Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutZoning Board of Appeals -- 2009-04-14 MinutesDate approved 06-09-09 Vote 8-0-0 TOWN OF BREWSTER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Meeting Minutes April 14, 2009 Chairman Philip Jackson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Members present were; Philip Jackson, Arthur Stewart, John Nixon, Paul Kearney, and Bruce MacGregor. Member missing: Brian Harrison, Leslie Erikson, Robert McLellan and Patricia Eggers. Attending Audience Members: Sue Leven, Brewster Town Planner OLD BUSINESS • Motion made by Robert McLellan to ACCEPT the Minutes of March 10, 2009 as presented. Second made by Arthur Stewart. VOTE 5-0-0. NEW BUSINESS 09-07 Charles A. and Margery A. Devito, 51 Drummer Boy Road, Map 20 Lot 11-1. Represented by Attorney Thomas J. Perrino. The applicant seeks an Appeal of the Zoning Agent's Decision, under MGL 40A-8 and Brewster Bylaw 179-6-D and E, authorizing the relocation and renovation of a blacksmith shop on the subject site. . Members hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson, Stewart, Nixon, Kearney and MacGregor. Applicant represented by Attorney Thomas Perrino. Mr. and Mrs. Devito were present. Mr. Perrino gave a brief overview of the application and the concerns the DeVito's have regarding parking , traffic, future valuation of their home as well as change of use to the property. The Board had several questions;including approximate location of the homes on the map as presented Open to Public Input • Roger O'Day- Attorney representing the Brewster Historical Society. The Historical Society is in opposition of this petition. This project has been through much public scrutiny. The Zoning Agent, Victor Staley, has thoroughly reviewed this and issued the appropriate permits. This decision should be upheld. First is the structure which is a permitted use as an accessory building. Second is the use- no additional smoke or noise. This will not be retail in nature; a demonstration shop will be akin to that in a museum. • Stewart- please explain what the proposed operation is; retail or demonstration. What will be the hours, days and will items be sold? Finally where will the money go? • Bob Lundgren- Director of the Brewster Historical Museum. This is anon-profit operation, run by volunteers. We are asking for maximum time to plan flexible hours for the volunteers. We would like to be open June to October, 10-5, Monday- Saturday. Off season open occasionally for education programs. Possibly special events such as Brewster in Bloom. Hours controlled by the Historical Society and limited by volunteers and blacksmith availability. • Peter Hurst-Harwich Blacksmith- At this point no agreement is in place, just acting as an advisor to ZBA Minutes 04-14-09 this project. Extent of the operation is entirely up to the Historical Society. Would train smith docents. No intent of a commercial operation. No noise, smoke or soot generated from this shop; fuel is traditional charcoal; least polluting, high grade (pure carbon), cleaner than charcoal grill, and smokeless. No soot as there is no unburned carbon. Completely "off the grid"- no electricity to the shop- only oil lamps. As to noise; uses a Fisher anvil which does ring, more of a dull thump and the sound does not carry. • Stewart- These operational hours seem quite a lot. Will you be selling items? • Lundgren-asking for those hours and days to have maximum flexibility for volunteers. Not using all these. Use about 50% of the time. • Nixon-retail sales; where will the money go? • Lundgren-we would sell small hooks and other small items made (about $50-75 a day) directly to defray costs. • Kearney- how many active Blacksmiths are there in the area? • Hurst-not many, one traditional at the Coast Guard Museum Shop in Barnstable. Would train smith docents to work forge or some hobbyist could be available. • Scott Clark- 87 Drummer Boy Farm Road- as a direct abutter I am presenting a petition from the people who use the park frequently. We would not like to see this park turn into a commercial venture. Do not want a working Blacksmith shop there. • Peter Johnson- 909 Stony Brook Road- President of Brewster Conservation Trust- a direct abutter. Understand a Museum shop is occasionally worked. Don't see that there will be a significant increase in traffic. • Bob Smith- operator of the windmill- 3 afternoons a week, 3 hours each average 25 people daily. • Johnson- strategic and smart for flexibility of hours and schedules. I would like to see proof beyond a realtor letter as to the diminished value of the property. I support this use and feel it will be a nice enhancement. • Chuck Devito- I live there. I know the traffic and many times cannot get in and out