HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-11-07 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesV
LI-LiVED
TOWN OF READING LERK
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS i NS, MASS.
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 7, 2002
LNG] JAN - b P fit- 13
MEMBERS PRESENT: JOHN JAREMA
EDMUND BALBONI
DONNA BOGGS
ROBERT REDFERN
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 PM.
Case #02-12
A Public Hearing on the petition of Joseph Calareso/Harrow Real Estate Trust who seek a
variance and a finding under Section 4.3.2.9/2.2.24 of the Zoning By-Laws in order to
permit the outside display storage and sale of plants and other goods when there is no
structure for such on the property located at 124 - 126 Main Street, Reading, MA.
Atty. Josh Latham stated they completed their application this afternoon and will submit
site specific plans to the Building Inspector tomorrow morning. There is presently no
open storage. He stated they have:
1. Construction control
2. Building control
3. Finalized plans
4. Site specific structural calculations.
Atty. Latham requested a continuance.
On a motion by Edmund Balboni, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of
Appeals voted to continue the public hearing on the petition of Joseph Calareso/Harrows
Realty Trust for the property located at 124-126 Main Street, Reading, MA, until
November 13, 2002.
The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0.
Case #02-26
Continuance of a Public Hearing on the petition of Kevin Fulgoni who seeks an appeal
from a decision of the Building Inspector under Section 2.2.13/5.1 of the Zoning by-laws
in order to allow proposed dwelling to be built on the property located at 28 Summer
Avenue, Reading, MA.
Atty. Christopher Vaccaro requested the Zoning Board of Appeals over turns the
Building Inspector's denial of a building permit or if necessary, grants a variance. He
stated this property is 3.8 acres, with 156' frontage on Willow Street, it is in a S 15
district, with a wetland overlay. The property has been separately owned since 1970. In
1970 it was a buildable lot, but in 1978 the zoning laws changed the definition of
frontage. The property currently lacks sufficient frontage to build as of right.
Zoning Board of Appeals Mnutes of 11/7102 page 2
Edmund Balboni stated he believes this is a buildable lot. It was a buildable lot before the
1978 definition change and he believes the definition is now illegal.
Bud Osoro, 20 summer Avenue, stated he is not in agreement. The petitioner purchased
this property in speculation. They will have three driveways in a row with no space in
between.
Atty. Vacarro stated he believes Mr. Osoro's argument is irrelevant.
John Jarema stated there is no such number as 28 Summer Avenue. There is only one
driveway given to a lot, unless it is a two family house. The major issue is a conforming
structure on a non-conforming lot at 26 Summer Avenue. The easement diminishes the
lots frontage further. The frontage for this property was created on Willow Street.
Atty. Vaccaro stated he disagrees that the easement makes the property more non-
conforming. An easement doesn't diminish the frontage on the area. He doesn't think the
government has the authority to tell someone where their access is. He asked the Zoning
Board to consider granting a variance.
Robert Redfern stated he believes this is a buildable lot. It has enough frontage on
Willow Street. The easement on Summer Avenue is a separate issue.
On a motion by Edmund Balboni, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of
Appeals voted for the property located at Assessors Map 81, Lot 19, that this Board
overturn the Building Inspector and declare that this is a buildable lot with adequate
frontage and area.
The motion was denied by a vote of 2-1-0.
On a motion by Edmund Balboni, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of
Appeals voted for the property located at Assessors Map 81, Lot 19, to grant a Variance
under Section 2.2.13/5.1 of the Zoning By-laws through the uniqueness of the lot shape
and the wetlands on the frontage, and the owner has obtained additional means of access
on Summer Avenue, as shown on plan titled Typography of Reading, drawn by Hayes
Engineering, dated August 3, 1994, revised April 17, 1995, that the easement on Summer
Avenue is recorded on and is consistent to the sketch plan drawn by Hayes Engineering,
dated June 9, 1995.
A discussion took place before the vote was taken. Robert Redfern was unclear on the
need for a variance. He believes they have enough frontage on Willow Street. John
Jarema stated he could not support the Variance.
8:45 PM The Zoning Board of Appeals recessed to allow Counsel time to confer with his
client.
8:50 PM The Zoning Board of Appeals reconvened.
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of 11/7/02 page 3
Atty. Vaccaro stated he is requesting a variance that addresses the definition of frontage
and secondly under Section 5. 1, because there is zero frontage according to the definition.
Mr. Balboni then moved to grant a Variance to Kevin M. Fulgoni Trustee Dennison-
Magnus Realty Trust at the property located on Lot 19, Map 81, Willow Street, finding
that the petitioner has justified the variance requirements under Section 2.2.13 and 5.1 of
the By-laws and that access to the property be granted at 26 Summer Avenue as depicted
on the Plan by Hayes Engineering, August 3, 1994, revised April 1, 1995 and as specified
on a Plan Showing Proposed Access and Utility Easement by Hayes Engineering, Inc.,
dated June 9, 1995. Motion was seconded by W. Redfern. Mr. Balboni immediately
moved the motion with no further discussion which was seconded and passed 2-1. The
resultant vote on the main motion was 1 in the affirmative-Balboni and 2 denying the
grant of the Variance by Redfern and Jarema. The Variance request is denied because it
was not unanimous.
The motion was denied by a vote of 1-2-0.
On a motion by Edmund Balboni, seconded by Robert Redfern, the Zoning Board of
Appeals voted to close the public hearing on Case #02-26.
The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0.
Old/New Business
John Jarema met with Archstone-Smith and discussed the concerns on the visual scope
from the street and the immediate abutters, density, conservation issues. They discussed
the issue of the intensity instead of density. The goal is to have something first class that
the Town can be proud of.
On a motion by Donna Boggs, seconded by Edmund Balboni, the Zoning Board of
Appeals voted to adjourn at 9:20 p.m.
The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0.
Res ectfully submitted,
J
ecording Secretary