Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-07-27BOARD OF APPEALS HEARINGS July 27, 1971 A regular meeting of the Lexington Board of Appeals was held on Tuesday, July 27, 1971 at 7:30 p.m. in the selectmen's meeting room, The Bird Room, Cary Memorial Building. Present were Chairman Nickerson, regular members Abbott, Sheldon and Wadsworth, and associate member Mabee. Public hearings were held on the following petitions, notice hav- ing been mailed to the petitioners and to the owners of all property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby as they appear on the most recent local tax list and also advertised in the Lexington Minute -man: Davenport's Garden Center and Flower Shop - for permission to maintain a free standing sign at 482 Bedford Street. The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - for a variance of the zoning by-law to allow the property at 1386 Massachu� setts Avenue to be subdivided into two separate lots, maintaining the existing buildings, one on each lot, leaving Lot A on which church is located with insufficient side yard of 13' instead of 15'. Lot B will require no variances. JoJen Realty Trust - for a variance of the Zoning By -Law to main- tain the existing dwelling at 41 Middle Street, for the reason that the front platform is 26.1 ft. from the front lot line instead of 30 ft. Anthony R. Cataldo - for permission to process and sell fruits and vegetables at premises located at Gold Ribbon Farms, 1265 Massachu- setts Avenue. Minute Man Park Realty Trust - for permission under Paragraph 25.13 in accordance with the provisions of Subsection 24.4 of the Zoning By -Law of the Town of Lexington to erect and maintain a building with stores and offices on the first floor, residential apartments on the second and third floors, and underground parking for the apartment tenants, said building to be erected in the Central Business (CB) District on a site bounded by Massachusetts Avenue, Meriam Street, Depot Place, and Depot Square, being substantially the Central Block Property so-called (1833-1851 Massachusetts Avenue, 1-3 Meriam Street, and 21-29 Depot Square) and the Old Fire Station parcel so-called (5 Meriam Street). Following the hearings the Board made the following decisions: Davenport's Garden Center and Flower Shop - permission unanimously granted to maintain the free standing sign at 482 Bedford Street for a period of two years from this date and although the letters "Davenport" on the chimney are non -conforming, they may be maintained for this two year period but not repainted. ' The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - per- mission unanimously granted to divide its property according to the drawing of Miller and Nylander, dated June 9, 1971, into two lots, A & B. Lot A on which the church will be located will have a rear yard of 13' instead of July 27, 1971 (continued) -2 the required 15', subject to the following conditions: An easement for i sewer and water for the house and garage shall be granted over church property on Massachusetts Avenue. JoJen Realty Trust - permission unanimously granted to maintain the house at 41 Middle Street with a front yard of 26.1' instead of the required 30'. Anthony R. Cataldo - permission unanimously granted to continue to process and sell fruits and vegetables at 1265 Massachusetts Avenue sub- ject to the following conditions: 1. This permit shall cease 3 months from this date. (October 27) 2. Premises shall be kept neat and clean. 3. No exterior lighting or signs shall be permitted. 4. No fruits or vegetables shall be sold at retail. 5. No by-products from the use of materials shall be stored out- side the building. 6. Suitable screening of the processing building shall be installed, stipulated as condition (1) of July 1969, if not already done. 7. No trucks shall be permitted to enter or leave the premises after 5 p.m. or before 7 a.m., unless for emergency purposes. Minute Man Park Realty Trust - voted unanimously to defer its decision until the various objections could be further studied and the advice of Town Counsel could be obtained as to whether a 10 foot rear yard must be required. All pertinent material is on file under the name of each petitioner. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Evelyn F. Cole Clerk The Board of Appeals posted, July 29, 1971, on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board a notice that an adjourned meeting would be held at 8 a.m., August 2, in the Bird Room, Cary Memorial Building, for the purpose of rendering its decision upon the petition of Minute Man Park Realty Trust for its special permission. On Monday at 8 a.m., August 2nd, the Board of Appeals reconvened for the purpose of rendering a decision on the petition of the Minute Man Park Realty Trust for permission to build on its property at 1833 through 1851 Massachusetts Avenue, location as described in its petition at hearing held July 27, 1971. It voted 4-0 in favor of the following findings: Minute Man Park Realty Trust - findings: -3 1. That in its judgment the public convenience and welfare will be substantially served by granting the permission requested. 2. That the permission requested will not tend to impair the status of the neighborhood. 3. That the permission requested will be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the regulations in the Lexington Zoning By-laws. And pursuant to said findings decides by vote of 4-0, Mr. Sheldon, alone, being absent, to permit: Minute Man Park Realty Trust under Paragraph 25.13 in accordance with provisions of Subsection 24.4 of the Zoning By - Law of the Tann of Lexington to erect and maintain a building in accor- dance with its petition as advertised July 8 and July 15 subject to the following conditions: 1. The building must be built substantially in accordance with plans by Bastille Neiley dated July 14, 1971 as revised July 29, 1971. Revisions made between July 14, 1971 and July 29, 1971 must have the approval of the Town Engineer and Traffic Committee. This includes services and sidewalks. 