The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutZoning Board of Appeals -- 2009-10-13 MinutesDate approved 10-10-09 Vote 8-0-0 TOWN OF BREWSTER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Meeting Minutes October 13, 2009 Chairman Philip Jackson called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Members present were; Philip Jackson, Arthur Stewart, Brian Harrison, Leslie Erikson, John Nixon, Patricia Eggers and Sarah Kemp. Attending Audience Members: Sue Leven; Brewster Town Planner. OLD BUSINESS • Packet received from Zoning Agent regarding Yankee Drive-full discussion to be held at November meeting. Zoning Agent will be asked to attend. • Motion made by Patricia Eggers to ACCEPT the Minutes of July 14, 2009 as presented. Second made by John Nixon. VOTE 7-0-0. NEW BUSINESS 09-15 Andrew G. Barto, 219 Leland Road, Map 36 Lot 90. The applicant seeks an Appeal of the Zoning Agent Decision and/or a Variance under MGL 40A-8 and 15 and Brewster Bylaw 179-52, Article V, Table 2 to construct an elevated wood stairway to Upper Mill Pond within the allowed setback. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson, Stewart, Nixon, Erikson and Ms. Eggers. Mr. Barto gave a brief overview of application. Properly was purchased in the Spring of 2007. The lower section of the stairway is in bad shape and unsafe (access to Upper Mill Pond). They are also concerned about bank erosion. They have been through Conservation with an approved Order of Conditions. According to the Building Inspector the stairway is a structure, closer than 20 feet to side setback (actually on the neighbors property) thus he denied the permit to rebuild. Requesting an exception to the 20' setback Board Questions • Erikson- how close to the lot line? • Barto- about 2 ~/z feet from the line on the lower end. Only the lower end to be replaced • Stewart- does the cross section show the elevations? • Barto- as close to the ground as possible • Nixon-looks to be about 18" off the ground • Stewart- lower part will have a railing, upper part a rope rail. The railing must meet building code in height. • Nixon- did Cons Com go over any alternatives? • Barto- NO, only regarding soil disturbance. Open to Public Input • No comments to issue Motion by Arthur Stewart to Close to Public Input, Second by Patricia Eggers. VOTE: 5-0-0 ZBA Minutes 10-13-09 Final Thoughts Stewart-consider under a Variance as a structure, not to overturn ZA decision. Nixon-agree • Stewart-difficult lot, slope is significant (40-50 foot drop), safety is an issue. Should not be on the neighbor's property. Hardship to put it elsewhere. Unusual lot. In favor of Variance. Eggers- more disruptive if moved, meets criteria for a Variance. • Erikson-comfortable with this • Nixon-Meets all four criteria, Conservation has weighed in, supportive. • 7ackson-concur with others MOTION by Arthur Stewart to UPHOLD the decision of the Zoning Agent. Second by John Nixon. VOTE 5-0-0 MOTION by Arthur Stewart to GRANT a Variance based on the data and field inspection that it meets all criteria. This corrects the boundary line transgression with replacement stairway. Second by Patricia Eggers. VOTE: 5-0-0. Discussion The Chairman preceded this case with a discussion as to the change of Bylaw regarding accessory apartments. 09-16 David C. Brownville, 7r. 67 Mates Way, Map 16 Lot 89-13. The applicant seeks a Special Permit and/or a Variance under MGL 40A and Brewster Bylaw 179-15, Table 2 and/or 179-42.1 for the addition of an in- law apartment with utility room to an existing single family dwelling. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson, Stewart, Harrison, Erikson and Ms. Eggers. Mr. David Brownville Sr. presented the application. They would like to build an in-law apartment for the senior Brownville. Son and family own the home and will be returning soon to live here permanently. Parents will live in the 600 square foot apartment. Board Questions • Harrison-need a Variance but cannot get past the first criteria (topography) • Erikson-is there soil test information? • Harrison-no drastic misuse of past Bylaw has been shown, but Bylaw has been removed. • 7ackson-topography has always been a sticky point with a Variance. • Stewart-this is a perfectly level lot. Accessory apartment was removed from Table 2, kept in definition and 2 other places. However, it does not meet criteria of a variance. • 7ackson- Thoughts are similar, not clear if accessory apartments will be returned in the future. Open to Public Input • Leven-difficult for the Board; he can build with everything but a kitchen and if and when the Bylaw is returned he can return for the kitchen. Issue is to make it easier and clearer. Provide enforcement and assure it is legal. Motion by Brian Harrison to Close to Public Input. Second by Arthur Stewart. VOTE: 5-0-0. Final Thoughts • 7ackson-have all criteria been met? • Erikson-unfortunate the applicant is caught in what the Town has to clean-up • Eggers-don't like the outcome but no choice. • Stewart-under old Bylaw it would be a Special Permit; doesn't fit aVariance-can't approve • Leven-applicant has the opportunity to withdraw (can be brought back without prejudice, • Harrison-allow applicant to withdraw; can't meet 1St criteria. ZBA Minutes 10-13-09 2 Jackson-recommend withdrawal and return when and if the Bylaw is changed. Brownville-request a withdrawal Motion by Arthur Stewart to grant request for WITHDRAWAL without prejudice of 09-16. Second by Brian Harrison. VOTE: 5-0-0. 09-17 Scott + Meredith Parr, 104 Canoe Pond Drive, Map 36 Lot 230. The applicant seeks a Variance under MGL 40A and Brewster Bylaw 179, Article V, Table 2 to construct a 9 x 10.9 deck on the side of existing dwelling. Members hearing this case were Messrs. Jackson, Harrison, Nixon, Erikson and Ms. Eggers. Mr. and Mrs. Parr were present. Mr. Parr presented the details of this application to the Board. This is a small lot; 100 x 200. It declines over the rear toward Canoe Pond. The applicant is asking for a Variance for a deck to the North side of the house. Conservation has approved an Order of Conditions. Project has been discussed with the neighbors. Board Questions Nixon-have you considered a terrace? • Scott Parr-they would like a deck for a grill and cooking area rather than going down steps; patio off the basement level. • Eggers-Is this west toward the pond? • Parr-other side of the driveway and septic. There is little front lawn. Keeping from wetlands and pond. Erikson-is the door off the kitchen? Parr- off the dining room- an unused area. Jackson- increasing non-conformity; Table 1, RL district, side setback 25' Parr- setback is 20.35, deck size 12 x 14 • Jackson-open terrace less than 4' in height would seem OK if no railings needed Parr-surface less than 4' Jackson-may not need a Variance; Table 1, note 6 Harrison-if it falls into exception-matter of right Jackson-suggest a continuance and ask for Victor's interpretation; Iwould like to pole the Board on this matter • Eggers-iffy Erikson-same Harrison-justify #1, criteria 2 tough Nixon- agree with what has been said; 1 OK, 2 tough Parr- asked to Continue until next meeting (November 10th),so as to consult with Zoning Agent (Table 2, Note 6) Motion by John Nixon to CONTINUE 09-17 until November 10, 2009 as per applicant request. Second Brian Harrison, VOTE: 5-0-0. c~ Motion by Patricia Egger to adjourn meeting. Brian Harrison seconded. ~' VOTE: 7-0-0 r~..~ Respe I submitted - ~: n -~ Mari yn Mooers, k ZBA Minutes 10-13-09