3/9/2011 - Meeting Minutes

Moderator: Maria Lajoie

3/9/2011 - Meeting Minutes

Postby Maria Lajoie » Thu Oct 06, 2011 2:33 pm

Documents from this meeting may be found in the Community Meeting Room and Community Development Department.

The meeting was called to order at 7:02pm.

ATTENDANCE
Chairman Daniel Heney, Pamela Holmes (Vice Chairman), Sean Holland (Member), Michael Nelson (Alternate) Adelle Reynolds (Building Commissioner) Attorney Jonathan Eichman of Kopelman & Paige (Town Counsel) and Maria Lajoie (Administrative Secretary).

7:02 PM ZBA CASE # 2010-14
PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: PETER R. & SUSAN M. BRADY
35 Wallis Street
Request for Appeal
Hearing this case will be Vice Chairman Pamela Holmes, Sean Holland and Michael Nelson. Chairman Daniel Heney recused himself. Present were the Applicants Peter & Susan Brady and their representative Attorney Edwin Taipale. Also present was Attorney Jonathan Eichman of Kopelman & Paige (Town Counsel for ZBA). Abutters present were Sharon Etre of 30 Wallis Street, Beatrice King of 21 Wallis Street and Lauren Heintz of 40 Wallis Street. The Board received a letter from Attorney Taipale dated 2/24/11 responding to Kopelman & Paige’s letter dated 12/28/10 regarding the use of the Brady residence. Holmes first asked the abutters if they would like to speak. Sharon Etre is concerned with increased traffic because she rides her horse and also is concerned about the Brady’s septic system flowing into the Reservoir due to the amount of people renting the property for functions. Lauren Heintz said she can hear the music playing from all the parties and strangers turn around in her driveway looking for the Brady home. Beatrice King told the Board that she saw that the Brady home was for sale on the internet and asked if it would continue as a business. Taipale said that he is concerned about people who send anonymous letters to the Town and thought that the Selectmen were going to make it a policy not to acknowledge anonymous letters. Taipale talked about accessory uses throughout the town and some were not customary to residential use unlike weddings and family reunions and in 2010 there were at least eight (8) weddings in town not counting the Bardy’s or adjacent property. The adjacent property was used for similar use as the Brady’s. Taipale submitted the following documents to the Board: 1) a brochure of Wallis Cove (located down the street from the Brady’s); 2) a letter from the Building Commissioner to the Brady’s dated June 22, 2010; 3) copies of Marriage Certificates for 2010 from the Town Clerk’s Office (8); and 4) a list of businesses in Town from the Town Clerk’s Office (6).
Taipale said that there were fifteen (15) family type parties all in conjunction with week-end rentals which are minor and insignificant.
Holland asked if there were any wedding ceremonies at the Brady residence. Taipale said yes that there were twelve (12) actual weddings performed.
Holland asked if there were any religious ceremonies.
Brady said yes last year a Hindu religious ceremony before the wedding.
Holland asked if there were any at Wallis Cove or any others.
Taipale said he didn’t know.
Holland asked where the parking was in Wallis Cove.
Taipale said it is a private road that goes down to the cabins.
Holland asked if there are any weddings there.
Taipale said that he didn’t know.
Holland asked if Wallis Cove had any abutters.
Taipale said yes.
Holland said that a “vacation residence” is not described in the Zoning Bylaws.
Taipale said vacation rental is when someone resides for vacation, using residential use for vacation purposes.
Holland stated use is entirely consistent and incidental to the use as a vacation rental.
Taipale said yes. There is a circular driveway with roadway to park but not on the street.
Holland asked if the Brady’s lived in Worcester.
Taipale said that they do have an apartment in Worcester.
Holland asked if portable toilets were used for all functions.
Taipale said yes per the Board of Health.
Holland asked if Wallis Cove had a Special Permit.
Taipale said he didn’t know.
Holmes asked if weddings constitute “residential use”.
Taipale said yes and feels that weddings and reunions incidental to residential use.
Nelson said that twelve (12) is a lot of weddings for a season.
Taipale asked how many would be appropriate and there was much discussion about the number of functions.
Taipale discussed how the complaint came to the Town’s attention due to the Bardy’s contract stating the need for all Town Department approvals.
Holmes asked what was residential about functions other than what was taking place on the property.
Taipale said the only transaction is rental income and no extra income from functions.
Holmes asked what was the relationship between the Brady’s and the events.
Taipale said events held at the property they are renting.
Holland asked if the Brady’s lived near the Forget waterslides and do they have a special permit?
Reynolds said that the waterslides were located across the Reservoir and they do have a special permit for the waterslides.
Holland asked if Wallis Cove had a Special Permit.
Reynolds said she tried to do research with little information but does have a Business Certificate for a photography business.
Holmes said the use is deemed improper in a Residential/Agricultural Zoned area. What prevents the renter from doing Commercial or Industrial uses?
Taipale said it is not allowed. The Brady’s started to rent their home on a vacation basis and now people want to hold weddings and other functions there. If the Board feels it’s a matter of degree, what is the right number of functions and what does the Board consider Accessory Use?
Holmes said that the Brady’s are here for an Appeal.
Attorney Eichman said this is rental use. Accessory to Residential Use and the functions accessory to rental use or are they dominant use accessory has to be accessory to permitted use and weddings are not connected to primary use of Brady’s Residential Use only connection is rental agreement. A function is only accessory to rental or is it the principal use for the rental.
Taipale said rentals are one (1) week or three (3) day week-ends and there are no one-day rentals but parties are incidental to rental.
Nelson said that it seems that weddings are not an accessory use, which came first – rental or weddings plans?
Holmes said the Brady’s have certain forms to be filled out by the renters.
Reynolds said that Douglas has a Home Occupation Permit which is grandfathered or allowed by right or ZBA approval and Assembly Use is like a function at a Church. And that the Brady’s originally stated they are not a business and don’t fit under Home Occupation. Discussed a possible bylaw change. Reynolds said that the Board is not saying the Brady’s can’t rent the property. The records state fifteen (15) weeks out of nineteen (19) weeks there were rentals with functions. If the Board says yes because they have a large parcel of land than it would be allowed on smaller parcels and is an assembly use.
Taipale said there is no assembly use in a residential zone and Reynolds said no. Taipale asked if there is no assembly use in a Commercial Zone and Reynolds said yes.
Taipale said that the bylaws don’t state that.
Reynolds said that when you look at zoning you have Zoning Districts, under the Building Code you have classification of uses and the Brady’s is a single-family home.
Taipale said that there is no reference of assembly use in the Bylaw so how can you say allowed in a Commercial District and not allowed in a Residential District?
Reynolds said that Mr. Taipale refers to Code, Section 303 / Assembly Group A – section from Base Code 1 & 2 family and you can’t pick and choose either.
Taipale asked how many functions were allowed?
Reynolds explained owners verses renters and having functions and that patrons have a right to expect safety at functions like all other functions / assembly uses.
After much discussion, a Motion was made by Holland to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Nelson. Vote was unanimous.
The Board asked Taipale to grant an extension on the decision date.
Brady noted that he has never had any complaints.
Taipale said that since the Hearing is closed no new information is to be received by the Board.
Holmes said that the Hearing has been closed and there will be no new information accepted.
Reynolds said that the Board is to be aware of the Board of Health information.
A Motion was then made by Holland to re-open the Public Hearing, seconded by Nelson. Vote was unanimous.
Holland listed the new information received tonight by Taipale and said no new information will be accepted: 1) a brochure of Wallis Cove (located down the street from the Brady’s); 2) a letter from the Building Commissioner to the Brady’s dated June 22, 2010; 3) copies of Marriage Certificates for 2010 from the Town Clerk’s Office (8); and 4) a list of businesses in Town from the Town Clerk’s Office (6) and all previous information that was submitted to Kopelman & Paige for review.
Taipale said that Brady will grant an extension on the decision date to April 6, 2011 to review the information only.
A Motion was made by Holland to close the Public Hearing and hold a Decision Meeting on Wednesday, April 6, 2011, at 7:30pm, seconded by Nelson. Vote was unanimous.

