Minutes of Zoning Board of Appeals Public Meeting
Date: September 14, 2006
Time: 7:00 PM
Attendees: Trevor Pontbriand, Jeffrey Stewart, William Nicholson, Vern Jacob, Robert Hankey Charlie Amsler, Bruce Drucker, Sibel Asantugrul and Christine Bates, Committee Secretary.
Chair Pontbriand called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Chair Pontbriand gave an overview of the
hearing process.
Public Hearings:
7:05 pm 06-29 Susan Hayden, 85 Rockwell Ave., Map 24, Parcel 158: Application for a Special Permit under WZB 6.1.5 to add a second floor and deck to a portion of an existing nonconforming single-family dwelling (Cont’d from 08/10/06). Acting Chair for this case, Jeffrey Stewart, called the case to order. The Board consisted of Jeffrey Stewart, Robert Hankey, Bruce Drucker, Vern Jacob, and Charlie Amsler. The draft meeting minutes of 08/10/06 were read. A site visit was made on September 13, 2006, and representatives from the National Seashore attended. Attorney Ben Zehnder represented the applicant. Mr. Hayden met with the National Seashore and a fence was installed with their approval. Health Agent Greenberg reviewed the plans to endorse
it is approved for a 6 bedroom dwelling. A revised plan was submitted which reduces the number of bedrooms to 5. The second kitchen will be removed which will make the dwelling a single family dwelling. Zehnder stated the proposed deck on the second floor from the living room will remain as planned and does not impact views for any abutters.
A letter from Health Agent Greenberg dated September 8, 2006 was read into the record stating the dwelling has 5 bedrooms based on drawings submitted. A letter dated September 14, 2006 from the National Seashore stated they reviewed the plans and 5 bedrooms are permissible. Landscaping will take place by the fence. There were no comments from the audience. During the Board’s discussion, concerns included the second floor decking which would create further intrusion into the setbacks, the size of the expansion and the overuse of the property which may become detrimental to the neighborhood, and parking. Hayden stated they only rent to families and there is room for 7 parking spots.
Bruce Drucker moved for findings of fact:
1. This is a non-conforming structure on a non conforming lot. The existing non conformities are inadequate lot area and intrusion into the front and side setbacks.
2. There is presently a two family dwelling on the lot which is pre-existing, non conforming.
3. There were no objections from abutters.
4. The proposed change will involve making this two family dwelling a one family dwelling.
5. The dwelling has a septic permit for 6 bedrooms and the proposed structure will be 5 bedrooms.
6. Approval from the National Seashore was received and the 2nd driveway was closed off with a fence.
7. The proposed construction of a deck on the eastside of the property involves an additional 12 foot intrusion into the setback.
Bruce Drucker moved to approve the Findings of Fact; seconded by Robert Hankey; passed 4-1.
Zehnder asked the Board if they wanted to make any findings against WZB 8.4.2.1; the Board stated no. Zehnder requested a poll of the Board’s vote. The Board would not take a poll; however, they expressed their concern with the decking and volumetric increase. Hayden stated the seashore approved a 900 square foot expansion. Attorney Zehnder requested the application be withdrawn without prejudice. Robert Hankey moved to allow the application be withdrawn without prejudice; seconded by Bruce Drucker; passed 5-0.
7:40 pm 06-34 Ronald Harper, 170 Pond Avenue, Map 29, Parcel 382: Appeal from Person Aggrieved (MGL Ch. 40-A, S.8) appealing the decision of the Inspector of Buildings that said decision be reversed regarding spray-painted messages on fencing at 170 Pond Avenue and be defined as in Section 2.1 of Town of Wellfleet Zoning Bylaws. Trevor Pontbriand and Robert Hankey recused themselves. The Board consisted of Acting Chair, Jeffrey Stewart, Bruce Drucker, Vern Jacob, Sibel Asantugrul, and William Nicholson. A site visit was made. Ronald Harper stated he is an abutter to the property in question. He gave an overview of the appeal which included definitions of signs according to our bylaws as well as the dictionary, exemptions to signage for non-commercial property, the
size and amount of political signs allowed on properties, freedom of speech, and referred to several previous court cases regarding signs. He stated he feels the writing on the fence is graffiti and is visual pollution. He does not consider “Keep Out” and “No Trespassing” an opinion. The majority of the signs in our bylaws are for commercial signs and this is not a commercial sign. Harper acknowledges the owners have the right to protect their property, but WZB 7.2 is there to preserve environmental restrictions on signs on personal property. He contends the graffiti on 170 Pond Avenue is definitely a sign as defined in bylaws. Further discussion regarding the Matthew v Needham case took place regarding free speech for political issues. Non commercial signs do not require a permit. He stated the Wellfleet Comprehensive Plan calls for noteworthy environmental protection and would include the Black Fish
Creek. In conclusion, Harper is asking the Board to find the writing on the fence as a sign which does not require a permit but is limited in size and quantity.
