JAMESTOWN ZONING BOARD OF REVIEW
Minutes of the September 24, 2002 Meeting
A regular meeting of the Jamestown Zoning Board of Review was held
at the Jamestown Library, 26 North Rd. The Chairman called the
meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. The clerk called the roll and noted
the following members present:
Richard Allphin
Thomas Ginnerty
Dennis Grieco
Don Wineberg
Raymond Iannetta
Richard Boren
Joseph Logan
Kathleen Managhan
Also present: Brenda Hanna, Stenographer
Pat Westall, Zoning Clerk
Fred Brown, Zoning Officer
Bruce Leach, Counsel
MINUTES
Minutes of the September 10, 2002 meeting.
A motion was made by Thomas Ginnerty and seconded by Richard Boren
to accept the minutes of the September 10, 2002 meeting as
presented.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
CORRESPONDENCE
Seated: Richard A., Thomas, Dennis, Don, and Raymond.
A letter from Turner Scott, Esq. requesting a continuance of the
appeal of Michael P. Dutton.
Dutton
A motion was made by Thomas Ginnerty and seconded by Dennis Grieco
to continue the appeal of Michael P. Dutton to the October 22,
2002 meeting.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
A letter from Turner Scott, Esq. requesting to allow the
withdrawal without prejudice of the pending application of Nancy
Kolman Ventrone.
Kolman-Ventrone
A motion was made by Dennis Grieco and seconded by Raymond
Iannetta to accept the withdrawal without prejudice of the
application of Nancy Kolman-Ventrone.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
OLD BUSINESS
Osprey Creek
Seated: Richard A., Raymond, Richard B., Joseph, and Kathleen
A motion was made by Richard Boren and seconded by Raymond
Iannetta to grant the request of Osprey Creek, LLC, whose property
is located at 486 East Shore Rd., and further identified as Tax
Assessor’s Plat 4, Lot 39 for a variance from Article 3, Section
302 Table 3.2 (District Dimensional Regulations) to build a new
house 12’-6” from the front line (40’ required) and 25’-6” from
the side line (30’ required), and to install an individual sewage
disposal system 51’ from freshwater wetlands (150’ required).
This Board has determined that this application does satisfy the
requirements of Article 6, Section 600; Section 606, Paragraphs 1
through 4; and Section 607, Paragraph 2.
This motion is based on the following findings of fact:
1. Said property is located in a RR80 zone and contains 13,760
sq. ft.
2. This is the second application of Osprey Creek within a one-
year period.
3. The first application was heard in June 2002 and requested a
dimensional variance to build a 2-bedroom home after demolishing a
560 sq. ft. house. The proposal was to build a 1615 sq. ft. house
on 2 levels. The proposed house was avant garde in design.
4. After the close of testimony, members of the zoning board
raised concerns over the design, the size of the structure, and
the height.
5. There was no opportunity for the applicant to address the
concerns.
6. The Board voted to deny the application.
7. In July 2002, the applicant submitted a new application for the
same property, which was heard by the Board in August 2002.
8. Two preliminary issues were raised:
Does Section 505 of the zoning ordinance and/or the doctrine of
administrative finality bar the Board from considering the new
application?
9. As a finding, it is noted that between the 2 applications; to
wit, on 6/25/02, R.I. General Law §45-24-41 was amended to
eliminate the requirement of “no other reasonable alternative”.
10. As a finding, it is noted that the applicant sought to change
the application pursuant to the concerns of the Board.
11. As a finding of fact, the changes between the 2 applications
show a change in material circumstances:
1) 1,412 sq. ft.
2) 32’ height
3) change appearance drastically
4) change in roof line
5) siding changed and shingles
6) 10% smaller footprint
7) reduced length by 4 feet
8) south side setback changed from 19 ft. to 25 ft. 6 in.
12. Therefore, Section 505 is not applicable.
13. The doctrine of administrative finality is not applicable.
14. Even if the doctrine were applicable, there is a substantial
change in material circumstances.
15. The applicant has met its burden under amended section 45-24-
41.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
NEW BUSINESS
Jamestown Place Assoc. LLC
(Knowles Court)
Seated: Richard A., Thomas, Dennis, Don, and Richard B.
A motion was made by Don Wineberg and seconded by Thomas Ginnerty
to accept the withdrawal with prejudice, the request of Jamestown
Place Associates, LLC (Knowles Court) at the request of John A.
Murphy, Esq. due to the decision made on Sept. 10, 2002.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
Lemery
Seated: Richard A., Thomas, Dennis, Don, and Raymond
A motion was made by Thomas Ginnerty and seconded by Don Wineberg
to grant the request of Gary C. and Kathleen A. Lemery, whose
property is located at 45 North Bay View Drive, and further
identified as Tax Assessor’s Plat 1, Lot 218 for a variance from
Article 3, Section 302, Table 3-2 (District Dimensional
Regulations) to add a second floor addition (approximately 860 sq.
ft. in size) to the existing one-story house. The proposed
addition will be 36’ from the front lot line wherein 40’ is
required, 10’ from the north lot line, wherein 30’ is required.
This Board has determined that this application does satisfy the
requirements of Article 6, Section 600; Section 606, Paragraphs 1
through 4; and Section 607, Paragraph 2.
This variance is granted with the restriction that a mimosa tree
will be trimmed in a manner agreed to by the neighbor, Maurice
Laflamme.
This motion is based on the following findings of fact:
1. Said property is located in a RR80 zone and contains 11,278
sq. ft.
2. That the footprint of the house had not increased, there is
simply a second floor being added.
3. That there were no objectors and that neighbors support the
application.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
Kelly
A motion was made by Raymond Iannetta and seconded by Dennis
Grieco to grant the request of John & Ramona Kelly, whose property
is located at 123 Beach Ave., and further identified as Tax
Assessor’s Plat 5, Lot 220 for a variance from Article 3, Section
302 Table 3-2 (District Dimensional Regulations) to construct a
one family dwelling 16 feet from the front of lot where 30 feet is
required and 15 feet from corner where 20 feet is required.
This Board has determined that this application does satisfy the
requirements of Article 6, Section 600; Section 606, and Section
607, Paragraph 2.
This variance is granted with the restriction that the garage will
be in line with the living room on Beach Street as depicted in
applicants Exhibit #1. This Exhibit illustrates that the change
to the original drawing C093502 has the garage reduced by 6’ along
the entire length of Beach Avenue.
This motion is based on the following findings of fact:
1. Said property is located in a R40 zone and contains 7,200 sq.
ft.
2. The hardship from which the applicant seeks relief is due to
the unusual characteristics of the lot whereby a new sand filter
ISDS requires the home be located further north towards Neptune
Street 15’ rather than the required 20’ setback.
3. The granting of this variance will not alter the general
characteristics of the neighborhood.
4. The new home will have 1,950 sq. ft. of living space, which is
in character with other homes in the neighborhood.
5. There were no objectors to the application.
6. The relief is the least relief necessary for the unique corner
lot.
7. The applicant reduced the garage by 6’ along Beach Avenue and
placed the garage entrance on Neptune Street
The motion carried by a vote of 4 – 1.
Thomas Ginnerty voted against the motion.
Collins
As there was no one at the meeting representing the applicant a
motion was made by Dennis Grieco and seconded by Raymond Iannetta
to continue the application of John P. and Holly B. Collins to the
October 22, 2002 meeting.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
DiBiase
As there was no one at the meeting representing the applicant a
motion was made by Dennis Grieco and seconded by Thomas Ginnerty
to continue the application of Peter A. DiBiase to the October 22,
2002 meeting.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
Young
Seated: Richard A., Thomas, Dennis, Don, and Kathleen
A motion was made by Kathleen Managhan and seconded by Don
Wineberg to grant the request of Patricia J. Young, whose property
is located on Beavertail Rd., and further identified as Tax
Assessor’s Plat 12, Lot 212 for a Dimensional Variance from
Article 3, Section 308 (Setback From Wetland) to construct an ISDS
approximately 100 feet from a freshwater wetland.
This Board has determined that this application does satisfy the
requirements of Article 6, Section 600, Section 606, and Section
607, Paragraph 2. In particular reference to Article 6, Section
606, Paragraphs 1 & 2.
This motion is based on the following findings of fact:
1.Said property is located in a RR80 zone and contains
approximately 25 acres.
2. The subject wetland is a pocket wetland by virtue of the previous
use of land as a golf course.
3.The subject wetland, as a pocket wetland is isolated and not
contiguous to a larger wetland system.
4. There is no other practical location for the proposed ISDS
system due to existence of other wetlands on property.
5. Letter submitted by Jamestown Conservation Committee stating no
objection to granting of 50’ variance.
6. The were no objectors.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
LONG
Seated: Richard A., Thomas, Dennis, Don, and Richard B.
A motion was made by Dennis Grieco and seconded by Thomas Ginnerty
to grant the request of Owen Long (prospective purchaser) and
Samuel and Sheena Broadhurst, owners, whose property is located at
56 Ocean Ave., and further identified as Tax Assessor’s Plat 8,
Lot 34 for dimensional variances from Article 3, Sections 300 and
302, and Table 3-2 (District Dimensional Regulations) to construct
an addition to an existing dwelling which will be 14’6” from the
front (westerly) lot line, 30’ required, and 3’9” from the
northerly lot line, 10’ required.
This Board has determined that this application does satisfy the
requirements of Article 6, Section 600, Section 606, and Section
607, Paragraph 2.
This motion is based on the following findings of fact:
1. Said property is located in a R20 zone and contains 9,250 sq.
ft.
2. The encroachment of the house on the north side will not be
increased at all by the proposed structure.
3. The encroachment of the house on the west side will increase by
only 4” such that the proposed structure will be no closer than
14’6” to the property line along Ocean Avenue.
4. The proposed addition is reasonable in scale and appropriate
for the needs of the applicant’s family.
5. The owner indicated he would maintain the design details of the
existing house, would “side” the house with wood shingles, and
would construct the driveway with a permeable surface.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
Weaver
Seated: Richard A., Thomas, Dennis, Don, and Raymond
A motion was made by Thomas Ginnerty and seconded by Dennis Grieco
to grant the request of Thomas & Annette Weaver, whose property is
located at 36 Mt. Hope Ave., and further identified as Tax
Assessor’s Plat 8, Lot 577 for a variance from Article 3, Section
302 (District Dimensional Regulations) to build an addition to an
existing carport which will be 6’ from the easterly lot line, 10’
required, and to build an addition and deck to the existing
dwelling which will be 8’2” from the easterly lot line, 10’
required.
This Board has determined that this application does satisfy the
requirements of Article 6, Section 600; Section 606, and Section
607, Paragraph 2.
1. Said property is in a R20 zone and contains 10,000 sq. ft.
2. That the proposed modification does not extend the eastward
encroachment, which pre-existed the previous application.
3. The roofline will be raised to only approximately 19 ft.,
within the legal limit.
4. There were no objectors.
The motion carried by a vote of 5 – 0.
ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made and seconded to adjourn at 10:07 p.m.
The motion carried unanimously.
4
4