HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-02-06 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading
Meeting Minutes
ISO Vo
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Zoning Board of Appeals
Date: 2014 -02 -06
Building: Reading Town Hall
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose: General Business
Attendees: Members - Present:
Time: 7:00 PM
qoW
HE CEO VED
_-'OWN CL tRK
SS.
�IbAPR —9 P
Location: Selectmen Meeting Room
Chairman Damase Caouette, Robert Redfern, John Miles, Erik Hagstrom,
Kathleen Hackett, David Traniello, John Jarema
Members - Not Present:
Others Present:
Building Inspector Glen Redmond
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Maureen Knight on behalf of Damase Caouette
Topics of Discussion:
CASE # 14 -01
A Public Hearing on the petition of Phillip Cormier who seeks a Special Permit under Section(s)
6.3.8 / 6.3.8.1b of the zoning bylaws in order to demolish an existing single family dwelling and
to construct a new single family dwelling on a non - conforming lot on the property located at 33
Belmont Street in Reading, Massachusetts.
Phillip Cormier presented his proposal to the Board and described the proposed dwelling and
passed around photographs of a similar house he built in North Reading.
The Building Inspector said it was a typical tear down and rebuild. He said the proposed
structure needed to move back a few feet but other than that it was acceptable.
Members of the Board asked a few questions that Mr. Cormier answered. All the setbacks will
meet the bylaw requirements and the proposed dwelling will be an improvement over the present
dwelling located there now.
John Miles recused himself from the case because he knew the next -door neighbors.
Rita Surette of Belmont Street asked a question about the driveway.
Mike O'Shea, an abutter, had questions about a pool of water that was there now.
David Decker of Winter Street asked some questions about the setbacks.
Page 1 1
On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by David Traniello, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to grant the Applicant a Special Permit under Section 6.3.81b of the zoning bylaws in
order to permit the demolition of the existing non - conforming single family dwelling, and to
construct a new one -story single family dwelling on the property as shown on the referenced Plot
Plan and in general conformance with the architectural plans submitted.
The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom).
Case # 14 -02
A Public Hearing on the petition of Al Couillard who seeks a Special Permit under Section(s)
6.3.8 / 6.3.8.1b of the zoning bylaws in order to demolish an existing single family dwelling and
to construct a new single family dwelling on a non - conforming lot on the property located at 46
Evergreen Road in Reading, Massachusetts.
Robert Redfern recused himself from the case because he knows the current owner of 46
Evergreen Road.
Priscilla Fitzgerald presented the case for Al Couillard (who was unable to attend) to the Board
and described what the proposal was. The Building Inspector said it is a typical tear down and
rebuild and meets all the required setbacks.
The Board did not have any questions.
Don Dehart of 108 Wakefield Street asked what the current setbacks, heights, and design were.
Paul Doherty of Wakefield Street asked the square feet of the proposed house and the grading.
On a motion by Kathleen Hackett, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to grant the Applicant a Special Permit under Section 6.3.8.1b of the zoning bylaws in
order to demolish an existing single family dwelling and to construct a new single family
dwelling on the property as shown on the referenced Plot Plan of Land.
The 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, Jarema, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom).
Page 1 2
Y
Case # 14 -03
A Public Hearing on the petition of Jacqueline Travassos who seeks a Variance under Section(s)
5.0 Dimensional Controls of the zoning bylaws in order to construct a one story addition with a
10.2' side yard setback rather than the required 15.0'as per plans submitted on the property
located at 15 Kurchian Lane in Reading, Massachusetts.
Jacqueline Travassos wanted to add an addition to her house for her mother with handicapped
provisions built in. They had been given a plot plan by the mortgage company but once they had
a new survey done it was apparent they did not have the required side yard setback. If they put
the addition on the other side they would have too much ledge.
The Building Inspector said it does not meet the 15' side setbacks and that is why it is before the
board.
John Jarema questioned their criteria for the Variance and said they did not address what was
required.
Robert Redfern said he did not think a Variance should be issued for a dwelling that presently
meets all setbacks. He said proof would be needed as to the ledge present on the lot in order to
even consider a Variance. He suggested if there was some revamping of the design and it may be
possible that they would not need to even come before the Board.
Erick Hagstrom said the Board needed more information as to the lot and ledge placement.
The Chairman said the required Variance criteria submitted was weak and the ledge needs data
to support the claim.
Pete Schmendy, who was an abutter, had concerns about how this addition might affect his
future options for expansion.
Mr. Redfern suggested the applicants meet with the abutters and that the Applicant could
continue the case, or they could withdraw without prejudice, or have a vote taken at this meeting.
The Applicant asked to withdraw their case without prejudice.
On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved
to accept the withdrawal of the case without prejudice.
The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom).
Other Business
Report from David Traniello on the Zoning Advisory Committee.
Mr. Traniello gave a report on the ZAC and where they are at this time. They are taking extra
time to get the proper wording. He explained the Stakeholders Breakfast and what they hoped to
accomplish with that event. They want to learn as many concerns and perspectives as possible.
They expect to make very useful changes. He said all involved are putting in a lot of time to
move things along and try to stay on schedule.
Page 1 3
MINUTES
On a motion by David Traniello, seconded by Kathleen Hackett, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to accept the minutes of November 7, 2013.
The vote was 7 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom, Jarema, Miles).
On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved
to accept the minutes of December 5, 2013.
The vote was 7 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom, Jarema, Miles).
Adjournment
On a motion by John Miles, seconded by Erik Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to
adjourn the meeting.
The vote was 7 -0 -0 (Caouette, Redfern, Hackett, Traniello, Hagstrom, Jarema, Miles).
Page 14