SENNETT - The owners of Bonca's restaurant secured a pair of variances from the Sennett Zoning Board of Appeals at its Tuesday meeting.

Though the ZBA agreed with the town's code enforcement officer, Paul Weiman, that Bonca's front setback and parking space area were in violation of town code, the panel issued variances that will allow the business to move forward.

The decisions marked the latest twists in a lengthy battle between the business owners and the town over the property, the former Pioneer Restaurant on Route 20.

Bonca's opened without a town certificate of occupancy earlier this summer after the owners disagreed with Weiman's findings that their establishment had numerous violations. Soon after opening, the town issued a cease and desist order, but Bonca's remained open because they had appealed the matter to ZBA.

At Tuesday's meeting, the ZBA attempted to limit both parties to 15 minutes each on issues still unresolved.

Scott Chatfield, attorney for RyBach & Rig, the restaurant's holding company, objected to this procedure.

“It is physically impossible for me to put in our proof in 15 minutes,” he said. “If the board wishes to cut me off, I will object.”

He also questioned town attorney Don Cheney's representation of Weiman.

“Having Cheney as council raises a cloud,” Chatfield said. “A question is raised as to whose interests Cheney represents.”

Cheney said Chatfield's remarks were made for “theatrical effect.”

James Lent, ZBA chairman, offered up front the choice of going for a routine variance as opposed to presenting an appeal.

“We have maintained that we have been in compliance right along with the zoning code,” Chatfield said. “While either resolves the issues, one resolves that we have been in complete compliance. Our chief appeal is for the interpretation that we have been in compliance. We have alternately applied for area variances if the board doesn't agree.”

“A variance would most likely be granted,” John Langey, attorney representing the ZBA, said. “No harm, no foul. You got what you needed.”

“I would love to do so in a heartbeat,” Chatfield said. “I can't in good conscience because there is a likelihood that this decision will be appealed with another (lawsuit)”

Variances for the area of parking spaces, front yard setback requirements for the restaurant's patio and porch, and the total number of parking spaces were considered.

A number of other violations have been satisfied related to the building code.

The board agreed with Weiman's interpretation of the square feet needed for parking spaces, denying the appeal but then unanimously granting a variance for 30 square feet less for each parking space.

The next issue was how many parking spaces would be allowed based on the total number of square feet in the occupied portion of the building. Chatfield proved that definitions in the code actually reduced the number of spaces required from those cited by Weiman, and Weiman agreed that there was no code violation on that matter.

The board also agreed with Weiman's ruling on setback, so a variance was unanimously granted to approve deviation of 0.7 feet from the required variance of 35 feet.

One major unresolved issue is vested right and whether or not RyBach and Rig could complete their building without following new zoning laws passed before its completion. With vested rights, many violations cited just aren't violations.

This meeting did not produce a final solution. The ZBA may wait until its next meeting on Sept. 23 to come up with a final solution.

Staff writer Kathleen Barran can be reached at 253-5311 or kathleen.barran@lee.net