Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-09-04.pdf DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals- September 9, 2004 Present, Mrs Uhrig, Chair, Mr Smith, Vice-Chair, Mr Barnert, Mrs Sheehan, Mr McWeeney Petition Address. 748 Waltham Street The Chairman opened the hearing at 7 45 PM by reading a letter from the petitioner requesting an extension from a previous decision by the board of appeals for a special permit and vanance This was asked to give the petitioner additional time to build a new roof for his garage The Petition was presented by—Paul J Rose, Owner Information presented by Petitioner- None The hardship is that the roof had not been completed and over the past two years had only been patched, which have either leaked or rotted Questions from the Board None Heanng was closed at• 7 55 pm Discussion None Decision On a Motion by Mr Barnert, seconded by Mr McWeeney The Board by vote of 5-0 TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION FOR SIX MONTHS Submitted by Dianne Cot-two, Clerk DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Anneals— September 9, 2004 Present, Mrs Uhng, Chair, Mr Smith, Vice-Chair, Mr Barnert, Mrs Sheehan, Mr McWeeney Petition Address 32 Barberry Road The Chairman opened the hearing at 7 50 PM by reading the notice and described information received from the Petitioner, other Boards and Commissions relative to the Petition Mrs Uhrig also made mention of numerous letters received in support from neighbors of the petitioner Atty Thomas Fenn presented the Petition The relief sought is for a Variance from side yard setback requirements in accordance with 135-35 (A), Table 2 Dimensional Controls The hardship is the topography of the land and the odd angle of the lot and building Mr &Mrs Bicknell is requesting a variance to build a garage on their property With them getting older they are concerned with their safety walking from driveway to the house in inclement weather. There were many neighbors present in support of this project They will have to remove 7 trees but are trying to save as many as possible They are planning on replanting trees and adding landscaping to the area Questions from the Board. . Mrs Sheehan Is there a 30 Barberry and are they present? Yes and they are in favor of the project Mr Barnert Will the turnaround at least 5 ft away? Yes, there is no change there Questions from the audience. — None Speakers in Favor — Neighbors, Arthur Katz and Herbert Weiss spoke strongly in favor Also had received letters from Phyllis Oppenheim, Manlyn Paul, David Peter Stroh, Judy Teicholz, Alan& Mary Becker, Julie & Steve Romansley, Herbert &Ruth Weiss and Jamie Katz Speakers in Opposition-None Hearing was closed at. 7.55 PM Decision On a Motion by Mr Barnert, seconded by Mr Smith The Board by a vote of 5-0 granted full approval Submitted by Dianne Cornaro, Clerk DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals- September 9, 2004 Present, Mrs. Uhrig, Chair, Mr. Smith, Vice-Chair, Mr. Barnert, Mrs. Sheehan, Mr. McWeeney Petition Address—59 Chase Road The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the notice and described information received from the Petitioner, other Boards and Commissions and letters relative to the Petition The Petition was presented by—Kathleen Morris, Owner The relief sought is to rebuild existing deck(which had been constructed without permit before she had bought home), modify front porch, install bay window Questions from the Board— Mrs Sheehan Does the driveway space stay the same? (Yes) Mrs Uhrig Concerned that there is no justification for variance (Petitioner wasn't sure what she meant) Since she is changing all the windows she would like to put in a bay window to add more light They are making the porch 4 feet wide because it is easier to walk. She is mainly concerned with the deck because it is getting dangerous Mrs Uhrig, is the empty lot next-door part of the house lot in the back? (Yes) Questions from the audience—none Speakers in Favor—None Speakers in Opposition-None Hearing was closed at 8 00 pm Discussion none Decision On a Motion by John McWeeney, seconded by Arthur Smith the Board by a vote of 5-0 APPROVED the petition Submitted by. Dianne Cornaro, Clerk DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals- September 9, 2004 Present, Mrs Uhrig, Chair, Mr Smith, Vice-Chair, Mr Barnert, Mrs Sheehan, Mr McWeeney Petition Address—26 Middle Street The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 00 PM by reading the notice and described information received