Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-08 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTwo CLE~K Town of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of November 8, 2007 Members present: Members absent: Robert Redfern Paul Dustin John Jarema Clark Petschek Peter Tedesco Susan Miller j 1E Rt.t NG, M t A SS. Zaa ik 10 A 11: 414 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. Case # 07-21 A Public Hearing on the petition of Matthew Cusolito who seeks a Variance under Section(s) 5.0/4.16 of the Zoning By-laws in order to construct a 12' x 12' shed 3.5' from the side yard property line on the property located at 16 Lilah Lane in Reading, MA. The property is also located in an Aquifer Protection District. Matthew Cusolito said he was requesting two Variances to put up a shed. He had a lot of ledge on his lot and he tried to get the full 5'setback that was required but he was unable to do this. He also has very uneven ground and he would need to remove a great quantity of ledge in order to try to get any level land. He listed the criteria that his property met to qualify for the Variances. The shed covers such a small area that it would be financially not feasible to install a drainage system for this additional coverage. Mr. Cusolito said there was nothing that he could remove to lessen the lot coverage. The proposed shed would be up on blocks and will have room underneath for water flow. The topography of his lot also makes the project difficult. The Applicant submitted pictures showing the difficulties and outcroppings because of the ledge. The shed would also be screened from abutters by his existing fencing. The Chairman read the written remarks submitted by the Building Inspector for this case that stated the Town has overlooked some AQ Districts in the past but now they have a better system of checks and balances. The Building Inspector thought this shed would be a minimal increase in coverage and should not require a recharge system. Mr. Petschek thought this case might be setting a precedent if the Variance were to be granted and that this case did not meet the intent of the Selectmen's policy. ZBA Minutes, November 8, 2007 Mr. Jarema did not think the Applicant tried hard enough to reduce the percentage of coverage and he thought Mr. Petschek was correct in thinking that this case did not meet the intent of the Selectmen's policy. The Chairman said the topography containing the great amount of ledge was problematic but he would like to see the shed shifted to allow the 5' setback required or perhaps the Applicant could change the shape to more of a rectangle. The Applicant said this would cause problems with the opening of the shed doors due to the topography and shrubbery. No abutters attended the meeting so there was no testimony regarding this petition. On a motion by Paul Dustin, seconded by Clark Petschek, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant a Variance from the setback requirements of Section 5.2.3.6 of the Zoning By-laws for the construction of the 12' x 12' shed to be placed as shown on: "Plot Plan of Land," #16 Lilah Lane, Reading, MA, dated August 17, 2007, prepared by Sullivan Engineering Group, LLC of 22 Mount Vernon Road, Boxford, MA 01921. The motion was approved by a vote of 4-1-0 (Redfern, Miller, Dustin, Petschek: in favor, Jarema: opposed). On a motion by Paul Dustin, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant a Variance from the impervious coverage requirements of Section 4.8.6.1.10 of the Zoning By-laws subject to the following condition: The Applicant shall elevate the shed on blocks, and shall provide a "best efforts" design for a 12" to 18" wide crushed stone drip zone under the shed eaves. The design and depth of the crushed stone are to be acceptable to the Building Inspector. In addition, any new impervious coverage, if constructed without an approved recharge system, shall not exceed the 26.75%o shown on the referenced plot plan. The motion was approved by a vote of 4-1-0 (Redfern, Miller, Dustin, Jarema: in favor, Petschek: opposed). Case # 07-22 A Public Hearing on the petition of Salem Five who seeks a Variance under Section(s) 5.1.2 & 5.3.1.1 of the Zoning By-laws in order to construct a one-story building with a drive-through for use as a bank on the property located at 8 Walkers Brook Drive in Reading, MA. Attorney Chris Latham represented the Applicant, Salem Five. He explained that the Applicant also had to appear before the CPDC and Conservation Commission after the Zoning Board of Appeals. He reviewed the renderings of the building proposed. The Applicant is requesting three Variances because there is no way this lot can be built upon without these Variances. Between the zoning setbacks and the conservation restrictions there is little land left to build on. The Applicant is proposing to locate the new structure in the center of the property as much as 2 ZBA Minutes, November 8, 2007 possible as opposed to the present structure that is on the back rear of the property on the line. This is the smallest parcel of privately owned land on Walkers Brook Drive, the narrowest depth in the Industrial District north of Walkers Brook Drive and it also abuts a residential district. Attorney Latham presented the four criteria that he thought qualified this property for a Variance. He felt this proposed bank would be more appropriate to the area than the previous gas station and will offer less hazardous conditions and traffic. Jack Sullivan, P.E., explained the buffer zones and the no structure limitations due to the conservation restrictions imposed because of the proximity of Walkers Brook and he answered the Board's questions about these areas. He said the Applicant has not appeared before the Conservation Commission yet because they wanted to complete their business with the Zoning Board first. Mr. Sullivan said he had a plan to reduce the impervious coverage on this property and that would be discussed with Conservation and CPDC. The Chairman read the written remarks submitted by the Building Inspector who said he thought this was a good proposal for the use of this lot. Attorney Latham said they have already met with the Design Review Team (DRT) and have incorporated many of the suggestions from that meeting into the plans. Mr. Jarema said he would like to see these recommendations from the DRT meeting. Attorney Latham said he had not seen any notes from this meeting but he would try to obtain some if they were available. Mr. Jarema said he did not feel he could proceed without additional information from the Town staff. Attorney Latham explained that the Applicant would meet with the other Boards after they knew this was a project that would be approved by the Zoning Board. The other boards wanted the Applicant to get zoning approval first. Mr. Jarema said they needed the input of Town staff, and what the consensus of the DRT was in order to continue with the zoning process. Attorney Latham agreed to continue the hearing on this matter and said he would provide to the Board any notes from the DRT meeting that may be available. On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Paul Dustin, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue the hearing to December 6, 2007. The motion was approved by a vote of 4-1-0 (Redfern, Dustin, Jarema Petschek: in favor, Miller: opposed). Case # 07-23 A Public Hearing on the petition of Jim Lordan who seeks a Special Permit/Variance under Section(s) 6.3.17/5.1.2 of the Zoning By-laws in order to raze the existing single family dwelling and to construct a new single family dwelling on a non-conforming lot on the property located at 84 Hanscom Avenue in Reading, MA. Permission is also required to allow an existing non- conforming structure (garage) to remain. 