Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-01-09-ZBA-minMeeting Minutes of the Lexington Board of Appeals Conducted Virtually, Via Zoom January 9, 2025, 7:00 pm Board Members: Chair – Ralph D. Clifford, Nyles N. Barnert, James A. Osten, Martha C. Wood, and Associate Member Jennifer Wilson Alternate Member: Jeanne Krieger Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, and Olivia Lawler, Zoning Administrator Address: 36 Oakmount Circle (ZBA-24-37) The petitioner is requesting ONE (1) SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 1135-6.7.7 and 135-9.4 to allow for an accessory structure apartment. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Certified Plot Plan, Floor Plan, Gross Floor Area Calculations, Elevations, and Photographs. 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, Planning Department, and Conservation Director. The Hearing was opened at 7:04 PM. Petitioner: Frederick Gilgun, Nicholson, Sreter, & Gilgun, 33 Bedford St., Lexington, MA Frederick Gilgun, presented the petition on behalf of Jessica and David Zweifel. He shared the Site Plan and gave an overview of the application. Mr. Gilgun stated that the proposal was to build an accessory dwelling unit for the applicant’s mother and added that the proposed dwelling unit satisfies the conditions under Section 6.7.7 and that the exterior appearance is compatible with the principal dwelling and the neighborhood. Mr. Gilgun also shared the architectural plans and explained the architectural design of the proposed unit. Mr. Gilgun emphasized that permitting the accessory dwelling unit will address the Town’s goals to create a diversity in housing apart from the additional tax revenue and will have minimum impact on the environment. Mr. Gilgun added that the applicant will work with the Conservation Commission to make sure all their requirements are complied with. Mr. Barnert asked for clarification regarding the permeable pavers and Mr. Gilgun clarified that they will be outside the five- foot setback from the boundary line. Mr. Osten wanted to know if there would be two means of egress from the top stairs and if both of them would be internal. The Architect, Kara Kressy, provided clarification. Board Chair, Mr. Clifford expressed his view that the unit looks like a second house instead of like an accessory building and asked the applicant to consider installing a ventilator fan to make it look like an accessory unit. Ms. Kressy explained that the intention was to create a house for people to age in place by incorporating the ADA requirements. The Architect and the home owner agreed to the suggested change. Mr. Clifford wanted to confirm if the requirement of the Noise Control Bylaw would be complied with. Ms. Kressy assured the Chair that since the proposed unit will be occupied by the applicant’s mother, Noise Control laws would be complied with. No further questions from the Board. No comments or questions from the audience. Hearing was closed at 7:23 PM (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). The Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant ONE (1) SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4, 135-4.1.1, and 135-6.2.4(4) to modify the dimensional controls of §4.0 to allow the renovation of a historic and architecturally significant building to allow a side yard setback of 13.4 ft. instead of the required 15 ft. with conditions (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). Meeting Minutes of the Lexington Board of Appeals Conducted Virtually, Via Zoom January 9, 2025, 7:00 pm Board Members: Chair – Ralph D. Clifford, Nyles N. Barnert, James A. Osten, Martha C. Wood, and Associate Member Jennifer Wilson Alternate Member: Jeanne Krieger Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, and Olivia Lawler, Zoning Administrator Address: 4 Homestead Street (ZBA-24-33) The petitioner is requesting a SPECIAL PERMIT RENEWAL in accordance with the Zoning By- Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4 and 135-8.4.2 to allow modification to a non-conforming structure. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Certified Plot Plan, Proposed Carport owner’s manual Assembly Notes, and Abutter Support 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 and Building Commissioner. Hearing was opened at 7.25 PM. Petitioner: David Grigorakos on behalf of Satish Chitnis Mr. Chitnis shared his presentation and added that since they do not have a garage, the carport will be convenient especially in winter. Mr. Chitnis added that the proposed carport will benefit his wife’s health and also increase the property value thereby increasing tax revenue for the Town. Mr. Grigorakos shared the proposed plot plan and gave an overview of the project and added that it is a pre-built carport. Mr. Osten asked for the setback requirements for carports. Ms. Lawler stated that the normal side setback requirements for this lot would be 15 feet and that the current house is nonconforming in terms of side, rear and front setbacks. Mr. Clifford wanted to know if the front setback would become 2 feet from the current 20 feet, with the proposed carport. Mr. Chitnis explained that this proposal would be where they currently park their cars, but with a cover on top. Ms. Wood wanted to know details about the side yard setback and walkways. Mr. Chitnis provided the details. Mr. Clifford asked the applicant if he had considered the sound implications of this proposal. Mr. Chitnis responded that since it will be an open structure, there will not be any amplification. Ms. Wood wanted to know how the structure will be attached to the ground. Mr. Chitnis provided the details. No comments or questions from the audience. Hearing was closed at 7:35PM. (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). Mr. Clifford