Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-11-20 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of November 20, 2008 Members Present: Members Absent: Paul Dustin, Chairman John Jarema John Miles Clark Petschek Peter Tedesco Robert Redfern Jeffrey Perkins MA SS. 1 fi A meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts, at 7:00 P.M. Also in attendance was Glen Redmond, Commissioner of Buildings. Case # 08-24 A Public Hearing on the petition of Jeffrey Brem who seeks a Variance under Section(s) 2.2.13/5.0/5.1.2 of the Zoning By-laws in order to create a buildable lot in an 5-20 District with a proposed frontage of 119' rather than the required 120' on the property located at 1198 Main Street in Reading, MA. Jeffrey Brem represented the Wilson's who are the owners of the property. He reviewed the plot plan he had submitted to the Board. He explained the process they had gone through with the Conservation Commission. Mr. Brem presented his arguments for the four criteria required in order to be granted a Variance. Mr. Dustin gave Mr. Brem a copy of Town Counsel's opinion. Mr. Tedesco said Town Counsel was referring to a different proposal than what was being presented by Mr. Brem. Mr. Brem restated his arguments for the four criteria required in response to Town Counsel's opinion on this case. Attorney Ed Wallace said the Wilson's have paid taxes for over 50 years with the intention to subdivide, sell and retire. He said they were only discussing one foot. Mr. Brem said they do meet the 120' requirement at the 20' setback line. Attorney Wallace gave the history of this case from the beginning. He said the Wilson's were now applying for a Variance and he gave his arguments for the criteria required. 1 ZBA Meeting, November 20, 2008 Mr. Redfern said some of the criteria presented had nothing to do with Lot 3 and that is the lot that the variance is requested for. Mr. Petschek said the Wilson's have two buildable lots at this time but now want to change them into three lots. Mr. Dustin said the applicant is requesting a Variance for what is essentially just a paper lot that has not yet been registered at the Registry of Deeds. Mr. Brem continued to present his argument that the shape of the lot is the criteria. Mr. Dustin said he must present arguments for all four criteria. Mr. Redfern said the shape of the lot has been determined by the Applicant. Mr. Brem said he could change the request for a variance to Lot 1 instead because in the application he did not specifically say Lot 3. Mr. Dustin said they are building a case for the last three criteria but have not yet satisfied the first criteria. Attorney Wallace said over time the stream bed on the property had been moved and affected Lot 1. The Applicant said that he can change the request for a variance to that Lot 1 instead of Lot 3. He said this would then give them the first criteria. Mr. Petschek said they would need information proving that the streambed had been moved for this to be considered. Mr. Brem submitted a map which he contended showed a change in the streambed when the road was improved. Mr. Jarema said they should be concentrating on Lot 1 instead of Lot 3. Mr. Jarema said without _ j representation from Town Counsel and Town Planner, as they were expecting, they are left alone again. He said if there was so much concern on behalf of the Town in this case, where are they this evening. He thought this should be continued again for further consultation with Town staff. Mr. Dustin said there are two options: to move and vote the motion up or down or move for a continuation. Mr. Tedesco wanted a continuation with Town Counsel present to give the Town's opinion. Mr. Petschek said the criteria for Lot 1 and Lot 3 have not been met and he is prepared to vote this. evening. The Chairman said it was his recommendation that the case be continued. Mr. Jarema said they would have to make sure that Town Counsel and the Town Planner were present to answer questions and the continuation must be requested by the applicant. If a decision were to be made this evening he would approve. Attorney Wallace said his client has been before this Board many times and has spent a lot of money. Town Counsel won't talk to them, nobody will talk to them. They are asking for a very small amount. They would like the Board to make a decision this evening. Mr. Brem wanted the Board to look at Mr. Wilson's side in this case. On a motion by Paul Dustin, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant's request for a Variance from Sections 2.2.13/5.0/5.1.2 of the Zoning By- laws in order to create a "buildable" lot with proposed lot frontage of 119.00' rather than the required 120', on the property. The Variance is denied based on the following: 2 ZBA Meeting, November 20, 2008 The Applicant failed to demonstrate that the lack of sufficient frontage is caused by circumstances related to soil conditions, shape or topography unique to the 1198 Main Street property. As the Applicant failed to demonstrate compliance with the first of the Chapter 40A, Section 10 requisites, the Board denied the Variance request. The motion was denied by a vote of 2-3-0 (Affirmative: Redfern, Jarema, Negative: Miles, Petschek, Dustin). Case # 08-19 Continuation of a Public Hearing on the petition of Jeffrey Brem who seeks a Variance and an appeal from a decision of the