Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-12-17 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesOFk IO„bt/I,I IV CLE , / 'p(1'�[\ � Town Of Reading Meeting Minutes RECEIVED TOWN CLERK i'EADING. MASS. Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 1016 MAR 1 4 P 2 021 Zoning Board of Appeals Date: 2015 -12 -17 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Session: General Session Attendees: Members - Present: Robert Redfern, Damage Caouette, John Jarema, Kathleen Hackett, Erik Hagstrom Members - Not Present: David Traniello Others Present: Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Kim Saunders Topics of Discussion: Case # 15 -15 The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on the petition of Ed Juralewicz (Reading Cooperative Bank) who seeks a Variance from Sections 8.0, 8.2.3, 8.2.6.4a of the zoning bylaws in order to install two additional wall signs, and to allow the existing sign to remain on the property located at 180 Haven Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Attorney Latham, who is representing the petitioner, introduced Tony Patty, Vice President of Reading Cooperative and Ed Juralewicz. Mr. Latham gave the history of the bank. He said when Reading Cooperative Bank was renovated in 1996 they installed a carved sign over the doorway which is not visible to the traffic on Haven Street. He said the petitioner is installing a new sign on the side of the building. He requested the Board grant relief and allow the petitioner to keep the carved sign. He said it should be considered as part of the building and not a sign. Mr. Latham listed and gave arguments for the four criteria required for a Variance. Mr. Redfern read comments on the petition that were submitted by Mr. Redmond who is the Town Zoning Officer. Mr. Juralewicz of United Sign Company said the CPDC approved the Master Signage Plan. He said the proposed sign would be similar to the one that was installed in the rear of the bank. Ms. Hackett asked if the carved sign would stay as it currently is. Mr. Juralewicz said it would. Mr. Jarema stated he had concerns allowing the Variance. There are other banks on Haven Street that he felt would request additional signage if the Variance was allowed. Page I 1 Mr. Latham said a sign serves as a memory. He stated the new sign is being installed and the carved sign will be covered up. Mr. Caouette said he has never noticed the concrete sign. He agreed the carving is not attention getting. Mr. Hagstrom said the carved sign should be considered ornamental and not commercial. The M.F. Charles Building has a carving on their building. Mr. Redfern agreed the carved sign is difficult to see. He questioned why the new sign could not be hung over the carved sign, rather than on the side of the building. He commented on other signage the Bank has on their property. Mr. Latham commented that if the carved sign is covered up it would not be very attractive. Mr. Jarema asked the petitioner to be creative and consider the streetscape. After consulting with the petitioner, Mr. Latham asked for the petition to be withdrawn without prejudice. There was no public comment. Mr. Latham wrote up his request to withdraw the petition. On a motion by Mr. Caouette, seconded by Mr. Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the petitioners request to withdraw the petition without prejudice. Vote was 5 -0 -0 (Redfern, Caouette, Jarema, Hackett, Hagstrom). Case # 15 -13 The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on the petition of Salvatore & Linda Russo who seek a Special Permit under Sections 7.3/7.3.2 of the zoning bylaws in order to add a 23' x 24' two -story garage with a room above and to remodel the existing apartment as per plans on the property located at 55 Hancock Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Ms. Russo said the property has been in her family for 60 years. She bought the property from her father, and now her daughter will be purchasing it. She said the apartment will accommodate her and her husband. She described the proposed addition and stated it meets the setbacks and zoning bylaws. Mr. Redfern read comments on the petition that were submitted by Glen Redmond who is the Town Zoning Officer. Mr. Hagstrom said the addition complies with the side setbacks and the project is straightforward. Mr. Caouette agreed and said the petition is straightforward. Page 1 2 Mr. Jarema questioned if the amount of rooms in unit 1 and unit 2 will change if the proposed addition is allowed. Ms. Russo said the number of rooms in each unit will remain as is; only the square footage will change. Ms. Hackett said she had nothing to add. Mr. Redfern said he had no issues. The addition meets all setbacks and there is no increase in non - conformity. Mr. Redfern opened the hearing to the public. Ms. Margaret Carlmen of 52 Hancock Street said she is in favor of the addition. On a motion by Mr. Hagstrom, seconded by Mr. Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Petitioner's request for a Special Permit under Sections 7.3/7.3.2 of the zoning bylaws in order to allow the construction of a 23' x 24' two -story garage with a room above it and to remodel the existing apartment at the property located at 55 Hancock Street, reading, Massachusetts all as shown on the referenced Certified Plot Plan and Architectural Drawings. 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. Vote was 5 -0 -0 (Redfern, Caouette, Jarema, Hackett, Hagstrom). Adjournment On a motion by Mr. Jarema, seconded by Mr. Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Vote was 5 -0 -0 ( Redfem, Caouette, Jarema, Hackett, Hagstrom). Page 1 3