The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-08-07 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutesowe re Town of Reading �—Toa ca( 5c Meeting Minutes RECEIVED 101 TOWN CLERK Moaw iiEA01NG. MASS. Board - Committee - commission - Council: Zoning Board of Appeals 2019 AUG 25 A 11: Ol Date: 2014 -08 -07 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Attendees: Members - Present: Chairman Robert Redfern, Erik Hagstrom, David Traniello, John Jarema, Damase Caouette Members - Not Present: Kathleen Hackett, Glen Redmond Others Present: Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Maureen Knight on behalf of Damase Caouette Topics of Discussion: Cases # 14 -13 (163 -167 South Street) A Public Hearing on the petition of Arch Land Development who seeks a Variance from zoning bylaws, Town of Reading, under Section(s) 5.0 & 5.1.2 of the zoning bylaws in order to create two non - conforming lots in an S -20 District on the property located at 163 -167 South Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Case # 14 -14 (163 -167 South Street) A Public Hearing on the petition of Arch Land Development who seeks a Variance and Special Permit under Section(s) 4.0 / 4.2.2 / 5.0 / 5.1.2 / 5.3.1.4 / 6.3.3 / 6.3.3.2 / 6.3.4 / 6.3.8 of the zoning bylaws in order to demolish an existing 4 -unit structure and to construct a new 4 -unit town house structure on a lot located in an S -20 District on the property located at 163 -167 South Street in Reading, Massachusetts. The Chairman said Attorney Brad Latham, the Applicant's attorney, asked in a letter to the Board that both cases be heard concurrently. The Chairman said they would hear them concurrently but vote individually on each case. Attorney Brad Latham said he also requested that the Board make a finding as to whether this is a legal non - conforming four - family dwelling. He reviewed the facts and history of the property and said it is grandfathered as a four - family dwelling. He submitted past phone lists and past assessor's cards that showed it was considered a four - family dwelling. Page I 1 The Building Inspector has inspected this dwelling in the past and had determined it a four - family dwelling. The owner, Ted Watson, stated the past history of the dwelling and how he purchased it after WWII, it was a four - family at that time, and he purchased it as such. Mr. Traniello asked if Attorney Latham thought the property was the determining factor and Attorney Latham said he did not. Mr. Jarema said he only saw three families living in the dwelling according to phone listings submitted. He said it looked like 163, 165, and 167 were designated street addresses for this property and that would denote this as a three - family dwelling. Mr. Caouette said he agreed with Mr. Jarema that it is not crystal clear. Mr. Hagstrom asked if there had been any abandonment and Attorney Latham said no. Also included for information submitted by the Building Inspector was an inspection that he had done in 2005 in which he listed it as a four - family unit and issued a Certificate of Inspection. Mr. Watson said he had documents from Reading Municipal Light Department and the Assessor's office that stated this was a four - family dwelling. On a motion by Erik Hagstrom, seconded by Damase Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to make a finding that the dwelling constitutes a lawful four - family use of structure. The vote was 4 -0 -1 ( Jarema opposed, Caouette, Redfern, Hagstmm, and Traniello in favor). Attorney Latham said that the proposal would be a change from what is on the property now but underlying the situation is that there will be a new four - family structure. The proposal will have to go before the CPDC for review. He reviewed what he thought were the required criteria. Mr. Traniello wanted to know how a four - family unit in a single - family use area was not detrimental and Attorney Latham said it would be a very attractive structure and it has to be approved by the CPDC also. The lot is slightly below 20,000 square feet so it is less than what is required. Mr. Watson said the lot lines were rearranged from his own property because he had a lot more land and he wanted to angle out the street and added enough to make it 20,546 square feet. His own lot will continue to have 27,000 square feet. He said three tenants have moved out and there is one left at 163 on the second floor. Mr. Caouette asked if this property was for sale and Mr. Watson said yes, it is being sold to Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson said there is parking for eight cars that will be moved to the rear and there will be a condominium organization to maintain the property. Mr. Caouette said what is there now is not impressive but it fits in better than what is proposed. Mr. Redfem reviewed an error he found on the survey plan regarding the dimension in the back of the townhouse units and he asked that it be corrected on the survey. He also did not see the proposed footprint area on the survey. The new structure footprint appears to be double what is there now. He did not think a variance was required but instead it should be a Special Permit. He also thought anything double in size is more detrimental to the neighborhood than what is there now. Page 1 2 Mr. Jarema said the architectural plans show a two -story from the front and a three -story in the back. There is no topographical plan for their review. The mass of this unit is substantial and should be considered as detrimental to the neighborhood. The size of the individual units is 1,900 square feet each, more than a typical Cape Cod style dwelling. Charlene Reynolds Santo of 48 Wakefield Street, who is a member of the Historical Commission, read the letter from the Historical Commission that she submitted to the Board at the beginning of the meeting. The meeting was opened to the public and Dave Walsh of 217 Walnut Street voiced his disapproval of the project. Dave Tuttle, member of the CPDC, asked if the plans were online and he was told he could review the file at the Community services Office. Tom Foxon of 230 Walnut Street voiced his disapproval of the project and was concerned about the dis- charging of water into the area. Joan Benevides of 164 South Street voiced her disapproval of the proposal and said it should be a single family. Attorney William Crowley, representing Michael and Heather Soracco of 235 Walnut Street, said they disapprove of the proposal and they get water in their property now and any changes will not assure that the water situation will not get worse. Wendy Foxon of 230 Walnut Street also voiced her disapproval of the project. David Dugan of 154 South Street voiced his disapproval of the proposal. Tom Wise of 181 South Street voiced his disapproval of the project. The Chairman closed the meeting to public comment and then reviewed the eleven letters received, mentioned the owners names, and read pertinent statements. All letters disapproved of the proposal. Mr. Jarema said there are other solutions out there for this property. He said Reading needs smaller structures and something substantially smaller would be better for this lot than the extremely large four - family dwelling proposed. Something much smaller would have less detrimental effect on the neighborhood instead of the massive structure proposed. Mr. Traniello asked if the applicant had pursued any other options and Attorney Latham said he had. Mr. Caouette said he agrees that this is too large a structure for the neighborhood. The topographical problems also bother him. A five minute recess was requested by Attorney Latham. When they returned Attorney Latham requested a continuation for Cases # 14 -13 and # 14 -14. On a motion by Damage Caouette, seconded by David Traniello, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue both hearings to September 18, 2014 at the request of the Applicant. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Redfern, Caouette, Jarema, Hagstrom, Traniello). Page 1 3 Other Business Discussion by the ZBA regarding Accessory Apartments and Non - Conforming Use sections of Zoning Bylaws with subsequent memo from ZBA to be sent to the Zoning Advisory Committee. George Katsoufis from the ZAC attended the discussion. Mr. Traniello said the Board should make their comments as they reviewed the changes for Accessory Apartments. He recorded their comments and will relay them to the ZAC. Mr. Traniello reviewed the specific changes that were suggested by the ZAC for the ZBA's review. Everything must ultimately be approved by Town Meeting. Minutes On a motion by David Traniello, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to approve the minutes of July 10, 2014 with changes. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Redfern, Caouette, Jarema, Hagstrom, Traniello). Adjournment On a motion by David Traniello, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Redfern, Caouette, Jarema, Hagstrom, Traniello). Page 14