ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MARCH 13, 2008
MINUTES
Members Present: Victoria Dalmas (Chairman), John Lennox (Vice Chairman), Roger Thurston (Clerk), Donald Intonti, Kathryn Sette, and John Zazzaro (Alternate).
Absent: David Fleming (Alternate)
Staff Present: Sarah Raposa/Town Planner, Melody Gulow/Appeals Clerk.
Chairman Victoria Dalmas called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
New Hearing - Special Permit
APPEAL #Z2008-03 - Mike McNamara and Mark Powers - Applicants seek a Special Permit under the Town of Eastham Zoning By-Laws Section V. Uses District A-Residential to allow weddings and catered functions on property located at 70 and 76 Old State Highway.
Applicants, Mike McNamara and Mark Powers, gave a presentation stating that, they had come to make an application in November but were told that they needed to wait until the expiration of the 2-year period after the previous owner’s special permit application request for the same use was refused. They then went over the areas of concern from that previous application and how they intend to address them. They appeared before Planning Board and the matter was continued.
Chairman pointed out that this is not an appeal but a new application.
Board discussed related history of the property and how it came to have three (3) structures on it.
Chairman opened the discussion to the audience.
Alexandra Heilala, 150 Ellis Road, Eastham, spoke suggesting a probationary period of say one (1) year so the neighbors would have some recourse if the new use did not work out for them.
Heidi Doherty, 10 Old State Highway spoke and was pleased that the applicants had discussed their plans with her directly and to learn that they intended to be onsite during any special functions.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Subject property is located at 70 and 76 Old State Highway, Map 22, Parcels 009 and 010, and is locally known as the Capt. Hemen Smith House.
2. Applicant desires to have ten (10) catered weddings or similar functions per year held on the property.
3. A previous application for similar activity was denied a previous owner by ruling of the Zoning Board of Appeals on January 12, 2006.
4. Subject property is located in Residential District “A”.
5. Property consists of two lots containing four dwelling units with a total of ten bedrooms.
6. Site coverage consists of 32, 670 square feet with an existing site coverage ratio of 11%.
7. Property is located in an environmentally sensitive area.
8. Property has had numerous complaints come to the Police Department when the previous owner used the property in a similar manner (e.g. weddings, social gatherings).
9. Applicant advertises on the internet that this property is available for rental as a family compound.
10. Applicant represents that he would rent the property for ten (10) functions per year limited to a maximum of 125 people during the months of September through June only. The functions would be defined as “weddings, family reunions, graduation parties and similar gatherings.”
11. No statement has been received from the Board of Health regarding septic use and capacity.
12. The applicant presented several letters and emails requesting to rent the property for weddings.
13. One letter was received by the Zoning Board of Appeals from a person in favor of the applicant’s proposed use. An additional letter from the Eastham Chamber of Commerce in favor of the applicant was presented.
14. One abutter spoke stating no objection to the application.
15. One abutter spoke voicing neither in favor or opposition to the application but suggesting some conditions.
16. No party present spoke in opposition to the application.
17. Applicant requires a “site plan review” by the Planning Board and has such a review in process.
18. Applicant represents that he has received a favorable review from the Eastham Police Department.
19. Applicant presented a statement from the Fire Department, Deputy Foley, including several questions regarding procedures (dated March 3, 2008).
20. Applicant represents that all cooking and preparation of food to be served by catering services will be done “off premises”.
21. Applicant represents that he will utilize a mobile toilet system at all functions.
22. Applicant represents that he will permit no music at functions after 7:00 p.m.
A MOTION to accept the Findings of Fact was made by Donald Intonti and Seconded by John Lennox.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR – Donald Intonti, Kathryn Sette, John Lennox, Roger Thurston and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE.
A MOTION was made by Kathryn Sette and Seconded by Donald Intonti to grant a Special Permit under Eastham Zoning By-Laws Section V. Uses in Zoning District A to allow weddings and catered functions at 70 and 76 Old State Highway with the following Conditions:
1. Cooking and preparation of food will be made off site.
2. There will be no amplification of music after 7:00 p.m.
3. Owner will be present at all functions.
4. A special police detail will be present at all functions.
5. A portable toilet system will be provided at functions.
6. All functions will be limited to 100 people in attendance.
7. No more than ten (10) functions to be held between September and June under this Special Permit.
8. The Special Permit will be limited to a period of one (1) year ending June 30, 2009. Applicant must reapply for additional permit after that date.
