Planning And Zoning Board Permitting Standards For Christy’s Proposal On Route 6A – Part 5

I have received a number of comments on the Christy’s proposal. In the previous posts I have addressed the permitting process for this project. A number of your comments, however, have focused on the issue of, once the project has been approved, how can we be sure it stays that way. This post will try to answer that question.

ENFORCEMENT ISSUES

Under the Dennis Zoning By-law the Building Commissioner is charged with enforcing the Dennis Zoning By-law. Whenever you believe that the Zoning is being violated, you can file a complaint with the Building Commissioner under Section 1.3.1 Enforcement.

1.3.1 Enforcement

The Building Commissioner shall administer and enforce the provisions of this By-Law. No permit shall be issued for construction or for the change of use of any land or premises unless the required submitted plans and specifications indicate that buildings, structures, premises and their use will conform in all respects to the provisions of this By-Law.

This section is the obvious starting point for all zoning complaints and actions. Further, given the Special Permit approval process for the Christy’s project, the Building Commissioner is also charged with ensuring compliance with the approved Special Permit under Section 4.1.2.6 Compliance. The following addresses the compliance regulations and provides a discussion as it relates to the project in question:

4.1.2.6 Compliance

a. No building permit shall be issued by the Building Commissioner for any building subject to this Section 4.1.2 and no construction or site preparation shall be started, until a decision of the Planning Board approving a site plan has been filed with the Town Clerk and a Special Permit has been issued by the Planning Board.

This section specifically requires the Building Commissioner ensure that the Special Permit is issued by the Planning Board and that the plans submitted for the project are consistent with the Planning Board Decision. In Dennis, even if a date is not the same on a plan, the Building Commissioner sends the applicant for the Building Permit to the Planning Department for a consistency review.

b. An as-built plan, certified by a registered professional land surveyor or engineer shall be submitted to the Building Commissioner before the issuance of a permanent occupancy permit. The as-built plan shall attest to a development’s conformity to its approved site plan, by indicating landscaping, buildings, drainage flow, number of parking stalls, and limits of parking areas and drives.

At the end of the construction process the Building Commissioner needs to ensure that the project has been built to the specifications of the Planning Board Special Permit. The Building Commissioner requires all final projects to be reviewed by the Planning Board for this consistency determination.

c. No permanent occupancy permit shall be issued for any building subject to this Section 4.1.2 unless such building and all its related facilities have been completed according to the approved site plan. No permanent occupancy permit shall be issued for more than eighty percent (80%) of the structures or units within a multiple unit development unless the development has been completed according to the approved site plan. No activity subject to site plan approval shall be conducted on the site unless, in the opinion of the Building Commissioner, the development or approved phase thereof has been substantially completed according to the approved site plan, and unless the proposed activity was reviewed by the Planning Board pursuant to the site plan approval procedure.

This section is very similar to (b) above, except that it also establishes the control over the activity to be located in the building. In the case of the Christy’s proposal many people have questioned whether a Dunkin Donuts will become a tenant of the building. The Planning Board has not been requested to approve a restaurant use in this facility. Restaurant uses have significantly different parking and access needs. The addition of a Dunkin Donuts to the building would be a change in the activity proposed for and approved in the building and would require additional review by the Planning Board and, quite likely, the Board of Appeals as it would be a further intensification of use in a non-conforming building. However, I want to stress that while Christy’s is being held to a higher level of scrutiny under the Formula Based Business By-law, this would preclude the store from having a coffee counter like most similar stores.

d. Any changes in the approved site plan, or in the activity to be conducted on the site shall be submitted to the Planning Board for review.

This section further reinforces the comments made under Section (c) above. The applicant cannot decide that the building will be used for activities other than what is approved by the Planning Board and the Board of Appeals. Any such change would be considered a violation of the Dennis Zoning By-law as well as the Special Permits issued for the property. These violations are subject to enforcement under the provisions in the Dennis Zoning By-law. These enforcement provisions are governed by Section 1.5 Penalty as illustrated below.

1.5 PENALTY

Any person violating any of the provisions of the By-Law shall be fined not more than $300.00 for each offense. Each day that such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. The enforcement officer shall be the Building Commissioner. When Enforced in accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. ch. 40, §21D, the penalty shall be as follows: First offense – written warning; Second offense – $100; and Third offense $200.

This concludes the discussion of the town review and enforcement as it relates to the Christy’s proposal. I hope that it has, at least, been informative as to the process that is followed and the limitations on the Dennis regulatory committees.