Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-03-09-ZBA-min Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom March 9, 2023 Board Members: Acting Chair –Nyles N. Barnert, Norman P. Cohen, Martha C. Wood, James Osten and Associate Members David Williams Alternate Member: Kathryn Roy Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk Address: 33 Bloomfield Street The petitioner is requesting SPECIAL PERMIT and VARIANCE in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4, 135-8.4.2, 135-9.2.2.2 and 4.1.1 Table 2 (schedule of dimensional controls to allow front yard setback of 22.7’ instead of required 30’ and allow a side yard setback of 6.2’ instead of the required 10’. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Topographical Plan, Plot Plan, Plans, Elevations and Gross Floor Area Calculations. Also submitted was a Certified As-Built Plot Plan, Certified Elevations and Certified As-Built Plot Plan Clarification. Submitted on February 9, 2023 was updated plans and plot plan. Prior to the meeting, the petitions and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Board of Selectmen, the Planning Director, the Historic District Commission Clerk, Historical Commission, Economic Development, and the Zoning Administrator. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator, Building Commissioner, Historical Commission Clerk, Select Board and Planning Department. Presenter: Deborah Kupka behalf of Anna Gayman and Michael McDonald The hearing was opened on January 12, 2023 Ms. Kupka presented the petition. She showed the current conditions. She stated they received approval from the Historical Commission. At the previous Hearing the Board asked them to come back with a study showing feasibility of the building elsewhere on the site. The preferred scheme is to build to the west side of the house which requires a variance. If they were to build on the rear of the house due to steep grade change it would require a variance as well and is a less ideal location for the property owners. This proposal would end with a variance for a three- story addition and a variance for the setback. They did move the front entry porch back a bit while trying to retain accessibility. There is a natural buffer on that side of the house and adjacent neighbor. The neighbors are in support of this project. She stated they would have to ask for relief for any expansion of the house. The lot shape and topography are creating hardships. A Board Member, Martha C. Wood, questioned how wide the porch is now that it has been reduced (4’ 9” to the column, about 5’). A Board Member, James Osten, questioned how many entries there are along the front of the house (There are two. Right now, the only access to the backyard is through the basement but in the proposal, they have a deck with stairs). Associate Member, David Williams, questioned if the homeowner has to walk from the driveway across the whole porch (They do, which is why they want to keep the porch somewhat accessible). Mr. Williams voiced his concern for the layout (The homeowners are happy to have another entry through the mudroom if they would like. It is more difficult to build to the right of the house). Mr. Williams stated he is not in favor of the long porch. An audience member, Susan Bennett of 64 Bloomfield St, stated the threat of demolition is not just theoretical, there was a petition for demolition filed and it was subject to demolition delay. The owner ended up selling the house. The neighborhood is delighted that they are seeking to preserve the house. The modest addition that will allow them to remain in the house seems like a very reasonable compromise. An audience member, Kathleen Lenihan of 60 Bloomfield St, stated at Town Meeting this year they are taking up a number of Zoning article changes that will address the housing crises and this is a great example of what they can do to help. A two-bedroom house is not a viable house for many people and if it can’t be modified it will be torn down. She urged the Board to approve the proposal. An audience member, Sharon Ladd of 40 Bloomfield St, stated she is the neighbor across the street and strongly supports the proposal. It is in keeping with the neighborhood and is modest. If this is not approved the house will be demolished. An audience member, John Sterman of 11 Bloomfield St, stated their support. It is a modest house and this proposal will make it possible for the current family and future families to live there. There were no further questions or comments from the audience. Alternate Member, Kathryn Roy, questioned what percent of the house will be retained and what percent will be new (They are adding about 1/3 new. They will have to move the interior wall for the addition and wide the living room). There were no further questions from the Board. The Hearing was closed at 7:29 pm (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – Yes, and David Williams – Yes). There were no comments from the Board. The Board of appeals voted four (4) in favor, one (1) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) 135-9.4, 135-8.4.2 to allow front yard setback of 22.7’ instead of required 30’ (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes ,James Osten – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – Yes, and David Williams – No). The Board of appeals voted four (4) in favor, one (1) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a VARIANCE in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.2.2.2 and 4.1.1 Table 2 (schedule of dimensional controls to allow a side yard setback of 6.2’ instead of the required 10’. (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – Yes and David Williams – No). Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom March 9, 2023 Board Members: Acting Chair –Nyles N. Barnert, Norman P. Cohen, Martha C. Wood, James Osten and Associate Members David Williams Alternate Member: Kathryn Roy Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk Address: 171 Massachusetts Avenue The petitioner is requesting SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4.2, 135-5.2.4(2) and 135-5.2.10 to allow a sandwich board sign. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Plans, Plans, photographs showing sign location, a letter from abutter, plot plan dated April 18, 1964 and a plot plan waiver request. Prior to the meeting, the petitions and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Board of Selectmen, the Planning Director, the Historic District Commission Clerk, Historical Commission, Economic Development, and the Zoning Administrator. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator, Building Commissioner, the Planning Department, Select Board Office and the Engineering Department. Presenter: Angela Maria Mahoney The hearing was opened on February 9, 2023 Ms. Mahoney presented the petition. She started with showing photos of the space. She stated she is proposing a 2 ft by 3 ft sandwich board sign on private property facing the bikeway. They went before the Design Advisory Committee who approved the sign. She stated as a small business they need to constantly figure out ways to reach new customers. With the bikeway they have an opportunity to reach other communities. They support the community due to their success. She showed a letter of support from the Lexington Retailers Association. They hope to be granted, as similar businesses have been granted, a Special Permit to place the sandwich board sign in the back of Wicked Bagel. A Board Member, Norman P. Cohen, questioned if there was a door in the back of the shop (That door is for deliveries and staff only). The Board questioned how customers will get to the front if they see the sign (There is a small path between the two buildings. They would have to take that path to the front of the building). Mr. Cohen asked whose private property the sign will be on (The landlord’s property, the strip mall). A Board Member, James Osten, questioned if there is parking for bikes available (There is not. There is the bike store next door that has bike stands). A Board Member, David Williams, stated the Economic Development Coordinator is trying to have all the businesses in the area have one sign. Right now, there are five food establishments in that area. He stated he supports them getting more signage but this should wait for the Town do this, behind those buildings is a mess. Building Commissioner, James Kelly, stated they are starting to see improvements made in the back of the buildings and this sign is part of that. Zoning Administrator, Julie Krakauer Moore, stated Economic Development has been working on this and it is a major project. Mr. Williams stated he is being told they have an end of June timeline on this. The Board clarified the sign location and building access. Acting Chair, Nyles N. Barnert, questioned the hours of operation (7am to 2 pm, Monday through Sunday). Mr. Barnert confirmed the sign would be out only when they are open (Yes, the sign would go out when they open and they would bring it in at the end of the end of the day). There were no questions or comments from the audience. Ms. Mahoney stated she appreciates the Boards consideration in approving the proposal as other sandwich board signs have been approved in the Town of Lexington. The Hearing was closed at 7:51 pm (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – Yes, and David Williams – Yes). The Board of appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a waiver for the certified plot plan (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – Yes, and David Williams – Yes) with the condition that the sign only be out when the business is open. Mr. Williams asked if this sign gets approved and the Town comes up with a comprehensive plan for signage would this sandwich board sign be removed. He suggested approval for 6 months. The Board discussed this further and agreed to take a vote. The Board of appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) 135-9.4.2, 135-5.2.4(2) and 135-5.2.10 to allow a sandwich board sign (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – Yes, and David Williams – Yes) with the condition that sign only be out when the business is open. The Board of appeals voted two (2) in favor, three (3) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to limit the Special Permit for six months (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – No, James Osten – No, Martha C. Wood – Yes, Norman P. Cohen – No and David Williams – Yes). Therefore, it was not passed and the condition is not required. Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom March 9, 2023 Board Members: Acting Chair –Nyles N. Barnert, Norman P. Cohen, Martha C. Wood, James Osten and Associate Members David Williams Alternate Member: Kathryn Roy Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk Address: 20 Pearl Street The petitioner is requesting SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-4.3.4 to allow an 8-foot fence to be located 0 feet from the property line instead of the required 8 feet. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Plot Plan, and Photographs. Also received was an abutter letter. Prior to the meeting, the petitions and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Board of Selectmen, the Planning Director, the Historic District Commission Clerk, Historical Commission, Economic Development, and the Zoning Administrator. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator, Engineering Department and Planning Department. Presenter: Irene Miller The Hearing was opened at 7:59 pm. Ms. Miller presented the petition. She stated she lost her husband in May and has been overwhelmed with doing things she’s never had to do before, especially maintenance. The only privacy she had was a row of very tall bushes, due to soil and water issues all the bushes died. She had a fence installed. A row of bushes on the left still remains. She was not aware she needed a Special Permit. The fence givers her privacy and security. A Board Member, Noman P. Cohen, questioned if there were objections from the neighbors (There were no objections. A neighbor helped to get letters). Ms. Miller stated the bushes were 20 ft high and when they were gone she was surprised by how much she could see and the lack of privacy. A Board Member, Martha C. Wood, questioned the height of the other fences in the neighborhood (Not sure. Her fence is only in the backyard). A Board Member, James Osten, questioned if there is a barrier between the property and the house on the left (There is an existing fence). Mr. Osten asked the Building Commissioner other than the height the fence is acceptable. Building Commissioner, Jim Kelly, stated he went to the site and it was well installed. A Board Member, David Williams, stated he blames the fence company, they should know better. An audience member, Eoin O’toole of 31 Arcola Street, stated he was sad to see the old screening go because it gave them great privacy. There is an 18-inch drop and the fence sits at the lowest point, so the effective height is only 6 inches over in height. Looking at the fence from 20 Bartlett Avenue it is a perpendicular view. He stated his support. An audience member, Kenneth McCracken of 20 Bartlett Avenue, stated when he first saw the fence go up he noticed it was very tall. He called the Town and had the Zoning Administrator come out. He was told that Ms. Miller had signed a form with the fence installer stating that they would not be responsible for the cost of taking down the fence given that it was taller than normal zoning rules. This indicates the Ms. Miller knew. He stated his objection. Ms. Miller stated Mr. McCracken does not see her fence, there are tall bushes on that side and he should not be affected. A Board Member, David Williams, questioned if someone needs a permit to install a fence. Mr. Kelly stated a permit is not required to install a fence less than 7 feet tall. A Board Member, James Osten, asked Mr. McCracken to clarify how much of the fence he sees. Mr. McCracken stated he sees the broad side of the fence from the eastern part of his backyard. He showed an image that clarified what he sees from his property. Acting Chair, Nyles N. Barnert, stated the plot plan provided is old so they do not know if the fence was put on a neighbor’s property. The Building Commissioner stated based on the plot plan provided he would be able to ensure that it is legally on the property lines. Mr. Barnert suggested a condition that the location of the fence be in compliance of the bylaw to the reasonable satisfaction of the Building Commissioner. Mr. Kelly stated they would do that. Mr. O’toole stated he is confident the fence is on the correct property. He stated there is a small area of sight line that is affecting Mr. McCracken’s property. He again stated his support for the fence. There were no further questions or comments from the audience. There were no further questions from the Board. The Hearing was closed at 8:36 pm (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Yes, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes) There were no comments from the Board. The Board of appeals voted four (4) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and one (1) in abstention to grant a SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-4.3.4 to allow an 8-foot fence to be located 0 feet from the property line instead of the required 8 feet (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Abstained, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes) with the conditions that the location of the fence be in compliance with the zoning bylaw to the reasonable satisfaction of the Building Commissioner. Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom March 9, 2023 Board Members: Acting Chair –Nyles N. Barnert, Norman P. Cohen, Martha C. Wood, James Osten and Associate Members David Williams Alternate Member: Kathryn Roy Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk Address: 6 Abernathy Road The petitioner is requesting SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-8.2to allow modification to a previously granted Special Permit dated January 9, 2003. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Plot Plan, Plans and Photographs. Also received was the previously granted Special Permit and Three Recorded Deeds. Prior to the meeting, the petitions and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Board of Selectmen, the Planning Director, the Historic District Commission Clerk, Historical Commission, Economic Development, and the Zoning Administrator. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator and the Building Commissioner Presenter: Carl Toumayan, of 340 Bedford St, representing Stephen Kay The Hearing was opened at 8:40 pm Mr. Toumayan presented the petition. He stated 20 years ago Mr. Kay and his parents went before the Board of Appeals seeking approval to construct a second dwelling unit. The goal at that time was to allow Mr. Kay and his family to occupy the larger dwelling unit and his parents to occupy the small dwelling unit. The Board of Appeals did grant the proposal with two conditions. The first condition is that the second dwelling unit is restricted to occupancy by a family member and the second condition is the Special Permit will expire when the property is sold. Under the current bylaw the Board no longer conditions these conditions. They are asking the Special Permit be amended to remove these conditions. A Board Member, James Osten, questioned if they have received comments from abutters (Mr. Kay stated there was a letter added to the file). Mr. Toumayan stated they are not proposing any changes to the existing structure. The structure was occupied by Mr. Kay parents until their passing. Associate Member, David Williams, stated his concern for parking (Mr. Kay stated his parents had cars. There is a carport and an additional parking area next to the porch). Mr. Williams questioned if Mr. Kay anticipates selling the property in the near future (Mr. Kay stated no). Mr. Williams asked if he is going to rent it to someone who would stay at least one year (Mr. Kay stated he wants to keep his options open). Mr. Williams stated he would not vote for this unless they condition it not be rented for less than one year. Zoning Administrator, Julie Krakauer Moore, stated when the Special Permit was issued in 2004 the Board had two options in the bylaw. They could issue a Special Permit as an accessory apartment or to issue a Special Permit as second dwelling. This Special Permit is issued as a second dwelling. If it was an accessory apartment then the restriction for no short-term rentals would apply. Mr. Williams stated he does not want accessory apartments used as short-term rentals. He stated he would not vote for this unless it there is a condition it not be rented for less than one year. Ms. Krakauer Moore explained the short-term rental bylaw. Ms. Krakauer questioned if the Board could condition something by-right. Building Commissioner, Jim Kelly, stated the Board could. It would be a difficult condition to monitor and enforce. It has a successful 20-year history. A Board Member, Martha C. Wood, stated if short-term rentals became common and there were issues, the neighbors would jump in and that’s how it would be monitored. Ms. Krakauer Moore stated a way the short-term rentals are monitored is they have to apply for a certificate that is renewed annually. A Board Member, Norman P. Cohen, questioned the square footage. He stated there is no neighbor on that side of the house. He stated he is in favor of the proposal. Acting Chair, Nyles N. Barnert, asked the applicant how they felt about a condition that one of the units had to be owner occupied (Mr. Toumayan stated it would be there preference if it remained without that condition). Mr. Barnert clarified they could be an absent landlord for the two units (Mr. Toumayan stated Mr. kay has indicated he has no present intention of vacating the property or in the near future. He would like to keep the option open). Mr. Kay stated his plan is to stay in the house. He has two children who are not ready to take over the house and he wants to keep his options open. An audience member, Roberto Rullo of 2 Abernathy Rd, stated he would oppose to the request to allow for both units to be rented. This would not be in keeping with the neighborhood. An audience member, Gabriella Rullo of 4 Abernathy Rd, stated when they went for the Special Permit in 2004 the neighbors were concerned. They would be okay with the proposal if Mr. Kay lives at the house and rents out the other unit. She stated her concern for it becoming a two- family house. An audience member, Sheldon Schwartz 5 Abernathy Rd, stated they understand the intention but they could end up with the house sold to an investor. He stated his concern for the property not being owner occupied. An audience member, Wei Huang of 9 Abernathy Rd, stated they would prefer the property is owner occupied. There were no further questions or comments from the