expressed his concerns regarding noise, and felt that a study by an acoustical engineer would help to understand more. Mr. Clifford added that due to the close proximity of the structure from the street, being just one foot away from the street, he was concerned about the impact on the line of sight, especially in a residential neighborhood. The Board decided to reopen the hearing to give an opportunity for the applicant to be heard. Ms. Wood questioned if they should do a straw poll? (yes) Hearing was reopened at 7:37 PM. (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). The Chair explained the process of Straw Vote to the applicant and the applicant requested a Straw Vote. A Straw Vote was taken: Nyles. N. Barnert- Yes, Martha C. Wood- No, James A. Osten- Yes, Jennifer L. Wilson – No, Ralph D Clifford – No. The applicant chose to receive feedback from the Board Members and go for a continuation if possible. Mr. Barnert asked the applicant to change the size of the carport to 16 or 17 feet instead of the 20 feet. Mr. Clifford agreed with Mr. Barnert. Mr. Chitnis said they could resize the carport. Ms. Wood added that there are solutions that provide sound absorbents. Mr. Clifford asked the applicant to come up with a comprehensive plan that would address all the concerns raised by the Board Members and also to make sure that all the provisions of the Zoning Bylaw are complied with. The Board discussed and agreed to Continue the Hearing with the agreement of the Applicant to the March 13, 2025 Board of Appeals Meeting to provide them with ample time to come up with a comprehensive plan that would address all the concerns raised by the Board Members. No further questions from the Board. The Board of appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a continuance until the March 13, 2025 Hearing (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Norman P. Cohen– Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes and Nyles N. Barnert – Yes) with conditions. Meeting Minutes of the Lexington Board of Appeals Conducted Virtually, Via Zoom January 9, 2025, 7:00 pm Board Members: Chair – Ralph D. Clifford, Nyles N. Barnert, James A. Osten, Martha C. Wood, and Associate Member Jennifer Wilson Alternate Member: Jeanne Krieger Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, and Olivia Lawler, Zoning Administrator Address: 10 Muzzey Street (ZBA-24-36) The petitioner is requesting ONE (1) SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4, 135-5.4.7, and 135-4.3.4 to allow light trespass onto an abutting parcel and Muzzey Street, and allow a structure other than a building to be located closer to the lot line otherwise allowed. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Floor Plan, Elevations, Photometric Plan, Certified Plot Plan, Photographs, and Historic Districts Commission Certificate of Appropriateness dated March 7, 2024. 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, Historic Districts Commission, and Economic Development Department. Hearing was opened at 7:50 PM. Petitioner: Brian Burke on behalf of Zen Asian Fusion Restaurant Mr. Burke gave a brief overview of the application and explained that they were trying to create an elegant area of outdoor dining in the area where a restaurant used to be. Mr. Burke emphasized that they worked with the Historic District Commission to ensure compliance with their regulations and to continue to maintain the historical context and character of the neighborhood. Ms. Lawler shared the ADA Access plan and Mr. Burke shared the details of the proposed patio installation. Mr. Burke added that dining should be closed around 11 pm and since it will be mostly dining, there will be no impact on the welfare, health, safety and noise of the neighbors. Ms. Lawler shared the photometrics plan and Mr. Burke added that the photometric plan addressed the concerns raised by the Building Commissioner and shared the details of the photometric plan. Mr. Barnert wanted to know how late the lights would be on. Mr. Burke replied that the lights will not be on only in Winter and that when it is on in summertime, it will be on till closing, usually around 10:30 or 11 pm. The owner of the restaurant, Iverson Guo, added that since it is dark around the restaurant, it would be helpful to have some lighting and added that typically they close at 10 on weekdays and 10:30 on weekends and for workers to finally leave would be 11 pm. Mr. Barnert felt that 11 pm was a little late in the night. Mr. Burke stated that it should be fairly acceptable as the proposal is in the commercial area and Mr. Barnert pointed out that it is a residentially zoned area and felt that to leave the lights on till 11 pm was excessive. Mr. Clifford explained the provisions of the Noise Bylaw and stated that the Board is not supposed to issue Special Permits if there is a possibility of violation of Noise Bylaw and asked the applicant to use the expertise of a Sound Engineer to ensure compliance with the Noise Bylaw. Mr. Burke explained that screening in the location would help bring the noise down and added that there used to be another restaurant in the same location before and that the applicant’s proposed operations would be very similar to those of the previous restaurant. Mr. Burke shared the details of the surrounding areas and added that there will not be any outdoor music and it will be regular restaurant activities. Mr. Clifford asked the applicant to explore means to use some sound deadening materials in the screening plants to ensure absorption of sound. Ms. Wilson asked the applicant if he had the ability to start serving food outdoors right away and Mr. Burke stated that since it was permitted in the past, they would be able to do it again. Ms. Wilson felt that the restaurant would not have an increase