HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-03-17 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesI o W N~ L~~K
Town of Reading
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Minutes of March 17, 2005
Members Present: Susan Miller
Paul Dustin
Robert Redfern
John Jarema
Michael Conway
Members Absent: Mark Gillis
cM -
i r
CD
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 #05-04
A Public Hearing on the petition of Debbie Hartman McCulley who seeks an appeal from a
- decision of the Building Inspector under Section 7.4.2.1 of the Zoning By-laws in order to allow
an accessory structure to remain in the front yard setback (which is not allowed in a residential
district) on the property located at 14 Cross Street.
Paul Dustin withdrew from this case because of prior contact with the Applicant.
Attorney Steve Mancini spoke on behalf of the Applicant. He discussed the affidavits and
photographs that had been submitted by the Applicant. He said two prior owners confirmed the
existence and location of the shed. The Applicant has not made any changes as to location or size
of shed.
The Building Inspector said there wasn't a building permit for this particular structure in the
building file. The Assessor's office also does not have any record for this structure although they
did have record of a 3' x 5' shed back in 1967.
The complaint regarding this shed was made three months prior to the first zoning violation
issued in December 2004.
John Apollos of 211 Main Street identified himself as the complainant. He said the Building
Inspector was at his house doing an inspection when he told him of the complaint. Mr. Apollos
said he also wrote to the Town Manager. He said he bought his property in 2002, moved in
during April of 2004 and made the complaint in May 2004. During his construction he became
v
aware of the zoning requirements and once the hedge row was down it became more apparent to
him that this shed was a zoning violation, was unsightly, and would affect his property value.
The Dowlings, previous owners of 14 Cross Street, were not present to substantiate their claim
regarding the present shed. The Applicant said Mr. Dowling was working and Mrs. Dowling had
a family event preventing her appearance.
The Board said it appeared this shed was placed inappropriately and constructed without a
building permit. They suggested the shed could be removed or moved to a more appropriate spot.
The Applicant said the maps of land show 4'on each side of the house and a triangle from 3' to
8' feet behind the house. She said the only way the structure could be moved was with a
helicopter and maybe that is why the Darlings placed it where they did. Ms. McCulley said
financial hardship would prevent her from removing the shed. She indicated it cost her $300 for
the appeal and she had received an estimate of $1,800 to $2,000 for removal of the shed.
The Building Inspector said the shed has to be 20 feet back from the front property line and 10
feet from the side property line. The Applicant would also need to get a building permit.
The Applicant's attorney presented testimony and evidence that the shed had been in place at
least prior to 1994. After reviewing the submitted information the Board concluded that the shed
had been in it's present location for 10 years or more.
The Board will use 8' x 12' as the size of the shed for the motion and the Building Inspector will
measure the actual shed and inform the Board if it is a different size.
On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals made a
finding that the 8' x 12' shed, located in the front yard of 14 Cross Street, has existed in its
current form and location for a period of ten years or more and that consistent with Section
6.3.2.4 of the Zoning By-laws is not subject to enforcement.
The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0 (Susan Miller, Robert Redfern, John Jarema).
Case #05-05
A Public Hearing on the petition of Bruce C. Hakanson who seeks a Special Permit under
Section 6.3.17 of the Zoning By-laws in order to tear down a residential structure on a non-
conforming lot and to construct a new single family structure on the property located at 208
Pearl Street.
The Applicant said he bought the house to rehab but could not do a reasonable reconstruction so
he wanted to demolish it and build a new two-story structure with a full basement.
The Board noted that it is a non-conforming lot due to frontage and there are no setback issues.
The Building Inspector said it looks like a three-story dwelling with windows and skylights on
the top level.
The Applicant said the third floor can be reached only by a pull-down stairway and it is just an
attic. The house has a cathedral ceiling and it lent itself to the windows shown. The skylights are
tunnel skylights to bring in more light. He said they were using the existing conditions as the
established grade for the 35' height. The Building Inspector said he needs to know where the
house sits now and that would determine the grade.
On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted
to grant the Applicant a Special Permit under Section 6.3.17 of the Zoning By-laws to demolish
the existing dwelling and to construct a new single family dwelling as shown on the submitted
Certified Plot Plan with the usual three conditions for a foundation permit, a building permit, and
an occupancy permit.
The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0 (Susan Miller, Robert Redfern, John Jarema).
Other Business
The Board expressed a desire to have an outside firm come in and review the Town's Zoning
By-laws. They need a review and if no one in-house can do it then an outside firm should do it.
John Jarema asked the Board's permission to do some investigative work. The Board agreed that
it might be a good idea to get more information regarding services and fees. It probably would be
best to do an entire overhaul instead of just piecemeal changes.
In the future there is going to be a joint meeting between CPDC and the Selectmen to discuss the
mixed-use by-law. The Town Planner will let the Board know when the meeting will take place
in case any Zoning Board members would be interested in attending.
On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted
to adjourn the meeting.
The motion was approved by a vote of 5-0-0 (Susan Miller, Robert Redfern, John Jarema, Paul
Dustin, Michael Conway).
Respectfully submi ted,
Maureen M. ght
Recording Se retary