Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-05-19 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesZONING BOARD OF APPEALS READING, MA MINUTES - May 19, 1988 Members Present:---Catherine A. Quimby John A. Jarema Sally Nitzsche Chairman Quimby opened the scheduled public hearing on May 19, 1988 at 7:30 PM in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 6 Lowell Street, Reading, MA. The Board began by discussing schedules of members. John Jarema then asked whether new copies of 40A had been received by any Board member. There was some question as to the correct procedure on granting an extension i.e., must a hearing have been previously opened in order to grant an extension?- It was agreed that an interpretation from Ted Cohen was in order as soon as possible. The first hearing was opened at 7:50, a continuance for Robert and Marilyn Pawlak of 130 Lawrence Road. Mr. Bill Wagner, attorney for the petitioners, began by stating that an original building permit for the structure at 129 Lawrence Road had not been located, however, a building permit for the addition to the structure had been found and was issued in September 1963. It showed 20' to right side lot line and 40' to the rear. The application for this permit made no sense in this case and was disregarded as evidence of importance in the decision. Chairman Quimby again stated it was clear to her that the intention of the owner when building this addition was to maintain one lot for the dwelling. Mr. Wagner then directed his comments to a plot plan he had submitted (no approval required/not viewed by planning) which was an instrument survey done strictly to address the needs of the Board. After viewing the plan, Chairman Quimby inquired as to how the Board was to determine if the structure would meet setback requirements, as this would depend on the location of the structure on the lot. The proposed plan was then passed among those in attendance. Mr. Wagner then spoke regarding three ways of which one he had hoped would meet the requirements of the Board. They were as follows: 1) knowing what the Board knew now, -is there any way they would consider the lot a buildable lot and grant the Special Permit in its present state, 2) would Board be willing to grant a Special Permit with a new lot configuration, and 3) the addition at 129 Lawrence Road (Lot #14) could be removed to meet lot line requirements. John Jarema then summarized the general feelings of the Board stating it appeared it was not taken into account that the two lots were separate at the time of construction of the addition and that the approval of the addition itself proved this. If addition were not there, the lot May 19, 1988 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Page 2 would meet all setback requirements. Mr. Jarema felt personally that Option #3 was the best solution. He also added that he felt pretty sure that Option #2 would not pass CPDC approval. There was no way to actually determine the intent back in 1963 for certain or who was at fault in this matter. Sally Nitzsche inquired whether Option #3 could be used and included as a condition in a decision to be made tonight. This was discussed briefly by the Board. Catherine Quimby then added that she felt Options #1 and #2 were not viable, only #3 was possible. Mr. Wagner then asked whether approval of the Special Permit could be done including the condition of removal of the addition. Chairman Quimby then asked if there were any further questions from the attendees, and John Jarema then moved to grant Special Permit citing all zoning requirements be met including set backs for any structure placed on the land at (Lot #15), Plat 130, Lot 39, for Robert and Marilyn Pawlak under Section 6.3.1.3., Lot 39, Plat 130 to be registered only after an authorized town official has verified that the property located at Lot 40, Plat 130 (Lot 14) conforms with existing by-laws with the exception of the easterly side setback requirement of 10' 8". Sally Nitzsche seconded the motion, and the Board voted unanimously Special Permit subject to above conditions. Catherine Quimby then noted to attendees the appeal period. The hearing was then closed. * * * * * * * * * * * * The next hearing was then opened for Thomas and Christina Morley of 205 Bancroft Avenue, Reading seeking a Variance to allow for the construction of an addition too close to side lot line. List of those who received notice was then read. Mr. Morley then began discussing his case by saying he needed additional space for his family of three small children. At this point, John Jarema inquired if Mr. Morley was aware of the four conditions required in the granting of a Variance. Mr. Jarema then proceeded to read the four criteria. Following a lengthy discussion as to whether there was anything relating to the land which would necessitate the structure be added at the point designated by the Petitioner, the discussion moved to the fact that building on any other area would block any natural sunlight coming into the kitchen on the northerly side of the house. The kitchen