the condos. • Mr. Mostyn said that the golf course is an easement throughout the condos. • Mr. Freeman asked if the easement lines are delineated. • Mr. Mostyn said they are in the Registry of Deeds in 1997. • Mr. Staley noted that renovations are acceptable as long as they don't trigger change of use. • Mr. Giller said that there seems to be a distinct difference; construction on Association lands. Where does this end? How close can they come? • Mr. McLaughlin said that the whole land was granted an easement for the golf course. It is a matter of title, nothing to do with Zoning. • Mr. Staley said that he agrees with Mr. McLaughlin. Civil issues are not under my jurisdiction. • Mr. McLaughlin stated that this was a Condo Association Master Deed and right with easement to cross for golf course. Board Discussion • Mr. MacGregor asked if there is an easement plan given to a buyer if requested. Can the golf course grow? • Mr. Freeman also asked if such a plan exists. • Mr. Mostyn said it is on record at County Registry of Deeds (part of title search). • Mr. Kearney said that he was curious about the 300' expansion, if this was within the original easement. • Mr. Giller said that he had been working since July to find this. • Mr. Kearney said that if the easement is at the Registry of Deeds plans must be available. • Mr. Giller said he had requested this from Mr. Devane. • Mr. MacGregor stated that this plan (current) and easement plan should line up. • Mr. Kearney said this is a confusing issue. • Mr. Freeman said that they were hoping to compare 2 maps but they need the easement map. • Mr. McLaughlin said they would get a copy for Mr. Giller. • Mr. Mostyn said it is complicated and refers to Victor Staley's letter. • Mr. Staley stated that staying within the easement is not a Zoning issue. If condition of Special Permit focus is on green space and number of units beyond easement space-not a zoning issue. • Mr. McLaughlin said that the focus was on number of units and open space. It was automatic not building a new building. Matter of title and right. • Mr. Stewart had no specific questions at this time but wanted to know why we were even here- it is clear not a zoning issue. • Mr. Nixon stated that our job has to do with an aggrieved party not to determine if someone has been aggrieved. Open to Public Input • Peter Reid noted that it is easy to get caught in legality, what is legal and fair and some degree of oversight and input by the Planning Board. • MaryAnn Thompson stated she was unaware that the golf course was being redesigned and expanded. They had no input or information. Concern with golf course paths. Board of Directors needs more information. Will views and changes affect the sale of units? • Mr. McLaughlin said that it will affect the sale- making them more valuable. The layout was displayed at the Pro Shop all summer. ZBA minutes 9-14-06 • Phil asked about traffic. Dump trucks were about for 4 da was a Special Permit but none was ever found. The Planning Board th Page 3 of 4 renovation. There were issues about the Sunday work- is this a p ys Victor Staley stated there should be a review process for a project that began so long ago and ought this was a minor olice issue? He feels there go. they still have 9 holes to • Paul-~nson spoke that he had not found the construction to be obtrusive. minimal. He encourages the ZBA to see the new 9 holes- it is an improveme the properly more valuable. They did a great job. The easement does Construction is homeowners. nt. It will make • Ma Lewis is an original homeowner and this summer has not been f not bother the is not a ZBA issue the petitioner does have some issues. Police should handle Through "injunctive relief" for noise and work hours regulations not i un. Although she feels it place for this relief. the noise. • Be Ave does not live at Ocean Edge but is an abutter as own n place. The ZBA is not a er of Wind Song Farm. Originally this was Brewster Green then Ocean Edge. Before 1984 the golf course w construction. Her concern is noise. She is 20 feet from the 3~d fairway and is offensive to her teachin as under g program. • Mr. Mos n said that if eve hin • MarvAnn Thompson said that she hopes Ocean edge Develolpmen~willtathe spring, that not all owners are golfer. People come to the Cape for atmosphere. There consideration side to the people who come to Ocean Edge. is another • Mr. Gillen said he concludes with a comment to Mr. Nixon that neighbor's disputes could