Mike Ellis – The Planning Commission devoted its entire May 24 meeting to reconsideration of a Conditional Use Permit for Gary Toub and Kathy Martone at 23 Elk St., and did not find sufficient reason to overturn their decision.
At a commission meeting April 12, with public comments critical of the CUP, commissioners denied the application. Toub and Martone took their case to the city council, and aldermen asked the Planning Commission to consider new evidence. Some of those who initially spoke or wrote in opposition have since endorsed the granting of the CUP, but others remained firm in their opposition.
Denise Ryan said she lives next door to the Toub/Martone property, and said they have plenty of off-street parking. After previously speaking in favor of the CUP, Ryan said she and her husband were harassed “by a few locals.” She added, “It’s the first time in twenty-five years that we’ve had full-time residents there.”
Susan Porter lives on Pine Street, and spoke against the permit. She said the ravine between her and Elk Street acts as a megaphone, and she said granting the permit would “chip away at neighborhoods.” She said she was appalled to receive a cease and desist order concerning her opposition to the permit.
Stevin Williams, attorney for Toub and Martone, explained he had sent out cease-and-desist letters “in response to a campaign of slander” that interfered with his clients’ ability to pursue a livelihood. He said the property had adequate off-street parking for both residents and guests, and he handed out additional letters of support.
In addressing the rule against granting a CUP for a “similar” business, Williams explained the differences between a B&B and other tourist lodging, including having the owner on site and serving food.
Toub followed Williams to the microphone, and pointed out that the secluded guesthouse had been used as tourist lodging from 1989 to 2002. He described it as 850 sq. ft., built in a style similar to the main house. Toub attributed most of the opposition to owners or operators of tourist lodgings. Martone say they want to continue to restore their property, and having income from that property will help make that possible. “Our neighbors have rallied around us,” she said, and some have withdrawn their opposition.
Property owners within 200 ft. had received notice of the application, and had the opportunity to write a letter supporting or opposing the permit. Commissioners counted up the letters, and found 10 in favor and five opposed, out of 22 property owners notified. Harman noted that if more than 20 percent of neighbors opposed a permit, the commission would need a three-quarters majority to approve it.
Before calling for a vote, Chair Steve Beacham reminded commissioners they were not voting directly on issuing a CUP. They were asked to consider new information, and make a recommendation to city council. “It will be council’s decision what to do then,” he said. Beacham acknowledged that applicants would not cause parking or traffic issues, but considered the proposed B&B similar to the tourist lodging next door, and the 200-ft. rule protects neighborhoods. “Lodging is lodging, and it’s next to another lodging,” he said. “That’s my take.”
As chair, Beacham did not vote, but James Morris, Harman, and Tom Buford voted no, and all cited the 200-ft. rule as their determining factor. Harman also cited the 23 percent opposition as a factor in her decision.
During public comments, Porter asked Greene to recuse, based on comments she had made following the April 12 denial of the CUP. Greene later explained the circumstances, and asked the other commissioners for their opinion. They said a decision on recusal rested entirely with her, and she said she did not see a conflict that would require recusal.