Transcript Slide 1

Nantucket Planning Office 2010 ATM Warrant Article Review

January 21, 2010

Article 37: Split Zoning District Corrections – Various Locations

Article 37: Split Zoning District Corrections – Various Locations

Article 37: Split Zoning District Corrections – Various Locations

Article 37: Split Zoning District Corrections – Various Locations

Article 38: Eel Point Road LUG-2 to LUG-3

Article 39: Appleton Road RC-2 to LUG-3 or VTEC

Article 39: Appleton Road RC-2 to LUG-3 or VTEC

     Residentially developed Located in COD Surrounded by open space LUG-3 would allow for modest ground cover expansion VTEC would allow for significant ground cover expansion and limited commercial uses

Article 40: Fairgrounds Road, Old South Road, and Tom’s Way RC-2 to CN, R-5, and/or CTEC

Article 40: Fairgrounds Road RC-2 to CN and R-5

 TON owned land  CN portion programmed for government functions  R-5 portion programmed for housing

Article 40: Old South Road RC-2 to CN

     Contains mixed uses Generally meets CN standards Connects to other CN areas Average lot size = 10,580 square feet Average ground cover ratio = 22.1%

Article 40: Tom’s Way to R-5, CN, or CTEC

     Residential in character Meets R-5 standards Lack of infrastructure to support commercial development Median lot size = 7,840 square feet Median ground cover ratio = 13.34%

Article 41: West Miacomet Road and Somerset Road RC-2 to R-10

Article 41: West Miacomet Road and Somerset Road RC-2 to R-10

     Residential in character Adjacent to R-10 district Generally meets R 10 standards Average lot size = 29,620 square feet Average ground cover ratio = 8.2%

Article 42: Miacomet Golf Club

Article 42: Miacomet Golf Club Proposed Revision

Article 43: Surfside Area Plan – Surfside West LUG-2 to LUG-1 and R-40

Article 43: Surfside Area Plan – Surfside West LUG-2 to LUG-1 and R-40

 Recommended in Surfside Area Plan  R-40 portion in TOD  LUG-1 portion in COD  Potential for 5 new lots  Ground cover expansion possible on all lots

Article 43: Surfside Area Plan – Surfside West LUG-2 to LUG-1 and R-40

 LUG-2 to LUG-1 – Average lot size = 77,754 square feet – Average ground cover ratio = 3.1%  LUG-2 to R-40 – Average lot size = 43,124 square feet – Average ground cover ratio = 4.4%

Article 44: Surfside Area Plan – Surfside South LUG-2 to LUG-1

Article 44: Surfside Area Plan – Surfside South LUG-2 to LUG-1

      Recommended by Surfside Area Plan Adjacent to LUG-1 district Potential for 5-6 new lots Ground cover expansion for most lots Average lot size = 46,700 square feet Average ground cover ratio = 6.2%

Article 44: Surfside Area Plan – Surfside South LUG-2 to LUG-1

     Adjacent to LUG-1 district Will correct zoning non conformities Will allow the TON to create one additional lot Median lot size = 56,628 square feet Median ground cover ratio = 1.9%

Article 45: Somerset Road and Somerset Lane LUG-2 to R-40 and COD to TOD

Article 45: Somerset Road and Somerset Lane LUG-2 to R-40 and TOD to COD

   Located in TOD Adjacent to R-20, R 10, CN, and RC-2 districts Ground cover expansion possible   Lot division potential through ANR Average lot size = 83,852 square feet  Average ground cover ratio = 3.8%

Article 46: Monomoy LUG-1 to VR

Article 46: Monomoy LUG-1 to VR

       Will correct non conformities Located in COD Adjacent to VR district Potential for 1 new lot Ground cover expansion possible Average lot size = 31,014 square feet Average ground cover ratio = 8.5%

Article 47: Intensity Regulations – R-5

  Amends side yard setback for the R-5 district only Side yard setback of 10’ on one side can be reduced if: – A secondary dwelling or other accessory structure is located within 20 feet of the rear property line; or – Where a common driveway easement of at least 10 feet provides access to 2 or more lots

Article 48: Secondary Dwellings Citizen Article

 Intent is to reduce the scalar separation requirement of 12 feet between the primary and secondary dwelling  Includes 2 options: – – Reducing the requirement to 10 feet Removing the requirement  Both options require amendment to definition of breezeway

Articles 49 and 50: Open Space Requirements for MRD and Cluster Subdivisions

 Intent is to redefine the open space requirement for MRD and Cluster subdivisions  Includes 2 amendments: – Adding a minimum upland requirement – Adding a standard of review for the open space parcel