Building Inspector under Section(s) 2.2.13 / 7.d.2.1 of the Zoning By-laws in order to request a variance from the current frontage requirement on the property located at 2 Brentwood Drive in Reading, MA. Mr. Brem represented the Gordon's in this case. The Board had previously rendered a finding in this case and then Town Counsel opined that the Board could not issue a finding in lieu of a decision and that the case should not have been before the Board because the Building Inspector had not submitted a denial letter. Mr. Brem reviewed the case already presented for 2 Brentwood Drive. Mr. Brem presented his appeal of the Building Inspector's decision. He wants the Board to overturn the Building Inspector's decision that they do not have a legal lot. Mr. Brem said the original finding was acceptable to him but it was overturned by Town Counsel. He said he is presenting the same argument that he presented back in February. Attorney Wallace said it appears that Town Counsel did not want a finding but instead required a decision. Mr. Petschek wanted the Building Inspector to explain why he made the decision he did originally. The Building Inspector explained how he defines frontage and it is usually the longer length. This lot did not meet the required frontage. Mr. Jarema said his major concern was that nowhere in the by-laws is there a definition of corner lots. This issue has not been addressed by the Town. He thought this should not be an opportunity to side step the issue of variances until the Town addresses this situation. Mr. Redfern said the Board should define that the frontage would be on Brentwood and would include the actual curve at the corner with Main Street. The Building Inspector said the Board should consult with Town Counsel regarding this definition, as it would affect many other lots in this Town. On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to overturn the decision of the Building Inspector's decision on the calculation of frontage on the property and supported by the proposed Certified Plot Plan drawn by Meisner Brem Corporation 3 ZBA Meeting, November 20, 2008 of Westford, MA drawn for Ralph and Marion Wilson of 1198 Main Street with a date of January 31, 2008 resulting in a frontage of 203.68' and an amended 20,000 square feet of lot coverage. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Miles, Petschek, Dustin). On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to accept without prejudice the withdrawal by the Applicant for the Variance for 2 Brentwood Drive. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Miles, Petschek, Dustin) Case # 08-25 A Public Hearing on the petition of John A. Coote who seeks a Special Permit under Section(s) 6.3.11 of the Zoning By-laws in order to construct a one-story addition on a non-conforming dwelling on the property located at 332 Summer Avenue in Reading, MA. The proposed addition will not conform to the side yard requirement of 15'. Elevation and floor plans will be available on November 6, 2008. John Coote reviewed the plans he had submitted to the Board. He wants to add an addition to the back of his non-conforming dwelling. It will not meet the required setback of 15' but will not increase the existing non-conformity. Mr. Redfern questioned the width of the stairs encroaching into the side-yard setbacks. Mr. Coote said they would be regular 3' access stairs. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Miles, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant a Special Permit under Section 6.3.11 of the Zoning By-laws in order to construct a one-story addition as depicted on the referenced Plot Plan. This Special Permit is conditioned upon the following standard conditions: 1. The Petitioner shall submit to the Building Inspector a Certified Plot Plan of the proposed construction and proposed foundation plans, prior to the issuance of a foundation permit for the work. 2. The Petitioner's final construction plans for the new structure shall be submitted to the Building Inspector, along with the as-built foundation plan(s), prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. As-built plans showing the completed construction shall be submitted to the Building Inspector immediately after the work is completed and prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit. `E. 4 ZBA Meeting, November 20, 2008 The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Miles, Petschek, Dustin). Minutes On a motion by Clark Petschek, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appealed moved to accept the minutes of October 2, 2008. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Miles, Petschek, Dustin, Tedesco). On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Clark Petschek, the Zoning Board of Appealed moved to accept the minutes of October 16, 2008. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Miles, Petschek, Dustin, Tedesco). Other Business: Mr. Dustin reviewed again what he had discussed with the Town Planner and the Board's lack of representation from the Town. He reviewed a memo sent to him by the Town Planner. John Coote addressed the Board as to his interpretation of the true meaning of the frontage requirement. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Miles, Petschek, Dustin, Tedesco). Respectfully sub i Ma reen M. igh Recording Se retar 5 ZBA Meeting, November 20, 2008