PLANNING BOARD
June 9, 2010
MINUTES
Members Present: Don Andersen, Michael Cole, Dan Coppelman, Tom Johnson, Leslie-Ann Morse, Craig Nightingale, John Knox - Alternate
Members Absent: Howard Sandler
Staff Present: Sarah Raposa - Town Planner
Chairman Michael Cole opened the meeting at 5:00 p.m. and explained hearing protocols. John Knox is sitting for the evening.
Case No. PB2009-17 (continued from 5/12/10) – First Horizon Home Loans of Fairfax, VA & East Cape Engineering, Orleans, MA seeks a Special Permit under Eastham Zoning Bylaws Section XIII (Site Plan Approval) to build a 27 bedroom, 14 unit condominium (ref. PB2006-14) with changes to the structures as required by the MA Building Code at property located at 2470 State Hwy, Map 15 Parcel 065.
Mr. Cole had letter from Attorney requesting continuance until July meeting.
A MOTION to grant a continuance to the July 14, 2010 meeting by Leslie-Ann Morse, seconded by Craig Nightingale.
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale
Opposed: None
Motion Passed - Unanimous
Case No. PB2010-09 (continued from 5/12/10) – Charles Cocce, of Hanover, MA, seeks a Site Plan Approval – Special Permit (§XIII) in relief of Eastham Zoning By-Laws Section VI.D.10.b. for enclosure of screened porch on a pre-existing, nonconforming lot containing a total of three or more dwelling units at property located at 735A Campground Rd, Map 7 Parcel 324 (ref. ZBA2010-02).
Mr. Cocce stated that he is awaiting new engineered plans and requested a continuance to the July meeting. Sarah Raposa stated that Mr. Cocce had changed the scope of his project and therefore was required to submit new plans to both boards, re-advertise and re-notice the abutters.
A MOTION to grant a continuance to the July 14, 2010 meeting by Leslie-Ann Morse, seconded by Craig Nightingale.
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale
Opposed: None
Motion Passed - Unanimous
Case No. PB2010-10 – Dave Nussdorfer, of Brewster, MA and Mark Clancy/Pine Harbor, of Harwich, MA seek Site Plan Approval – Special Permit in relief of Eastham Zoning By-Laws Section §XIII for construction of new 32’x32’ detached garage at property located at 3700 State Hwy, Map 11 Parcel 1 (Atlantic Oaks Campground).
Mr. Nussdorfer of Atlantic Oaks Campground presented plans for a 2-bay garage to be used for the storage of vehicles.
Mr. Cole stated that Commercial Site Plan Review for Special Permit requires 5 votes. He also stated that Mr. Nussdorfer was requesting quite a few waivers, and the garage is shown on the plan at 25' from the side line. The current setback requirement is the height of the building, which is 26’+, and will have to be addressed. Mr. Nussdorfer said he didn’t think that the by-law change would be effective immediately, and the setback was 25' from the side line and 100' from the street when he submitted his plans. Mr. Cole also stated that the site plan submitted shows just a portion of the property, and doesn’t show the orientation of the garage. Mr. Nussdorfer stated that the front of the garage faces the comfort station, and there would be no driveway construction or paving done.
Ms. Morse inquired about the 8' setback between the buildings and stated that there were a lot of buildings on the site. Mr. Cole stated that the 8' separation was required. Mr. Nussdorfer stated that he needed a place to store his equipment.
Mr. Andersen asked the size of the property and which portion he was seeing. Mr. Nussdorfer said it was 18 acres, and presented a site plan showing the entire property.
Mr. James McGrath of Pine Harbor Wood Products arrived.
Mr. Nightingale asked if the garage was placed in this location to not take away from the campsites.
Mr. Johnson stated that in District D, an accessory building for non-conforming use was not allowed. Sarah Raposa stated that would need a Special Permit from the ZBA, but the Building Inspector did not have that perspective on the matter. Mr. Johnson, Ms. Morse and Mr. Cole discussed the accessory structure in support of a non-conforming use and also the expansion of a non-conforming use.
Mr. Johnson discussed setback and roof pitch.
Ms. Morse said there are too many buildings in too small a space and wants site plan to show all of the space.
Don Andersen asked if there was a second floor in the garage, but it is only truss space. There is a manager’s residence on the second floor of the office/retail space.
Mr. Coppelman wants a real site plan, and has issues about safety. Large vehicles backing out of the garage when people are in the comfort station area. Perhaps combine the existing garage storage with the new garage. Should continue the architectural theme of the office/retail building. Plan should show landscaping, lighting and relationship of buildings. Wants to look at a master plan of the property. Should also show driveways and travel paths to show no co-mingling between pedestrians and vehicles. For aesthetics, needs landscaping on the Route 6 side.
Chair opened the hearing to the audience and there were no comments.
Mr. McGrath discussed the scale of the buildings, possibility of lowering the roof line to meet the 25' setback, and stated that the existing storage building is small and old. The buildings will have a correlation each other.
Mr. Nussdorfer said that he removed 4 of the cottages when they built the last large building. He said the existing storage building does not meet the 100' setback now, and adding on to it would make it more non-conforming. Could possibly tear down existing garage/storage building.
Mr. Cole wants more information on the site plan, showing intensity, visual, safety, pathways, driveways, landscaping and lighting. Suggested Mr. Nussdorfer meet with the Building Inspector to make a determination on Zoning for accessory building, and get in writing.
Mr. Coppelman looked at the existing storage and agrees that it does not have much life left in it. Revisit the big picture approach to combine the buildings and mirror architecture and proposal to provide for future loss of old garage.
Mr. Andersen requested a floor plan and Mr. Nussdorfer said it was an open floor plan, storage, unheated. Mr. Nightingale suggested the plans state that there is no plumbing in the garage, only electricity. Mr. Johnson noted angles of existing buildings.
Mr. Cole wants a master plan - phased plan.
A MOTION to grant a continuance to the August 11, 2010 meeting by Tom Johnson, seconded by Craig Nightingale.
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale
Opposed: None
Motion Passed - Unanimous
Case No. PB2010-11 – John & Debbie Seliga, of Eastham and David Karam, of Brewster, seek a Residential Site Plan Approval from the Planning Board in relief of Eastham Zoning By-Laws Section IX.D.1. & XIV (site coverage exceeding 15% and percent expansion exceeds 2.5% on a lot under 20,000 sf) to demolish and replace a preexisting nonconforming cottage at property located at 6 Penny Lane, Map 10 Parcel 299 (ref ZBA2010-04).
David Karam, John and Debbie Seliga were in attendance.
Mr. Karam presented proposed plans for a new residence at 6 Penny Lane, maintaining existing setback nonconformities. Lighting is on the landscape plan - spot lights on the gable end, south side front gable or on the soffit so that the driveway would be lit, directed down.
Mr. Nightingale asked if the driveway was shared with the neighbor. Mr. Seliga stated that he has a fence on the side and therefore parks on his own property.
Mr. Cole stated that Residential Site Plan Review project needs ZBA Special Permit, and they are scheduled for tomorrow night, and Mr. Karam stated that the Health Department proposed a new well. The Board of Health hearing is on June 24th. Proposing a full foundation.
Mr. Andersen asked if proposed building height was 25'. Living room is cathedral and middle section is storage. Attic access is pull down stairs.
Ms. Morse questioned how much space was attic space, and said the plans were deceiving. The plan that was submitted is only a sketch plan and she wants a full set of plans. If the building is 25' in height and the first floor is 10', that leaves 15' for storage attic. Wants to know what that space will be used for.
Mr. Karam said the building was 24' 6" total height with 9' space and collar ties at 41/2'. He said the attic will be used for storage only.
Mr. Coppelman said that the project was to demolish and new construction, not rebuilding. Mr. Cole said the members have concerns about how the residence gets used, and it would ease their concerns if there was a section view or second floor plan labeled unheated attic space. The section plan should also show height. The Board wants more details on the drawings.
Mr. Johnson stated that it was twice the footprint on a very, very, very small lot.
Mr. Nightingale stated that without the hardline to scale drawings, if the board has any issues or concerns, and we need to put a condition on your project, we would like to condition the project based on the correct proper drawings like we are used to seeing, it will be easier for us to visualize the project. Mr. Karam said it is expensive to draw a full set of plans. He suggested a hardline section but Ms. Morse said she wants a full set of plans, she doesn’t want a sketch. People bring in full sets of plans.
Mr. Coppelman said we need a more definitive plan, hardline section with dimensions to scale, floor plans, label exterior, and definition of use of space.
Mr. Johnson brought up the size of the building and Mr. Cole commented on the size, and stated that the board wanted full plans.
Mr. Cole opened the meeting to abutters.