be remedied outside this process. • Mr. Mostyn said that Mr. Gillen could meet with the Project Manager on site, plans are still available. There is an on-site project manager and project developer. • Mr. Fr._ eeman asked what kind of Association mechanism is in place to acquaint homeowners with what is going on. • Mr. McLaughlin said there are 14 associations. • Mr. Mostyn said that there has been communication with homeowners and association. • Phil Brown said that Mr. Rick Roberto was notified by Conservation Commission but very little documentation was sent to the homeowners. • Mr. Freeman said that the ZBA debated the notification process and felt that all should be notified. The method of feedback is from homeowner to Condo Association to Management, not ZBA or Victor Staley. It should be within your own organization. • Mary Ellen Lathenberg_said that the individual has the right to notice. She thanked the ZBA for this notice. Motion by John Nixon to Close to Public Input. Seconded by Paul Kearney. VOTE 5-0-0. DISCUSSION • Mr. Macgregor-what he has heard is not ZBA issue. Building Inspector made the correct decision, he votes to uphold ZA decision. • Mr. Nixon said that he feels the same way but he appreciates the opportunity for all parties to get together for future issues. • Mr. Freeman said that he feels this meeting was helpful. • Mr. Stewart agrees with Mr. MacGregor and Nixon. This is not a Zoning issue. • Mr. Kearney said that he was curious to see how the expansion occurs but not our right. He supports Victor's decision. Motion made by Mr. Arthur Stewart regarding 06-25 seeking an Appeal of the Zoning Agents decision under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179 section 8 and 15 for a cease and desist order for the golf course expansion at Ocean Edge to be DENIED. Second by Mr. John Nixon. VOTE 5-0-0. 06-29 Lothrop and 7anice Smith, 286 Robbins Hill Road, Map 2 Lot 9. The applicant seeks a Special Permit under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179-6 E (4) for beach nourishment in a wetlands conservancy area. Placement of compatible beach nourishment and installation of a sand drift fence. ZBA minutes 9-14-06 t Page 4 of 4 06-30 Douglas C. Smith, 298 Robbins Hill Road, Map 2 Lot 8.. The applicant seeks a Special Permit under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179-6 E (4) for beach nourishment in a wetlands conservancy area. Placement of compatible beach nourishment and installation of a sand drift fence. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Freeman, Jackson, Nixon, Kearney and Stewart. Mr. Mark Burgess of Coastal Engineering represented both parties for this hearing. Mr. Burgess was asked to give a brief overview. Conservation Commission approved unanimously. Both projects are identical. This project will be done in conjunction with the Browns (approved last year) BOARD QUESTIONS • Mr. Stewart asked why there were 2 sets of plans. • Mr. Burgess because of the fiber rolls (soft solution) but Cons Com did not agree and these will be removed from plans. • Mr. Jackson asked how far this will go along the bay. • Mr. Burgess said about 120 feet per lot. The industry is headed to off shore. It is a standard in North Carolina and South Carolina. One to two miles off shore a trench is dug. It would be the town's responsibility not individual. • Mr. Nixon asked if the Corps of Engineers is out of this now. • Mr. Burgess said YES at the moment. Open to Public Input No one spoke to the issue. Motion by Arthur Stewart to Close to Public Input. Second by John Nixon. VOTE 5-0-0. Motion made by Mr. Philip Jackson regarding 06-29 to GRANT THE Special Permit as requested under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179-6 E (4) for beach nourishment in a wetlands conservancy area. Placement of compatible beach nourishment as printed in design by Coastal Engineering M1, revision 1, dated 9-13-06. Second by Mr. Arthur Stewart. VOTE 5-0-0. Motion made by Mr. Philip Jackson regarding 06-30 to GRANT THE Special Permit as requested under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179-6 E (4) for beach nourishment in a wetlands conservancy area. Placement of compatible beach nourishment as printed in design by Coastal Engineering M1, revision 1, dated 9-13-06. Second by Mr. Arthur Stewart. VOTE 5-0-0. Motion to adjourn made by Mr. Stewart at 9:00 PM Second by Mr. Stewart. VOTE 5-0-0 BZ: 6 d E ~0 90, ZBA minutes 9-14-06 Respectfully Submitted,