HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 Jan 31 - Board of Appeals Decision - Petition #4091 o�Y��o
� TOWN OF YARMOiJTH
S�: -`� :_/�-_�t�
O�_.� :,: �_ --�y BOARD QF APPEALS
Y:�,. � � �d':� DECISION
1�rACME�
FILED WITH TOWN CLERK: January 31, 2007
PETTI'ION NO: #4091
HEARING DATE: January 25,2007
PETITIONER: dudith E.M�nn dba Celiac Sa►lution,LLC
PROPERTY: 7 Rita Avenue, South Yarmouth
Map&Parcel: 79.43 Zoning District:R40
MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING: David S.Reid,Chairman,John Richards,Joseph Sarnosky,
Diane Moudouris,Sesn Igce and Stcven DeYoung,alternate.
Notice of the hearing has been given by sending notice thereof to the Petitioner and a11 those owners of
property as required by law, and to the public by posting notice of the hearing and publishing in The
Register,the hearing opened and held on the date stated above.
The petitioner seeks to amend Decision #4006, granted to her in 2006, by removing from that
Variance its one-year limitation.
The property is located in the R-40 zoning district. The lot contains approximately .23 acres, and is
improved with a single-family home. On January 26, 200b, the Board granted to do tlus petitioner a
use Variance to a11ow, as an accessory use to her home, a home business (K11) for the preparation of
gluten free foods for those suffering from Celiac disease. As part of that Variance decisian, the Board
imposed the following condition; "the Variance will be initially limited to a one-yeax period (one year
from the date this variance becomes effective, by the issuance by the Board of Appeals, of the
certificate of Variance). Prior to the expiration of that time the petitioner may re-apply for a further
extension of the Variance, it being the imention of the Board that, barring any unforeseen
circumstances, a further e�ension of the Variance would be granted." The petitioner now seeks the
removal of this one-year limitaxion_
The petitioner represents that the business has operated successfully since the issuance of the
Variance. However, the classes have not yet commenced. The petitioner is aware of no adverse
effects upon the neighborhood from the operation of her home business. The petitioner anticipates
that her business will continue to grow, and in the not too distant future will be moving to a
commercial site. In the meantime, the operations as described in the Va.riance will continue. No
chan�e in the operation is requested at this time. In the event that the petitioner is successful in
opening a commercial site, the Board will, at that time, review this decision and address the need to
continue any of the business activities at this home site.
No opposition to this request was received by the Board. The Board members are not awaxe of any
ongoing concerns from the neighborhood. T'he Board therefore finds that this operation has passed the
1
test of time intended by the initial one-year limitation, and may continue without further limitation all
in its duration.
A motion was therefore made by Mr. Richards, seconded by Mr. Sarnosky, ta grant the petition as
requested, by removing the time limita.tion on the Variance granted in Decision 4�6, the business to
otherwise continue as represented, and subject to all ather conditions and limitations imposed by the
Variance decision of February 3, 2006. The members voted unanimously in favor of this motion. The
petition for modification is therefore granted.
No pemut shall issue until 20 days from�e filing of this decision with the Town Clerk Appeals from this
decision shall be made pursuant to M.G.L. C40A §17 and must be filed within 20 days after the filing of
this notice/decision with the Town Clerk
David S. Reid, Chairman
2