HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-12-17 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 0 orxe� kc:CEIVEI)
Town of Reading TOWN CLERK
Meeting Minutes � r -ti :,1C MA"°°RO�P'O 2021 MAY 24 PM 3: 20'
Board - committee - commission - Council:
Zoning Board of Appeals
Date: 2020-12-17 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: Location:
Address: Session:
Purpose: Version:
Attendees: Members - Present:
Robert Redfern
Nick Pernice
Hillary Mateev
Jamie Maughan
Cynde Hartman
Members - Not Present:
Others Present:
Andrew MacNichol - Staff Planner, Glen Redmond - Building Inspector, Brad
Latham, John Delegas
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Amanda Beatrice
Topics of Discussion:
Staff Planner Andrew MacNichol briefly explained the protocols for tonight's meeting that is
being held virtually. He presented the Zoom Meeting information to the public for those
wishing to join and explained the features of the Zoom program and how to provide comments
for any given application. He added that RCN is broadcasting and recording the meeting.
Mr. Redfern called the meeting to order.
1337 Main Street—Case#20-11
Mr. Redfern read the legal notice for Case#20-11-1337 Main Street into the record. He then
swore in those wishing to speak on the application.
Mr. Brad Latham was present on behalf of the application along with business owner Mr.John
Delegas. Mr. Latham begun by explaining that the owner purchased the gas station property
within the last four months and has been looking to do ongoing improvements to the site.The
land is within the Business-A Zoning District and totals just over 21,000 square feet. Mr. Latham
stated that the Applicant is seeking relief in order to build a canopy over the existing gas pumps
and said canopy would be within the required front yard setback.The pumps themselves are
over 20' away from the front lot line and about 6.7' of relief is needed for the canopy. Mr.
Latham continued that eight out of the ten gas stations in Reading have canopies and without
such his client is at a competitive disadvantage to those nearby.
Page I I
Mr. Latham reviewed the answers submitted to the variance criteria. He stated that the lot is a
unique shape and limits the availability of pump location. Mr. Latham opined the pumps must
be visible from the street in order to draw customers in.Alternatives explored included
removing the existing building and relocating the pumps to the northeast but this option is very
cost prohibitive. He continued that the Board has granted relief for very similar applications in
the past as well.
Mr. Latham added that the canopy would be about 20'from Main Street but closer to the lot
line.The site is located at a signalized intersection and the canopy would not obstruct any
vehicular sight lines. Mr. Latham stated that the canopy will be about 14.5' above the ground.
Mr. Redmond agreed that a variance is needed for the front setback but added that there is
additional concern around lot coverage because this site is also located in the Aquifer
Protection District. Mr. Redmon asked what the proposed lot coverage is as the 14.8%
identified is questionable. Mr. Latham replied that impervious area is not being increased as the
building is not being changed and the ground below the proposed canopy is existing impervious
area. Mr. Latham opined the 14.8% lot coverage may be just the building coverage.
Mr. Redfern asked about the canopy offset to Main Street. He stated that the plans indicate it
will be about 8-9'from Main Street but the Applicants stated 6'. Mr. Latham clarified that the
variance needed is for about 6 .
Mr. Pernice opined that when looking at the uniqueness of the lot the adjacent areas must also
be reviewed. He stated the nearby Mobile Station is about double the size of this lot which
makes this a disadvantage to the current owner. He agreed that there could be a financial and
business hardship without the canopy.
Mr. Maughan stated that an additional license was granted for this lot and questioned what use
such license allowed. Owner John Delegas replied that the license allowed for the sale of used
automobiles. Mr. Maughan asked if this use would need new structures to be built. Mr. Delegas
replied in the negative.
Mr. Maughan stated that the gas station is currently full service so customers do not need to
exit their cars. He asked if this full-service use would continue. Mr. Delegas replied in the
affirmative. Mr. Latham opined that because customers still need to open their windows and
that they may wish to exit their cars to access the convenience store a canopy would be
beneficial to the business.
Mr. Maughan asked if relocating the pumps to the south was explored. He asked if so was a
cost estimate was given on such. Mr. Delegas replied that they did look at it and it was found to
exceed $100,000 to do so. He continued that a cost estimate was not submitted but he can get
one. Mr. Maughan asked if the tanks below the ground would be needed to relocate as well.
Mr. Delegas replied in the negative.
Mr. Maughan asked if a smaller canopy could be used. Mr. Latham replied any smaller would
not adequately cover the pumps. Mr. Maughan questioned if electronic signs are allowed at gas
stations. Mr. MacNichol replied that there is a clause that allow gas station prices to be shown
Page 1 2
electronically. Mr. Maughan appreciated such and added that a cost estimate submission
should be conditioned before permits are issued.
Ms. Hartman stated she had no new questions or comments that were not already presented.
Ms. Mateev asked if the 3'thick canopy is the thinnest available as it is a bit heavy looking from
the street. She asked for alternatives to be explored.
Mr. Maughan asked if the owner maintains the landscaped area in the front of the site which is
actually on Town property. Mr. Latham replied that they are open to be conditioned to
maintain such.
Mr. Redfern stated that this is not the first time such an application has been before the Board.
He stated that canopies do typically come in stock sizes so it can be difficult to trim some of the
dimensions. Mr. Redfern asked if a fire suppression system will be installed within the canopy.
Mr. Delegas replied because they are full service it is not required but fire extinguishers will be
provided.
Mr. Redfern opened the hearing to public comment. Seeing none Mr. Redfern closed the public
comment portion of the hearing.
On a motion made by Mr. Maughan, seconded by Ms. Mateev,the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to grant the Variance Application for Case#20-11-1337 Main Street.
Vote was 5-0-0 (Pernice, Redfern, Mateev, Maughan, Hartman)
Minutes
8/5/2020
On a motion made by Mr. Maughan, seconded by Ms. Mateev,the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to approve the August 5, 2020 meeting minutes as amended.
Vote was 5-0-0(Pernice, Redfern, Mateev, Maughan, Hartman)
9/3/2020
On a motion made by Mr. Pernice, seconded by Mr. Maughan,the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to approve the September 3, 2020 meeting minutes as amended.
Vote was 5-0-0(Pernice, Redfern, Mateev, Maughan, Hartman)
Adjournment
On a motion made by Ms. Hartman, seconded by Ms. Mateev, the Zoning Board of Appeals
moved to adjourn the meeting.
Vote was 5-0-0 (Pernice, Redfern, Mateev, Maughan, Hartman)
page 1 3