HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-26-03.pdf Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals June 26, 2003
Present Messrs McWeeney, Smith, Barnert, Chairman Sacco, and Vice-Chair Mrs Uhrig
Associate member Mr Williams was in attendance for the Follen Rd petition and sat on the
Walgreen sign petition in place of Mr. McWeeney, who had recused himself on that matter.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Sacco at 7 45 P M
1 10 Muzzey Street-Petitioner, Kyung Chai, represented herself Chairman Sacco read the
notice Petitioner explained request for 5-year renewal-proposed internal remodel She said
that she did not realize she had missed renewal date until she looked at permit in connection
with proposed remodel No one spoke in favor or against Board was concerned that there is
not a system in place to signal when renewals have been missed. Ideally we would send out
notices Other departments identified no issues Heanng was closed at 7 51P M On a
motion by Mr Barnert, 2nd by Mrs Uhrig the petition was granted unanimously for a five
year period ending 6/30/08
2 18 Preston Road, The hearing began at 7.52 P M with a reading of the notice by Mr
Sacco The Petitioner, Mr Weisskoff, represented himself and presented several abutter
letters in support and described the alterations he planned to the board and his need for
zoning relief and hardships of the property with its severe slopes which create the height
variance circumstance. Andrea Simpson of 7 Nichols spoke in support. No one spoke in
opposition Mr McWeeney wanted to know of the building inspector if a front yard variance
was also required and was told no because the lot was on a corner and the other side was
considered the front yard for setback reasons The hearing was closed at 7 52P M On a
motion by Mr Smith, 2nd by Mr Barnert the variance was unanimously granted
3 10 Tavern Lane The hearing opened at 7 57 P M with notice read by Mr Sacco
Petitioners were present represented by Atty Tom Fenn Mr Fenn described the family need
for expansion of the home, the wetland, ledge issues of the property, the approval of HDC
had been received. He presented letters of support from 5 and 12 Tavern Lane. Architect
Peter Dosier responded to question of expanding the paved parking area by Mrs Uhng that
there would be no increase in the paved area No one spoke in favor or against Mr Sacco
felt that the house sat sideways on the lot and that it was more like a side setback than a front
setback The Hearing was closed at 8.03 P M On a motion by Mr Barnert, 2nd by Mrs
Urhig the Vanance was granted unanimously
4 99 Follen Road Mr Sacco opened the hearing at 8 03 P M by reading the notice Atty
William Dailey represented the petitioners who were in attendance along with their
contractor, Jim McLaughlin. Mr. Dailey explained that the petitioners had purchased the lot
and demolished the house on it in order to provide a level play space for their grandchildren
who lived next door They contracted to has the lot leveled which resulted in the
construction of rock walls some over 10 feet high holding back the earth fill The placement
of the fill and the construction of the wall were without proper permits Mrs Uhrig
questioned whether the leveling was done to create a better lot for future development No
one spoke in favor but several neighbors spoke of concern of the structural integrity of the
wall, the negative change to the views from their properties, safety concern for children
climbing the wall and being hurt from falling loose rocks. Mr.Ahur of 32 Independence said
that he reported the filling to Mr Hackala in March The records indicate that notice went
Page 1 of 3
08/14/24 12 36 PM
H\ZBA minutes\6-26-03 doc
out to the McNamaras right away but they were in Florida all through March so the work
continued unabated till their return Mr Ahor also provided copies of photos to the Board
Concerned with appearance of the walls Mr Frederickson reported that the walls were set
back far enough to satisfy zoning Also speaking were neighbors Robert Wemgard, 30
Independence, John Trenchman of 28 Independence, Ms .Liz Gerber of 20 Independence
spoke of concern for her daughter whose playroom with a glass wall faced the rock wall
Don Ives at 24 Independence wanted assurance the dirt was clean and the walls safe The
Board expressed disappointment with the petitioners and their contractor's lack of following
the necessary process in this case Hearing all this, Mr Dailey suggested that they be granted
a continuance to discuss the appearance and safety issues with the neighbors and perhaps
through terracing or landscaping some agreement might be possible He would also return
with an a sworn letter from the contractor as to where the soil had come from and an
application for a permit for a retaining wall with supporting information and certification
from a structural engineer that the wall was safe and presented no danger to abutters from
collapse or disintegration Mr Dailey presented the Board with a letter requesting a
continuance to August 14,2003 On a motion by Mr Smith, 2nd by Mr Barnert the petitioner
was granted a continuance to the August 14, 2003 meeting The audience was advised that
no notices would go out for the continued heanng Mr Williams was present for the entire
hearing and also eligible to hear this case on 8/14
5 60 Bedford Street Mr Williams replaced Mr McWeeney for this heanng Mr Sacco
opened the hearing at 8.48 P.M. by reading the notice. The petitioners were represented by
the architect, Mr Hunt, Mr Hancock, the store Manager, and Ms O'Hara District Mgr for
Walgreen Mr Hunt described the process they had been through from the variance a year
ago to meetings with DAC The petitioners plan to reduce their overall signage square
footage but increase the number and type and location of the signs Ms O'Hara reported the
entire store was going to be done over with all new equipment and department layout The
only remaining issues were the lighting of a Walgreen's sign on Worthern Road and proper
consent from the landlord or the liquor store to place Walgreen's sign on their wall Mr
Hunt said that Walgreen's had agreed to not illuminate the logo sign in the circle over the
door, to leave the Goodwill trailer where it is, to not block the corner with landscaping but to
landscape the site in accordance with plans submitted He requested permission for internal
illumination of the sign on Worthern Rd Mr Williams stated that Stop&Shop did not have
an illuminated sign on Worthern Road and DAC was against illumination there No one
spoke in favor or against the petition Mrs Uhng was concerned about snow storage at the
corner Mr Hunt said they believed they had sufficient excess parking to leave snow on site
but agreed the corner would not be used for snow storage Mr Hunt asked if site plan
approval would still be required apparently Mr. Hackala maintains they have to return to the
Board The board consensus was that they felt it was not necessary but were not going to
speak for Mr Hackala The hearing was closed On a motion by Mr Smith to approve with
internal illumination on Worthern Road and 2nd by Mr Barnert, the Board voted 4-1 with Mr
Williams in the negative
6 32 Waltham St Mr McWeeney rejoined the board After consideration of request to change
sign from parallel to perpendicular, Mr Smith moved and Mrs Uhrig 2nd a motion to
consider such a change a"minor modification"which was passed unanimously
The meeting was ended at 9 35 P M
Page 2 of 3
08/14/24 12 36 PM
H\ZBA minutes\6-26-03 doc
Minutes submitted June 27, 2003
John J McWeeney, Clerk
Page 3 of 3
08/14/24 12 36 PM
H\ZBA minutes\6-26-03 doc