Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-11-01 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading Meeting Minutes TOWN, CLEM< A. 1142,,, Board - Committee - Commission Council: 2018 FEB 26 pfd 4' 34 Zoning Board of Appeals Date: 2017-11-01 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: Public Hearing Session: . Attendees: Members - Present: David Traniello, Chairman John Jarema Robert Redfern Cy Caouette Nick Pernice Erik Hagstrom Members - Not Present: Others Present: . Josh Gagnon,, Angelo Salamone, Michael DeCroteau, Terence Ward, Larry Hayes Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Kristen Grover Topics of Discussion: Chairman Traniello called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM Case # 17-09 — 236 Ash Street The Zoning Board of Appeals held a continuance of a Public Hearing in the Selectmen's Meeting Room at Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts on Thursday, September 7, 2017 at 7:00 PM on the application of Edward Sartell, pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 40A §9 for a Special Permit under Reading Zoning Bylaw Section 5.5.1.1e to allow.a non-residential accessory structure within the side and.rear setbacks, and pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 40A §10 for a Variance under Reading Zoning Bylaw Sections 5.5.1.4a to allow the accessory structure to exceed the 12 foot height limit, on the property located at 236 Ash Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Mr. Traniello introduced the case and announced the Applicant requested a Withdrawal without Prejudice. He reminded the Board he had recused himself at the previous meeting and stated he will not vote tonight. He then turned the matter over to Mr. Jarema and the Board for a vote. Mr. Jarema read the case into the record and then read the Applicant's request for a Withdrawal-. He then opened the matter to the Board for a vote. On a motion made by Mr. Redfern, seconded by Mr. Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant a Withdrawal without Prejudice for Case #17-09. Vote was 5-0-0 (Redfern, Caouette, Jarema, Hagstrom, Pernice) Mr. Redfern will write the decision and send to Mr. Jarema to sign. Page 1 1 Case # 17-11— 23 King Street The Zoning Board of Appeals held a Public Hearing in the Selectmen's Meeting Room at Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts on Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 7:00 PM on the application of Joshua Gagnon, pursuant to M.G.L. Ch: 40A §9 for a Special Permit under Reading Zoning Bylaw Section 7.3.2 for a 4.08'x3.75' extension of an existing nonconforming entryway, with a side setback of 13.5' on the property located at 23 King Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Josh Gagnon, the Applicant was present on behalf of the application. Mr. Traniello,ihtroduced the case and swore in the Applicant. Mr. Gagnon presented his case to the Board. He described how the existing entryway is small and cramped, and that he would like to extend it by four feet to make entrance into the house eaiser. Mr. Traniello and Mr. Gagnon contemplated whether there was an existing encroachment into the setback already, and Mr. Gagnon stated he did. not find that information in Town records. Mr. Gagnon stated he has owned the house since April. Mr. Traniello questioned if the.Building Department had given him any feedback and Mr. Gagnon explained he has spoken with the Engineering Department. Mr. Traniello asked if the existing structure was reflected on the original plot plan in Engineering was part of the submitted package. Mr. Gagnon stated it was not, that it was not sufficient for what the Building Department was looking for so he paid for a professional updated plot plan. Mr. Traniello and Mr. Gagnon discussed the original plot plan, trying to determine details and the date of the plan. Mr. Traniello advised Mr. Gagnon that he was asking the Board for relief to extend an existing non- conformity and it's the part of the Board's job to determine how and when that original non -conformity came to be, and that if it was in existence longer than l0 years then the state statute allows the Board discretion to treat a non- conformity older than 10 years as legal. Mr. Traniello explained to Mr. Gagnon that if the nori-conformity was originally granted by a Variance, then the only way the Board would be able to allow Mr. Gagnon relief.for the extension he is requesting is by another Variance, not by Special Permit. He further stated Mr. Gagnon's application for today to extend the existing non -conformity along the same line should fall under a Special Permit given Mr. Gagnon stated he feels the non -conformity has been in existence for at least 10 years. Mr. Traniello turned the matter over to the Board for questions and comments. Mr. Redfern mentioned he had the same thoughts on the matter and referenced benefit of having the history of the Assessor's plans which the Board did not have this evening. Mr. Redfern stated he believes the house was built prior to existing Zoning and feels it is legal nonconforming situation. He stated it is a grandfathered legal nonconforming lot anyway, and does not feel the proposed request will create a new nonconformity or be detrimental as you can't see it from the street, and doesn't feel it would be a detrimental impact to the property or neighborhood. Mr. Redfern said he supports this application. Mr. Pernice stated he agreed with what Mr. Redfern just said. He added that it is a minimal change to the structure and he is okay with the application. He said he feels it won't increase the.nonconformity. Mr. Jarema said he only had one question and that was if the front door moved to the side porch. He mentioned the only way to check is to look at the file but he assumes it was put on more than ten years ago. He said it appears to be a legal nonconformity. Mr. Caouette stated there is no doubt in his mind that it is legal nonconformity but looking at the tax maps, it show the frontage as 48' but the plot plans shows 50'. Mr. Redfern commented that in his experience, tax maps are approximate and it would be best to use the certified plot plan for reference. Mr. Caouette asked the Applicant if the rear deck. was being taken down, to which the Applicant answered that it was and being replaced by a platform with steps. Mr. Hagstroin stated he didn't have any questions or issues with the application. Mr. Traniello read the memo and denial letter from Mr. Redmond, the Building Commissioner which stated the bylaws. Mr. Traniello then opened the meeting to the public for comments and questions. He closed the meeting without public comment. Mr. Pernice read the conditions to grant a Special Permit. Page 1 2 On a motion made by Mr. Pernice, seconded by Mr. Redfern, the_ Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant a Special Permit for Case #17-11. Vote was 5-0-0 (Pernice, Redfern, Jarema, Caouette, Traniello) Mr. Traniello then explained further action to the Applicant. Case #10-04 —Beacon Court Mr. Traniello addressed the next item on the Agenda, stating that technically there is nothing on the Agenda as nothing has been submitted for the Board to review and vote on. Mr. Salamone was present representing Beacon Court and stated he was there is response to the letter that he submitted to the Board. Mr. Traneillo asked Mr. Salamone which letter he was referring to. Mr. Salamone attempted to hand in a paper to the Board. Mr. Traniello told Mr. Salamone not to hand anything to him tonight and that he has been informed multiple times about procedure, and that there was nothing submitted before the Board for them to act on tonight. Mr. Salamone stated he was present this evening as a courtesy to the Board. Mr. Traniello informed Mr. Salamone the Board did not care about a courtesy and advised him to see an attorney then go through the proper channels. Mr. Salamone attempted to speak of a letter he wrote to the Board and also hand delivered to the Building Commissioner, Mr. Redmond. Mr. Salamone stated that is all he was addressing, that he was not asking the Board to act on anything. Mr. Traniello told Mr. Salamone he needs to submit a request to the Board that states whatever relief he seeks and until that happens, there is nothing for the Board to take action on. Mr. Salamone told the Board he had a conversation with Town Counsel where Town Counsel -suggested what to say to the Board tonight, which was his prepared statement that he wanted to read to the Board. Mr. Salamone stated he received a letter from Town Counsel confirming that Town's position is that the 40B Comprehensive Permit has lapsed and he will submit a formal request to the ZBA to.appeal that Decision: Mr. Traniello asked what Decision and Mr. Salamone stated that was the paper he tried to submit to the Board which they didn't want.' Mr. Salamone stated it was a letter he received from Town Engineering which brings him to this situation. Mr. Traniello told Mr. Salamone to hold on to his letter and file a proper request with the Town. Mr., Traniello explained to Mr. Salamone that if he is simply looking to appeal the Town Engineer's decision, the Board does not handle appeals pertaining to the Town Engineer, but only for the Building Department and Building Commissioner. Mr. Traniello told Mr. Salamone there have been many discussions, even as recent as today and all parties have advised Mr. Salamone to seek counsel, and if he would like to.make a request this Board has jurisdiction on then to go daytime government and take the appropriate steps, the next meeting is on November 15ffi. Mr. Traniello dismissed Mr. Salamone and addressed comments from the public where he advised them also to see daytime government. Miscellaneous Public Inquiry A member of the public, who had come in to the meeting late, asked the Board why 23 King Street was first denied his application. Mr. Traniello briefly explained the procedure to the woman. She asked where she should go for an application and Mr. Traniello explained what to do and to go to the Building Department.. The woman thanked the Board and left. Minutes Septemben28, 2017 On a motion made by Mr. Redfern, seconded by Mr. Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to approve the September 28, 2017 minutes as amended. Vote was 5-0-0 (Traniello, Jarema, Redfern, Caouette, Hagstrom). Page 1 3 Adiournment On a motion made Mr. Caouette, seconded by Mr. Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:37p.m. Vote was 5-0-0 (Traniello, Jarema, Redfern, Caouette, Hagstrom). Page 14