Acting Chair Stewart read into the record a letter from Attorney Richard Henderson, who represents the property owners, requesting a continuation to November so the owners could be present for the hearing. Also read was the reply from Committee Secretary, Christine Bates, stating the case would not be continued. Henderson’s response dated September 5, 2006 stated he would attend the September 14, 2006 meeting on behalf of the owners. A letter from Suzanne and Richard Robert dated August 6, 2006 stated the graffiti is unsightly and hopes the town will do something about it. The meeting was opened to the audience. Barbara Gray, who abuts the Cove, stated she was looking to the ZBA to set a standard for the community regarding fencing. Ara Ishanian of 90 Pleasant Point Road, read a
letter representing several neighbors expressing their concern that the fencing and statements impede against their pursuit of happiness. Suzanne Husted of Wigwam Street reported additional fencing had been placed and trees were removed.
The meeting was closed to the public. Vern Jacob read Building Inspector, Paul Murphy’s, letter into the record stating no action would be put into place regarding the fencing. Paul Murphy stated he feels this is a neighbor dispute and doesn’t feel it is signage as it relates to the bylaws. He does not feel the bylaws pertain to signs on a personal fence and the bylaws are for commercial issues. He stood by his letter and will not take any action against the Zelinsky’s. The Board reviewed the definition of the bylaws regarding signs. Discussion took place which included preprinted signs, graffiti, lettering, size of a sign, visibility from a traveled way, and what conveys a message. Drucker requested the Board identify the writing on the fencing as a sign and
refer it back to the Building Inspector. Nicholson stated the campground signs could be viewed as commercial and would not be allowed in the district. The Board exchanged opinions on what people can post on their properties, what would be considered excessive, what is a sign and what is a message.
Jeffrey Stewart moved for Findings of Fact:
1. The property located at 170 Pond Ave is owned by Doris Z Zelinsky.
2. The property is vacant and a stockade fence has been erected on the north, south and westerly property lines of 170 Pond Ave
3. There is spray painted red lettering on the fence stating ”Keep Out”, “No Dumping”, etc. on various sections of the fence.
4. The spray painted lettering is visible to the public from a traveled way.
5. The spray painted lettering conveys various messages to the public such as keep out.
6. The spray painted lettering on the stockade fence on 170 Pond Ave is a sign as defined in WZB 2.1
7. The spray painted lettering is not subject to WZB 7.2.1
Bruce Drucker moved the Findings of Fact; seconded by William Nicholson; vote 4-1.
Jeffrey Stewart moved for an additional Finding of Fact: Message on fence does not constitute a sign based on definition of 2.1 ; seconded by Vern Jacob; vote 2-3.
Bruce Drucker moved for an additional Finding of Fact: The complaint be referred back to the Building Inspector for his determination, if any, what action should be taken under the WZB with respect to the sign at 170 Pond Ave: seconded by William Nicholson; vote 3-2.
Jeffrey Steward moved that based on the votes of the Findings of Fact; the appeal is denied.
William Nicholson moved to reconsider the decision; seconded by Bruce Drucker; Nicholson withdrew his motion.
Bruce Drucker moved that based upon the Findings of Fact; the petition be granted in part and that it is determined that the lettering on the fence at 170 Pond Ave is a sign as defined in section 2.1 of the Wellfleet Zoning Bylaws; seconded by Sibel Asantugrul; vote 3-2. Acting Chair Stewart announced the petition failed.
9:10 06-15 Harborside Village Cooperative Corporation, Harbor Lights Circle and Weatherly Ave, Map 20, Parcel 19: Application for a Special Permit under WZB 6.1.1 and 6.1.5 to replace 17 existing trailers with 17 new trailers set on piers, above base flood elevation and not in the floodplain district (Cont’d from 06/22/06). The Board consisted of Trevor Pontbriand, Jeffrey Stewart, Robert Hankey, William Nicholson, and Bruce Drucker. Attorney Myer Singer represented the applicants. The meeting minutes of 6/22/06 were read into the record. Attorney Singer stated the Association had reorganized and Vi O’Connor is now President. Attorney Singer reviewed the site plan that had been previously requested by the Board, and which was submitted in advance of the
hearing. He also provided proposed findings of fact and conditions for the Board’s consideration. Members of the audience spoke in support of the new trailers as potential affordable housing for year-round local residents. Pontbriand requested the Board make a determination with regard to the issue of lot coverage, and so moved for a Finding of Fact that the trailers do not constitute lot coverage as defined in bylaws; seconded by Stewart; vote: 3-2. Further discussion took place regarding lot coverage. Pontbriand moved to adopt the Findings of Fact as provided by Attorney Singer:
1. The Mobile Home Park and the trailers are non-conforming because Trailer Parks are not an allowed use under the Town of Wellfleet Zoning By-laws.
