2012-03-15 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes

Home Browse Search

Town of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of March 15, 2012 Members Present: Jeffrey Perkins, Chairman Robert Redfern John Jarema Damase Caouette Kristin Cataldo Glen Redmond Members Absent: John Miles 'ToW Ca RECEIVED TOWN CLERK READING, MASS: 0112 JUN 18 A 10:51' A meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts beginning at 7:00 P.M. Also in attendance was Glen Redmond, Commissioner of Buildings. Case # 12 -03 A Public Hearing on the petition of Steven Cicatelli who seeks a Special Permit under Section(s) 6.3 of the zoning bylaws in order to demolish an existing foundation and to construct a new single family dwelling on a non - conforming lot on the property located at 60 Mount Vernon Street in Reading, MA. Attorney Steven Cicatelli represented the owner of 60 Mount Vernon Street. Also present was the owner and the engineer. He presented the proposal and gave the history of the property. A Special Permit was granted in the past for this property for storage of motor vehicles. Due to disrepair, all that remains at this point of the building is the existing foundation because the Building Inspector said the structure was unsafe and had to be removed. The new foundation will be removed and made more conforming when it is replaced by a new foundation that will have a smaller footprint. It will not increase the nonconformity. The previous building was commercial in nature but this new structure will now be a residential dwelling only. The Building Inspector said he rejected the proposal under dimensional controls because he did not think it met the residential setbacks but he did think it was a good proposal. In the past a two - family had been proposed but it was not allowed in this district. Since the foundation is being removed, they basically are starting from scratch again. He thought a Variance might be a more appropriate choice. The Board members made their individual comments. They thought it was more conforming and an improvement than what is there now. They questioned the side setbacks and wondered if it needed a variance although they were now 9' instead of the previous 6.' There was a discussion ZBA Meeting, March 15, 2012