The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-11-06 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of November 6, 2003 Members present John Jarema Paul Dustin Robert Redfern Mark Gillis Susan Miller M .A rS. -U1 3 4: 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 present was Chris Reilly, Town Planner; John Gannon, Town Counsel; Joe Delaney, Town Engineer; and Greg Burns, Fire Chief. Case # 00-10 Continuance of a Public Hearing on the petition of James T. Lynch, Trustee of L.A.B. Realty Trust who seeks a Comprehensive Permit under MGL Chapter 40B of the Zoning By-Laws in order to construct 10 townhouse units on the property located at 23 George Street. The Chairman explained that when the Board last met on this case there were a number of issues revolving around citizen access, fire department access and drainage. There also seem to be questions as to where the litigation is at this point. The Board does not want this to go on indefinitely and they want to get to the heart of the issue which is the access and drainage. They are looking at this as new because it has been three years since the original permit was given. Fire Chief Greg Burns said the template showing the ladder truck turnaround as shown is sufficient but in order to make the sweep they have to go into the oncoming traffic. The overhang of the truck goes past the roadway. He was concerned about these issues as well as the changes of the width of the roadway. He would like to see the same width all the way into the project. The turnaround seems adequate but without the dimensions he could not be sure if they could turn around. He asked for no parking signs because of the width of the road. He does not want the road obstructed with parked cars and wants permission for the police to give out tickets. The slope is unclear and he would like to see a maximum slope of 6%. Attorney Ciccatelli said they would agree to the ticketing but since they only have 20 feet they cannot increase the roadway width. He acknowledged they would have to cross the strip and questioned why they should be held to a greater standard than others in the town. The Board asked if the Petitioner's engineer has looked at other designs for coming in off of Curtis Street and he said he had not. They also asked if he had consulted with the Town Engineer relative to accessing the property and he said he had not. The Town Engineer said nothing had changed since his October 2"' comments and no one had been in to see him on behalf of the proj ect. Attorney Ciccatelli said the plan shows the proposed 2-way traffic pattern. There is a 20 foot easement which predated the acceptance of the road. He said they have a right of access and a sidewalk could not be constructed by the town because it would obstruct the access. His opinion was that two vehicles can enter and exit the site through the 20 foot way without interference. The Town Engineer said modifications to Curtis Street would have to be approved by the BOS. Attorney Ciccatelli indicated the driveway ends at the curb and they are not going over a driveway but the town pavement and there is no encroachment. The town does not have a right to put a sidewalk and obstruct. The Board asked if it was their intent to ask the BOS to pave the town property right up to the lot line of the individual house. Attorney Ciccatelli said it is done all the time and the travel way would end with the curb. He said they have the right to travel over the full width and this was not out of the ordinary by using the full width for street purposes where there is not a sidewalk. The Town Engineer explained that typically a roadway layout is centered within the right of way. What was presented in this case is not the way the Town lays out roads. Where sidewalks have been waived (Grove Street) the roadway is centered in the middle of the right of way. Attorney Ciccatelli said if there was a 90 degree entrance he would agree but with the proposed turning radius the cars will exit the site at an angle and only traverse a small area that will be paved. They are just extending the end of the street and he did not think this was dangerous because of the small volume of traffic anticipated. If the Board does not want these areas paved they will not do so. The Chairman asked if there was a possibility that with some additional engineering there could be a safe access into this property. The Town Engineer said there might be a way to do this. The way it is now a small truck could not access without going into the oncoming lane. Large trucks would be rare but there will be UPS trucks, delivery trucks, trash trucks and oil trucks. The radius could be increased but it would affect the location of the house as proposed on the plan. He does think there is a solution but the Petitioner has to look at alternatives and the access has to be straighter into the site with a larger turning radius. The Chairman advised Attorney Ciccatelli that he should meet with the town staff on an individual basis to resolve the issues. He also asked if there was a way to get the data that has been requested within the next six weeks before the winter months as time is running out. The Town Engineer said he did not have any information on the drainage other than the infiltration. In September he had asked for soil tests and it is up to the Petitioner to schedule these, the Town only witnesses the tests. 2 The Chairman said the case is not moving towards a positive end right now. There may be something workable but they are running out of time. The Petitioner must get the necessary information to the Town Engineer and the Fire Chief. Once the winter sets in not much will get accomplished. The Board cannot get tied down with legal issues and the bantering back and forth. The Board needs to decide if this is a viable project or not. It would be six weeks until the December 11th ZBA Meeting. The issues that should be addressed at that meeting are access, drainage and the 6% slope of the access road around the buildings. Robin Hamilton, 102 Curtis Street, said the traffic does not flow on this piece of land near her home. Occasionally someone will park there and they have to come down Curtis Street and cross head on into traffic to get into their driveway. The curb is now going to obstruct access to their property. There is less than 2 feet of access if the curb is going to be installed. The water will be channeled onto their property and they will have to buy flood insurance. They have had a few problems in the past during bad storms. Tim O'Connor, 96 Curtis Street, said it seems to him that maybe they are putting the cart before the horse if this has to go before the BOS. He thought the role of the Board was to see if this change was reasonable, not if it was possible. He felt this should go before the BOS and then before the Zoning Board. The Chairman explained the BOS is looking for the Board's input regarding this current proposal and not the one that was submitted three years ago. They are not going to tell the Board ahead of time how they are thinking. There is no question that this is a project that must be measured by today's standards as to safety and all other standards. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to continue the hearing until December 11, 2003. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by Susan Miller, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. Respectfully submi