2006-10-26 / Front Page

Zoning grants continuance on house plan after debate

By Sam Bari

At Tuesday's meeting of the Zoning Board of Review, a debate between board members, Town Solicitor J. William W. Harsch, and attorney John C. Revens, representing applicant Elaine Enterprises, resulted in a 4-0 vote to continue the matter.

The second application of Elaine enterprises, Inc., the owner of property located at Prospect Avenue and North Main Road., for a variance and special-use permit to construct a house on the lot was not approved. The original application for a three-bedroom house with a single-car garage was denied last month. That application is under appeal.

In an effort to build a house on the property for a prospective client before winter, Elaine Enterprises owner, Robert Domin, compromised the original plans to satisfy the concerns of the Planning Commission as well as the zoning board. The prospective client is a former Jamestown resident who wants to move back to the island

as soon as possible. He is willing to accept the revised plans if the house can be completed in the next few months. The new application, which was recommended by the Planning Commission, is for a two-bedroom house without a garage.

However, Vice Chairman Don Wineberg, sitting for absent Chairman Tom Ginnerty, as well as several of the board members, were not satisfied with the application because a new house plan was not included. In addition,

Wineberg felt that a qualified environmental co-ordinator should look at the plans before the board made a decision.

Town Zoning Officer Fred Brown revised the original plans while the attorneys discussed the matter. He eliminated a wall and the garage, which converted the plans for the proposed dwelling into a two-bedroom home without a garage to satisfy the concerns of the board when they denied the application in September.

Town Solicitor Harsch suggested that the board listen to a proposal from Revens, the applicant's attorney, to resolve the matter and possibly approve the application without a continuance. Revens offered to withdraw the appeal for the three-bedroom structure if the board would approve a conditional application with the wall and garage removed to make the house a two-bedroom structure on the same footprint.

His proposal was not enough to convince the board, whose mem- bers insisted on a continuance of the hearing and that the applicant:

+ Have an environmental coordinator review the plans.

+ Include the new house plans with the revised application.

+ Include the original house plans so they can be compared with the revised plans.

+ Provide confirmation from the zoning officer stating that the plans do not require another review by the Planning Commission.

Return to top