Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-07-15 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of July 15, 2004 Members Present: John Jarema Susan Miller Robert Redfern Mark Gillis ' - L V FOW CLERK .~.DIG. MASS. 2604 UC'1 2b P 1. 40 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 # 04-17 Continuance of a Public Hearing on the petition of John & Karen Janowski who seek a Variance/Special Permit/Appeal under Sections 5.1.2/5.2.8/6.3.11.2 of the Zoning By-Laws in order to add a 3rd dwelling unit on a non-conforming lot within the required setbacks on the property located at 38 Salem Street. The Chairman explained that the case was continued to allow the Petitioners to explore other ideas and options. Karen Janowski said they were withdrawing all requests except for the deck on the easterly side of the property. She said they want to make the condos as desirable as possible for resale. They cannot afford to take a financial loss and a deck on that side will make the project more desirable to potential buyers. If the deck is too narrow it would not be suitable and they need to make the project as financially profitable as possible. The Chairman outlined what the Applicants were asking: to withdraw the request on the proposed 2-story frame addition and limiting the request for a Variance on the 8' x 18' wood deck on the easterly side. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to accept the request for the withdrawal of the proposed 2-story addition that included 3 garages. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. The Chairman read a letter submitted by John Faye who said he had no objection to the deck being considered although he had concerns about the other aspects of the project. The Board members discussed the idea that if the deck was kept to the same sideyard setbacks equal to what it is today the Board could grant a special permit but if the applicants persist in asking for an 8' x 18' deck that would require a variance. They would then need to present the criteria for a variance. The Board discussed how this lot is unique relative to the other lots in the neighborhood. They said because it is a historical house in an area where there are other historical homes then perhaps at one time there was more land and the lot has been downsized and reduced over time. The driveway has been there since the late 1980's but then it was only a dirt road and not paved. When the fire station was put in it was paved. If the Applicants were going back in a straight line they would be asking for a Special Permit instead of a Variance. Karen Janowski said a 7' x 18' deck would not be sufficient, it would not allow enough movement on the deck so they need it to be 8.' The Building Inspector stated he would rather see an 8' foot deck instead of what had been previously proposed. The Board discussed how in another case not long ago they determined that a deck had to be in a particular spot because the house had been placed oddly on the lot because of an old drainage ditch. This case would be similar because of the old right of way. On a motion by Susan Miller, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant the Petitioner's request for a Variance under Section 5.1.2 of the Zoning By-Laws to construct a deck as shown on the Plan of Land prepared by Benchmark Survey of Stoneham, MA, dated May 12, 2004, indicating a side setback on the easterly side of no less than 77' with the usual two standard conditions. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. Case # 04-18 A Public Hearing on the petition of Mary Ellen Costello who seeks a Variance/ Special Permit/Appeal of the Building Inspector under Sections 4.8/4.8.6.1.10/6.3/7.4 of the Zoning By- Laws in order to remove a portion of an existing dwelling and to construct a new 36 x 22 addition on the property located at 3 Fielding Road. This property is in the Aquifer Protection District. The Applicant said her mother was not well and would soon need one-level living. She purchased the home from her mother in 2002. There is a small kitchen and the laundry is in the cellar. She would like to remove the existing breezeway and garage and expand the kitchen, add a mud room, utility room and a one-car garage. She said she was surprised about the Aquifer Protection Zone requirements and currently has 30.8% coverage. She plans to reduce the coverage to 23.2% by reducing the driveway, removing a brick patio and putting in a ground water discharge system. The Building Inspector said the proposal is a good one, the lot will be reduced in non-conformity and it will also meet the rear setbacks. It appears to conform to the maximum amount practicable - f and with the proposal they are moving toward greater conformity. 2 On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant the Petitioner a Special Permit under Section 6.3.17 of the Zoning By-Laws for partial removal of the existing dwelling and to construct a new addition to the single family dwelling as shown on the submitted Plot Plan. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to accept the Petitioner's request to withdraw her application for a variance. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. Case # 04-19 A Public Hearing on the petition of Thomas & Elizabeth Richissin who seek a Variance/ Special Permit/Appeal of the Building Inspector under Sections 4.8/6.3/7.4 of the Zoning By-Laws in order to alter and to construct an addition on a non-conforming (lot coverage) dwelling on the property located at 17 Deborah Drive. This property is in the Aquifer Protection District ZBA member Mark Gillis stepped down from the case because he knew the Petitioners. ZBA member Robert Redfern made mention of the fact that he had previously employed the contractor involved in this case but did not see a conflict of interest. Thomas Richissin said the impervious coverage was presently 24%. They need additional space because they have a special needs child that cannot walk and the project would increase the street area access for her. They want to add a 19' x 24' two story addition to the front of the house over a portion of the existing driveway and to alter the entrance by bringing it forward to be more architecturally in synch with the addition. This would increase the total impervious ground cover to 26.6%. The Building Inspector voiced concern over the increase in the impervious cover without any attempt to mitigate the increase nor a certified plot plan that was specific and clear on the total increase in the coverage for the proposed changes and the accompanying calculations. The Board made a finding that if the Applicant could produce a plan for groundwater recharge that would guarantee a percentage less than the now existing 24% impervious cover, and that the plan would be acceptable to the Town Engineer, then the Applicant would be moving towards a greater degree of conformity. Because the home was built prior to the Aquifer By-Law it is unrealistic to remove any part of the dwelling. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to instruct the Building Inspector to issue a building permit for the proposed changes and additions to the house with the condition that a groundwater recharge system for the disposal of storm water runoff be designed by a Massachusetts registered Engineer to insure that the total impervious cover of the proposed alterations and addition be less than the now existing 24% and that the system be reviewed and approved by the Town Engineer. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to accept the Applicant's request to withdraw the request for a variance. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to accept the Applicant's request to withdraw the request for a special permit. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to accept the Applicant's request to withdraw the request for an appeal of the decision of the Building Inspector. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. Reorganization of the Zoning Board of Appeals: The members of the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to appoint Susan Miller the Chairman for the 2004 - 2005 season. The vote was 3-0-1. The members of the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to appoint Robert Redfern the Vice- Chairman for the 2004 - 2005 season. The vote was 3-0-1. The members of the Board congratulated John Jarema for doing a commendable job as Chairman for the last two years. On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Mark Gillis, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to adjourn. The motion was approved by a vote of 4-0-0. Respectful] Maureen N Recording 4