My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1993-03-04 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
>
Public Access
>
Minutes
>
Zoning Board of Appeals
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
1993-03-04 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/23/2010 1:37:30 PM
Creation date
11/9/2010 2:44:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
TOWN OF READING <br />ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br />MINUTES-MARCH 4, 1993 <br />Members Present: rd.ith ' ieworka <br />Stephen Tucker <br />John Jarema <br />meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held in the <br />Selectmen's Meeting of the Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, <br />Reading, A at 7.00 P.M. <br />The Scheduled Public Hearing was on the petition, of Dorothy <br />M. Jones et al who was seeking a Special Permit under <br />Section 6.3.1.3 of the heading Zoning By-Laws and/or an <br />appeal from the decision of the Building Inspector on a lot <br />with 0 feet of frontage located at lots 198 and 213 <br />between Harvest and Tracy, Road, Reading, MA. <br />Ms. Wieworka stated that the legal requirement for <br />advertisement for a hearing is 14 days. Because of an error <br />by the Reading Chronicle, the advertisement did not appear <br />on Thursday, two weeks ago, but on Friday. Wherefore, <br />there had been only 13 days notice. She also stated that <br />the applicant was aware of the notice problem. She stated. <br />that the Board had consulted with Town Counsel who felt <br />that the 13 days was adequate. The applicant had also <br />waived any rights to object. She also asked the public <br />present if anyone objected to the 13 day notices There was <br />no response. <br />Ms. .Munn. s, representing the applicant, then discussed the <br />Loot numbers, She stated that it was a little confusing, as <br />the Lot Numbers shown on the Zoning Map were 49 and 32 <br />She also discussed that there was a drainage easement on <br />the property. <br />She stated that the Loot is undersized given the district <br />but that there are a number of single family residents <br />within the 300 foot area that are similar. She stated that <br />s. Jones would like to get a Special Permit to sell the <br />Lots as buildable. <br />She went on to say that the plan dates back to 1921 which <br />predates zoning and should be grandfathered.. She also <br />discussed that the Lots are held in common ownership. <br />Mr. Jarema then read an affidavit from Dorothy M. Jones <br />discussing the property. <br />Ms. Munnis discussed that .fibs. Jones would life to sell each <br />lot separately, but would consider one Special Permit for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.