of my driveway. Buses and cars park everywhere. I am against this project as it will be more limiting access to my home. This is the only road in and out. Children playing in the park will be within 50' of the Blacksmith Shop, not appropriate (too close to children). • Roy Robinson- Brewster Historical Society. DeVito's home is 800' to the North of the shop. Clark's is 70'. This shop was an original to Brewster (Hopkins) but in 1972 was given to the Brewster Fire Museum. • Stewart-has parking been looked at such as a gravel area dedicated for the Blacksmiths Shop. • Robinson- that has not been thought about but if it helps-fine. • MacGregor- are the roads marked in the area such as: private homes/private driveways/do not block. • Robinson- perhaps the Fire Department, Police and DPW can mark roads appropriately to help with the confusion. • MacGregor- is it clear where the roadway is? If his road is accessed over public property perhaps signs are needed to park on one side only. Or park in the middle of the grass circle. We are here to decide on the application of the Appeal only and cannot set conditions at this point. • Smith- only one bus per year at the windmill. • Margery Devito- with the circle, play area there are only 4 spaces. Drummer Boy Road is only one lane either in or out (2 cars cannot pass), at least once a week a bus blocks the road even when the windmill is closed. How much traffic can a small road endure. • Ellen Clark- parking is a problem, people park right in the road, no thought of others who might live there. • M. Devito- theoretically this is a good idea but I feel strongly about the traffic issues and the devaluation of the homes. • Elizabeth Taylor-member of the Planning Board- relocation does not increase traffic nor pre- existing use of property. Parking issues are a Town issue for the whole property. Planning Board is in favor of this location. • Clark- will merchandise be sold from this building? • O'Day- intent for small items that were made there to be sold. No profit on sales. Funds will help defray expenses. Answer is YES. ZBA Minutes 04-14-09 2 • M. Devito- road from 6A through Historical Society property given an easement for access • Perrino- we have heard about demonstration purpose but there will be sales. Bylaw states sales are NOT allowed in R district. The issue is how far does the definition stretch? Day to day use should be given more weight. The increase in traffic is a public safety issue. • Alice Swanson-if the selling of goods is the deciding factor maybe they should be sold at the Museum Gift Shop at Spruce Hill. • Pat Bush- I was going to suggest the same. • O'Day- the Zoning Agent went through this very detailed to make this decision. I request the ZBA uphold his decision. • Sue Leven- Brewster Town Planner- a letter was sent to the Board prior to the meeting with my comments. I feel that the criteria set by the Zoning Agent have been met. Motion by Arthur Stewart to Close to Public Input. Second by Paul Kearney VOTE: 5-0-0 Thoughts of the Board • MacGregor-consistent with Historic uses. Demonstration is a normal part of this. It is an accessory to what is there, not major use. • Stewart-I feel the same way. There may be a minimal traffic impact. What museum doesn't sell items that are made on premises? This is similar to the Gristmill selling the corn meal they grind. I am in favor of support of the Zoning Agents decision; he did a thorough job of reviewing this. • Kearney-parking is an issue but this is the Town's responsibility through the Selectmen. • Nixon- retail sales can be solved by agreement to sell off premises. Smoke, noise, etc; testimony of the Blacksmith refutes that. The issue of parking should go to the Fire, Police and Selectmen to be resolved. I think the decision should remain as is. • ]ackson- in favor of upholding this decision. Motion made by Bruce MacGregor to UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE ZONING AGENT for case 09-07 as per our discussion. Second by John Nixon. VOTE: 5-0-0. 09-08 Michael ]. and Laura G. Hanley, 9 The Channel Way, Map 17 Lot 63. The applicant seeks a Special Permit and/or a Variance under MGL 40A-9A and Brewster Bylaw 179-6(B + C) to build three additions to an existing home within the Wetlands Conservancy District. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson, Stewart, Nixon, Kearney and MacGregor. Represented by John O'Reilly, Engineer Mr. Fred Ambrose- Contractor/designer Mr. Hanley was present Mr. O'Reilly was asked to give an overview of the project. This project has been approved by the Conservation Commission and the septic upgrade by the Board of Health. There are three additions; 2 small on existing entry ways and a larger addition as the proposed garage. The current 2-car garage will be turned into living space with 2"d floor living space. The new garage will be placed in the area of the existing gravel driveway. House was built in 1968-prior to Zoning Bylaws. Thus being pre-existing building thus a Special Permit is requested. If the Board feels this should be a Variance, please do not close to public input thus Mr. Hanley will have to time for legal representation. Mitigating several areas into the wetland area increasing the buffer zone. Removing 900 s.f. of gravel to restore to natural landscape. The additional 2 bedrooms indicated the upgrade Title V septic. Conforming to setback requirements. Garage will be placed in the area already degraded, upland to wetland? ZBA Minutes 04-14-09 Special permit because it pre-dates soils conservancy Bylaw in 1971. Proposed use and extension not detrimental to neighborhood. Type of soil is Deerfield, not silt loam or clay; soil is suitable for the foundation. Board Discussion • Nixon- seems much larger structure than it is. I think it should be heard as a Special Permit. • Kearney-heard as a Special Permit, doesn't qualify as a Variance with the soil issues. • Stewart- Option of Special Permit in the Bylaw. Has this house been expanded before? • Ambrose-only record is 1968 (principal structure) raised-up/ reconfigured roof. No new foundation except the garage slab. Minimum impact. • Stewart- assume 30' setback; dual frontage not creating any more non-conformity. Falls as a Special Permit. • MacGregor- agree with Stewart- it passed Conservation • Jackson-Cons Com and Board of Health approved. No further disturbance of soil. The sense of the Board is a Special Permit. • Sue Leven-Brewster Town Planner- pre-existing non-conforming. Modifications as long as not increasing nonconformance. Not outside the footprint. • Stewart-increase height and additional garage on existing driveway increase soils issues. • Leven- raises issues if soils not appropriate for construction. • O'Reilly-type of soil is Deerfield, not silt loam or clay. This is suitable for foundation. Motion by Arthur Stewart to hear this as a Special Permit after due consideration. Second by Paul Kearney. VOTE: 4-1-0 (Mr. Nixon voted against) Further Questions • Nixon-septic is now a Title V, how much more to expand? • O'Reilly-horizontally the same, top elevated 12-18 inches. Same location, re-landscaped. • Nixon-the ground to the West looks disturbed. • O'Reilly- testing site. • Nixon-was upgraded in 1995- anything mentioned at that time about future use? • O'Reilly- the Board of Health used to have a "no future expansion" statement. Now case by case- water saving- maximum number of people. • Stewart-on East elevation; new garage is that a porch on top? • Ambrose- decorative rail for design purposes. Only storage above the garage. • Stewart-what is off to the left, another porch? • Ambrose-that deck does not exist- mistake in the drawing, correction to be made. • Stewart- concern of scope from 3 to 5 bedrooms in an environmentally sensitive area. • O'Reilly- Cons Com was Ok to mitigate the addition of the garage (600 s.f.) and the proposed removal of the driveway and restoration of the wetland area. Less impact. • MacGregor-do we have the same on the opposite end, or is it the outside shower? • Ambrose- that is the outside shower, not on the site plan. Open to Public Input No one spoke to this issue Motion by Arthur Stewart to Close to Public Input. Second by Paul Kearney. VOTE: 5-0-0. Board Discussion • MacGregor-went through Conservation and Board of Health. Building within existing foundation. In favor of this application. • Stewart-in favor, good mitigation, minimize soil disturbance, not detrimental to the neighborhood. • Kearney- no problems • Nixon-under the Special Permit criteria is has to "remain within the historic character of the neighborhood" and I feel a 5 bedroom home in this area with an additional 18" raised septic takes this out of character. Not in favor. • 7ackson-I am in favor of this application. ZBA Minutes 04-14-09 Motion by Paul Kearney to GRANT a SPECIAL PERMIT for 09-08 to build three additions to an existing home within the Wetlands Conservancy District. Upgraded plans must be submitted upon decision. Second by Arthur Stewart. VOTE: 4-1-0 (Mr. Nixon voted against as stated above). Motion by Arthur Stewart to Withdraw Variance application. Second by Paul Kearney. VOTE: 5-0-0. 09-09 Merrimack Valley Holding Company Inc., 1399 Freemans Way, Map 45 Lot 70 or 70-1. Represented by William Hoffman /Owners Representative. The applicant seeks an Appeal of the Zoning Agent's Decision and/or a Special Permit under MGL 40A 8+9 and Brewster Bylaw 179-49A (1) on property within the Industrial Zoning District and Water Quality Protection District to continue business of the existing uses on the site. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson, Stewart, Nixon, Kearney and MacGregor. • MacGregor- as part of the record-some tenants have contacted him about renting space. Mr. William Hoffman (owners representative) Mrs. Bonnie Trant -property owner Mr. Hoffman was asked to give a brief overview of their application. This property has always been an area of dispute. Lot 70 was sold by William Grover; deed was filed but the sketch was not. There was a claim (Mayo) on the lot next door-overlapping lots in the front. We don't use much of the front. The people who use the property are; Bay View Boat Hauling, States Maintenance (Peter Due), David Wood - mechanical contractor. Other uses have been Cape Cod Septic and New Horizons Landscaping. No one has ever asked to be the property. When was there a requirement to have permission? Asking for the right to continue uses and stay on the properly. According to Victor Staley uses were never applied for. Applications were applied for in 2006 but they received no response. Land was industrially zoned in 1971, Ground Water Protection came in 1994. Board Questions • Stewart- why no response to 2006 letter? Water Quality Review called you before them in 2004, Spring 2005 Building Dept. and Health looked at the property. It was determined that if any part of the lot is in Water Quality area then the whole lot is subject to WQ rules. There is a WQ Compliance ONLY for Boart Storage which has since been revoked. Only hearsay that others applied for use permit. • Hoffman- Mrs. Trant inherited the land in 2002; she never knew these were not allowed. Not aware of who hold permits. They have applied and never received a response. • Stewart- have you talked to Victor about these requests? • Hoffman- yes, copies of the applications are missing. • 7ackson- I asked Victor if he had them; his answer was N0. • Hoffman-they were not sent certified mail; no proof. • Stewart-there is a lot of equipment on the site. • MacGregor-information given to this Board made it very difficult to find the property. • Hoffman- blue gate with reflectors, white trailer beyond. • 7ackson- we should be given as much information as possible so that we find the correct property. It is difficult to come to a conclusion without proper documentation. • Nixon- I went to the wrong place. • Stewart- looks like someone is living there, dirt road and no number on the gate. • Hoffman- should I ask for a Continuance? ZBA Minutes 04-14-09 • Sue Leven -Brewster Town Planner- first if the request is to allow uses to remain, there must be some proof that they were there when legal to be there. Copies of leases, checks, legal documents etc. This is in the DCPC; uses are not legal pre-existing. This Board cannot grant uses until DCPC is finished. • ]ackson- no proof it was pre-existing. Applicant must provide this information. Leven- Before Water Quality Protection District; that there wasn't zoning or zoning in place that you can do this and this and this.....and in place continually. Must produce something that proves use was appropriate on the site. • Hoffman-uses precede current owner. • Leven- only thing that was there when the property was purchased was the Boat Yard. If this is so, that is all that should be there. Anything else should be permitted under zoning, if not permitted it should NOT be there. Hoffman-all permitted uses. Leven- then provide documentation Open to Public Input • Steve Peno Bay View Boatyard- filed every 2 years with the Town Clerk for a Business License since 1994. • ]ackson- Boatyard OK • Stewart- we need Victor here for historical continuity. Leven- maybe the Board should visit the site with Victor and/or Mr. Hoffman. Taylor- It is in the DCPC area-no permits issued until end of October. Motion by Arthur Stewart to Close to Public Input. Second by Paul Kearney. VOTE: 5-0-0. • Hoffman- on behalf of my client I would like to request a Continuance of this application. Motion by Arthur Stewart as requested and agreed by William Hoffman to Continue 09-09 until June 9, 2009. Second by Bruce MacGregor. VOTE: 5-0-0 08-13 Cape Cod Museum of Natural History, 869 Main Street, Map 20 Lot 6. The applicant seeks a Variance under MGL 40A-9 and Brewster Bylaw 179-19 and 20.5E (5) to erect a sign advertising Museum events. Mr. Roy Smith is requesting an extension of this sign application due to the fact the Town has not re- addressed the sign code. After discussion the Board decided to allow Mr. Smith the reapply for another Variance for 3 years (through Fall 2012) with no fee to be charged. Motion by Arthur Stewart to adjourn. Second by Paul Kearney. VOTE: 5-0-0 ZS: ~ y l - 1J(l ,0. ZBA Minutes 04-14-09 6