from the Petitioner, other Boards and Commissions and letters relative to the Petition The Petition was presented by—Craig Weeks, Owner The relief sought is a Variance/Special permit to demolish more than 50% of existing structure and expansion above existing house. The hardship is that the house had not been built to today's code The present owner had land surveyed and found that the house is 3 feet to close on one side He was not aware of this when he bought the property Mr Weeks would like to best use the land and to make the house larger In the process of getting the application done there have been a number of Conservation issues that have come to surface that need to be addressed He was to go before the conservation a couple of weeks ago and didn't He is going before the Conservation Board this month Questions from the Board Mr Barnert, Is the Bay window on the side close? Yes, according to the way zone originally read, Zoning has since changed The reason for the window is to being in more light and to add space to the room Property on the side has 1 or 2 windows on that side but they are to more towards the front of the house There will still be plenty of privacy Mr Smith didn't understand plans, How much of the house will be demolished (Depends on the Conservation outcome) Mr. Smith. Keeping original foundation? (Yes) Mrs Sheehan What is the increase in sq footage? (From 1250 to 3100) Mrs Uhrig Why not demolish and move house back? (He is trying to maintain the uniformity of the street Houses all along the street are to the front of the properties He wants to stay consistent Mr Barnert thought that the board would have a hard time making a decision without knowing the outcome of the Conservation issues Mrs. Uhrig told Mr. Weeks that he would have 2 options. 1) Continued to another time or 2)withdraw without prejudice Mrs Weeks agreed that he would withdraw until he has met with Conservation Mrs Uhrig questioned what Zoning officer told him about applying for variance/special permit—she read by-law that read "cannot expand on special permit" Questions from the audience—none Speakers in Favor—None Speakers in Opposition-None Decision On a Motion by Mr Barnet Barnert, seconded by Mr Smith The Board by vote of 5-0 to accept the withdrawal without prejudice. Submitted by Dianne Cornaro, Clerk DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals- September 9, 2004 Present, Mrs. Uhng, Chair, Mr. Smith, Vice-Chair, Mr. Barnert, Mrs. Sheehan, Mr. McWeeney Petition Address—76 Bedford Street, Unit 1 The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the notice and stated this is the third time this has come before the board The relief sought is special permit to operate a Curves franchise The Petition was presented by Andrea Considine & Cheryl White Information presented by Petitioner- Ms Considine read from a prepared document explaining what has been done concerning issues that have been presented First being the noise She explained they had a sound engineer monitor their Stoneham facility and then go to the Lexington site and run sound tests there They played music from 9 30 to 11 00 am on September 1st When they checked with their neighbors, none had heard any of the music played The testing noise level was 10%higher than they usually play the music. The Second issue was parking. She explained that they had visited the parking lot between the hours of 7 & 9 AM and at 5 30—7PM and found only 20% of the lot was full She felt that her peak time of using the parking lot would be when other businesses in the building were not at their peak usage She also stated that she took offense to comments by John Groman that they intended illegal use of the basement The basement would be used for storage only Ms Considine thought that people did not understand what Curves was all about and she had prepared a 60 second video that showed what an inside of a Curves looked like Questions from the Board. Mrs Uhng had asked if the Board had visited a Curves franchise'? Not everyone had Ms Considine was commended for all the work that was done to prepare for tonight's hearing Mrs Sheehan How long is the lease for? (5 years) Are you aware that permits are only given for a year to begin with? (She did not know that) Are you willing to take the 5-year lease and receive a permit for a year and see what happens after that year? (Yes she is) Mrs Sheehan Has the Condo board met since the last BOA meeting? They were to meet, discuss Curves, and come to some agreement (No they hadn't met because they couldn't