HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-02-25 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesBOARD OF APPEALS
READING, MA.
MINUTES - FEBRUARY 25, 1987
Members Present: John ,Jarema, Chairman
Catherine Quimby, Clerk
Stephen Tucker
Ardith Wieworka
Chairman Jarema opened the scheduled public hearing for
Thomas R. Gian.grande", 260 Old Farm Road - appeal against
decision of the bu:i l.d:ing inspector, # 87,i
Mr. .Jarema reviewed the history of the case: Building
Inspector had issued a cease and desist: on October 22, 1986
against Mr. Giangrande for operating a buisiness in his home,
a residential zone. Mr. Jarema further explained the process
of law involved in this situation advising that the
petitioner had indicated that indeed be was operating a
business in his home. The court clerk, in turn, requested
that he (the petitioner) petition the Board of Appeals which
would "buy time„ for the petitioner.to find space for his
business in a business zone
Latter from the Building Inspector to Mt. Giangrande.read for
the members' benefit. Building Inspector indicated that in
his opinion repair of old and used equipment, lawn motors,
snow blowers and small motors, and the sale of new equipment,
was taking place at 260 Old Farm Road.
Mr. Jarema questioned the petitioner with regard to the
storage of gas in his home adding that if this business was
operating in the proper zone it would be inspected by the
Fire Department for safety.
Mr. Jarema explained the various options available to the
petitioner: appeal from the building inspectors' decision;
use variance; or special permit for a home occupation. Each
process was explained to the petitioner Mr.Giangrande
advised that be wished to continue his request for an appeal
from the building inspectors' decision.
Mr. G:iangrande reaffirmed the business he was operating out
of his home advising that he did not feel it was having a
negat.Ive impact on the neighborhood. He noted there was no
noise, pollution, or heavy traffic involved. He viewed
several pictures taken from the Building Inspector's file and
advised that the trailors on the site were his personal ones.
Board of Appeals Minutes February 25, 1937 Parse 2.
Mr. Giangrande advised that he is presently attempting to
:find rental space and had looked at several sites with the
Building Inspector.
Several abutters in attendance offered the following:
Molloy: 29 Old Farm~Road: This business has no effect nor
does it take away from the value of her property. She
questioned just what constituted "sales". Mr. Jarema
answered that he felt: the Zoning-By-Law -identified home
occupation as clean, paper orientated business such as
lawyer, accountant, etc.
Malinowsk, Old Farm Rd : If the Hoard were to consider
making a change to the zone then she would debate the issue
and be opposed but she had no objection to this business
under home' occupation.
Collins, Old Farm Road: Quite a bit of traffic in the
summer; location is advertised as a business.
Carlson: (no address): Asked for clarification of Home
Occupation, noting he felt the delivery of things constituted.
a "business" which could cause the Board to disallow in a
residential zone.
Manchester, 2 Park Avenue: Does not live in the area but did
not believe that this business had any impact on the tr=affic.
Marshall, 11 Old Farm Road: Business has been run in a very
considerate manner but in general she would not want business
on Old Farm Road.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously:
VOTED: That the Board of Appealsuphold the decision of the
Building Inspector with regard to business being conducted at
260 Old Farm Road, Reading,, MA.
A five minute recess was taken as people moved in and out and
the Chairman then opened public hearing scheduled for 3:00
p.m. petition of Fafard for special permit to construct 100
town houses on property located off Salem Street, Pleasant;
Street and Smith Avenue.
Bogard of Appeals Minutes - February 25, l4-t~37 Page 3.
Chairman advised the applic.--,ant that fee for Special. Permit
was now $200 and therefor -there was a balance clue of $1.10.00.
He also noted that the application had been received by the
Town Clerk's office on January 22, 1987 and applicant had
subsequently filed with the CPCD on January 23, 1987 for Site
Plana Review. Mr. J~trema had confirmed ti.in etable of C P D C
decision with Mr. Redfern and it appears that their decision
should be issued by March 13, 1987. He reviewed the opt: ions
available to the applicant at this time and it was determined
that this hearing would proceed and be continued until March
18, 1987 so that the Board could receive the input of the
CPCD Site Plan decision.
