HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-06 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes4 Town of Reading
gbh„ Meeting Minutes
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
Zoning Board of Appeals
Date: 2024-11-06 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: Reading Town Hall
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose:
Attendees: Members - Present:
RECEIVED
By Town Cie* GPar 11:24M. Geo ar. 30a1
Location: Select Board Meeting Room
Session:
Version: Final
Andrew Grasberger,Cy Caouette, Cynde Hartman, Chris Cridler, Frank
Capone, Tara Gregory
Members - Not Present:
Patrick Houghton
Others Present:
Building Comissioner Bret Bennett, Administrative Specialist Amanda
Beatrice, Brad Anderson
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Amanda Beatrice
Topics of Discussion:
ZBA Case#24-13-215Case#24 215 Washington Street Street
Mr. Andrew Grasberger opened the public hearing for Case #24-13-215 Washington Street. He noted
that the applicant submitted an email requesting to withdraw their application without prejudice.
Mr. Chris Crider made a motion to accept applicants request to Withdraw without prejudice for Case
#24-13-215 Washington Street for a Variance to the November 6, 2024 meeting. Ms. Cynde Hartman
seconded the motion and it was approved 5-".
Vote was 5-0.0 (Grosberger, CGouette, Hartman, Cridler, Capone)
ZBA Case #24-15 - 34 Hancock Street
Mr. Andrew Grasberger opened the public hearing for Case #24-15 -34 Hancock Street by reading the
legal notice into the record and swearing in members of the public wishing to speak.
Mr. Brad Anderson briefly described his project, which involves building a deck at the back of his house
The proposed deck would exceed the 25% lot coverage limit by 1.5%, approximately 80 square feet. He
noted that the size of his lot is about 5,388 square feet.
Mr. Grasberger mentioned that a neighbor had submitted a letter of support, which had been
distributed to all board members.
Ms. Cynde Hartman asked if the structure had to be a deck or if it could simply be a space with a table.
Mr. Anderson responded that they currently have such a space and believed a deck would improve
visibility of the yard when his children and dog are outside, creating a more comfortable environment.
Page I 1
He also noted that they were adding anew entrance to access the deck, as there is no direct access to
the back of the house.
Mr. Chris Cridler inquired about the size of the shed on the property. Mr. Bret Bennet was unsure, but
Ms. Hartman estimated the shed's size to be approximately 6'x 4' based on the proportions in relation
to the deck Mr. Cridler suggested that, depending on the circumstances, the shed could potentially be
removed to allow for the deck.
Ms. Hartman and Mr. Cridler explained to the applicant that variances are difficult to obtain. The
variance criteria are set by the state, and to be granted a variance, applicants must meet all four criteria.
Ms. Hartman noted that, under the first criterion, the lot size is not a valid justification to satisfy the
variance criteria. The applicant would need to demonstrate that his property is unique in comparison to
others in the neighborhood.
Mr. Grasberger further clamed that the applicant must prove a substantial hardship; simply not having
a deck would not be considered a substantial hardship.
Mx. Tara Gregory asked the applicant if he would be willing to reduce the size of the deck. Mr. Anderson
stated that the size of the deck was a key part of the project. Ms. Hartman suggested that if the deck
were reduced to half its proposed size, the applicant could likely comply with the lot coverage
requirements, potentially incorporating stairs leading to a smaller patio instead. Mr. Frank Capone
added that if the shed were removed, the applicant might be able to build a larger deck, depending on
the size of the shed.
Mr. Cridler outlined the next steps the applicant could take. He could request a vote, but if the board
denies the variance, he would not be able to bring the case back before the board for two years.
Alternatively, the applicant could withdraw the application without prejudice or request a continuance
to a future meeting.
The applicant requested that the case be continued until January 7, 2025.
Mr. Chris Cridler made a motion to continue Case #24-15 —34 Hancock Street for a Variance to the
January 7, 2025 meeting. Mx. Tara Gregory seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0.
Vote was 5-0-0 (Grasberger, Caouette, Hartman, Cridler, Capone)
ZBA Minutes 10/1/24
Mr. Chris Cridler made a motion to accept the minutes. Mr. Andrew Grasberger seconded the motion
and it was approved 5-".
Vote was 5-0-0 (Cridler, Caouette, Hartman, Capone, Gregory)
Motion to Adjourn
Mr. Chris Cridler made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mx. Tara Gregory the motion and it was
approved 6-0-0.
Vote was 6-0-0 (Grasberger, Caouette, Hartman, Cridler, Capone, Gregory)
Page 1 2