3 ZBA Minutes, November 8, 2007 Clark Petschek recused himself from this case due to his personal association with the Applicant. Jim Lordan said the lot is in a S 15 District, has 10,000 square feet with 100' of frontage and is 100' deep. It is a very common size lot for this area. He said he is seeking a Special Permit to demolish the existing dwelling and to build a two-story single-family dwelling with an attached two-car garage. The Applicant would like to keep the existing garage, convert it to a storage shed and remove the driveway leading to it. The existing garage is 4.3' from the side lot line and 5.2' to the rear lot line and therefore will not meet the zoning setbacks on the side. The Chairman read the comments from the Building Inspector who said this was a typical teardown and rebuild. He also had no issues with the existing garage being turned into a shed. The Chairman said he saw this application as just a request for a Special Permit to tear down an existing dwelling and rebuild. Ellen Commito, 28 Hanscom Avenue, questioned what the Applicant would be using the old garage for and he said this old garage would now be used as a shed. He would be keeping the overhead door although he would be replacing it with a new overhead door. Ms. Committo asked questions about the height of the new dwelling and the Applicant said it would be very close to what is currently there. She asked if he planned on selling this property when the project was complete and he said yes, he was. She also asked him to please consider keeping a particular tree on the property that was quite beautiful and he said he planned on it. ' Joanne Mandeville, 66 Hanscom Avenue, asked about the materials being used for the house and the Applicant explained what products he would be using. On a motion,by Peter Tedesco, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant a Special permit under Section 6.3.17 of the Zoning By-laws in order to demolish the current dwelling and to replace it with a new structure as shown on the Certified Plot Plan dated October 19, 2007 for 84 Hanscom Avenue, Reading, MA prepared by Engineering and Survey Services, 70 Bailey Court, Haverhill, MA 01832. This Special Permit is conditioned on the following 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. 3. 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. 4 ZBA Minutes, November 8, 2007 The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0 (Redfern, Miller, Jarema, Dustin, Tedesco). Case # 07-11 Continuation of a Public Hearing to hear the submitted Local Initiative Program (LIP) application for property addressed at a portion of 49+ Pleasant Street (Assessors Map 0065, Lot 0007) and 75 Pleasant Street (Assessors Map 0065, Lot 0006). The application proposes to place 4 units of rental housing at said location, of which 100% of the units will be made affordable as per the Board of Selectmen LIP Regulations. The applicant is The Reading Housing Authority of 22 Frank Tanner Drive, Reading, MA. The drawings were prepared by Brown Linquist Fenuccio & Raber, 203 Willow Street, Suite A, Yarmouthport, MA. Attorney Brad Latham reviewed the documents submitted since the last meeting. The Chairman said the Town Engineer indicated in his submitted comments that he wanted a percolation test and then to have the drainage system sized accordingly. Attorney Latham said the memo from Fran Fink, Conservation Commission Administrator, listed some things that were erroneous and that he could not support. He therefore did not think this memo should be listed as a document unless it for informational purposes only. The Board agreed with this. Mr. Jarema questioned the three-year time period to begin building that was listed in the decision. Attorney Latham said this wording was generated by Town Counsel and meets the State regulations. The Board requested minor changes to be made to the decision that were agreed to by Attorney Latham. With respect to the drainage system, the Town is going to install it and the Board is satisfied with what was designed. Mr. Jarema said the project basically rests on the Memorandum of Understanding between the Applicant and the Selectmen. He asked Attorney Latham to prepare a clean copy of the decision with the changes that were made at this meeting and Attorney Latham agreed to give it to the Town Planner the next morning. On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Peter Tedesco, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to close the public hearing on case # 07-11. The motion was approved by a vote of 570-0 (Redfern, Miller, Jarema, Petschek, Tedesco). On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Clark Petschek, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Reading Housing Authority a Comprehensive Permit for the construction of four three-bedroom townhouse style rental units, in a single structure, with associated infrastructure and improvements on Lot B, subject to the following conditions. The term "Applicant" as set forth shall mean the Applicant, it's successors, transferees, and assigns. The terms and conditions ` of this Comprehensive Permit, together with the Regulatory Agreement to be entered into shall 5 ZBA Minutes, November 8, 2007 control the development of the project. To the extent the Comprehensive Permit and Regulatory Agreement are inconsistent with any other instrument document, agreement of plan submitted in connection with the Project, this Comprehensive Permit shall control to the full extent permitted by law. This Comprehensive permit is subject to compliance by the Applicant with all terms and conditions of this decision. The ZBA finds that the waivers granted, as conditioned or limited, do not render the project uneconomic. The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0 (Redfern, Miller, Jarema, Petschek, Tedesco). On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 6-0-0.(Redfern, Miller, Jarema, Petschek, Tedesco, Dustin). e pectfully sub Maureen M. Kni Recording Secr4 6 ZBA Minutes, November 8, 2007