2. The proposal is only to replace mobile homes that were on the land when the mobile home park became non-conforming. No additional land is being added to the site.
3. There will be no change in use, no increase in use, no significant visual impact to the community, and no increase in traffic, noise, or odors, nor the creation of any nuisance, hazard or congestion.
4. The mobile homes will continue to be serviced by the on-site sewage treatment system.
5. Replacing old trailers with new trailers is an upgrade of the property.
6. The project involves only the replacement of 17 trailers, the installation of piers to elevate the new trailers above the base flood elevation, and the placement of new trailers and appurtenant porches and decks generally in the area of the foot print of the existing trailers.
7. Each new trailer will meet FEMA regulations.
8. The Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions allowing the replacements. The proposed work will improve the area by (a) providing a net gain of flood storage area, and (b) allowing for improved flow of storm water.
9. The replacement trailers will have no effect on public views, and there will be no change in parking and service areas as viewed from the public streets.
Robert Hankey moved to approve the Findings of Fact, with the following conditions as provided by Attorney Singer; seconded by Trevor Pontbriand; passed 5-0
1. All new trailers shall be elevated according to FEMA regulations.
2. No elevated trailers shall have a shed.
3. No trailer site shall have more than 840 square feet of site coverage by trailers, porches and decks, both covered and uncovered.
4. No new trailers shall be “double-wides”.
5. All new trailers shall be set back front and rear from other trailers by at least 8 feet and shall be set back side to side from other trailers by at least 10 feet.
6. There shall be no increase in the number of trailer sites.
7. All work shall comply with all lawful Conservation Commission, Board of Health and Building Department rules and regulations.
8. There shall be no additions to trailers and no new decks constructed without prior review by the Wellfleet Building Inspector.
9. All applications by trailer owners to the Harborside Village Cooperative Corporation for permission to make improvements shall be submitted for review to the Wellfleet Building Inspector.
Trevor Pontbriand moved to grant the Special Permit based on Findings of Fact with the above conditions; seconded by Bruce Drucker; passed 5-0.
timeMinute30Hour219:30 pm 06-38 Geraldine Ramer, addressStreet70 Cahoon Hollow Road, Map 16, Parcel 3: Application for a Special Permit under WZB 6.1.5.1 to construct a replacement bedroom within the setback. The Board consisted of Trevor Pontbriand, Jeffrey Stewart, William Nicholson, Bruce Drucker and Sibel Asantugrul. The applicant stated that she wants to build an 11.3’ x 12’ one story addition to her dwelling which would encroach on the front set back by approximately 4 square feet. Pontbriand moved for Findings of Fact:
1. The existing structure is non-conforming due to an intrusion into the front setback.
2. The proposed addition will not extend any further into the setback than the existing structure.
3. The square footage of additional coverage within the front setback is insignificant.
4. There is no objection from abutters.
5. There will be no change in use.
Trevor Pontbriand moved to approve the Findings of Fact; seconded by Bruce Drucker; passed 5-0.
Trevor Pontbriand moved to approve the Special Permit based on the Findings of Fact; seconded by Bruce Drucker; passed 5-0.
9:40 pm 06-35 Jean Bessette, Dorrit Jacob, and Lee Ann Fanning, 25 Bank Street, Map 14, Parcel 82: Application for a Special Permit under WZB 5.3.2: Increase Unit 4 from 484 sq. ft. to 616 sq. ft; and increase Unit 3 from 210 sq. ft. to 384 sq. ft. Vern Jacob recused himself. The Board consisted of Trevor Pontbriand, William Nicholson, Bruce Drucker, Charlie Amsler, and Sibel Asantugrul. Gerry Bessette represented the applicant. Bessette gave an overview of the project which includes the expansion of Unit 3 and Unit 4. Bessette explained that Unit 4 is currently for sale, and the new owners may not wish to adhere to the plans exactly as submitted. Pontbriand questioned the Building Inspector, who agreed that so long as the final proposed plans where
equivalent to what was approved by the Board with regard to the dimensions of the structure, there should not be an issue. Barbara Leddy, owner of Units 1 and 2 expressed concern regarding the expansion of Unit 3 possibly being detrimental to her building. Pontbriand stated he felt the expansion of Unit 3 can be done by right and should not be subject to review by the ZBA. The expansion of Unit 4 would increase its dimensions by 6 feet and expand the intrusion into the setback. Pontbriand moved for Findings of Fact:
1. The property has been subdivided into a condominium form of ownership and the application is in reference to Unit #3 and Unit #4.
2. The proposed construction for Unit #3 does not require a Special Permit.
3. Unit #4 is nonconforming due to intrusions into the rear and north side setbacks.
4. The existing structure referred to as Unit #4 is currently 22’ x 22’ and will be increased to 22’ x 28’.
5. There will be a minimal expansion of the intrusion into the rear setback.
6. There will be no change in use.
7. There is no objection from abutters.
Bruce Drucker moved to approve the Findings of Fact; seconded by Trevor Pontbriand; passed 5-0.
Bruce Drucker moved to approve the Special Permit with respect to Unit #4 based on the Findings of Fact; seconded by Trevor Pontbriand; passed 5-0.
9:55 pm 06-37 Maraspin Creek Realty Trust, 2238 Route 6, Map 23, Parcel 15: Application for a Special Permit under WZB 6.1 change of a pre-existing, nonconforming use to a proposed, more conforming use; and WZB 5.2 use closely resembling an authorized special permit use; and WZB 5.3 warehousing / open bulk storage / light industrial use to operate a wholesale building supply company (Shepley Lumber). The Board consisted of Trevor Pontbriand, Jeffrey Stewart, Bruce Drucker, Sibel Asantugrul and Charlie Amsler. Attorney Michael Ford and Mr. Shepley gave an overview of the proposed project. The property has not been in use for the past year. The property is located in the C2 zoning district and meets all requirements for that district. The proposal is to convert the site
to a wholesale building supply, which will operate primarily as a satellite of their main Hyannis location. There will be no retail sales and approximately 90% to 95% of the business would consist of deliveries to contractors. The existing greenhouses would be replaced with storage buildings for materials. One accessory structure would be located in the front of the property and serve as an exit checkpoint. There are currently two curb cuts off Route 6 that serve the property. There will be a controlled gate on the one entrance. The entire lot would be fenced for security purposes. The property will be repaved and landscaping will be installed around the perimeter of the property. The existing propane tank located in the rear of the property will be used as the source of heat; however, no propane will be sold. Attorney Ford stated the impact to traffic would be less than currently exists with retail use. The proposal would
be operated year round and employ approximately 6 to 8 people on site.
The abutting lot to the north and east is owned by the Catholic Church. Frank Sedlock, a member of the church committee in attendance in the audience, explained that they are currently working on plans for a new church building. He expressed concern regarding the proximity of the existing propane tank to the public well supply for the church property; encroachment by the previous tenant of the subject property onto the church property; and the aesthetics of the proposed security fence. Dennis O’Connell, Chair of the Planning Board, asked to know the total square footage of new structure, and how many parking spaced would be required for the proposal. Attorney Ford stated the total buildings, including the storage sheds, would be 7,480 sq. ft. which is an increase of 1,580 sq. ft., and that a
total of 4 parking spaces would be required. From the audience Eric Winslow stated Shepley’s would be an asset to the town.
The Board closed the discussion to the public. Drucker questioned if trucks would be located on the property; Shepley responded there would be a flatbed and one pickup truck for deliveries. Stewart questioned if this would fall under the Development of Significant Impact bylaw. The Board determined that it did not meet the increase in square footage and/or parking requirements that trigger a Development of Significant Impact review. Pontbriand noted that the proposed construction does not require a Special Permit, and that the Board should only be addressing the issue of the change of use. The Board asked the applicant about hours of operation; Shepley stated the hours of operation would be 7 am to 5 pm Monday through Friday and Saturday 7 am to 12 noon, if necessary. He stated there
would be two trucks making deliveries and there would be minimal traffic generated by customers, as 95% of product will be delivered. Further discussion took place regarding the potential traffic impacts. Shepley stated there would be landscaping in the front of the property and that he would work closely with the church on any issues. Drucker requested that the hearing be continued and that Attorney Ford provide the Board with
proposed findings. Stewart requested additional information from the applicant including landscaping plans, police approval, lighting design plans, a review of proposed signage, and a traffic analysis. Stewart stated he had no concerns with the proposed change in use. Asantugrul questioned the need to continue to
the hearing, with which Pontbriand agreed. Further discussion took place regarding the need for additional information. Trevor Pontbriand moved to continue to October 12, 2006; seconded by Bruce Drucker; passed 5-0.
Bruce Drucker moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 pm; seconded by Jeffrey Stewart; passed 8-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Christine Bates, Committee Secretary
| 
