Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-10-21 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutesr' ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS READING, MA MINUTES - OCTOBER 21, 1987 Members Present: Chairman Quimby Board of Appeals Street, Reading, t-Catherine Quimby Stephen Tucker Ardith Wieworka /V C opened the scheduled general public hearing of the Zoning at 7:45 PM in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 6 Lowell MA. Mr. Joseph Machnowski was the first petitioner to come before the Board this evening to seek a Special Permit for the construction of an accessory apartment at his residence located at 407 Woburn Street, Reading, MA. Catherine Quimby began by reading the names of those who were notified of the petition and then turned the floor over to Mr. Machnowski for his comments. It was also mentioned that the members of the Board had visited the property to get the full idea of what was intended. Mr. Machnowski stated he was not familiar with all by-laws associated with an accessory apartment but had read the two by-laws referenced in the letter he received from the Building Inspector applicable to his case. The two major questions in this case were 1) the second egress; was it in violation of Section 601 of the State Building Code? and, 2) parking and driveway shown on plan. Mr. Machnowski stated that after learning from the Building Inspector just a few hours earlier that his access was in violation of the State Code, he modified his plans by changing the location of the second means of egress. He reviewed his new proposal with the Board drawing new location on plan. New location brings the stairway from the apartment down the back of the garage and out to his property on the northerly side. He explained that he would have to construct a solid wall along the back of the garage to provide for stairs, and once outside, he would install fencing to create a corridor effect for passage to the driveway. He felt fencing was essential for safety reasons due to the location of his pool in this area. Considerable discussion ensued with regard to his proposal for parking and the intention of the Zoning By-laws. Was Summer Ave a front or side yard? Indeed all members agreed that it was the Machnowski's side yard, but his immediate abuttor's front yard. The language contained within the by-laws was reviewed section by section. Mr. Machnowski indicated to the Board that should they determine that he could not have additional parking as requested, he would pursue through Town Meeting to have the by-law amended to clarify this issue. He specifically asked for guidance as to procedure to pursue this issue. Minutes - October 21, 1987 A Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 i The Chairman advised him as to what was necessary in order to submit zoning changes to Town Meeting. Members explained to the Petitioner that they had to take into consideration the appearance of the neighborhood and maintain the single-family appearance. There was consensus amongst the members that the second driveway proposed on Summer Ave would be in violation of the intent of the by-law. The Petitioner stated that with the church parking lot across the street and his immediate abuttor's circular driveway, this determination was unjust and would be brought before the Town Meeting in the future. The meeting was then opened to the public, and Mr. Frank Orlando of Summer Avenue inquired whether it would be possible for the occupants to leave any automobiles on Woburn Street and enter on Tri o sSS e6t u°-Also, would post office treat this as a separate address. Catherine Quimby informed him that parking restrictions were possible and that address details would be decided between the owner and tennant. Square footage by-laws were then discussed, and Ardith Wieworka stressed the need for properly calculated footage including the barn and workshop as part of the dwelling. The Petitioner asked if it was possible for him to resubmit his application with the proper information provided and was informed by the Board that this information could be provided to them in a continuance. Stephen Tucker also noted that the barn must be included as part of dwelling as by-laws require that an accessory_apartpent be part of --"'principal dwelling. It was also noted that if the ~icessory~apartment is allowed, this would eliminate the possibility of any future plans for a two-family dwelling. The time frame covering building permits and special permits was clarified by the Board to the Petitioner, and the hearing was continued to November 18 at 7:45 PM. The second petition brought before the Board was that of Robert and Carol Sprague, 365 Pearl Street seeking Variance to their garage to allow for the construction of an additional parking area. Mr. Sprague, representing himself, reviewed his plans to build a structure on his existing garage in which to house an additional car. It was determined that his proposal would create a 7-foot encroachment on the northerly side of the property line. Four aspects of the statute relating to the granting of a Variance were reviewed, and the Petitioner attempted to present rationale to support his request. Petitioner stated his feelings that this piece of land was