Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0027 FALCON ROAD I } ®� S M E A No. 53LOR UPC 12543 smead.com • Made In USIA 3a1J��Y�� a o A IB9t US®N 11�5 PRd01KT I@E �ro OFil�SNP�iRAM CIS 5G - -- jSL �-lP kkh c e E A RKA ijO "W 6k± ��� , cl- Shea, Sally From: Shea, Sally Sent: Tuesday,January 29, 2019 10:41 AM To: Florence, Brian Subject: application number tb-19-303 27 Falcon Road, West Barnstable Brian, The above referenced application has the following issues that are cause for denial. A formal letter of denial is needed. • Denied Conservation Approval • Denied Planning Approval • Denied Historic Approval v Inadequate frontage for buildability purposes • Applicant is applying as the homeowner. No documentation applicant is the current property owner. Applicant: Andre Limarino Address 48 Warwick Way Centerville, MA 02632 and relimarino(ab-gmail.com 508-738-1764 Attorney Alexander T. Senatori, Esq. Gill Devine, P.C. 776 Main Street, Hyannis MA 02601 alex ,gilldevine.com Owner Gordon & Janice Leblanc 132 Chine Way Osterville, MA 02655 Sally Shea Town of Barnstable Assistant Zoning Admin/Lead Permit Tech. 508-862-4031 1 i -7 T�(c o September 22, 1980 ro -3 �O 3- ( Ce Aregular meeting of the Barnstable Planning Board was held this date, in the Planning Board Office at 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Chairman, Mary Ann .Strayer; Robert Brown; Clerk; JamesWilson, Charles Lockhart; Edward Murphy at 8 P.M.; John Rosario. at 8:15 P.M. -- , Members Absent: Mary Ann Grafton Rogers =n Others present: Janet White, Recording Secretary; Terry Ryder, Engineer c"n 7:35 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING SUBDIVISION #453 - Greenbrier Development - West Main .Street The Hearing Notice was read by Mrs. Strayer, Mr-.. William Dacey, III presented the pltn. There are a total of 27 lots on this road (the first .8 lots were approved as an•ANR 51 an). The road was in exis , but they are abandoning one end ..of the road,as it exits to Lincoln Road,as .they �--knot acquire the land other than :what is shown on the Land Court Plan. The lots range in area from 10,000 to 18,000, and they intend to build large.=type. homes, ranging in price between$40 .and$50,000. Mr. Wilson read the Board of Health report, stating the developer must provide Town Water to each dwelling and connect- each dwell.i.ng' to the Town sewer. The DPW has not yet had a chance to review the drainage .calculations'.. . The width of the road is 40 feet, so they will be seeking a waiver from the''oa.rd of' 50 ' foot layout requirement, Mr. Wilson inquired. Mrs. Strayer asked if anyone:.in the audience was either for or against. Mr. George Diggs, executor of .the Joseph .Gomes estate 'on Lincoln Road,' stated he'.was not against it. He did not know what it. was about until he came here. Mr. Dacey asked.how soon he could build the road. The Board took. -the plan under advisement until the receipt of the DPW report. Mr.- Wilson stated there is a 21- day appeal period after the decision is filed with the Town Clerk before the road can. be started, unless the petitioner proceeds a.t' his own peril . SUBDIVISION #452 - Howard Woolard The Board had received a report from the Board of Health and the Conservation Commission. Mr. Woolard- brought in a letter from tht Fire Chief, stating he was in favor of the subdivision. They-have not filed a Notice..of Intent with the Conservation Commission :as yet. Motion by .Mr. Wilson to approve the:.subdivision plan as filed, waiving the frontage requirements; further .that said approvement 'be .subj:ect to Falcon Road, running from Plum Street to the perimeter of the lots, be constructed to the width of 16 feet with 1" .of ," stone and 4" of dense .processed.' stone and graded in accordance with the profiles; and that the approval be subject to the conditions set forth on the.plan itself and conditions set forth in the..Board of Health letter dated September 18, 198.0. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lockhart. Mr. Wilson for.clarification of the records, regarding waiving the frontage requirements. It would appear to. be .in the public interest to have less lot frontage, as it would need greater road constructi.on;.: and be a detriment to the wetlands. The developer will p lace a covenant with;the Town for the construction of this road with the clarificatioh of the waiving of the lot. frontage :, . spelled out in the covenant. This plan is a definite improvement from the original . plan of ?21 .lots. - The motion was voted unanimously. The original covenant should not be released unti.l the new. covenant is executed. Mr. Woolard inquired about posting. a bond in order to get the lots released prior to the construction of Falcon Road. All three. lots are to be sold, hopefully by October 22. The Board said maybe 1 or 2 lots could be sold and hold one. Mr. Ryder said the. Town should hold $6,000 for the release of the lots, as the cos:t .of constru.cting. .the road. Everything is frozen for the 21 day appeal period. SUBDIVISION #319 - Trafton-Thacher Holway Road- Release of Lot 7 was retracted by the ,.. . Planning Board after a few of the members went out to view: the area, and found quite.a few Rules & Regulations that had not been complied with. -In the meantime, Richard Tanz thinking the Lot had been released, was able to obtain a :building permit to build his home. It would create a great hardship for him, if he were unable to us.e this lot at the present time. Mrs. Trafton was present and stated the shoulders :were being reseeded that day, Tt oo I.