Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-07 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of June 7, 2012 Members Present: Jeffrey Perkins, Chairman John Jarema Kristin Cataldo Damase Caouette Robert Redfern John Miles Members Absent: None 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. Case # 12 -08 A Public Hearing on the petition of Edward Newton who seeks a Special Permit and a Variance under Section(s) 4.3.2.8 & 4.3.2.8.2a of the zoning bylaws in order to create an accessory apartment on the property located at 43 Belmont Street in Reading, MA. Edward Newton wants to add an accessory apartment with a kitchen to his house so that his son can use it. He needed the addition to the house to be occupied since 1982 in order to add an accessory apartment and that is why he is asking for the Variance from this zoning bylaw. He bought the main house from his mother's estate and has lived there since 1978. Also the necessaries are there for his son to make him comfortable. Mr. Newton presented what he thought were the four required criteria in order to be granted a Variance. The accessory apartment area will be similar to a "studio apartment" with an enclosed bedroom and bath. All renovations will be made to the interior of the dwelling only. Ms. Cataldo asked for some explanation as to the conditions of this property that would allow a Variance to be granted. The Applicant said the proposed apartment kitchen area is going into the portion of the house that was part of the original house. Ms. Cataldo reminded Mr. Newton that he also needed to be granted a Special Permit. The other Board members reviewed the requirements and the zoning bylaws and thought even though the apartment is being built in both the pre 1982 and post 1982 sections of the house, the dwelling at this address has been occupied since before 1982. MGL Chapter 48 is very specific about the criteria and makes it difficult for the Board to grant a Variance for that section of the bylaw. ZBA Meeting, June 7, 2012 It was suggested to Mr. Newton by a Board member, that he speak with the Building Inspector about doing the project without installing a stove and using another device such as a microwave and perhaps an open doorway, and that might be acceptable. He may be advised that he would not have to come before the Board but could just build such an area. Even though Mr. Newton was just remodeling some space for his son, a concern of the Board was that a variance /permit goes with the house and /or property and someone else might buy the house and rent out this accessory apartment, effectively creating a two- family dwelling in a one - family district. It was considered that there may be hardship involved with Mr. Newton trying to help his son and, an accessory apartment would add affordable housing stock to the Town. Even though the main dwelling was constructed in 1946 and that a portion of the accessory apartment was going in a section of the house that was built post 1982, the Building Inspector said at the previous hearing for the first case by Mr. Newton that was withdrawn without prejudice, he would require anyone to get a Variance and Special Permit for this proposal. The Board thought a Variance may not be necessary but, Mr. Newton would have to be granted a Special Permit in order to construct this accessory apartment for his son. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Damase Caouette, the Zoning. Board of Appeals made a finding that the dwelling in which the accessory apartment is to be located was occupied prior to August 1, 1982. The Board voted 4 -1 -0 (Perkins, Caouette, Miles, Redfern approved) (Jarema opposed) to approve the motion that Section 4.3.2.8.2.a of the zoning bylaws was met by the Applicant. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant a Special Permit to create an accessory apartment in the single family dwelling on the legal, non - conforming lot on the property and depicted on the three (3), floor layout sketches prepared by Edward and Judy Newton and submitted with the application. The Special Permit is subject to the following conditions 1. The existing dwelling at 43 Belmont Street shall not reflect any exterior changes to it's outside appearance in regards to the addition of the accessory apartment. 2. The Applicant shall submit to the Building Inspector construction plans of the proposed construction of the accessory apartment prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the work. 3. The Applicant shall submit to the Building Inspector as -built plans of the finished construction prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit for the accessory apartment. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Perkins, Caouette, Miles, Redfern, and Jarema). ZBA Meeting, June 7, 2012 Case # 12 -09 A Public Hearing on the petition of Cumberland Farms Inc. who seeks a Variance under Section 6.2.3.14 of the zoning bylaws in order to install 2 free standing signs on an existing overhead canopy at a height of 17'4" rather than 14' (allowed) on the property located at 303 Salem Street in Reading, MA. Attorney John Smolnak represented the Applicants and presented their proposal to the Board for the Cumberland Farms store. There is an existing sign on the storefront and it will be reduced in size and be in the same general location as the existing store front sign but, this sign is not the subject of this application. The signs being proposed on the canopy are why this Variance is being requested. The canopy signs will be reduced in size from the existing canopy signs and, are more attractive. These new canopy signs are located on the canopy and the Building Inspector said they can not be classified as wall signs. The canopy signs are also not attached to the building and that is why they are being classified as freestanding signs. The top mounting height of the proposed canopy signs will exceed the maximum height allowed (14'— 0 ") by the By -laws by 3'4 ". Attorney Smolnak presented what he thought were the four criteria required in order for a Variance to be granted. The proposed canopy signs are less in terms of area than the maximum allowed by the Zoning by -laws. The new canopy signs would not be detrimental. The parcel is a narrow corner lot and the new canopy signs are less detrimental to the area than what presently exists. The CPDC thought the new smaller signs were more attractive and that it would be difficult to identify the brand if these signs were not there. The Board members commented on the proposal and generally agreed it was not unattractive and did not have any issues. The will be an overall reduction of signage, and an update and improvement to the fagade of the building. Tony D'Arezzo voiced his disapproval of the proposed signs. Attorney Smolnak responded to Mr. D'Arezzo's objections. The Board members said they were comfortable that the four criteria were met. On a motion by Damase Caouette, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant's request for a Variance under Section6.2.3.14 of the zoning bylaws in order to install two free standing signs at a height if 17'4 ", as depicted on the referenced plans on condition that no additional signage shall be installed or proposed signage modified from that depicted on the plans referenced herein, without review and approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Cataldo, Caouette, Perkins, Redfern, and Miles). Minutes ZBA Meeting, June 7, 2012 On a motion by Damase Caouette, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to accept the minutes of March 1, 2102. The vote was 4 -0 -0 (Cataldo, Caouette, Redfern, and Miles). On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Kristin Cataldo, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to accept the minutes of March 15, 2102 with changes. The vote was 4 -0 -0 (Cataldo, Caouette, Redfern, and Miles). On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to accept the minutes of April 5, 2102. The vote was 4 -0 -0 (Caouette, Perkins, Redfern, and Miles). On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to accept the minutes of April 19, 2102. The vote was 4 -0 -0 (Caouette, Perkins, Redfem, and Miles). Adjournment On a motion by Kristin Cataldo, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Caouette, Perkins, Cataldo, Redfern, and Miles). ZBA Meeting, June 7, 2012 4