📍 Zoning Board of Appeals 8-5-25 AI Recap

Below is a summarized version of the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, organized by timestamps and speakers, focusing on key points raised during the discussion in Reading, Massachusetts. This summary condenses the discussion into major themes, speaker contributions, and decisions, avoiding excessive detail while retaining the essence of the conversation. Timestamps correspond to the video linked at the bottom.

🏛️ Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Summary

📅 Date: August 5, 2025
🕖 Time: 7:00 PM
📍 Location: Town Hall conference room + Zoom
👥 Board Members Present: Andrew Grasberger (Chair), Frank Capone, Taylor Gregory, Chris Cridler, Patrick Houghton (Vice Chair)
🧾 Staff Present: Amanda Beatrice (Administrative Specialist)

---

📌 Case #25-08: 57 Pearl Street – Front Bump-Out Variance

🕒 0:00–46:11
📣 Speaker: Ian Smart (Homeowner)
📝 Request: Variance to construct a front bump-out and portico on a legally non-conforming lot with a non-conforming front yard setback.

🔑 Key Points:

• The proposed bump-out would extend approximately 2 feet from the existing front wall to improve interior layout and allow for a functional closet.
• The portico would cover the front landing and stairs, enhancing aesthetics and providing shelter for visitors.
• The existing landing is 3.5 feet deep and 36 inches above grade; the bump-out would encroach into the front setback, reducing it from 20.9 ft to approximately 18.5 ft.
• Smart argued that the topography and elevation of the front door (40 inches above grade) necessitate a landing and stairs, and that the bump-out would not alter the footprint significantly.
• He cited neighborhood context, noting that many homes on Pearl Street are non-conforming due to age and setbacks.

🗣️ Public Comment and Board Discussion:

• A neighbor at 88 Pearl Street opposed the variance, citing concerns about privacy, reduced sunlight, and visual encroachment. She argued that the house already feels close to the street and that the proposed changes would exacerbate that.
• The neighbor also challenged Smart’s claim that his was the only conforming house on the street, providing measurements and historical context for other homes.
• Board members discussed the legal criteria for granting a variance, emphasizing that all four must be met under state law and local bylaws.
• Some members expressed concern about setting precedent and the lack of a clear hardship related to the land or structure.
• Others acknowledged the unique topography and interior layout challenges, noting that the bump-out would improve functionality without significantly impacting the neighborhood.
• Smart offered to remove the portico from the proposal and proceed only with the bump-out, reducing the encroachment and addressing some board concerns.

✅ Outcome:

• Motion Passed to grant a variance for the 2-foot bump-out only, excluding the portico.
• Conditions:
  • A revised plot plan must be submitted reflecting only the bump-out.
  • The landing may remain but must not be covered.
  • The decision must be drafted and posted within 14 days, followed by a 20-day appeal period.

---

📌 Case #25-102: 102 John Carver Road – Special Permit for Addition

🕒 46:49–58:09
📣 Speaker: Meredith Chamberlain (Architect, representing homeowners Sarah and John Marcus)
📝 Request: Special permit to demolish and rebuild a mudroom and garage addition with a primary suite above on a legally non-conforming structure.

🔑 Key Points:

• The existing garage and mudroom are structurally compromised and will be replaced with a new addition on a similar footprint.
• The new structure will not increase any existing non-conformities; in fact, it will be slightly further from the front and side lot lines.
• The proposed addition includes a one-car garage, mudroom, and second-floor primary suite.
• The property is adjacent to the Ajona River, but the portion behind the house is classified as intermittent, not perennial, simplifying conservation permitting.
• The deck and stairs will slightly encroach into the 100-ft buffer zone but are not considered impervious structures.
• Multiple neighbors submitted letters of support, and no objections were raised during public comment.

✅ Outcome:

• Special Permit Granted under Section 7.3.2.
• Conditions:
  1. Submit certified plot and foundation plans before foundation permit.
  2. Submit final construction and as-built foundation plans before building permit.
  3. Submit as-built plans after completion and before occupancy permit.
  4. Subject to Conservation Commission review due to proximity to the Ajona River.

---

🗂️ Administrative Notes:

• Minutes Approved for meetings on June 3 and July 1, 2025, with minor amendments.
• Next Meeting: Scheduled for September 2025.
• Adjournment: Meeting adjourned by unanimous vote.

---