Mr. Latham, representing the applicant, reviewed the locus of
the property in question; 22 acres in a S--10 district with
frontage on Azalea Circle. Mr. Latham went through each
requirement of the zoning by-law noting compliance specifics.
In all instances the development proposal either met or
exceeded the standards set down. He advised that they felt
it was a creative use of the land and that, a natural
buffer to abutting- properties existed.
Mr. Latham advised that the applicant would handle the
emergency access planned to Pleasant Street in any way the
Town washed it to be handled. He noted that at the request
of the C-,PDC they were presently proposing a six inch granite
curb at this location.
Mr. Jim McLaughlin, Engineer for Fafard gave a general. review
of the property noting that there was 200!400 feet of
wetlands around the, property. They proposed to construct. 25
four unit buildings consisting of three styles. He showed
slides of the three styles as well as various aspects of
landscaping, etc. that Fafard has constructed in other
locat.i.ons.
All utilities will come in off of Salem Street: and sewer
lines- would tie into the existing main at the rear edge of
the property.
Letters from the Board of Health; CPDC; Housing Authority and
Conservation Commission were read into the record by Board
members.
Mr. Jareina also referenced a letter received from the Mass
Water Resource Commission, addressed to Mr. Fletcher, Dept.
Of Pub.-Lic Works. Letter spoke to repa.t-s scheduled for the
pumping station and its effect on waste water proposed from
this site.
Hoard of Appeals Minutes. - February 25, 19£37 Page i.
Testimony from citizens:
LeBlanc, Philip Presented a petition consisting of
two/three pages of signatures and a cover letter directed to
the Police and Fire Chiefs. Petition spoke to emergency
access planned for end of Pleasant. Street which was to be
blocked by a six i.nc:h_ granite curb. Signers of petition
indicated that proposed curbing in essence was "no barrier"
and they requegt thgj an earth berm be constructed at this
location.
Foley, George, Smith Avenue: Sewage concern over what is
presently in existence. Advised that raw sewage was seeping
into residents' basements.
Mr. Latham responded by outlining the Town's present program
of..two to one whereby no building permits could be given
until developer had complied with this requirement. Mr.'
Latham advised that the Town Engineer determines where the
infiltration is taking place that the developer is to respond
to. Hopefully, he will ask the developer to address the area
of Eaton Street, Smith Avenue.
Murphy, Ed., 23 Elm Street: Advised that manhole overflows
every year and this year it is the worst yet. In his opinion
it is not right for the Town, or anyone, to clump raw sewage
into wetlands. This problem should be eliminated before
additional waste water is added to the system.
Mr. Jarema advised that there issues must be addressed by the
Conservation Commission and.the Department of Public Works
noting that the Board of Appeals had no jurisdiction in these
areas.
Fall NO& 23 Smi thAvenue: Presented the Board with a copy
of report issued to the Board of Health from their agent in
November, 1986. She read report: and presented pictures both
of which outlined problems of bubbling sewage out of manholes
on Eaton, John and Smith Avenue rheas. She asked the board
not to issue Special Permit which would add to these problems
until the existing problems had been addressed by the Town.
Cox, Morgan, 14 Smith Avenue: Advised that he had contracted
salmonella poisoning last E'all. which could have been caused
by exposure to raw sewage. He asked for a determination as
to just: who was responsible for allowing this existence of
raw sewage to continue? He also noted that he understood
that the letter from the MWRC indicated that they could not
guarantee, repairs to pumping station would solve the existing
problems. He further ,:asked the Board initiate an agreement
whereby- the F<_afard Company would assume livability, should the
situ at :ion become worse after cons truct:ion.
Board of Appeals Minutes February 25, 1981 Page S.
Mr. McLaughlin responding to various :issues raised advised
that Fafard would handle the emergency access onto Pleasant
Street: in any way the Town desired. He also advised that i-t.
was his opinion that this development would, hopefully, would
eliminate some of the existing problems of water/sewage; flow.
Foley, Smith Avenue: Back-up would increase problem
regardless as to whore this development: ties in.
Lemard, Smith Ave: Asked for clarification of procedure-CPCD.
Devine, 42 John Street: Two issues did not believe the
citizens were opposed to development but were utilizing this
opportunity to air their exist=ing problems. 2 for 1 is just a
bandage fix to get us through the next decade. Devine said
that, the Town is already in big trouble, but it is not the
developers fault because the Town has not addressed its
existing problem . He noted various statistics as to
discharge of water and suggested.that"the citizens address
their concerns to the Board of Selectman/'.Town Manager who had
the authority to respond and address these issues.
Ferenzie, Joanna Drive: Questioned location of various
detention areas - Mr. McLaughlin outlined on the site plan.
He further advised that location of one of the three proposed
detention arras had been moved from the Definitive
Subdivision Plan for Azalea Circle onto the proposed
Greenacres Townhouse Plan. This was done at the request of
the CPCD and a new plan would be forwarded to the Board of
Appeals shortly. In response to question with regard to
lighting Mr: McLaughlin, in a vague manner, pointed to
location of lights outside of buildings and advised that no
street: lighting was planned. Light; sensitive bulbs would be
used outside of buildings.
Theso two issues are being addressed by the CPDC Site Plan
Review. Mr. Jarema advised that he would ask the CPDC to
locate-.several of their DECTSTONS in the Public Library for
the benefit of the citizens.
Foley: 'Advised that the applicant was using a two year old
traffic study and asked that the Board request an updated
one. Mr. McLaughlin advised that they were presently having
an updated study performed.
Fall - Asked the developer just how much of the 22 acres was
going to be utilized for the buildings? Mr. McLaughlin
advised that the parcel contained 7.2 acres of uplands and
that the zoning bylaws included calculations with regard to
Board of Appeals Minutes of February 25, 1987 Pages G.
allowable wetlands on parcel..tBy--l.aw-states that the maximum
amount of lanai to be built: upon is 20% and they were only
using 15%. Buildings and driveway would take place on two
acres of the 12 dry acres.
LeBl.aDC: -Asked that the new traffic study give breakdown of
flow at rush hour times.
Public hearing was adjourned at, this time (10:00 P.M.) and
continued until 7:30-p.m. on March 18, 1987.
General Business: Members spent the next thirty minutes
reviewing the Town Manager's proposed budget. Mr. Jarema
advised that he had not presented the Board's voted budget to
the Town Manager. The bottom line difference between the
budget approved by the Board and the budget which the Town
Manager was submitting to the Finance Committee was around
;;700/800. Board members reached consensus that they would
not ask for reconsideration of FY'88 Budget by the Town
Manager. -However, they did instruct; the Chairman to com-
municate with the Town Manager and advise him of their voted
budget as well as seek his imput as to rationale behind his
(Town Manager's) recommendations.
Tt_was further discussed and agreed by the Board that
improved communication was necessary among Board members in
order to beta:ear address business matters which the Board
handles. The Chairman will report the status of "business
issues to the Board.
it was, agreed that Mr. Tucker and Mrs. Quimby would work
together and generate an "Annual Report for submission to the
Town Manager.
Mrs. Driscoll reported that the Town Clerk's office had
refused to accept minutes reflecting a previous Board
meeting. Chairman was asked to relay this to the Town
Manager so he could resolve the issue..
Mrs. Quimby advised the hoard that although she had offered
to promulgate minutes, so as to meet the requirements of the
Open Meeting Law, site must now withdraw that offer as she
felt it was impeding her ability to direct her full attention
to ;i.nput, being given the Board.
Meeting adjourned at approximately 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Catherine A. Quimby, Cles