DISCUSSION-BUSINESS
1. Application for a ZBA Alternate Member. The Board received a copy of an application from the Board of Selectmen regarding a request from Leonard Demers of 114 Yew Street who is interested in becoming an Alternate Member of the ZBA. Heney said he called and had a conversation with Mr. Demers regarding the duties. After discussion, a Motion was made by Holland to recommend the appointment of Leonard Demers as an Alternate Member of the Board, seconded by Holmes. Lajoie was asked to send the Selectmen a memo.
2. Meeting Minutes of 2/9/11. After review, a Motion was made by Holmes to approve the Meeting Minutes of Wednesday, February 9, 2011, as presented, seconded by Holland. Vote was unanimous.
3. John Bombara, 288 Northwest Main Street. This Hearing was continued to the April 6th meeting. The Board will do a site walk prior to that meeting.
4. Planning Board Zoning Bylaw Public Hearing Notices (3). Heney asked Lajoie to send the Bylaw information to the Board.





ADJOURNMENT
At 8:15pm, a Motion was made by Holmes to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Holland. Vote was unanimous.

Respectfully submitted,
Community Development Dept.



Maria D. Lajoie
Maria Lajoie
Maria Lajoie
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 11:09 am
Location: Community Development Department

Return to 2011 Zoning Board of Appeals Meetings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron