HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-06-03 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutesd or HCJo
Town of Reading
;I Meeting Minutes
UJ,IMtPP1°'
Board - Committee - Commission - Council:
RECEIVED
By Town Clark (RIQ at 5:11 pm, Aug 07, 2025
Zoning Board of Appeals
Date: 2025-06-03 Time: 7:00 PM
Building: Reading Town Hall
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose:
Attendees: Members - Present:
Location: Select Board Meeting Room
Session:
Version: Final
Andrew Grasberger, Patrick Houghton, Frank Capone, Taylor Gregory, Chris
Cridler
Members - Not Present:
Cynde Hartman
Others Present:
Amanda Beatrice - Administrative Specialist, Sean Mindes, Christie Moore,
Dauam Campos, Faith Towers Provencher, Minshen Ren, Keith Tower
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Amanda Beatrice
Topics of Discussion:
Case 025-02 - 80 Minot Street
Andrew Grasberger opened the continuance of a public hearing for Case 025-02-80 Minot Street by
reading the legal notice into the record.
The appliunt, Sean Mindes, presented new information regarding the project on behalf of the
homeowner, Mins hen Ran. He stated that he had conducted research on previous cases and found
several that he believed were relevant. He noted that most homes in the area are non -compliant. After
driving through the neighborhood, he observed that many homes have detached garages close to the
property lines. He presented photos showing the next -door neighbors garage directly abutting the
property. Additionally, he shared a 3D rendering illustrating the garage's small size and noted that there
were windows on the side, which they would be willing to resize or relocate if necessary.
Mindes also provided text messages between the homeowner and the direct abutter, Antonio Vetrano,
at 113 Washington Street —who is directly affected by the setback —confirming that Vetrano had no
objections and supported the garage project. He addressed the Board's concern about setting a
precedent if the variance were granted, stating that each decision is based on specific circumstances. He
emphasized that it is unlikely to find another property with identical issues —similar, but not the same.
Due to the size and shape of the lot, Mindes considered this a hardship, further noting the homeowners
personal hardship as his elderly parents were moving in, and the garage would help ensure their safety.
He believed that the project would not negatively impact the neighborhood, as most homes on the
street already have similar garage setups.
Frank Capone asked how someone would access the house from the garage. Using the 3D rendering,
Mindes showed that they would walk straight forward, where a small landing and stairs on the left-hand
side would lead into the house. He explained that they planned to relocate the existing bulkhead to
achieve this, which accounted for the bump -out at the back. The garage foundation would be a slab.
Chris Cridler commented that the additional information provided useful perspective, and the
conversation between the homeowner and abutter was helpful.
Patrick Houghton inquired about the substantial hardship, referencing a variance decision previously
submitted for 544 Summer Ave, which appeared similar to this project. Mindes stated that the hardship
stemmed from the lot's unique shape and that no other location on the property could accommodate
the garage. In his research, he had examined S-15 zoning and requests related to rear and side yard
setbacks.
Andrew Grasberger expressed concern about the setback distance.
Mindes and the Board reviewed submitted images of homes with similar garage placements and used
GIS street view to examine surrounding properties, which showed that many homes had detached
garages close to the property line. Mindes noted that the distance between the new garage and the
neighbor's garage would be approximately 14 feet. Grasberger remarked that the setback requirement
for each abutter was 15 feet, and the proposed setback fell short of that standard.
Capone pointed out that many homeowners attempt to build as close to the property line as possible.
He emphasized that the Board aims to maintain a reasonable distance, as future developments on
neighboring properties remain uncertain.
Taylor Gregory expressed concern about the window size, stating that their proximity to the property
line made them appear too large. Mindes responded that they were willing to make the windows
smaller and raise their height to allow natural light into the garage while addressing concerns. He
modified the 3D renderingto illustrate how these adjustments would look.
Grasbergerthen opened the meeting to public comment. Hearing none, he subsequently closed public
discussion.
Capone reiterated that his primary concern was the setback being as close as five feet.
Houghton noted that, while slightly different from the decision for 544 Summer Ave, the lot issues in
that case were similar enough that he would be in favor of the project.
Gregory asked if 10 feet was the smallest feasible garage size. Mindes confirmed that a standard two -car
garage is typically 24'x24', while a 20'x20' garage is considered tight. A 10-foot width is the absolute
minimum, though they generally aim for at least 12 feet. He explained that the bump -out at the back
was necessary for accessing the house from the garage without needing to exit and enterthrough the
front door.
Cridler stated that his concerns had been addressed by the newly presented information and indicated
his support.
Grasberger acknowledged some of the points made but felt the proposed setback exceeded the
flexibility the Board typically allows.
Gregory noted that reducing the window size would be acceptable.
Ren indicated that he was ready to proceed to a vote.
Taylor Gregory made a motion to grant a Variance for Case #25-02 — 80 Minot Street. Chris Cridler
seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-1.
Vote was 4-0-1 (Houghton, Capone, Cridler, Gregory, Grasberger [opposed])
Case #25-06 —33 Salem Street
Andrew Grasberger opened the public hearing for use #25-06— 33 Salem Street by reading the legal
notice into the record and swearing in members of the public wishing to speak.
The applicant, Faith Towers Provencher, introduced her project. She is seeking a variance or a special
permit to replace their existing deck and to extend it using composite material. She explained that the
Page 1 2
deck is I poor condition in need of replacement, and with two children they would like to be able to have
a little more space. The current deck is 12' x 8' and they would be extending it 7.5 feet. She explained
that the other side of the fence is the end of a driveway where the neighbor stores the trash barrels and
the other neighbors have a shed.
Chris Cridler asked if she had spoken with her neighbors. Provencher states she has talked to a few
neighbors and no one had any issues with the deck. The next -door neighbors are renters and so she has
not been able to talk to the property owner.
The meeting was opened to public comment and, with no input from the public forthcoming,
subsequently closed.
The Board members agreed a special permit was appropriate for this project as.
Taylor Gregory made a motion to gram a Special Permit for Case #25-06 — 33 Salem Street. Chris
Cridler seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0.
Vote was 5-0-0 (Grasberger, Houghton, Capone, Cridler, Gregory)
Case g25-07 - 279 Washington Street
Andrew Grasberger opened the public hearing for case #25-07 -179 Washington Street by reading the
legal notice into the record and swearing in members of the public wishing to speak.
The applicant, Dauam Campos, introduced his project. He is seeking a special permit for a second -story
addition. He will be enclosing an existing deck, then building straight up on both the deck and the
existing dwelling to provide additional living space for the family. The existing setback is 11.1 feet, and it
will not be reduced.
Frank Capone asked if they would be building within the same footprint. Campos confirmed they would
be and that a new foundation would be installed.
Houghton asked if the deck would be removed. Campos confirmed that they would be enclosing the
space where the existing deck is to create additional Irving space.
Grasberger asked if anyone had spoken with the neighbors. Campos stated he was unsure whether the
homeowners had done so.
Grasberger then opened the meeting to public comment.
Keith Towers, the direct abutter from 175 Washington Street, stated that he was in favor of the project
and requested that the window placements remain unchanged from the existing plans.
Grasberger closed the public comment.
Patrick Houghton made a motion to grant a Special Permit for Case #25-07 -179 Washington Street.
Taylor Gregory seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0.
Vote was 5-0-0 (Grasberger, Houghton, Capone, Cridler, Gregory)
Minutes
5/6/25
Andrew Grasberger made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Taylor Gregory seconded the
motion and it was approved 4-".
Vote was 4-0-0 (Grasberger, Houghton, Capone, Gregory)
Motion to Adiourn
Chris Cridler made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Taylor Gregory seconded the motion and it was
approved S-".
Vote was 5-0-0 (Grasberger, Houghton, Capone, Gregory, Hartman)
Page 1 3