� ZONING BY-LAWS �pF 7N E t0 w f = BARNSTABLE, i MAO& ape,1639. 'F0 MO a' } i j FEBRUARY 1980 TOWN OF BARNSTABLE MASSACHUSETTS PRINTED ON CAPE COD AT THE PATRIOT PRESS,HYANNIS,MASS. S 7� Y with the intent and purpose of the Subdivision Control Law waive strict e. Place of business of baker, barber, blacksmith, builder, compliance with said frontage to a minimum of twenty (20) feet. carpenter, caterer, clothes'cleaner or presser., confectioner, contractor, Paragraph E added 1979 An 1,approved by the Atty.Gen.Feb.26,1980. decorator, dressmaker, dyer; electrician, florist, furrier, hairdresser, hand laundry, manicurist, mason, milliner, newsdealer, optician, APPENDIX A • painter, paper hanger, photographer, plumber, printer, publisher, Front Yard Side Rear i roofer, shoemaker, repairer, , , Area in Frontage width Setback Yard Yard shoe re airer shoe shiner, tailor, tinsmith Sq.Ft. in feet In feet In feet in feet in feet telephone exchange, telegraph office, undertaker, upholsterer, RESIDENCE B 10,000 100 20 10 10 wheelwright. RESIDENCE B-1 10,000 100 20 10 10 f. Gasoline and oil filling stations and garages. RESIDENCE C 15,000 100 20 10 10 g. Apartment houses, subject to Section M. RESIDENCE C-1 15,000 125 30 15 15 h. Hotel or motel, subject to Section N. RESIDENCE C-2 15,000 100 20 10 10 i. The above listed types of business uses are not intended to be RESIDENCE D 20,000 125 30 15 15 all inclusive and any other ordinary business use of a similar nature RESIDENCE D-1 20,000 125 30 10 10 may be carried on in a Business District. RESIDENCE F 43,560 150 30 15 15 2. Business District A. RESIDENCE F-1 43,560 125 30 15 15 a. The same uses as permitted in the Business District, except RESIDENCE F-2 43,560 150 30 15 15 that hotels and motels are excluded. RESIDENCE G 65,000 200 30 15 15 Prior sub-paragraph 3 deleted by 1973 An 151,and remaining paragraphs renumbered In proper se. Residence B-1 area added by An.1977'2S;ifppioved by the Ally.Gen.Jan.12,1978. quence,approved by the Atty.Gen.June 15,1973. Residence F-2 added by 1977 An 36,approved by Atty.Gen.Jan.12,1978. 3. Business Limited District B. Residence A and Residence Al deleted by 1973 An 140,approved by the Atty.Gen.June 15,1973. a. Motel' hotel or lodging house. Appendix A amended by adding the words"Front Yard"and be deleting figures shown as"50(30)" b. Building, sale, rental, storage and and Inserting therein the figure"30"1974 An 145,approved by the Atty.Gen.July 16,1974.. repair of boats. Residence C-2 added by 1974,July 30,Sp.12,approved by the Atty.Gen.September 5,1974. c. Retail sale of marine fishing and boating supplies. Residence G added by 1979 An 7,approved by the Atty.Gen.June 20,1979. d. Retail sale of fishing bait, fish and shellfish. Residence D-2,Residence D-3,Residence E,Residence E-1 deleted 1979 An 9,approved by Atty. g Gen.Feb.36,1980. e. Operation of a commercial fishing business excluding can- Front yard setback distances shown above mean from sideline of ning or processing of fish. the street. Where a lot abuts on one or more than one street,front yard f. Restaurants. setback shall be applicable from all streets. ( g. Retail stores. Prior paragraph deleted and new paragraph inserted by 1974 An 146,approved by the Ally.Gen.July ! h. Operation of charter fishing and marine sightseeing and ex- 16,1974. curslon facilities. B. USE REGULATIONS — NON-RESIDENCE DISTRICTS I a. &f. required to connect to the Town sewer system and subject A. No building shall be erected or altered, and no building or to Special Permit under Section P. premises shall be used, for any purpose in the following specified i Prior paragraph deleted and new paragraph added by 1978 Fall An 16,approved by Ally,Gen.Feb.6, districts other than provided in this section. The maximum height of 1979. any building shall be not more than two (2) stories, or thirty (30)feet 4. Business Limited District C. from ground level to the plate,whichever is lesser, except that in a Pro- a. Professional or home occupation use. See Section I for fessional Residential District hospitals are excluded from this height definition. limitation. b. Small retail businesses common to a residence district. Paragraph A.amended by 1974 An 108,approved by the Atty.Gen.July 16,1974 by adding,"The c. Detached one family dwelling. maximum height...from this height limitation." Sub-paragraph(c)added by 1970 An 108,approved by the Any.Gen.June 19,1970. 1. Business District. 5. Marine Business District A. a. Wholesale or retail stores or salesrooms. a. Building, sale, rental, storage and repair of boats. b. Retail trade service or shop. b. Retail sale of marine fishing and boating supplies. c. Offices and banks. 6. Marine Business District B. d. Restaurants and other food establishments. a. Building, sale, rental, storage and repair of boats. >. b. Retail sale of marine fishing and boating supplies. Page 12 Page 13 i with the standards set forth in Section T and subject to the granting of such home occupation shall be met off the street and other than in a re- quired front yard. a Special Permit by the Board of Appeals. The above use shall be subject t0 the granting of.a Special Per- Paragraph added by 1974,July 30 Sp.14,approved.by the Arty.Gen.September 5,1974. g a a. Such use may also be permitted in Precinct 6, Marstons Mills mit by the Board of Appeals. d Precinct 7 Cotuit in that area bounded on the West b Santuit-. Prior rub-paragraph deleted,new sub-paragraph 12 Inserted by 1977 An 30,approved by Atty.Gen. I an , Y Jan.12,1979. Newtown Road; on the north and east by River Road and on the South 13. Residents of a dwelling in residential districts shall be permitted by Route 28 in accordance with the standards set forth in Section T and to keep, stable and maintain horses as a permitted accessory subject to the granting of a Special Permit by the Board of Appeals. use,but not for economic gain therefrom, provided the following condi- Sub-Paragraph a,added by 1975,April 2,Sp.7,approved by the Atty.Gen.July 22,1975. tions are complied with: J. INTENSITY REGULATIONS — RESIDENCE DISTRICTS a. DENSITY: One half(1/2) acre shall be the minimum lot size A. In any residence district all buildings, except one (1) story for the keeping of horses. There shall be an additional one quarter(1/4) buildings of accessory use, hereafter erected, altered or enlarged, shall acre for each horse in excess of two(2), except as authorized by special be located on a lot having not less than the minimum requirements for permit from the Board of Appeals. size and width of lot, and all buildings shall comply with the re- b. HEALTH: The stabling of horses shall conform to all regula- quirements for set back., side and rear yard, all as set forth in the tions of local and State health authorities. following table. c. SAFETY: Adequate fencing must be installed and maintain- B. In any Residence District a one (1) family dwelling and its ac- ed to reasonably contain the horses within the property. The use of cessory buildings may be erected on any lot which complies with the ap- barbed wire shall be prohibited. i plicable provisions of Chapter 40A of the General Laws. d. SET BACK; All structures including riding rings, and fences Paragraph B amended by 1971 August 31,Sp.22,approved by the Any.Gen.March 2,1972. to contain horses shall conform to 50% of the set-back requirements C. In order to comply with the minimum square foot requirement, a for the district in which located. lot must be a closed plot of land having a definite area and perimeter e. USE OF BUILDINGS: The use of temporary buildings (i.e.). and having a shape number not exceeding the numerical value of 22, tents, trailers, packing crates is prohibited. except that a lot may have a shape number larger than 22 provided that f. MAINTENANCE: The area shall be landscaped so as to har- the site intended for building is contained within a portion of said lot, monize with the character'of the neighborhood. The land shall be so which said portion meets the zoning requirements of the area in which maintained that it will not create a nuisance. it is located and has a shape number not exceeding 22. The shape. g. LIGHTING: The use of outside artificial lighting in connec- number shall be the number resulting from the division of the square of tion with the keeping of horses beyond that normally used in residential the perimeter by the area of the lot or said portion thereof. Seventy(70) districts is prohibited. percent of the required zoning area of such lot shall be contiguous Paragraph added by 1974 An 101,approved by the Atty.Gen.July 16,1974. upland. Lots with less than 50 feet frontage, in a width district, which 14. Vision Clearance Corner Lots.In any district, on a corner lot, no comply with the preceding requirements, shall not be created from the fences, wall or structure, planting or foliage more than 3 feet in height principal way to a depth greater than two (2) lots. above the plane of the established grades of the streets shall be allowed i Paragraph C added by 1971 An 132,approved by the Atty.Gen.June 22,1971. in an art a of front or side and herein established, that is Included Paragraph C amended by adding"70 percent of the required zoning area of such lot shall be upland" y p Y 1973 An 156,approved by the Atty.Gen.June 15,1973. within the street lines at points which are twenty feet distant from their Paragraph C amended by adding the word"contiguous"1974 An 100,approved by the Atty.Gen.July point of intersection measured along said street lines which will 16,1974. material] obstruct the view of a driver of a vehicle approaching a street Added to Section J.C.by 1977 An.34,approved by Atty.Gen.Jan.12,1978,"hots with less than... Y greater than two(2)tots.,, intersection. D. In a residence district all buildings except boathouses (buildings Paragraph added by 1974 An 114,approved by the Atty.Gen.July 16,1974. used solely for the storage of boats and related equipment)shall be set 15. Open Space Residential Development. Such use may be permit- back a minimum of 50 feet from Mean High Water on any Great Pond. ted in Precinct 6, Marstons Mills, and in Precinct 2, West Barnstable Paragraph D added by 1978 Fail An 13,approved by the Atty.Gen.Feb.6,1979. in that area bounded on the South by Race Lane, on the East by , E. All lots shall have the minimum frontage set forth in Appendix A Osterville-West Barnstable Road, on the North by Prospect Street and' except that the Planning Board may in the case of original subdivision 7 Popple Bottom Road and on the West by Crocker Road, in accordance approval where such action is in the public interest and not inconsistent Page 10 Page 11 .t.. r .•t:s' !;!'-^.G..?".•a-;':.w'^�y(^ .rr,�... IewCi7t �(/66.J6 �rm•�•/.":'`:L e.�.Ky„elw1a. .♦{,•• .�, �•rf�• PASGt/.A.GE ✓ .P[/.1130+Ief un. �•�.�:� .. � � ' i Q y /• f MA.CSACCT�C.) I 6' .,\r'.1 ra�Jr'ro•C �t' I' '. _... ;f� '.•' ' b ? . . ,._�� Nas rem `& �°.eeeis I..'.. .. .. F F3L l -- ---- °'m:T,•¢_ 4� /.l _ --w"� l�/,.[G ., MAa✓ `� o , i � 1 ��• � `` . � , � --d'f�{---�-----_- ��')! / •.T`' � 1 f f b.tb�• ' M%� .IL�� �`` v ;,,�� .. L 15 p Q J' -•-. •IJYn"c /OrW000 IJ ortif I, / u'r"' / ee9<o'b'['\� �I.r9'. / •�� Ia0 41 A // / 'AJ°"..... . � :.. .e•II e••• �F�p/,:.\, 97P` f ' • \ �" 8, his 8 / e�aGj/ � Py+o / 'sm•I/'m-e �.: r°n:o,' �a`� / J. ` A J 11 � ]a �-'•� I �OT'� d I �,� _- -' yY/'P.:y .12Y n<PP srAGE I:rawo ' A•. .` b /j �_ �.�P`i�.l \\ I {f�1,.�i ` r/o �/� .. � '� "•b;�, .ly�v Op�'y �'RPc• � �. .. - `0d' A0 �r. .I i ,w•ie;r r —'cr'nb9¢�",t°"'-) vQ LOT 2 "- I I ^�\ s.�tucc PnNo /som ,.aNygx' \• („ � � °�:n \ 53 b � F I d \�, � �Pe ?•.6, !r�� '�wc�a •c3oc'" ; 'cor q:•� �a ,�'aY:�'���bi..��3�• ��. , ' I rsve ricE fbl/e � \\�`� \ �ab.�. ';'' '1•a-or•oo: � iI i 8 � ,i�of' v r 8 b� ' /orl.e .;... • 't� . . ,!'t;�l �P'r ' 1,•<�� � v 1 �°'~ \ a�`a JY\'.� W.. I .Y/POP��.COfIJT/oU V � .. ( .•.f Ao•N M G y'i . `nn/f• /�� � 4- °j.• I 9 3(c..wle+`¢Jzv Camv I¢z.cz'....r ;� � p r /',/�/.rac.n.o' ee.9o• `I. V '\. �:' <'•�� •\\\/ LH°n� u'9•oi's''"' [t�f. �4 r-,�� �_' dam. S ����`a, p No \"�� p _•� I} Ilk J¢'ao 'V �. pl by \ \•- •9.a. ,.,. Gp/LIByc{6f ftian.% of LANG /w/ rQ:.�.�,_'_s Y_ :Y / 6• (w�1T� :C3A•2AISTFJ�GE, MFS�4.. '�+•'o ep'✓ � .`.<,`- � +��-�\ f�+ -'-�. . Z—wa, D/Jnel f(I Acee.yw.GOTJ/z61 �a ``�, .```�' 1/ ✓ ;p.pe;' �-' 91+LW�POG¢ RYPUUiUO[.-. QO A ING C60r/r461J �f/-l�+.e6G FbR I uenoae IaK 6NJOIWs/GG•m+./EOG WW. � 4� \ao:�```i ee3�� �� w9>rr, f/O wlalelo w. 'Wool- RD ���'�� Ql N1z6UC6 NSP wlrM MAee lG Go✓4-uP..T. '� � \i;;•, _ �• ` �. 'A.OU A P6-Sm/!O/V/J ION 4"P i`M-Sr"HAN MPo6 r2Q "F�JGLE PLAL�1'�EUST' e�4• u. o•'fi.. , ,Q¢beOEy {U Aslu OOOC O/7, A9n4 14,77K W,_4—Seta • PIwVf,N N.tIOY 26[TlJUC6�. •..•� nONO _��:` �.r.>:.' � _ om2 —w,/Pr—a P# ,WPe—o6/U \ti\" N/GL' D�/���•"� J�•i ww 1"' M1L:�_ _- M m M 4e PCCO4DA•VCE WAM eb-WSSE✓LK CKEOS 4.��R1.: r66� NO.'Jf Mom' 'IWPCOVPL ap nI/S OLFu..M6J UO>•N.VJf tL.t --'•-- � - eea�77UN°ffF6LTVG✓ r9'!e. �6���\.•99Od=•. .�-- /p✓ APayf G 6�.faa%O✓K<ftl40.L'CYO,oG n� >.. _�___ �g'p•/ .¢WWU w�to/s tFS o,h:' t.rP+/us A.LP//1czc, naxe aF nc row..cr Jo¢a Iu crcr I graft 6� _ a� ✓rincG¢,emcee AX J+Ab✓/J/w' MP.✓P/XO,n6 GJ✓[HA. sY nKT)W WIYCB e1JUIIi QaP�'I�'rVI%16C/%Oq Ilia/�-� y �G•%O;" 1NIJ+NU K 4Aefa F fYAN,8¢rgeMO:u OFnMiyivPL PP 291V At:aV OV 1Nf HPUUiU6 a/cw.,90 " Gy Tc Ni R.LS. JinU MOK aL7 Hf..>a I06t Rif$Ne�fLN Rcaa QefJ Iv>•1N13 OM q I CIVIL EUGIMfCS.! tlfC¢IV¢O OfIR/US 1y tAuo.WR✓eYE.PS �a00e�•A9.�96, winl eU.>ei.r¢url9.4Y � 1wB.M6aT-L1.Mr MYr Ae1¢4 Jlxi/ecrbwr A✓Q es ee°wa ay.a.,.e.wnce-. mti F.a �.'.. .CO•ea wU.ctlp , 1ye'� � � S 91r 6A . / Goe/STf1R/T/a/E r✓oPP/ ,� G.aa' fl c RLclrrll'G: Uct I l I't to f H 00 �w ZO0.00i�i e9 e9', R[GISiRT d• S2/'47 50"W Mp�Y �\\ �1F.PhENM[[R — z 1� At * r IDLUS II'AS 2/.00• u3L'37'13"C A rwoo 2' / \\ 11' '� � 7/ E S 49'40'407 3I 99�11 / t f2O� �� � , l 54/•ZZ WE �C '� / AZY N/f)P oSCALE / e000 n•o3'Cd'l7' !� 543'29 04 E. S�,eUGE l�NO i3pcG' t4itl.VEX� '/' \\ � tt:: / ,r•�:� S7G"C9'/9"E\� /BO.JJ' 1 '✓ h CiSFy A. ,{ � q ' '(or,�/ . ... tip`` �� ^5.pn a 1 LDT./o 4/' n v t o a N FO,z ,2EG/3r,ZY ccSE �0 if IF /i�9 A a• � v IF • LOT 9 I M r-4L.77'. % / l /� p h I t�i J (►� / /Vi �{ ct�.a E __ :. r. •5a.00.___ l _ _tea o dP ti : �- LiSMa 01 // \ C` � STDA./E CUL✓E� CD/7C,V ..._ /52• (^ aQ fz .05 .` o �, y p V Q. \� ' ALE --- QT/FY 77/47 TN/5 PGf/A/ WAS MADE /dl (.\���o N/GL i��i'�i� t%BCi�5 S r eppeoVAL OF 77/15 PLFiAJ L-WAI k-oj D, OP- /TLTC \ �� ARPAaOVAL OF SAND ///L L /CVO P014 D, O�71/E )20firVLE WIrW 2E6/5re)' OF DEEDS 'v�\\': 99.05' ••. .��'��� VE!/ic[6 7mgc.C-S SWOWAI W/77•//u LorS 1,2�3 J/�qT/OA/S EFF•EC77VE ✓.4 /97G. �`----_--��S FOe SU/!O/V/S/OAJ /-YiePOSES• ol VOO'rB'LO w 7}//S PL,aV /S /3F15E0 ON A /Y11A/ 2EGG20E0 /AJ /�� %3 t0 I IctA,v al-aOK 3/7, r'6. 34 �.H /°'f+R/ �ECOQDED /U DATE oQ //Qu,Q✓p R.L•S. I��G u [300C 23/, N5. /56, WiTN St/PPLCAT6, rQR-Y FIELD .SUA!V6Y Nit') ')�Isu Shea, Sall From: Shea, Sally Sent: Tuesday,January 29, 2019 8:42 AM To: andrelimarino@gmail.com' Subject: Permit/Application:TB-19-303 at 27 FALCON ROAD,WEST BARNSTABLE for Building - New Construction - 1 or 2 family Residential Hi Andre, A Your application is being administratively denied. You must obtain approval from Barnstable Historic as well as Conservation. Only then can we move forward with your application. Thank you. Sally Shea Town-of Barnstable Assistant Zoning Admin/Lead Permit Tech. 508-862-4031 V �� �h 1 1 0 O�IME O Application Number.......... .... .. ....�... ......... v.............. + gAgNgPAglg. ' . MASIL Permit Fee.......................................Other Fee........................ 039. Total Fee Paid.................... ./../../ ..................... ...... TOWN OF BARNSTABLE Permit Approval by.................................On........................... BUILDING PERAUT Map.............. .............Parcel..........ez�. ............ APPLICATION Section 1 — Owner's Information and Project Location - Project Address LOT 3 2-+ f�aU o r-3 ed ' age Owners Name I'C n10ek L.1 hr`AUrvo Owners Legal Address `1 c7 WAV-UJ 1% Cie, VJ City '(f.V kVzA LU State zip nZ 02- Owners Cell# �� f�ro J E n.. A At L, Section —ise of uctur Use Group Comm ial Structure over 35,000 cubic feet ❑ mmercial Structure under 35,000 cubic feet /Two Family Dwelling Section 3 NTYpe of Permit Ne Co ction ove/Relocate ❑ Accessory Structure ❑ Change of use ❑ Demo/(entire cture) . inish asement ❑ Family/Amnesty ❑ Fire Alarm Rebuild D k Apartment ❑ Sprinkler,System ❑ Addition Retaining wall ❑ . Solar BUI('UJI10 Oj'� ❑ Renovation Pool ❑ Insulation AN Other—Specify anR ABLE Section 4 - Work Description NEW 1-l�0s� 8Ed - t3ATJ� - 2 CA2 c,AeA&k Last updated. 11/152018 Application Number.................................................... Section 5—Detail Cost of Proposed Construction �COD Square Footage of Project 3yC Age of Structure Dig Safe Number # Of Bedrooms Existing Total#Of Bedrooms (proposed) 110 MPH Wind Zone Compliance Method ❑ MA Checklist ❑ WFCM Checklist ❑ Design Section 6—Project Specifics [vj Wiring ❑ Oil Tank Storage 0'Smoke Detectors C3 Plumbing Gas ❑ Fire Suppression Heating System ❑ Masonry Chimney ❑Add/relocate bedroom I Water Supply ❑ Public Kr Private Sewage Disposal ❑ Municipal 96n Site Historic District ❑ Hyannis Historic District ❑ Old Kings Highway Debris Disposal Facility: I am using a crane ❑ Yes EfNo Section 7—Flood Zone Flood Zone Designation Within or adjacent to a wetland, coastal bank? Yes ❑ No Section 8—Zoning Information Zoning District Proposed Use 3= Lot Area Sq. Ft. I AUk a Total Frontage Percentage of Lot Coverage 307, of Dwelling Units (on site) Setbacks Front Yard Required Proposed Rear Yard Paz 0:; Required - Proposed Side Yard Required Proposed { i Has this property had relief from the Zoning Board in the past? ❑ Yes No Last updated: 11/15/2018 Application Number................... Section 9= Construction Supervisor Name Telephone Number Address City State Zip License Number License Type Expiration Date Contractors Email Cell # ,I understand my responsibilities under the rules and regulations for Licensed'Construction Supervisor in accordance with 780 CMR the Massachusetts State Building Code. I understand the construction inspection procedures,specific inspections and documentation required by 780 CMR and the Town of Barnstable.Attach a copy of your license. rture Date Section 10—Home Improvement Contractor Name Telephone Number Address City State Zip Registration Number Expiration Date I-understand my responsibilities under the rules and regulations for Home Improvement Contractors in accordance with 780 CMR the Massachusetts State Building Code. I understand the construction inspection procedures,specific inspections and documentation required by 780 CMR and the Town of Barnstable.Attach a copy of your KI.C... Signature Date Section 11 -Home Owners License Exemption 1 , Home Owners Name: A NQ t tbl ry�ov �zf'jo Telephone Number p tJ (�'(o y Cell or Work Number I understand my responsibilities under the rules and regulations for Licensed Construction Supervisor in accordance with 780 CMR the Massachusetts State Buil ' Code. understand the construction inspection procedures,specific inspections and documentation required by 780 CMR d th Town of Barnstable. Signature Date 3— iOo so 1-1 ICANT SIGNATURE Signature Date-3k,3 Von 2019 Print Name ITV O Qk W Ag n- Telephone Number 508'�3e N 9 E-mail permit to: A N o P-c L1 rv-Nm-i NO9 c-,roo.