By Susan MacEachron

The proposal by the owners of 69 Maple Avenue, known as the Manor House, to add a day spa and additional facilities to the property was debated at the Planning & Zoning (P&Z) meeting on April 8. At the end of a lengthy discussion a straw vote indicated that at least four of the six commissioners present were in favor of approving the modification to the 1996 special permit.  It was agreed that P&Z counsel, Daniel Casagrande of Cramer & Anderson, would work with Zoning Enforcement Officer Stacey Sefcik to present conditions for consideration at the meeting on May 13.

P&Z commissioner Jonathan Sanoff read prepared remarks explaining his support for the proposed plans and rebutting the neighbors’ concerns about property values, increased traffic, parking, lighting and noise in a residential neighborhood. Commissioner Steven Landes expressed sympathy for the neighbors but focused on the need for additional business in Norfolk. Landes said P&Z should not impose restrictions that could prevent the development of a successful enterprise.

Commissioner Willard Wood reviewed the estimated number of day spa clients and restaurant customers provided by the owners’ representatives and said if successful it could mean up to 80 members of the public coming and going on a given day. He noted it would be a significant intensification and questioned whether it would be in accord with the regulations. Wood said if the business plan succeeds, the eight room bed and breakfast would be a minor part of the enterprise, and that was not envisioned in the country inn regulations.   Wood emphasized that P&Z is obligated to follow the regulations and determine whether the proposed modification is within the scale of the neighborhood. He  said that the proposed plans seem out of scale.  

Sanoff said that he believed the activities would be “virtually invisible” because of the promised plantings around the parking areas.  Wood responded that the lights of cars coming and going will not be invisible to the neighbors.  He went on to say if the plan succeeds the Manor House will be “a buzzing hive of activity, like having a beehive in your bedroom.”

Commissioner Edward Barron noted that he has been on P&Z for a long time, and this is the “by far the most complete and best application we’ve ever had” and a very difficult decision.  Barron referred to the lack of a site plan. Although referenced in the minutes of 1996, P&Z must decide this matter with no reference point to what was approved besides a letter reciting the country inn regulations.  Barron asked if it was in the purview of the commission to modify conditions such as the events for 150 people, that the applicant was not asking to modify?  Commissioner Jordan Stern said “yes, we do it all the time.”  P&Z Chair Christopher Schaut then addressed the question to Casagrande.

Casagrande said while there is no case law on point, and it is “untrod ground” he agreed with Stern and believes P&Z does have the authority to impose conditions if they are reasonably related to the original special permit.  He said the courts would defer to P&Z’s determination as to what’s appropriate in taking a holistic view of the conditions that exist today.

Schaut asked Casagrande and Sefcik to draft a motion, including conditions, for P&Z to consider at its meeting on May 13.

P&Z continued the public hearing regarding the zoning status of two A-frame structures located on Loon Meadow.  The question was whether there was a “principal use” structure on the property to which the A-frames were accessory.  Sefcik had been asked by P&Z to consult with Attorney Michael Zizka regarding the applicable regulations.  She reported that in addition to Zizka she spoke with Glen Chalder, a town planner who was involved in drafting the applicable regulation. Sefcik said both agreed the regulation might benefit from some clarification, but the intent was to require a principal use on a property for accessory structures to be permitted.

The Loon Meadow property is divided into two parcels. On the 160-acre lot there is a cabin in the woods and an A-frame.  On the 18-acre lot there is a “tiny house on wheels” and a second A-frame structure.  Sefcik previously granted a zoning permit for the house on wheels as a recreational vehicle.

P&Z commissioners focused on the cabin in the woods and whether that provided a principal use that would allow for accessory structures. Tyler Mathers, representing the property owner, AEB Realty, owned by Albert “Terry” Betteridge III, was asked about the cabin and how it was used. He responded that no one had been there for months, and it was not being used for anything right now.  Mathers went on to say that its intended use is recreational, and that the owner wants to be able to go there with his grandchildren.

Schaut suggested that a continuation of the public hearing was needed but noted that the time limit imposed by regulation allowed only 16 additional days.  It was determined that the best course of action was for Mathers to withdraw the application for the A-frames.  This would allow AEB Realty to resubmit an application whenever it chose to do so.