9. Special Permit is granted only to the present owner of the property.
10. Board of Health approval must be received as a condition of this Permit.
11. A favorable decision on the site plan review must be received from the Planning Board.
12. All abutters must be notified by the owner prior to all functions.
The VOTE: 1-4 IN FAVOR – Kathryn Sette. OPPOSED: Donald Intonti, John Lennox, Roger Thurston and Victoria Dalmas. MOTION FAILS.
The Board finds that the request in the application exceeds the intention and character of the zoning district stated in the Eastham Zoning By-Laws as follows:
SECTION V -- USES
“Special permits may be granted for any use not specifically permitted but which is consistent with the intent of the zoning district characteristics expressed in Section 3 of this By-Law.”
DISTRICT A – [permitted uses] home occupations, service trades, and bed and breakfast, as defined in Section II of this By-law;
Section II - Zoning Districts
DISTRICT A – A residential area of one (1) and two (2) family dwellings.
New Hearing - Special Permit
Appeal #Z2008-04 - Peter Doolittle - Applicant seeks a Special Permit or Variance on setback requirements under Town of Eastham Zoning By-Laws Section VI, Non Conforming uses, Paragraph D, for alterations and construction of a new building on property located at 2355 State Highway, Map 15 Parcel 087.
Applicant Peter Doolittle addressed the Board.
Chairman clarified difference in Variance and Special Permit. Chairman said it did not appear that the Zoning Board of Appeals could act on this Commercial application until the Planning Board hearing according to the Eastham Zoning By-Laws SECTION XIII.B.1. - No special permit, variance or building permit shall be issued for any of the following uses unless a Site Plan Special permit has been granted by the Planning Board:
A. The construction or exterior alteration of any commercial, retail and/or mixed use structure;
Applicant agreed to continuance.
A MOTION was made by Donald Intonti and Seconded by John Lennox to continue Appeal #Z2008-04 to the April 10, 2008 meeting pending decision of the Planning Board.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR – Donald Intonti, Kathryn Sette, John Lennox, Roger Thurston and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE.
Other Business
Chairman agreed to hear a request from Southside Realty Trust to amend the Findings of Fact in Appeal No. Z2008-01. Applicant John McShane and Attorney Kevin M. Kirrane presented the reasons for their disagreement with the Findings of Fact in items 10 and 27 approved at the February 12, 2008 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting and ask that they be corrected.
Finding No. 10 in Appeal No. Z2008-01 stated:
Applicant agrees to a profit margin of 11.4% net of development costs.
By consent, the Zoning Board of Appeals agrees to a scrivener’s error in Finding No. 10.
A MOTION was made by Roger Thurston and Seconded by Kathryn Sette to amend item No. 10 of the Findings of Fact in Appeal No. Z200801 to read: “Applicant presents a projected profit margin of 11.4% as stated in his pro forma”.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR – Donald Intonti, Kathryn Sette, John Lennox, Roger Thurston and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE.
Finding No. 27 Appeal No. Z2008-01 stated:
27. A (10) foot wide bike path is included in the basic plan.
By consent, the Zoning Board of Appeals agrees to a scrivener’s error in Finding No. 27.
A MOTION was made by Roger Thurston and Seconded by Kathryn Sette to amend item No. 27 of the Findings of Fact in Appeal No. Z200801 to read: “A four (4) foot wide sidewalk is included as shown on the accepted plan”.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR – Donald Intonti, Kathryn Sette, John Lennox, Roger Thurston and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE.
Approval of Minutes
A MOTION was made by Kathryn Sette and Seconded by John Lennox to accept the Minutes of February 12, 2008 as amended.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR – Kathryn Sette, Donald Intonti, John Lennox, Roger Thurston, and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE.
A MOTION was made by John Lennox and Seconded by Donald Intonti to accept the Minutes of February 14, 2008 as corrected to properly reflect attending and absent members.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR – Kathryn Sette, Donald Intonti, John Lennox, Roger Thurston, and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE.
Adjournment:
A MOTION to adjourn was made by Roger Thurston and Seconded by Donald Intonti.
The VOTE: 5-0 IN FAVOR - Donald Intonti, Kathryn Sette, John Lennox, Roger Thurston, and Victoria Dalmas. OPPOSED: NONE
The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Roger Thurston, Clerk
Eastham Zoning Board of Appeals
| 