get quorum because of so many on vacations, etc.) Mrs Sheehan On P 3 of by-law document it states that no hairdressing salon, how did Bella Sante get in? (Condo Board had decided it was not a hair salon) Questions from the audience. Alan Algart Do you think the week before Labor Day is a good time to judge parking lot? Are you suggesting that is normal? (they are not suggesting anything, that's just when they were able to view it) Have you been there outside of a summer? (They hadn't) Ms Constrtme stated that parking anywhere in the winter with snow build-up was usually a problem and she didn't doubt that it was any different there Rebecca Ramsey Has Board taken into consideration the number of accidents that are in the front of this building John Reece When you played music in the Building, was the "change station"played as well (Yes it was and he also turned it 10%higher than usual) Speakers in Favor Dr Gerald Gutrell said that obesity is a problem in the United States and anything that can be done to help the situation should be done He does not understand why there is so much opposition Gwen, owner of unit in question, operated a business out of unit She said parking has always been a problem and she would expect that any business that came in would have the same difficulties She does not think the pedestrian traffic from Curves would have an impact She said the Curves cliental are mature woman who aren't doing jumping exercising Frank Carney, he was responsible for Marketing Building at one time. He stated that gyms are not prohibited from using building Also he stated that the largest tenant, Caldwell Bankers, has moved out No one will know the parking impact since they have moved Speakers in Opposition. Dr Kathleen Stiemer-Adair is opposing this lease because she bought into this association because she believed that no gyms or exercise facilities would be permitted in the building (Judy read a letter from Trustees of building saying that there is nothing that is stopping Curves from leasing in building Rebecca Ramsey. Said the difference is what is not what is not prohibited but not permitted. Paul Mason, Spa Director He stood outside of the Unit while the music was being played, could not hear it but could feel the vibrations He is concerned because he performs "relaxing treatments" He had called the Post Office in Charlestown, abutters to a Curves franchise, and asked about the noise The Post Office said they have constant noise from the Curves there Marsha, Physiologist in Building Questioned the"intended use" listed in the by-laws of the condo association (She presented copy of by-laws) Said the issues the owners have are 1) Most office have clients that stay a longer period of time, 2)back-up of traffic getting in and out of parking lot, and 3)the effect of traffic on the fire station. Rebuttal or comments by Petitioner -Ms Constrtme said when they were there playing the music no one realized they were there The sound Engineers removed panels in the ceiling to look at the effects with the exposed ceilings Still no one knew until they went to ask if they had heard any of the music The hearing was closed at 8 55 PM Discussion. Mrs Sheehan thought this was becoming a Condo Association meeting rather than a BOA meeting Mr Smith explained that it is not this boards function to enforce condo agreements Mr McWeeney felt the petitioner had come very prepared and had done a lot of homework to show what they were proposing After coming here for the 3rd time he wasn't sure there was any perfect place m Lexingon He thought it was hard to put someone in neighborhood where they are not wanted Mr McWeeney thought they had the noise under control Mrs Sheehan thought that the Caldwell traffic was probably equal to what Curves will be Mr. Smith said he was willing to approve with conditions. Conditions discussed.. Hours 7 AM to 8 PM, noise cannot be heard from other tenants and decibel level cannot be higher than 67 decibel Complaints will be addressed at the 1-year renewal Decision. On a Motion by Mr. McWeeney, seconded by Mr. Smith. The Board by vote of 5-0 to approve the petition with the following conditions Hours 7 AM to 8 PM - 7 days a week, noise cannot be heard from other tenants and decibel level cannot be higher than 67 decibels Permit will be for 1 year from filing Submitted by Dianne Cornaro, Clerk DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Anneals- September 9 2004 Present, Mrs Uhng, Chair, Mr Barnert, Mrs Sheehan, Mr McWeeney, Ms Carolyn Wilson sitting for Mr. Smith Petition Address—MIT Lincoln Labs, 244 Wood Street The Chairman opened the hearing at 9•.00 PM by reading the notice and described information received from the Petitioner, other Boards and Commissions and letters relative to the Petition She said this is not a discussion on the entire MIT building project, this petition is regarding the tower only Petition presented by Bill Ericsson Information presented by petitioner. Mr Ericson showed aerial pictures and explained the proposed areas of expansions and where the tower will be moved They currently have 3 towers and want to move one of the existing towers Mr Ericsson presented an overview of the entire development project This project is not to add people but to give space to work First step of expansion is to move towers to make room for the proposed development. Tower cannot be seen now and will not be able to be seen when moved The relief sought is a Special Permit to allow erection of 60-foot tower Questions from the Board. Ms Wilson Are you sliding tower over or are you building a new one (Tower will have a new concrete bottom and they will bring in large crane to move the existing tower) Ms Sheehan. How many feet will concrete base add? (Same as what is there, 60 feet includes the base.) Mr McWeeney Is there a building there now where the tower is going or are they approving something not there? (New building will be built over the winter and the tower will be relocated in the spring) Questions from the audience -None Speakers in Favor -None Speakers in Opposition-None Rebuttal or comments by Petitioner -None Heanng was closed at 9 25 PM Discussion. None Decision On a Motion by Ms Wilson, seconded by Mr Barnert The Board by vote of 5-0 to approve the special permit. Submitted by Dianne Col-two DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Anneals- September 9, 2004 Present, Mrs. Judy Uhrig, Chair, Mr. Nyles Barnert, Mr. Arthur Smith, Mr. John McWeeney, Ms. Carolyn Wilson sitting for Ms Maura Sheehan Also present at meeting were David Williams and Martha Wood Petition Address—Grandview Avenue The Chairman opened the hearing at 9 30 PM by reading the notice and described information received from the Petitioner, other Boards and Commissions and letters relative to the Petition She explained because of the late hour the procedure tonight would be to only hear plans from the petitioner and that the hearing would be continued Ms Uhng stated that that the town has hired a technical expert to advise them on this project Petition presented by David Burns (His Lawyer, Kenneth Kimmell was present but did not talk) Information presented by petitioner Mr Burns showed drawings of what the units would look like He is looking to build 12 rental units in 3 buildings. 25%would be slated for affordable income. Description of Request Comprehensive Permit for Chapter 40B rental housing Questions/Comments from the Board. . Mrs Uhrig Asked if an onsite visit could be arranged Would like the buildings and corners staked out so they can visualize what he is presenting (SITE VISIT ARRANGED FOR SATURDAY, OCTOBER 9TH AT 9 00 AM AT THE SCHOOL STREET ENTRANCE) Other town boards and public are invited to attend. Mrs Uhrig stated the Technical Assistant was unable to be here tonight but has a list of things we need to have We will provide Mr Burns with copies of that as well as a list of what the board is looking for Mr Barnert He is still not sure of the reasons of why there is a need for the waivers Mrs Uhrig stated the same five people need to sit on the board for every meeting concerning a 40B heanng Mr McWeeney Should neighbors have their own night to present objections, etc 9 Questions from the audience. Speakers in Favor-None Speakers in Opposition. There were a number of people in the audience who were there regarding this petition and had hoped to be have the opportunity to be heard Attorney Emily Sample representing over 30 abutters who are opposing this project spoke that they would accept the opportunity to talk at a later date Heanng was closed at 9 50 PM Discussion Site visit set up for Saturday, October 16th at 9 00 AM It was agreed that the Hearing should be continued until Thursday, October 2l st at 7.45 PM for the sole purpose of hearing questions and comments from the audience. Decision On a Motion by Mr Barnert and seconded by Ms Wilson the Board agreed by vote of 5-0 to continue the hearing until Thursday, October 21' at 7 45 Meeting has been set-up in the Police Guard Room at the Lexington Police Station Submitted by Dianne Cornaro