in noise levels if the place was previously permitted to be engaged in restaurant activity. Ms. Wilson added that the creation of a canopy does not in itself increase the amount of noise. Mr. Clifford clarified that as an authority granting special permits and variances, the Zoning Board of Appeals has to enforce the Noise Control Bylaw. The Building Commissioner Mr. Kelly suggested that the Special Permit be conditioned that the Building Commissioner or the Zoning Administrator or both will ensure compliance of the bylaw prior to opening and using the patio. Mr. Kelly added that in the event of any violation, Zoning staff will work with the owners to mitigate it. The applicant agreed to work with staff to ensure compliance with the Noise Bylaw. Mr. Osten offered suggestions for noise reduction. No further questions from the Board. No comments or questions from the audience. Hearing was closed at 8:28 PM. (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). Mr. Clifford asked the applicant to use the expertise of an acoustical engineer to help design their building and also take the help of staff in this manner. Mr. Clifford emphasized that the lights have to be turned off at 11 pm. Mr. Barnert said that he felt that the lights had to be turned off closer to 10 p.m. The Board discussed and arrived at 11 pm for lights to be turned off. The Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant ONE (1) SPECIAL PERMIT in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4, 135-5.4.7, and 135-4.3.4 to allow light trespass onto abutting parcels in Muzzey Street and to allow a structure other than a building to be located closer to the lot line than otherwise allowed with a condition that there is an express requirement that before the canopy can be used it must comply with the noise control bylaw, and a generalized special condition indicating that the lights must be turned off between 11 pm and dawn on all days of the week. (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). Meeting Minutes of the Lexington Board of Appeals Conducted Virtually, Via Zoom January 9, 2025, 7:00 pm Board Members: Chair – Ralph D. Clifford, Nyles N. Barnert, James A. Osten, Martha C. Wood, and Associate Member Jennifer Wilson Alternate Member: Jeanne Krieger Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, and Olivia Lawler, Zoning Administrator Address: 675 Waltham Street (ZBA-21-40) CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER The petitioner is requesting a SPECIAL PERMIT RENEWAL in accordance with the Zoning By- Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.4 to allow continued use of a golf recreational facility. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Certified Plot Plan, and Previously Issued Special Permits. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Previously Granted Special Permits, Certified Plot Plan, Continuance Request Form dated December 12, 2024, Continuance Request Form dated January 14, 2025, Abutter Opposition Letter and Photographs dated December 11, 2024, Correspondence Letter to ZBA from William Dailey Jr. dated January 6, 2025, Good Standing Letter from the Police Chief , Support Letter from the Varsity Golf Coach, Letter to ZBA RE: Impermissible License Agreement dated January 9, 2025, Stone Meadow & Lexington Conservation Commission License Agreement Draft. 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, and the Conservation Director. The Hearing was Open on December 12, 2024. Petitioner: William Dailey, Jr., Sloane and Walsh, 114 Marrett Rd., Lexington, MA Mr. Dailey presented the petition on behalf of the Carroll family. Mr. Clifford informed everyone that a 63-page document was sent by the applicant just an hour before the meeting, which could not be read and considered in such short notice, and asked the Carrolls to submit a responsive document. Mr. Dailey stated that he was not aware of the contents of the document. Mr. Clifford stated that he did not have the opportunity to read the entire document, but he mentioned that Mr. Freitag was challenging the validity of the license. Mr. Dailey asked the Zoning Board to act on their petition for renewing the special permit, while Mr. Mancini’s claims can be challenged in Court. Mr. Clifford stated that the license was a critical component of the Special Permit and it was important for the Board to determine the validity of the license before issuing a Special Permit and to consult the Town Council. Mr. Clifford asked Mr. Dailey if they will be able to submit a written response to Mr. Freitag’s letter in a week in order for the matter to be discussed in the next meeting of the Zoning Board. Mr. Dailey agreed that one week would be sufficient time to come up with a response. No further questions from the Board. No further comments or questions from the audience. The Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to grant a CONTINUANCE to the January 23, 2025 ZBA meeting (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). Meeting Minutes of the Lexington Board of Appeals Conducted Virtually, Via Zoom January 9, 2025, 7:00 pm Board Members: Chair – Ralph D. Clifford, Nyles N. Barnert, James A. Osten, Martha C. Wood, and Associate Member Jennifer Wilson Alternate Member: Jeanne Krieger Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, and Olivia Lawler, Zoning Administrator Other Business: 1. Minutes from the December 12, 2024 Meeting The Board of Appeals voted five (5) in favor, zero (0) opposed, and zero (0) in abstention to approve the minutes from December 12, 2024 Hearing (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes). The Board voted to Adjourn at 8:49 PM (a roll call vote was taken: Ralph D. Clifford– Yes, Nyles N. Barnert – Yes, Martha C. Wood – Yes, James A. Osten – Yes, and Jennifer Wilson – Yes).