HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-02-19 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesBOARD OF APPEALS
READING, MA.
MINUTES - FEBRUARY 19, 1987
Members 'resent: John Jarema, Chairman
Catherine Quimby, Clerk
:''Ardith Wieworka
$tephen Tucker (Business Meeting Only)
Chairman Jarema opened the continued public hearing on
petition of Mr. Rodriguez, #87-5.
Mr. Rodrigues explained the events that preceeded his
application to the Board for a variance. He advised that he
had not realized that a building permit was needed for
erection of a shed. Hedescribed the construction process of
his shed advising that he,intended to utilize the backside of
the shed as the beginning of a stockage fence which he would
construct in the future. He presently has a stockage fence
on the opposite side lot line.
Mr. Rodrigues testified that he presently stores five cord of
wood, which lasts him one winter season. He noted that he
has always stored his wood in this location but in previous
years he had covered it with plastic. It was his opinion
that construction of the shed was an enhancement to his and
abutting properties. His house sets back from sidewalk
approximately 88 feet.
Letter from Conservation Commission read into the record.
Letter advised that applicant must file with the Commission
as property falls under both the. State and Local Statutes
with regard to wetlands. Mr. Rodrigues was not aware of the
fact that, part of his land was in the wetland district.
Mr. Thomas Hurton, father in law of Mr. Rodrigues, gave
testimony with regard to the appearance of the sided and the
property in general..
Two abutters spoke in oppoSition to the variance being
granted and gave testimony with regard to the appearance of
the shed'and property in general. One abutter submitted a
letter in this regard. They both indicated that the
structure was an eyesore: and built directly on the lot line.
Board of Appeals Minutes 2-19-87 Page 2.
Case #87-5 Rodrigues continued
In response to questions from Ms. Wieworka, Mr. Rodrigues
confirmed that he ha-d a three foot swimming pool to the rear
of his home and the hot top continued around to the back from
his driveway for about 35 feet. He estimated that there was
approximately 60 feet of level land behind his home before
the land sloped off.
Mr. Jarema reviewed the criteria for granting a variance and
the petitioner asked for clarification to the fourth criteria
(public good and intent of the zoning by--law).
General discussion with regard to aspects of the request for
.relief. Mr. Jarema noted that the Board had to take into
consideration interpretation of "structure".
Mrs. Quimby advised that she felt possibly the applicant
could show financial hardship but could not justified the
other requirements.
Ms. Wieworka noted that she had problems justifying the first
criteria and therefor had not continued with the balance of
the Statute.
Mr. Jarema advised that: he could justify the first two but
could not the last two; public good and intent and purpose of
the zoning by law.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously:.
VOTED: To grant a variance to Mr. Rodr:igues,108 Van Nordon
Road for structure to be located to close to the
side lot; ling.
VOTE: Ayer zero NAY: Jareina, Quimby, Wieworka
VARIANCE DENIED
Decision herewith attached and made a part of these minutes.
Public: Hearing closed at approximately 8:20 P.M.
Board of Appeals - Minutes February 19, 1987 Page 3
General Business: (Mr. Tucker now present)
Minutes of 2/11/87 were reviewed. Motion was made, seconded
and unanimously:
VOTED: To amend minutes to :include the following:
Motion to request $1,840 from Finnce Committee for transfer
to Board FY87 Budget. Request was estimated on anticipation
of 18 more hearings;,-2 of which would bring in $200 in
application fees; 167$90 fees.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously:
VOTED: To approve minutes of February 11, 1987 as amended.
BUDGET REVIEW:
General discussion of support staff that was needed by the
Board for both day and night time. It was agreed that 12/15
hours was needed plus coverage for night meetings. Whether
secretarial support for day and night is same person was
determined to the Town Manager's decision. It was noted that
Mr. Hechenbleikner had indicated that he would be looking for
staff support for the new Planner and CPCD also.
Members, using present rate paid secretary, arrived at
$1,646.40 as amount needed for salary line. It was estimated
that approximately six hours was required per hearing.
40 X 6 = 240 hours. Mr. Jarema advised that presently costs
break down as follows:
6 hours - $41.16
34.00
6.00
2.50
$83.00
advertising
postage
misc. (tapes, etc.)
- This cost is supported by $90.00
application fee.
In addition to the above the Board must allow for secretarial
support to prepare minutes. All members agreed that a
realistic, adequate clerical service was needed for recording
purposes. Consensus was reached that 15 hours a week,
hopefully, will surfice, and would certainly provide a
"beginning" to maintain adequate records and in addition
provide personnel on a daily basis to interface with the
citizens.
Board of Appeals Minutes - February 19, 1987 Page 4.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously:
VOTED: To request a total of 18 hours for secretarial
services, three of which would be for evening hearings, for a
total salary budget of $5,762.40.
EXPENSES: Tapes $125.00
Paper - 25.00
Ribb.o_ns 50.00
Dues & Mtgs._ 60.00
.$260.00
Advertising: $1,600 - 40 hearings at $40.00 each..
Postage: $ 564 includes postage for mailings to
members and neighboring.Towns.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously:
VOTED: To request $2,424 for Expenses FY'88 Budget.
Total Budget Request: $8,186.40
Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
atherine A. Quimb C1 rk