was recently remodeled, therefore, the petitioner was reluctant to interfere with the existing structure in that area of the home. An abuttor, Mr. Steve Corliss of 215 Bancroft Road, then requested May 19, 1988 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Page 3 to speak to the Board and stated that the land on the lot in question was a filled lot with the surrounding walls holding up land. Catherine Quimby then read a letter dated May 18 from the Conservation Commission, Ms. Beth MacKillop, regarding wetlands bordering this lot and the requirement that the ZBA inform them of their decision. In the event that this Variance was permitted, the petitioner would also have to get approval from Conservation Commission. The Board then discussed possible options with the petitioner which might allow him to make the changes he wished without requiring a Variance. John Jarema clarified during this discussion that obtaining a Variance was extremely difficult due to the "forever and for all" effect it would have. The Board, generally agreeing that the first criteria could not be met, gave the petitioner the chance to prove the remaining three points. Further discussion followed with the petitioner stating that the interior of the home would not lend itself to an addition at any other location. The Board again stated they could not take this into consideration. When it was clear there were no further questions or comments, Sally Nitzsche made the motion to grant Variance under Section 5.1.2 to Thomas and Christina Morley of 205 Bancroft Avenue on the Northerly side of the dwelling too close to the side lot line. John Jarema seconded, and the Board voted unanimously to deny the Variance. The hearing was then closed. * * * * * * * * * * * * The final hearing was then opened for Mr. Timothy Kirwan of 48 Hanscom Avenue, Reading seeking a Variance for a replacement garage located too cl,ose.to side lot line. After it was clear that Mr. Kirwan was aware of the four criteria in the granting of a Variance, he spoke on his own behalf stating the old structure was a single car shed, unsound and unsafe. This would be replaced with a pre-fabricated two-car garage/shed structure measuring 16' X 24'. It was necessary to be in non-conformance of three feet due to ledge found to the side lot line. After some discussion and review by the Board, John Jarema noticed the structure had been placed improperly on the plan--the 241 length was actually only required to be 16' in length. The 24' length was not creating any problems once placed properly on the lot. Following this discovery, Mr. Kirwan requested to withdraw without prejudice, Sally Nitzsche seconded, and the Board voted unanimously to grant a withdrawal without prejudice to the petitioner. May 19, 1988 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Page 4 Following the public hearings, the Board discussed general business. This discussion began with Chairman Quimby reading a letter from Jonathan Edwards regarding a request for extension on an appeal on a decision of the building inspector for Fuller/Trancoa/Transitron property. After some discussion, John Jarema made the motion to accept with one amendment the extension which would extend the ultimate determination date to August 31. Sally Nitzsche seconded, and the Board agreed unanimously. It was agreed that the Chairman would follow up this procedure with Town Councel. During this time, a discussion on where the responsibility should lie for final acceptance of applications and who should represent the approving signature was held. John Jarema felt strongly that Jonathan Edwards should have the final say. Gail Faller was presently responsible, and it was agreed she was doing a fine job. Mr. Jarema felt, however, that Gail should not have to face the consequences should there be any problems. Sally Nitzsche tended to agree with Mr. Jarema. After a lengthy discussion on this topic, it was decided that this would be voted only after all members had their input, and if agreed would be put into R&R's. Final discussion would take place on June 16. The Board then discussed the attempt being made to streamline the abuttors lists. It then became clear that the Board would need clarification as to who is actually required to be informed by mail and if the Board would choose to follow these laws and do only what was required. It was felt that if a public way was keeping a person from being informed of possible construction across the street, this was unfair and would have to be reconsidered. The Board then briefly discussed the upcoming meeting of Tuesday, May 24 with the Selectmen on the forthcoming dispute with Eric's Greenhouse. A letter from the Town Manager was then read which requested the Board rate the legal services currently under contract with the Town of Reading. Board members gave their comments for submittal to the Town Manager by Catherine Quimby. The meeting was then adjourned at 10:40 PM. Respectfully submitted by Pamela A. Spang, Recording Secretary to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Date: Signature: