Laserfiche WebLink
O� OFRR�' <br />Town of Reading <br />e� . � r Meeting Minutes <br />°.ra: ucoxo°P <br />Board - Committee - Commission - Council: <br />Zoning Board of Appeals <br />Date: 2022-12-19 <br />Building: Reading Town Hall <br />Address: 16 Lowell Street <br />Purpose: Remote Meeting <br />Attendees: Members - Present: <br />1 rIBSLai/{rIr7dSl <br />70WNEIVEL) <br />RPAD'I���L MA <br />2123 JUN 28 AM 10:27 <br />Location: Select Board Meeting Room <br />Session: <br />Version: Final <br />Cynde Hartman, Cy Caouette, Andrew Grasberger and Patrick Houghton <br />Members - Not Present: <br />Others Present: <br />Senior Planner Andrew MacNichol, Building Commissioner Bret Bennett, <br />William, Nolan, Robert Comenos <br />Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Amanda Beatrice <br />Topics of Discussion: <br />Case #22-16 -29 Gavin Circle <br />ZBA Chair Cynde Hartman opened the public hearing for Case #22-16 — 29 Gavin Circle by reading the <br />legal notice into record and swearing in members of the public wishing to speak. <br />Mr. Bill Nolan, the architect for the owners of 29 Gavin Circle submitted letters of supportfrom the <br />abutters. He then gave a brief description of the project. The existing home is two -stories with an <br />inground pool that has a significant amount of unbuildable Conservation land and two easements on the <br />property. He noted that they learned the shed is non-compliant when they received the site plan which <br />has now been removed. They are looking to put a 14'x25' two story addition with a deck about 14'x18 <br />off the back of the house. The addition will be the same height of the existing home. He noted that the <br />pool is about 8.6' from the house and is a pre-existing non -conformity. Mr. Nolan stated that this is a <br />Variance due the Building Inspector unable to find an existing permit for the pool, which has existed for <br />about 18 years. The hardship in this situation is that almost half of the lot is unbuildable due to the <br />Conservation land and easement restrictions and the existing pool. <br />Mr. Houghton asked Mr. Nolan to clarify if the pool is non -conforming and not changing, or if the home <br />is nonconforming because R's not far enough from the pool. Mr. Nolan stated that the home would be <br />conforming if the existing pool was not there. However, because the pool is close enough to the house it <br />is to be considered an attached principal structure and is subject to principal setbacks, making the pool <br />non -conforming. <br />Mr. Robert Comenos stated that he was surprised when they found the shed was non-compliant <br />because according to their neighbor, the existing fence has been there for 30+ years and that there was <br />no permit record for the existing pool. Mr. Nolan added that they are also going to go before the <br />Conservation Commission as well. <br />Page I 1 <br />