just a "useless" piece of land, and the Board noted that the land in question was a necessary buffer between homes. It was discussed that too much land would be required in the rear of garage to construct addition in this area and that the intended location was the only solution to creating a two-car garage on the property. The current building is a Minutes - October 21, 1987 l Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 one-car garage. The Board informed the Petitioner of their failure to see any uniqueness of the land or hardship other than financial. Board members specifically attempted to have the Petitioner provide some documentation with respect to the topography of the land or structure which did not effect the area in general. Ardith Wieworka then moved to grant Variance and the motion was seconded. The Board then unanimously voted not to grant Variance as submitted for the property located on Pearl Street. The next hearing was then opened for Mr. David E. Hurley and James M. Joly seeking Special Permit to allow for the construction of a 7-room single-family home at the property located at 17 John Street, Reading, MA. Councel for the owners, Mr. Stephen G. Viegas, who is also an immediate abuttor to the property, spoke in their regard. Owners are two principals in the operation of the Century 21 real estate firm located in Reading. Their main interest for this property is to do what is best for the neighborhood, thereby creating a positive outcome for the abuttors which would reflect upon their wanting to do what is best for the town--some good PR for them! It was stated that the property in its present use as commercial property was being used as a garage for an ambulance company. This created a lot of noise and traffic in and out of the property. Its use as a single-family home would be a benefit to the neighborhood, and the current plans for construction would not change the conformity of the land with the by-laws. The Board questioned where entry to the home was intended, and where parking area was to be located. After further discussion, the meeting was opened to the public. Mr. Mike Guenther of 167 Hopkins Street clarified the history of the lot and its size, etc. as being sold by the past owner to one of her sons. The past owner and present abuttor is his mother-in-law. It was noted that at the time, the lot was subdivided illegally and laws were never enforced. This structure existed prior to zoning and is a pre-existing non-conforming lot. Mr. Guenther questioned the ways in which construction may effect the property abutting the land under petition, i.e., drainage, parking, etc. The current owners stated they would be willing to accommodate any drainage problem by substantially reducing the size of the driveway on the property. Also, any permit would ensure that there would be no visual obstruction to traffic negotiating this intersection. Another member of the neighborhood, Mr. Daniel Merit of 20 John Street expressed his concern for the.safety of children playing in the street near the home as it was planned as a four-bedroom home and there was a strong possibility of children occupying the home. The Board stated that possible situations could not be part of their decision. It was also noted that there was a park nearby, and that other members of the community were successful in keeping their children off the street. Minutes - October 21, 1987 Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 Ms. Pricilla Carrol, another immediate abuttor to the property, stated her concerns as well for the safety of the children and those passing through that intersection in automobiles as the corner is presently very dangerous. She was in favor of the property remaining commercial with permanent storage as its use. The Board noted that the promise of permanent storage at this location was not possible as commercial use was already granted to the premises, and future active commercial enterprises could buy the property at any time. Petitioners also made it clear that several businesses were interested in the property, and it could be sold for such purposes at any time with greater financial gain to the Petitioners. Following final discussion, Ardith Wieworka moved to grant Special Permit for the alteration of the structure located at 17 John Street to Mr. Hurley and Mr. Joly under Section 6.3.2.1., 6.3.2.2., and 6.3.3.4., of the Reading Zoning By-laws from the present two-bay garage and office to a 24' X 32' single-family dwelling with a single garage under stipulating the following conditions: 1) That the northerly side setback be at least nine feet, thereby reducing the present foundation on the northerly side by four feet; 2) That the dwelling contain no more than six rooms; 3) That the present driveway be reduced to a single-car driveway measuring no greater than 10' X 20'; 4) That the view of traffic at the intersection of John and Union Streets not be obstructed by the owners of the property at 17 John Street in any way. After further discussion, the Board unanimously voted to grant Special Permit for the property located at 17 John Street. The general public hearing was then closed. Respectfully submitted by Pamela A. Spang, Secretary to The Zoning Board of Appeals. DATE: SIGNATURE: