HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-17 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading
a Meeting Minutes RECEIVED
„owo�w' TOWN CLERK
EADING. MASS.
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Zoning Board of Appeals 2017 NOV 13 A 6 51
Date: 2013 -10 -17 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose: General Business
Attendees: Members - Present:
Damase Caouette, Chair
Robert Redfern
John Jarema
Erik Hagstrom
David Traniello
Kathleen Hackett
Members - Not Present:
John Miles
Glen Redmond
Others Present:
Minutes Respectlully Submitted By: Maureen M. Knight, Recording Secretary
Topics of Discussion:
CASE # 13 -12
Continuance of a Public Hearing on the petition of Alice Beltran who seeks a Variance under
Section 4.2.1 of the zoning bylaws in order to modify a Variance granted on December 17, 1957
in order to use the existing cottage for the use of a dwelling on the property located at 29
Gardner Road in Reading, Massachusetts.
The Applicant's attorney, Michael Osboume, submitted an email, read into the record by the
Chairman, requesting that the case be continued to December 5, 2013 so he may submit
additional information supporting his position. Mr. Redfern said this situation has to end with
Attorney Oshoume showing up on December 5th to present his case because Mr. Redfern and
other members thought the Board should no longer agree with any more continuances until the
Board meets with Attorney Osboume.
On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved
to continue the hearing to December 5, 2013. Attorney Osboume will be requested to provide the
additional information no later than November 12, 2013 to allow Town Counsel and Board
members sufficient time to review the information before the December 5 meeting.
The vote was 5 -0 -0 ( Caouette, Redfern, Jarema, Hackett, Traniello)
Page 1 1
CASE # 13 -19
A Public Hearing on the petition of Gail Johnson (Arch Land Development LLC) who seeks a
Variance and/or a Special Permit under Section(s) 5.1.2 & 6.3.3.2 of the zoning bylaws in order
to demolish an existing structure and to construct a new single family dwelling on a non -
confomring lot on the property located at 84 Cross Street in Reading, Massachusetts.
Bill Johnson presented their proposal to the Board. There is currently 2 feet of water in the
basement of the present dwelling and the walls are falling down. The roofing structure is in bad
shape. The neighbors he spoke to are in favor of the proposal.
The Building Inspector submitted a letter stating he was in favor of the proposal and had no
objections.
Mr. Traniello said he did not think the Applicant needed a Variance and a Special Permit would
be suitable. Ms. Hackett asked why there were two plans submitted and Mr. Johnson said in case
an alternative was needed. The one that is dated 9 -23 -13 is the one that is to be considered for the
Special Permit.
Mr. Jarema had some questions about why Mr. Johnson was using Section 6.3.3.2 when he could
put the house on the lot in better regard to the dimensional controls. He thinks the plan could be
amended more and had concerns about the height since that lot is at present the highest elevation
in the area. Mr. Johnson said he did not want to have to blast since the houses are so close to
each other. Hydraulic hammering might be required at the most.
The garage will be slab on grade with a half basement for the dwelling. Mr. Jarema said the
alternate plan seems like a better plan but Mr. Johnson said then the turn-around is tight and
retaining walls would have to be built.
Mr. Redfern said Section 6.3.3.2 states that a Special Permit can be granted if it does not increase
the non - conformity and is not more detrimental and he thinks the new dwelling will not be more
overwhehning or detrimental than the present dwelling. He did not have any problems with the
proposal and thought it was in fact an improvement.
Mr. Hagstmm said the blasting could be a problem.
Paul Sumner of 78 Cross Street said he is in favor of the proposal but had some concerns about
privacy and tree removal.
Dan of 293 Ash Street said he is concerned about privacy also and would want trees or a border
of some sort for privacy.
Richard Iannetti of 79 Cross Street is in favor of the proposal but was concerned about lot line
measurements to the structure.
Kerry Lee of Ash Street had questions about the blasting.
On a motion by Robert Redfem, seconded by Kathleen Hackett, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to grant the Applicant a Special Permit under Section 6.3.3.2 in order to demolish the
existing non - conforming single family dwelling and to construct a new two story single family
Page 1 2
dwelling with attached garage on the existing legal non - conforming lot on the property as shown
on the referenced Plot Plan and in general conformance with the architectural plans submitted.
This Special Permit is conditioned upon the following:
1. The Petitioner shall submit to the Building Inspector a Certified Plot Plan of the
proposed construction and proposed foundation plans, prior to the issuance of a
foundation permit for the work.
2. The Petitioner's final construction plans for the new structure shall be submitted
to the Building Inspector, along with the as -built foundation plan(s), prior to the
issuance of a Building Permit.
3. As -built plans showing the completed construction shall be submitted to the
Building Inspector immediately after the work is completed and prior to the
issuance of an Occupancy Permit.
The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Jarema, Hackett, Traniello).
Minutes
On a motion by Robert Redfem, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved
to approve the minutes of August 15, 2013 with changes.
The vote was 6 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfem, Jarema, Hackett, Traniello).
On a motion by Robert Redfem, seconded by Kathleen Hackett, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to approve the minutes of August 15, 2013 with changes.
The vote was 6 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Jarema, Hackett, Traniello).
Adjournment
On a motion by David Traniello, seconded by Erik Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to adjourn the meeting.
The vote was 6 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfem, Jarema, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom).
Page 1 3