Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutADU opposition- Jeff and Laurie BrownJeff and Laurie Brown 50 Woodbury Ave Hyannis, MA 02601 Jeff.Brown.USN.RET@gmail.com (508) 830-6568 20 June 2024 Zoning Board of Appeals Town Hall Hyannis, MA 02601 Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals, I am writing to express our opposition to the variance request submitted by Israel Lopez Marroquin for the property located at 42 Woodbury Ave. As an abutter to this property, we have significant concerns regarding the potential impact of granting this variance, particularly in terms of increased traffic, noncompliance with the ADU ordinance, and challenges in managing occupancy requirements. Historical Context and Family Usage The property in question, along with the neighboring properties at 44 and 46 Woodbury Ave, have a long history of familial ownership and usage, which has been characterized by a shared understanding and respect for the granted easements and rights of way. The following timeline highlights the important familial relationships and transfers of these properties: • On or about October 24, 1949, the ancestral family of the current owners (Woodbury, Holmes, Brown Family) transferred a single lot that now is known as 42 and 44 Woodbury Ave, which included a 30-foot right of way across the property of Colin P. Woodbury property, now 46 Woodbury Ave. • On or about August 15, 1950, James and Sarah Doherty (parents of Lorraine Mitchell, the current owner of 44 Woodbury Ave) transferred a portion of their property (now 42 Woodbury Ave) to Francis and Harriet Doherty (uncle of Lorraine Mitchell), including an easement across 44 Woodbury Ave. • The property at 42 Woodbury Ave remained in the Doherty family until 1995 and has since changed ownership multiple times. This right of way and easement has traditionally been used to support single-family homes owned by the family and relatives of the abutters. The proposed variance, which seeks to build a freestanding 3-bedroom home under the town's ADU ordinance, disrupts this historical precedent and introduces several concerns. Increased Traffic Across Easement and Right of Way The right of way across 46 Woodbury Ave and the easement across 44 Woodbury Ave were granted with the understanding that they would serve single-family homes. Introducing an ADU with additional bedrooms increases the potential for higher traffic. The increased use of these pathways not only infringes on the privacy and tranquility of the neighboring properties (to include the homes at 38, 46 and 44 Woodbury) but also raises safety concerns, particularly because the right of way and easement are not roads but pathways granted solely for access to the property from the town roadway. The real estate agent, representing the previous owner, in the Spring/early Summer of 2022, approached Mrs. Mitchell and asked if the shared way could be paved or improved with stones; she said no. The house was sold in the summer of 2022, and the current owners independently graded and blue-stoned the entire length of the shared pathway. We, as owners of 46 Woodbury, were never approached or asked. These unauthorized improvements have allowed traffic on the pathway to increase to dangerous speeds, causing neighbors to frequently gesture for drivers to slow down and many times, they do not stop when transitioning to and from the town roadway. This access was always kept ungraded as a way to slow ALL traffic and delineate it as private versus the paved public town road known as Woodbury Ave. Noncompliance with ADU Ordinance The ADU ordinance stipulates that an accessory dwelling unit shall contain no more than two bedrooms and greater than 900 square feet. The request for a variance to build a 3-bedroom ADU does not comply with this requirement. Allowing this variance sets a concerning precedent for future deviations from the ordinance, undermining its purpose and intent to maintain the character of single-family neighborhoods. Managing Compliance with Occupancy Requirements The proposed parking plans suggest accommodation for up to six driving-age persons, which far exceeds the ordinance's limitation of two adults per ADU. This discrepancy raises serious questions about the enforceability of occupancy restrictions and the realistic use of the property. The potential overcrowding and associated noise, waste management, and general congestion are significant concerns for the neighborhood. In conclusion, granting this variance would significantly alter the character and dynamics of the neighborhood. The historical usage of these properties has always been in support of single- family homes, and the proposed changes pose risks that are not in line with the intent of the ADU ordinance. I urge the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider these points carefully and deny the variance request for 42 Woodbury Ave. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Jeff and Laurie Brown