Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1948-02-20 1 BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING A meeting of the Board of Appeals was held in the Selectments { Room, Town Office Building, Lexington, on February 20, 1948. Chair- man Locke, Messrs. fluffy, Ballard, Ripley and Brown were present. The clerk was also present. At 8:00 p.m. hearing was declared open upon the petition of William Ulchak for permission to erect at 200 Follen Road, Lexington a dwelling which would not have the required side yard. Notice of the hearing was Eead by Mr Brown. Notices of this hearing had been mailed to the owners of all property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby as they appear on the most recent loca4l tax list. Mr. Ulchak explained that on the design of the house there was$ an extra 5 feet on the garage on the slope and he would like very much to get that design in there. He said that the house next door was quite a distance away and it would not crowd the next house. Mr. Ulchak indicated on the plot plan which bad been submitted the portion of the house which had already been built. Mr. Ulchak •4 szi„ then made a rough sketch of the addition he wanted to build. Mr. Locke asked how the building would be entered. Mr Ulchak stated that entrance was from the garage. 4 Mr. Ripley asked if there were a stone wall along Mr. Ulchak lot. Mr. Kenneth Clarke indicated on the sketch the stone wall on his land. He said that the lot line was between 40 and 45 feet from his house. He said he did not have any objection to the addition. Use said he had seen sketches and he thought it would add to the looks pf the house and he wished to appear in favor. Four other persons raised their hands and indicated approval of the granting of the application. No one indicated opposition, and the hearing was declared closed. At 8 15 p.m. hearing was declared open upon the petition of Norman W. Brown for permission to erect a neon cut-out Shell sign at 1096 Massachusetts Avenue. Notice of the hearing was read by Mr. J. Milton Brown. Noticed of this hearing had been mailed to the owners of all property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby as they appear on the most recent local tax list. Mr. Earl McKay of the Shell Oil Company stated that he was aa]les e2 supervisor for the Metropolitan district. He explained that Shell Oil wished to put up a neon cut-out sign, 48 inches across, a two- face sign which could be seen from both sides, or either way from the road. He said the reason for the request was the fact that it had been found difficult to see the Shell station from the Concord Turn- pike. He said he thought it would be an attractive sign. Mr. Locke asked how much of the sign would be illuminated. Mr. McKay stated that it would be illuainated all along the shell and the middle of the shell. He said the shell would be lighted from the inside. Be added that Shell Oil was anticipating knocking down the four or five posts along the edges and several globes as they were antiquated and did not add to the property. He explained that the globes were in the shape of shell. Mr. Ballard asked how far from the street line the island on which Shell Oil wished to put the sign was located. Mr. McKay re- plied it was about 10 feet. Mr. Ballard asked if there were a sidewalk there. Mr. McKay replied in the negative. Mr. Ballard asked if there were a driveway between the island and the street. Mr. McKay replied that there was a grass plot. Mr. Locke asked if there were one line of pumps. Mr. McKay replied that there were two lines of pumps. Mr. McKay indicated to the Board, on the sketch, where the sign would be located. Mr. Ballard asked if the new sign would hang from a post. Mr. McKay stated that the hanging sign would be out towards Maple Street. Mr. Duffy asked what there was there now. Mr. McKay replied that there was nothing there now, no sign, nor any identification at all. Mr. Locke asked if there were floodlighting for illumination. Mr. McKay replied in the affirmative. Mr. Duffy asked if the station were lighted only during service hours. Mr. McKay replied that it would be lighted only during ser- vice hours. Mr. Ballard asked if there would be flashing. Mr. McKay replied that there would not be, that idhatever light there was would be steady. Mr. Locke asked if anyone wished to speak in favor. No one spoke at this point. Mr. L. Goggin, 1123 Massachusetts Avenue, stated that he couldn't see any reason for a sign of that kind in the neighborhood. He said the district was a residential site. He said he knew very well that the neighbors would object to it. He said, in fact, they did. He 3 2-20-li8 said the fact should be taken into consideration that a sign of that kind would be put up in a residential neighborhood. He said that there were enough signs there already. He said, in fact, there were two signs with the name "Shell" on them and they were very brilliant and they shone into people's houses. He said he didn't think an additional sign would help the situation and would have a tendency to lower the desire to live in that neighborhood. Mr. McKay stated that their sign was a steady neon sign. He said they Would have the type with an arrow going around. Mr. Locke asked if the neon were merely for illumination. Mr. McKay replied in the affirmative. He added that there would be no noise, that it would be a steady sign, and there would be no moving parts. Mr. Goggin stated that even if there were no moving parts, the sign still would be there and there was plenty of light there now. He stated that he thought it would be objectionable. Mr. R. Dexter, 1106 Massachusetts Avenue, stated that he was probably the one to be moat affected bythe sign 1n that he was direct- ly across the street. He said he was very friendly with the boys at the station. He said he liked the appearance. He said he would see no objection to identifying the station but he thought he would feei a strong objection to a neon sign due to the fact that they do throw a spray of illumination. He said as a motorist driving by there every day he would question how much it would improve the business of the station. He explained that it might detract from the neighborhood and lower the appearance of the neighborhood considerably. Mr. J. Holt, 1062 Massachusetts Avenue, stated that he would ]Dike to register objection to the sign on the same grounds that Mr. Dexter had. He stated that at the time the station was built they were definitely promised at the time there would be no sign display. He said that was carefully observed when the previous owner had the station. He said that when Socony owned it, that was also observed and after Shell took it over the trouble started and questions have come up and also complaints from that time since. Mr. Holt repeated that there was the promise that there would be no signs. Mr. Alfred Charles Capone said that he personally did not hav 4 objection to the sign. He said he lived directly in back of this location. He said if Shell Oil did not put up the sign, the globes would remain. Be added that in the summertime they had a lot of trouble. He said that when cars were washed there the water ran dc*wn and formed a puddle near his place. He said that as far as the sign was concerned, to him it did not make much difference. Mr. McKay stated that he did not realize there was so much trouble existing. He stated that those posts were coming down any-i way. He requested that this be entered in the records. He stated that they would withdraw their petition. He said that he would keep _ -1.. 4 2-20-48 the word of the Shell Oil and take down the posts and globes if there was such a stipulation in the Town H11 records, then they would want to abide by it. - Mr. Locke asked Mr. Holt if he could give the approximate date of a meeting at which the stipulations he had mentioned had been made Mr. Holt stated that as farashe could remember it was about 1923. He said he knew there were some hearings at that time, that he was not present at the hearings himself, but he did know that the owner agreed that there would not be any signs if the neighbors agreed to approve of the station being built. Mr. Holt added that he would say that the statim was not a discredit to the neighborhood, but if such a sign were put up, it would be the first step in the downfall of the neighborhood. Mr. McKay stated that he did not know that that agreement had been made. Mr. Hold stated that there had been a hearing. Mr. Locke stated that if this was originally set up at that time it probably was handled by-the BoardofSelectmen. He stated that could be ascertained from the records. Mr. Dexter said that he had questioned the presence of the sta- tion and he was told and assured that there was some kind of an agree - went, that the station was only there on sufferance, and if there were, in any way, anything objectionable, it would have to be removed. He 111 added that it was so well run that there was no objection. Mr. McKay requested permission to withdraw the petition. Mr. Locke stated that the Board would ask that it receive a written statement of withdrawal. Mr. Brown of the Shell Oil agreed that he would see that the Board's request would be complied with. Mr. Locke stated that if there had been an agreement, then it would be effective. Mr. McKay stated that if Socony had agreed then the Shell Oil would, too. Mr. Locke stated that the files of the Board of Appeals would show that this application had been withdrawn and no action was taken by this Board. There was no further discussion and the hearing was declared closed at 8:47 p.m. Mr. Locke dictated the following to the clerk to be included in records of this hearing: „Inasmuch as the representative of the Shell Oil Company requested permission to withdraw this application and 2-20-48 5 inasmuch as they promised to advise us to that effect, the Board oil Appeals takes no action on this case." The Board considered the application of William Ulchak. Upon motion of Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Ballard, it was unanimously voted that the application be granted in the following form: (Quote order). A true reoord: Attest /s/ Catherine Parello Clerk, Board of Appeals 1