 |
Wellfleet Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting of March 20, 2002
Wellfleet Library Meeting Room
Present: Chair Dennis O Administrator
Excused: David Wright
Chair Dennis O
Public Hearing on Two Bylaw Proposals: Affordable Accessory Dwelling Units and Dimensional Special Permit.
The Chair opened the Public Hearing on Affordable Accessory Dwelling Units by briefly summarizing the article as an attempt to allow accessory dwellings to be created under the town zoning bylaw: up to 3 units on any lot through special permit; deed restricted to affordable income rentals; in which the owners might occupy either the principal or accessory dwelling. He stated that this proposal encompasses five articles in the Warrant, the final section of which creates a tax exemption for landlords of these affordable accessory dwellings. Mr. Omany interested citizens. Many of the speakers commended the article. Discussion areas follow:
Issue of 800 square feet maximum area for unitsthe state sanitary code square footage regulations
the percentage of single women or women with children needing affordable housing (62% of recent survey)
ambiguity in the Article B the necessity of an additional statement explaining the difference between the main house and the accessory unit
Question of Question was raised for the reason for 6.21.3.C--to prevent increase in noncomformity. The intent was explained as being able to take an existing nonconforming structure (i.e. garage) and build an apartment into it without making it more nonconforming.
Cheryl Gale of the LCCCDC, who attended the meeting to answer questions about administration of the affordable rental units, explained loans which can be obtained from grant money for rehabilitation units; in such loans the borrowerused.
Question was raised concerning what would happen to an affordable accessory unit with the transferring of title or the decision not to continue to rent affordably. The chair explained that the decision was made against creating these units in perpetuity; to monitor the affordability, an annual qualifying procedure will be set up. If the unit is the hope that the tax break for landlords would keep these dwellings in the affordable category rather than returning them to the the situation in Eastham, which has created a similar bylaw, and has had only 9 applications made for such units, none of which have been returned. It was noted, however, that Eastham does not offer the tax break
the fact that the tax break incentive cannot compare to the financial gain in the return from seasonal rentals. It was pointed out, however, that the affordable rental is a twelve-month lease, not a seasonal one, and that there will be a yearly review to determine that the rental remains affordable under the terms of the special permit.
a suggestion of cross-referencing with the beach sticker program for management of year-round rentals
the fact that if the renterthe situation of a landlord deciding to end affordability. The unit, which is registered at town hall as affordable, can retain only the number of bedrooms allowed under Title 5 but cannot retain a kitchen. The hope is that the landlord will not jeopardize his investment by terminating the affordable rental.
the fact that the bylaw may not generate a lot of new structures. It was noted that there are existing structures which may be used and that this will give people a legal avenue to use them.
6. Question on adjustment of rents for affordabilityA discussion of landlords8. Explanation of 6.21.3.H on the prohibition of selling off accessory unit from principal dwelling.
Chair Osquare feet. No second. Lisa Brown moved to increase the maximum size to 1200 square feet. Gerry Parent seconded. Wilson stated that this was a bad idea because it increased density of use and encouraged a person with enough acreage to build one large rather than two separate units. The Chair repeated the motion on the floor and called for the vote; the motion passed, 5-1.
Mark Berry inquired whether the Board should consider lowering the threshold for income; Parent replied that there is no low threshold. He suggested that to gear the program to Wellfleet
The Board turned to Sections 6.21.3.C and D and the problem with statements on setbacks; with the aid of Building Inspector Asmann, changes were made to the wording of these sections. Gerry Parent moved and Mark Berry seconded the deletion of the words (changes in boldface). Passed unanimously, 6-0. Lisa Brown moved and Mark Berry seconded to accept A-E as amended and to recommend these articles to the Board of Selectmen for inclusion in the warrant. Unanimously passed, 6-0.