audience. Mr. Osten, stated it may not be legal to restrict someone from renting their home. Mr. Toumayan stated if the Board is inclined to put a restriction on owner occupancy then they would request that it be to one of the units and not a specific unit. Mr. Barnert stated that was his intent. Mr. Kay stated the traffic would not increase anymore whether he is living in his unit and he rents the second unit. This is a nice neighborhood and the people that rent would be nice people. There were no further questions from the Board. The Hearing was closed at 9:13 pm (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Yes, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes) Mr. Williams questioned the short-term rental aspect. Mr. Barnert stated the only way they can short-term rent is through the building department. Mr. Kelly stated if they were to ask for a permit for short-term rental it is likely to approved assuming the building is safe. Mr. Barnert asked Mr. Kelly if there are serious objections from the neighbor would that have an impact on his decision. Mr. Kelly stated yes. There were no further comments from the Board. The Board of appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-8.2 to allow modification to a previously granted Special Permit dated January 9, 2003 as follows to eliminate condition number 1 and 2 and add a condition that one of the units must be owner occupied (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Yes, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes). Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom March 9, 2023 Board Members: Acting Chair –Nyles N. Barnert, Norman P. Cohen, Martha C. Wood, James Osten and Associate Members David Williams Alternate Member: Kathryn Roy Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk Address: 321 Marrett Road The petitioner is requesting SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-3.4 Table 1 (Permitted Uses and Development Standards) Line J.1.02 to allow fast food use in the CN zoning district. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Plot Plan Waiver Request and Floor Plans. Prior to the meeting, the petitions and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Board of Selectmen, the Planning Director, the Historic District Commission Clerk, Historical Commission, Economic Development, and the Zoning Administrator. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator and the Economic Development Department. Presenter: Talwinder Multani The Hearing was opened at 9:19 pm Mr. Multani presented the petition. He stated his restaurant is Spirit of India. He is requesting a Special Permit to allow dining for the restaurant. A Board Member, David Williams, questioned the hours of operation (Mr. Multani stated 10 am to 9 pm, Monday through Sunday). Ms. Krakauer Moore clarified they are allowed to do take-out by right, so they were allowed to open for take-out only. They are applying for fast-food use, the restaurant use is not allowed in that zone and is not part of this application. An audience member, Zhaojiang Lu, of 11 Grapevine Ave, questioned what the change was. Acting Chair, Nyles N. Barnert, explained the request. Mr. Lu stated his concern for noise and light pollution. Ms. Krakauer Moore stated they would need to file a complaint with herself, the Zoning Administrator. There were no further questions or comments from the audience. Mr. Barnert read the suggested conditions. There will be no delivery or trash pick up before 7 am or after 8 pm and all deliveries will be to the rear of the store, one handicap accessible toilet will be provided to patrons, the dumpster will be screened and emptied as need to meet Board of Health standards, the dumpster should be kept locked before 7 am, trash receptacles should be provided in the parking lot to keep free of litter, a copy of the Special Permit shall be posted in a conspicuous place in the establishment and this permit will expire in three years. Mr. Williams questioned what condition the exhaust pipe is in in regards to order mitigation. Mr. Multani stated no. This is new ownership and new management. They hope to bring in more people. The Hearing was closed at 9:32 pm (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Yes, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes) The Board agreed on the above conditions. There were no further comments from the Board. The Board of appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) to grant a waiver for the certified plot plan (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Yes, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes). The Board of appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-3.4 Table 1 (Permitted Uses and Development Standards) Line J.1.02 to allow fast food use in the CN zoning district (a roll call vote was taken: Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, James Osten– Yes, David Williams– Yes, Martha Wood– Yes, and Norman P. Cohen – Yes). Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom March 9, 2023 Board Members: Acting Chair –Nyles N. Barnert, Norman P. Cohen, Martha C. Wood, James Osten and Associate Members David Williams Alternate Member: Kathryn Roy Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk The Board voted to adjourn.