%` • corn Last updated: 11/152018 Section 12—Department Sign-Offs P g Health Department ❑ Zoning Board(if required) ❑ Historic District ❑ Site Plan Review(if required) ❑ Fire Department ❑ r i Conservation ❑ For commercial work,please take your plans directly to the fire department for approval 99 f: 1 Section 13—Owner's Authorization I, L1 as Owner of the subject property hereby I; authorize PNJ o pip U MWO,_o to act on my behalf, in all j matters relative to work authorized by this building permit application for: 2} c �► vJ . 3 ►�s1� (Address of job) Zd 19 Signature f r date Print Name Last updated: l 1/15/201 s Florence, Brian From: Houghton, David Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 2:52 PM To: John Kenney (John@JWKesq.com) Cc: Florence, Brian;Jenkins, Elizabeth;Wackrow, Paul; Nober, Karen; Weil, Ruth; McLaughlin, Charles Subject: Lot 3 Falcon Road Gordon LeBlanc Buidability Question Attachments: RE: LeBlanc Property - 2t 7 Falcon Way,West Barnstable; FW: Gordon LeBlanc 27 Falcon Road Hello John: I think I am finally at the point where I can fully respond to the zoning question in your email of March 21 to Brian, Elizabeth and Paul and referred to me for response. In it you ask/suggest that "the town seems to be of the opinion that a variance needed to be obtained from the Zoning Board of Appeals" based on the Arrigo case you said you found in the planning board file and that your opinion is our zoning in effect in 1980 allowed the planning board to reduce lot 3 frontage to 20' as shown on a plan for Howard Wollard dated October 14, 1980 for zoning purposes. In your March 21 email you cited Section J of the zoning bylaw (it's actually in subsection E of section J) in effect on the above plan date as providing in part "in the case of original subdivision approval where such action is in the public interest and not inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the Subdivision Control Law waive strict compliance with said frontage to a minimum of twenty (20)feet."The Arrigo case held "persons . . . seeking to make two building lots from a parcel lacking adequate frontage are required to obtain two independent approvals: one from the planning board , which may in its discretion waive the frontage requirement under the criteria for waiver set out in G. L. c.41 s. 81R and one from the board of appeals which may vary the frontage requirement only under the highly restrictive criteria for waiver set out in G. L. c.40A s. 10." This may have been the basis for any claim that a variance was needed to reduce the frontage to 20' on the 1980 plan but I think we agree up to the point that subsection E as a zoning provision allows the planning board to waive compliance with frontage down to 20'. In my reply on May 17 (see attached) I mentioned that the plan was a re-subdivision and that subsection E of section J limited the planning board's power to reduce frontage to an original subdivision and asked for your thoughts on that aspect. You replied on August 16 (see attached) that the planning board file states a 1977 plan dividing your locus was rescinded and cited the definition of"rescind" as including to annul, cancel or abrogate which reverted the land to its state prior to 1977 and therefore made the 1980 plan "original" for purposes of subsection E. Webster's Collegiate dictionary defines"origin" and "original" respectively as "the point of which something begins or rises" and "the source or cause from which something arises." It seems to me that a rescission might not comport with those definitions of"begins" or"rises" or'Source" or"cause" so that the land reverts to its former state especially if taken to the logical extreme of multiple 81W rescissions. I took a look at the planning board file and at first did not find any rescission in accordance with section 81W. However, the 1980 plan itself states the 1977 plan was rescinded, one of the members signing was Attorney Jim Wilson, and the minutes of the September 22, 1980 planning board meeting state in part"[M]otion by Mr.Wilson to approve the subdivision plan as filed . . . [M]r. Wilson for clarification of the records regarding waiving the frontage requirements [I]t would appear to be in the public interest to have less lot frontage." That language follows subsection E ("in the case of original subdivision approval where such action is in the public interest" (emphasis supplied)). 1 Official acts carry a presumption of validity. "Perhaps strictly speaking this is not a true presumption but rather the drawing of an inference of regularity and compliance with law." Hale v. Hale, 332 Mass. 329, 323 (1955). Attorney Wilson has a deserved reputation as an eminent land use attorney before and since the 43 year period from the 1977 division in his private practice, service on our planning board and as counsel to the Old King's Highway Regional Historic District Commission. I concur then with your opinion that the zoning in effect in 1980 allowed the planning board to reduce the zoning bylaw frontage requirement for lot 3 to 20' based on my analysis of the passage of time,the presumption of validity of official actions and that the 1980 rescission is the only instance before or since (i. e. not an extreme series of rescissions) so as to reasonably consider the 1980 plan as an original subdivision within the meaning of subsection E. The second email I attached contains other outstanding issues, some of which you address and the rest requiring further dialogue with which I am not directly involved but I can address if asked by staff. 2 Florence, Brian From: Houghton, David Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 5:08 PM To: 'John Kenney' Subject: RE: LeBlanc Property- 27 Falcon Way, West Barnstable Hello John: To try to progress having read the Arrigo case and the bylaw provision you attached my initial reaction is the latter states in J(E)that the Planning Board "may in the case of original subdivision approval" waive strict compliance with frontage to a minimum of 20'. The August 13, 1980 plan that shows 20' frontage on Falcon Road you rely on states "being a re-subdivision." Its predecessor dated October 3, 1977 recorded in Plan Book 317, Page 34 is marked "approval under the subdivision control law" which reads to me as "original subdivision approval" terms. The 20'frontage claimed for Lot 3 on your 1980 plan served lot 16 on the 1977 plan and the 1980 plan combines lot 16 and a number of other lots and eliminates the ways shown on the 1977 plan. It puzzles me what the effects are,whether the planning board made an error by approving the 1980 re-subdivision or the owner at the time did wittingly or unwittingly forfeiting lot 16 and the ways shown on the 1977 plan. Seems odd to me. I welcome and am interested in your response. From: John Kenney [mailto:johnCabJWKesq.comJ Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 1:02 PM To: Houghton, David Subject: RE: LeBlanc Property - 27 Falcon Way, West Barnstable David, Any progress on the below matter? My client has a sale pending and would like a response. If you read my initial e-mail and the Arrigo case, I think it is pretty clear the case does not apply and ZBA approval was not required for the reduction in frontage.We know we still need to address Conservation and OKH issues but we need to make certain you agree the frontage reduction by the Planning Board is good and the comments about the applicability of the Arrigo case in the Building/Planning Department file are not correct. Your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated. John From: Houghton, David <David.Houghton @town.barnstable.ma.us> Sent:Sunday, April 28, 2019 11:34 AM To:John Kenney<iohn@JWKesq.com> Cc:Weil, Ruth <Ruth.Weil@town.barnstable.ma.us> Subject: RE: LeBlanc Property-27 Falcon Way, West Barnstable In process. From: John Kenney [mailto:john@JWKesq.com] Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 3:15 PM To: Houghton, David Subject: Re: LeBlanc Property - 27 Falcon Way, West Barnstable 1 I David, Have you had a chance to review the Arrigo vs. Planning Board of Franklin ( 12 Mass.App. Ct. 801) case and render an opinion on its(lack of) applicability to Mr. Leblanc's property? He has a sale pending and does not want to lose his buyer. Thank you, John Law Office of John W. Kenney Suite 12 1550 Falmouth Road Centerville, MA 02632 T: 508-771-9300 F: 508-775-6029 E-Mail: iohn@iwkesq.com CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the Town of Barnstable! Do not click links, open attachments or reply, unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe! CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the Town of Barnstable! Do not click links, open attachments or reply, unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe! 2 Florence, Brian From: Houghton, David Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 4:21 PM To: Florence, Brian;Jenkins, Elizabeth;Wackrow, Paul Cc: Weil, Ruth; McLaughlin, Charles Subject: FW: Gordon LeBlanc 27 Falcon Road From: Houghton, David Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 4:17 PM To: 'John Kenney' Subject: RE: Gordon LeBlanc 27 Falcon Road John: Understand and thank you. Will review, circulate and reply. From: John Kenney [mailto:john@JWKesq.com] Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 4:02 PM To: Houghton, David Subject: RE: Gordon LeBlanc 27 Falcon Road I David, Sorry for the delay in responding,things have been very busy! Following are my responses to your questions listed in your e-mail below.The number of the answer corresponds to the question number in your e-mail: 1. In your May 17th e-mail you point out that the bylaw provision empowers the Planning Board to waive frontage down to 20 feet in the case of"original subdivision approval".You point out that the plan showing the 20 foot frontage is a "re-subdivision". However, if you read the Planning/Building Department files you will see the 1977 plan was rescinded. Black's Law Dictionary defines "rescind" as 1.To abrogate or cancel (a contract) unilaterally or by agreement. 2.To make void; to repeal or annul.... I do not think the Planning Board made an error.Their intent is clear.The old plan was rescinded and the new plan was treated as the original subdivision plan.To rescind, annul, or void something means it did not exist. i I will respond to all your other questions but the one question I am trying to get the Town to answer is do you agree with me that the Arrigo case does not apply and the lot,for zoning purposes is buildable? My client keeps losing buyers because of the memo in the Town's file that suggests the 20 foot frontage is not adequate and was not done properly because it needed to go to the ZBA as well as the Planning Board per the Arrigo decision. I gave you my reasoning for why Arrigo does not apply and I have now responded to your concern about the "original subdivision" issue.The Planning Board's intent was clear and the Town even acquired title to a lot based upon the same plan. Please let me know if you agree Arrigo is not applicable and the lot is buildable for zoning purposes. 2. The building permit application is no longer pending.The buyer walked away due to the delays in determining if the lot is buildable. 1 i 3. Yes, it was developed under 1980's Planning Board standards. A covenant was put on record;then two bonds; finally the road was built to the Town's specifications and the lots/bonds released. Half the roads in town were built to 1980's standards. Not sure why this is a concern. 4. No, I do not have title information but I am not sure what you are talking about in this item.The access road was approved by the Planning Board. 5. Yes. We recognize an OOC may be required. 6. Yes, it is currently under 61A.Yes,the plan is to remove one acre for the house.Yes, we have to follow the procedure. My client recognizes the need to go to OKH, perhaps Conservation, and the need to get signoffs from various departments in order to get a Building Permit.The intent is to go through the process.The problem is no one wants to spend all the money needed to do those things once they read the Planning/Building department file which raises the Arrigo case issue. It is not right that the memo is in the file.The memo is wrong and we need to resolve this issue so my client can find a buyer willing to go through the balance of the process to get a building permit. If you want to discuss this matter or would like to meet to review it, please do not hesitate to contact me. Otherwise, I will await your response. Thank you for your consideration, John Law Office of John W. Kenney Suite 12 1550 Falmouth Road Centerville, MA 02632 T: 508-771-9300 F: 508-775-6029 E-Mail:john@jwkesq.com From: Houghton, David <David.Houghton @town.barnstable.ma.us> Sent: Friday,July 26, 2019 4:24 PM To:John Kenney<john@JWKesq.com> Subject: Gordon LeBlanc 27 Falcon Road Hi John: Hope all's well and you're having a good summer. Unless I've missed something I haven't heard back from you in reply to my May 17 email attached. I mentioned that to Mark Ells and Ruth, Elizabeth, Brian, Paul and I met to review both my message and the status of the building permit application. The result is we have additional questions so rather than take up piecemeal I wanted to check with you on a response to my message and convey the other issues in case we collectively want to delve into all at the same time. All the matters that I know of pending for this property are as follows. 1. A reply to my May 17 email. z 2.'THere is an active but incomplete building permit application pending. OKH approval of the building plans will need to be submitted to complete the application. Is there a pending application for ON approval and if so what do you estimate the status and timetable is? 3. The portion of Falcon Road that extends from Plum Street to our property line appears to have been developed P Y p p Y PP P under 1980(?) planning board standards. Do you know if that's the case? If so it may not be adequate for building and fire to issue a building permit. 4. The access way starting at the end of Falcon as improved appears to traverse conservation land. Do you have any title information on when your client and predecessors acquired title i. e.whether the conservation land is subject to access for 27 Falcon or vice versa? 5. Are there wetlands on 27 Falcon? If so an OOC may be needed. 6. Is the property currently assessed under 61A? If so do you plan of removing part or all and equally plans to follow the procedure to do so? Looking forward to hearing back from you,John. CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the Town of Barnstable! Do not click links, open attachments or reply, unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe! i 3