The Chair then re-opened the Public Hearing to discuss Dimensional Special Permits by summarizing the article: the bylaw allows the Zoning Board of Appeals to issue special permits for building on undersized lots if all conditions are met. He informed the audience that this is a rewriting of an earlier, similar version which had been struck down by the Attorney General2001 article attempted to correct this, but that because of the specific date restrictions included, Assistant Attorney General Ritchie deemed the bylaw exclusionary. The currently drafted bylaw states that if lots can be gotten into single ownership at any time, they could be eligible for special permit. A list of potentially eligible lots has been compiled from the AssessorMort Inger read a letter in opposition to the bylaw.
Dale Donovan made two points:
Why does the bylaw have no beginning stated purpose?
This bylaw needs a list of eligible lots with current and previous owners stated to avoid loopholes.
Moe Barocas stated that the intent of the bylaw is to correct a previous wrong; the owners of such lots were never informed that building rights would be taken away after five years mandated by the state had passed. He agreed that the potential lot count had increased but pointed out that each lot will go before the ZBA and must meet all regulations. Discussion covered several points: lots were bought after the five year deadline had passed; the bylaw has been precipitated by buyers who canSteve Rose, Chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals, stated that Planning Board had decided at the time of the zoning change not to have grandfathering, but if it now felt that it was unfair to prevent building, the bylaw should pass and owners should have relief.
Gerry Parent, a Planning Board member at the time of zoning changes, stated that grandfathering did not take place because it was never established at the first zoning change, overlooked by Town Counsel and subsequent Planning Boards. It was not the Planning Boardfrom building by a Building Inspector more knowledgeable than previous officials. Parent stated that he did not believe, according to this bylaw presentation, that there was a danger of overbuilding to Wellfleet.
Helen Wilson said that her take on it after reading through the Planning Board minutes for the mid-80Lezli Rowell pointed out that whatever the final number of lots, these lots may not pass the other BoardsThe following letters were read:
The Chair and Mr. Parent read the letter (dated 3/19/02) from Atty. Richard Henderson of Cohasset supporting this bylaw which he authored and which is a revision of the earlier bylaw proposal of 2001.
The Chair read a letter (dated March, 2002) from Louise Brooks in opposition to the bylaw.
Rex Peterson read a letter (dated 3/16/02) from the Watkinsons, abutters of a lot ineligible for building because of size.
Further discussion elicited the following points:
Jan Plaue asked if the wrong done by taxing the owners of unbuildable lots could be alleviated by rebating some of those taxes.
Dale Donovan of the Board of Selectmen requested that the minutes show that a list of lots to accompany the Article was not requested because it would constitute spot zoning.
Donovan asked if the Planning Board had received any written record of information from the Attorney General; Chair OAlfred Pickard commented that the town has an obligation to people who have paid money to the town for a permit, for example, for a septic system. Mrs. Barocas responded that it was not a matter of the money per se but of the fact that expectations were raised by taxation of the land and the issuing of permits.
Moe Barocas stated that whenever a conflict of legal interpretation occurs, the intent is studied, and that the meeting had heard from one of the framers of the bylaw concerning square footage of the Planning BoardHelen Wilson offered an explanation of why the Town of Wellfleet did not address grandfatheringChair OLisa Brown queried Steve Rose, Chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals, as to how the ZBA would received these permit requests. He replied that if a proposal comes to the ZBA for a variance, they consult the other Boards for a recommendation. Asked if he was comfortable with the bylaw as it stands, he replied in the affirmative, that the ZBA could pick up Lisa Brown stated her concern for change in Wellfleet but her confidence that this bylaw would not cause it to would require. David Breen, Chair of the Board of Health, stated that the personalities of boards do change but that each case is examined individually. Lezli Rowell added that these, as new constructions, would be looked at case by case. The vote was called; the motion passed, 4-2.
Chair OReconsideration of Evelyn Paine
Gerald Parent moved for adjournment; Helen Wilson seconded. Meeting adjourned at 11:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________________ __________________________________
Frances J. Castillo, Assistant to the R. Dennis O Committee Secretary
__________________________Date
| |
