Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-11-20 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes OPRfgO Town of Reading = Meeting Minutes `� �i'4 iC CJ TOWN CLERK , � .IM(00.POPP RE , V \P, k4A. Kk- Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 2020 FEB 10 AM 10: 2E Zoning Board of Appeals Date: 2019-11-20 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Select Board Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Purpose: Public Hearing Version: Final Attendees: Members - Present: John Jarema Robert Redfern Cy Caouette Erik Hagstrom Nick Pernice Hillary Mateev Members - Not Present: Others Present: Building Commissoner Mark Dupell, Staff Planner Andrew MacNichol, Nicole Princic, Dan Princic, Dan Brokowski, Gary Buonarosa, Mark Tango, G. Saggese Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Amanda Beatrice Topics of Discussion: Mr. Caouette opens the meeting. Case# 19-21 —61 Summer Ave Mr.Princic stated they are looking for another continuance for at least another few months. He noted that they were still in the middle of construction of their addition and finding it difficult to become compliant, as the deck is currently being used to help with the construction of the addition.Mr.Caouette asked if they wanted a specific date for the continuance. Mr. Princic stated he believed the contractor and the Building Inspector came to some sort of an agreement that this would be taken care of before the final inspection of the house. He also stated what was left to do and that they are not currently living there. Mr. Princic mentioned that part of the structure in the ground holds up part of the retaining wall. Mr.Princic stated they are hoping to be done with the house and his contractor was working on the addition and that they do not have the resources right now. Mrs. Princic mentioned that the winter posed a problem because of the ground being frozen. Mr. Redfern thanked the applicants for attending the meeting to ask for a continuance,then asked Mr. Dupell for his view. Mr.Dupe] stated that they found the zoning violation when the applicants applied for a building permit to build an addition. He stated that they made an agreement with the contractor to give them the permit for the addition as long as the owners went to the Zoning Board to rectify the situation. Page 1 1 Mr.Jerema asked if they would be able to do something about the situation by February/March or would there be another continuation at that point. Mr. Dupell stated that there could be an additional continuance because they would be at the end of construction and there could be more things to wrap up.Mr. Dupell did not believe that this continuance would hold anything up. Mr.Pernice stated that come March,there could still be issues with the ground being frozen and if other changes happen that they should submit a new plot plan. Mr. Princic stated that he was trying to provide all the information they could to be helpful to the Board. Mr. Pernice asked if they chose a date for a continuance further back in the year,could they move it up if there is room in the schedule. Mr. MacNichol said he would have to look into it. Mr.Caouette entertained a motion to continue for March 18,2020. On a motion made by Mr.Redfern,seconded by Mr.Jerema,the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue the hearing for Case#19-21 to March 18,2020,at the request of the Applicant. Vote was 5-0-0(Jerema,Caouette,Redfern,Hagstrom,Pernice) Case# 19-14- 104 Salem Street Mr.Caouette read Attorney McGrail's letter asking for a continuance on behalf of his client until December 18th,2019. Mr. Dupell updated the Board that they had reached an agreement and that they had received a foundation permit. Mr. Dupell believed that they were part way there. He stated he could not speak for Attorney McGrail,but he believed they were continuing and not withdrawing due to a clause in the agreement that if the house does not make it through the process that all bets were off.The applicants would then be back in front of the Board for the original appeal of his decision. Mr.Jerema asked Mr. Dupell to clarify if the house would be moved or going back to its original place. Mr.Dupell stated that they are digging a new foundation that would be in a slightly new location but still complied with the Zoning Laws. It would be the original house going onto a new foundation. The Board discussed the amount of continuations there has been for this case. Mr. Dupel explained the reasoning for some of the timeline. Mr.Caouette entertained a motion to continue for December 18,2020. On a motion made by Mr.Jerema,seconded by Mr.Pernice,the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue the hearing for Case#19-14 to December 18,2019,at the request of the Applicant. Vote was 4.0-1 (AYE;Jarema,Caouette,Hagslrom,Pernice,NAY;Redfern) Mr.Jerema recused himself from the next case,due to a conflict. Case# 19-26.287 Lowell Street Mr.Caouette reads the Legal Notice into record. Attorney Traniello introduced himself,the owner and gave a brief description of what he would be covering. He stated that due to sick/disabled family members the owner of P&S would like to devote his time to help with his family and he cannot do that while running the store.There is a lease agreement opportunity with Mark Tango Plumbing based on him being able to continue the retail use. Page 1 2 Attorney Traniello stated that this new retail use would be less detrimental to the area and that the current building is compliant with setbacks and there would be no changes to the exterior. He gave a brief overview of the property history and noted in his paperwork it was stated that during the new construction due to the fire, one apartment was added and not two. He also stated that interior changes are very minimal. Attorney Traniello stated that the hours of operation would be reduced from 7 days a week 6-8pm to 5 days a week 7-8 pm and appointments as necessary.The people who would be using the property would be employees and anyone who is invited which would reduce the traffic,although there was no traffic study done.There was already an arrangement made between the property owner and the plumbing company for the plumbing company's trucks to be parked there for at least the past 6 years. He believed that extended the current use to a retail plumbing use would not be more detrimental Mr. Dupell stated for clarification there was no memo sent out and that he had a phone conversation 6-8 months ago,spoke in person with Mr.Tango 4-6 months ago and he talked to Attorney Traniello and everything was verbal.There was no written denial because the Attorney Traniello planned on presenting the case using historical facts. Mr. Redfern questioned what the applicant was seeking. Mr. McNichol stated that it would be up to the Board Members to decide what type of action to take. Mr. Redfern asked about future signage.Attorney Traniello stated that they would go through proper channels and the bylaws.Mr. Redfem questioned the parking lot and that some of the parking is on Town land and if there was any agreement with the Town for using it for parking. Attorney Traniello stated that there was a discussion with the owner of the State Highway and the Town to provide for less intrusiveness ingress and egress of the property and that there was an agreement in place,though he has not seen it. Mr. Redfern stated he did not have an issue with the application and that the future use would be less detrimental. He asked Attorney Traniello if there would be change planned for commercial/residential use or would the percentage be the same.Attorney Traniello stated that at this time there were no current plans but, in the future,they would go through the proper channels for any other changes and zoning requirements.Mr. Redfern asked if Mr.Tango was already leasing any of the property. Attorney Traniello stated that he has been storing his vehicles there for 6 years and using some of the garage for storage. Mr. Pemice stated he did not see this change of use as any more detrimental to the community and he would be leaning towards a special permit. Ms. Mateev agreed. Mr. Hagstrom stated that it seems as if the previous Variances were based on the convenience store aspect of it and he believed that a special permit would be more appropriate so that in the future,not just anyone with commercial use couldjust go into this space and they would have to appear in front of the Board for permission. Attorney Traniello stated that is something they would certainly consider. Mr. Caouette asked if the property was already being used to park Mr.Tangos vehicles and some storage. Attorney Traniello confirmed. He also asked about the two apartments on the second floor. Attorney Traniello stated that there was only one apartment,though they had permission to expand and never acted upon it. He asked if any one occupied the apartment and Mr. Buonarosa stated that he and his daughter lived there. Mr.Caouette swore in Mr. Buonarosa and a few additional people. Mr.Caouette asked if they would continue to live there. Mr. Buonarosa stated that he has lived there with his daughter for the past 14 years but he would be moving in with his family and Mr. Tango will rent it out,though Mr. Buonarosa would still own the building. Mr.Caouette opened the meeting up to the public. Page 1 3 Two abutters stated that they do not have an issue with it.A third abutter stated that he had no issues also. Mr. Caouette closed the public comment. Mr. Caouette asked Mr. Tango exactly what he would be using the property for Mr. Tango stated he would be moving his office there, parking his trucks, a meeting place for his employed and setting the downstairs up for a showroom. He would not be using the site for supplies. The Board briefly discusses whether or not they should add any conditions. On a motion made by Mr.Redfern,seconded by Mr.Pernice,the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant a Special Permit for Case#19-26. Vote was 5-0-0 (Redfern,Caouette,Pernice,Hagstrom,Mateev) Minutes: 10/2/2019 On a motion made by Mr.Redfern,seconded by Mr.Hagstrom,the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to accept the minutes as amended. Vote was 5-0-0 (Redfern,Caouette,Pernice,Hagstrom,Mateev) Other Business: Mr. Caouette read an email from the Town Clerk to the Board going over the minor language changes to the bylaws,to clarify that you must be a resident to be a Board Member. The Board Members briefly discussed the minor language change. Adjournment On a motion made Ms.Mateev,seconded by Mr. Hagstrom,the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting. Vote was 5-0-0 (Redfern,Caouette,Pernice,Hagstrom,Mateev) Page 1 4 E