Mr. Don Wentworth of 10 Penny Lane addressed the board. He is opposed to the project based on the owner’s past project on Fisher Lane, which turned a lot with a very small house into a mega house with 20 or more variances. They were allowed to build up 10' and when we counted shingles the house was 32' high. When they complained, they were told they would be charged with trespassing. The lot coverage is unbelievable and they don’t want that to happen again. This proposed structure is very tall. Penny Lane is a winding road and his lot is way up at the end and people can’t get to his house. What is occupancy he is allowed, is it 4 people like his? Is it going to be lived in or rented out seasonal or year-round? He has also moved the neighbors fence 3' and he thinks there is some kind of legal
action pending.
Mr. Karam stated that the building on Fisher Lane was certified by an engineer, on the record, and was within the allowed building height limit and the fence was certified in the plot plan.
Mr. Cole stated that the board is not going to review history here. This is the Planning Board for Residential Site Plan Review tonight and the larger hurdle is tomorrow night to obtain a Special Permit from the ZBA. The Planning Board, for its work, if we pass a project, assigns one member to the project to follow through to completion and they monitor the project to make sure that it was done to their specifications.
Mr Karam said that the applicant would make sure that the driveway is on the site.
Mr. Edward Jans of 2 Fisher Road stated that on one hand he would like to see a property approved as it increases the property value of his house as well, but he has concerns because everyone shares the same aquifer and whether there will be enough water for additional residents, particularly if they live there year round. He said the prior project mentioned by Mr. Wentworth had been a sticky situation that should have been handled better, even by the Town, and that one of his bench marks disappeared and 3' of his property abutting lot 81 was taken from him. He is impressed with the Board and what they do.
Mr. Seliga stated that Mr. Wentworth and Mr. Jans are abutters to property where they currently live and that the property in question is between 420 and 430 feet from where they are.
Mr. Cole read a letter into the record from Charlena Hunt of 35 Leland Road. Ms. Hunt was present to retract her letter of opposition because she did not understand the project at first. She is now on the record in support of the project.
Mr. Johnson questioned the covered porch and materials used - room could be used for sleeping.
Mr. Karam clarified that the room is unheated with either screen or glass storm panels. Mr. Coppelman questioned the patio area. Mr. Karam stated that the patio would be on ground only with landscape blocks. No structures or trellises. Access to the covered porch is through bedroom or from the outside.
Mr. Jans said that this property actually sits on Leland Road and that Penny Lane is a right-of-way.
A MOTION to grant a continuance to the July 14, 2010 meeting by Leslie Ann Morse, seconded by Craig Nightingale.
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale
Opposed: None
Motion Passed - Unanimous
Discussion on a request by Theresa Martin of Open Cape to speak to the Planning Board. Mr. Cole said that Open Cape wants to bring better high speed fiber optic internet service to the Cape. North Eastham Village Center to be discussed at meeting on June 29th.
Abutters Notice Update - The Abutter’s Notice has been updated to include email address and adding extension number to contact info. Abutters will be notified initially but it is up to them to keep in touch regarding the project, regarding cancellations and continuances.
Rules and Regulations - Mr. Cole said the document is a work in progress, and we will take time to go over these with new board members. Ms. Raposa said she only made the changes that were discussed at the last work session. The Bureau of Accounts is a State office. Will take time to review and discuss them further at the July Work Session The July Work Session has been scheduled for July 27, 2010.
Ms. Morse wants the board to address the Grandfathering Clause so as to comply with 40A §6. Ms. Raposa suggested the possibility of a joint meeting with the ZBA. Mr. Cole stated that the by-laws should also be addressed. The possibility of an early Fall Community Planning Forum or Community Input Forum on a Saturday morning to hear from the citizens as to their concerns and discuss what we can do about them.
Minutes of May 12, 2010
A MOTION to approve the minutes of May 12, 2010 by Leslie Ann Morse, seconded by Tom Johnson.
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale,
Opposed: None
Minutes of May 25, 2010
A MOTION to approve the minutes of May 25, 2010 by Dan Coppelman, seconded by Leslie Ann Morse.
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale,
Opposed: None
Adjournment
A MOTION to adjourn the meeting made by Leslie Ann Morse seconded by Dan Coppelman
The Vote: 7-0
In Favor: Andersen, Cole, Coppelman, Johnson, Knox, Morse, Nightingale
Opposed: None
Motion passed - unanimous
Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
as prepared by Madelynanne Magill
Craig Nightingale, Clerk
Eastham Planning Board
| 