2. Depot Place must be 20 ft. wide as drawn but no additional "yard" may be required. 3. Construction must commence within a year from this date. 4. Agreement must be made by owner limiting loading or unloading on Meriam St., Mass. Ave., and Depot Square and such must be signed and appended hereto. (on the permit) 5. No signs to be requested or allowed except as permitted by Sign By -Law. 6. No unusual or floodlighting will be permitted. 7. This permission wil not become effective until the approval of the Historic Districts Commission is obtained. Before acting on this permit, it will be necessary to secure a building permit from the Building Inspector. All pertinent material is on file under Minute Man Park Realty Trust. Also, following these hearing minutes are detailed minutes of both July 27, 1971 and August 2, 1941. Evelyn F. Cole Clerk 1 MINUTE MAN PARR REALTY TRUST HEARING 8 p.m., July 27, 1971 ' The Bird Room At 8:18 p.m. Chairman Nickerson read the notice as it was advertised in the Lexington Minute -man newspaper and which notice was mailed to abutters. Representing Minute Man Park Realty Trust were: Ernest A. Giroux, George H. Matheson, both trustees; Robert G. Neiley, architect with Bastille- Neiley of Boston; and Mr. Perry, attorney with Hale and Dorr, 28 State St., Boston. Approximately 30 people were present on this hot, sticky, humid evening. (names are recorded at the end of hearing record.) Mr. Nickerson: You have presented us with a series of materials. In most instances there are two of each item. I am going to back into this. The chief thing is the set of drawings containing 4 sheets of elevations and 4 larger drawings showing the basement level with space for 44 cars - (there will be 42 apartments), 2 copies of a ground floor plan showing the ramp down to basement, and a typical apartment floor plan showing one bedroom apartments and efficiency apartments. In addition to these you have pre- sented us with a wealth of material. one drawing (2 copies) shows the proposed building and the green areas of Emery Park and Buckman Tavern. The plan is entitled "Compiled Plan of Land in Lexington, Massachusetts," by Joseph W. Moore Co., Inc., Civil Engineer and Land Surveyors, plan dated July 7, 1971. Another drawing (2 copies) shows the proposed build- ing on the lot surrounded by the streets and the rampway, plan entitled "Site Plan in Lexington, Mass." by Joseph W. Moore Co., Inc. A revised ground floor plan of the ground floor area, dated July 28, 1971 by Bastille- Neiley and another revised plan of the same area dated July 29, 1971, showing changes in the width of the corridor and other changes and Depot Square and the passage way at the rear on Depot place. And in addition to that two copies of the Agreement of the 15 foot land swap and also the Deeds required. We received the first drawings on Tuesday in the late afternoon. You gave copies of plans to the Planning Board. It was through my urging. The Plan- ning Board did discuss it ----that's alright. Eric Clarke of the Planning Board is here. We have letters from the Planning Board and Town Engineer. You have submitted a wealth of material! Mr. Giroux: You have not mentioned the sheet with land areas explained. We realized it would take some time so we worked it out and put it all on paper to help. Also, we gave you a signed agreement from the Selectmen. Mr. Nickerson: Yes, those were received this afternoon and I glanced at ' them right before the meeting. You have the signed agreement from the Selectmen (2 copies) and the Quitclaim Deed and 2 copies of the original deed. The Chairman explained again (having done so before this same evening), the procedures the Board follows for hearings. Minute Man Park Realty Trust - 7/27/71 -2 Mr. Nickerson: I will read the notice as published, the petitioner shall ' present his case, the Chairman will question the petitioner, the Chairman will ask the Board if they have any questions, then the Chairman will ask if anyone wishes to speak in favor of the petition and those who wish to speak in opposition may do so. Mr. Nickerson continues: You have presented a wealth of material. Now I will read the letter from the Planning Board and the letter from the Town Engineer. (Note: The Chairman did not have the opportunity at this time to read the letters.) Mr. Giroux: We have not prepared a lengthy formal presentation. The application for the permit involves building apartments. The parking requirement is for one parking space for each bedroom. If we had pro- posed two bedroom units there would have to be more parking spaces. These are one bedroom apartments that we have planned, 42 apartment units with no more than one bedroom and we have allowed for 44 parking spaces. We originally thought we could have 48 to 50 apartments but we reduced it to 42. The ramp provides access in and out and is important. One vital item ---we need to build on all the property. We are confined to certain space. Mr. Perry of Hale and Dorr, our attorney has an interpretation on the open space requirements. Mr. Perry read his interpretation of open land requirement which would justify allowing the open space adjacent to the property to be considered adequate in this case. Mr. Nickerson: I think I will reverse the formal procedure. Both the Planning Board letter and the Town Engineer's letter go beyond this and will raise questions. We got the letters this afternoon. (letter was read) Excerpts from the Planning Board letter follow: Prior to 1968 our Zoning By -Law did not provide for a rear yard next to a street in the definition of "side and rear yard" in Section 2. Since 1968 the Zoning By -Law defines the rear yard as "a yard extending between the side lines of lot adjacent. to the rear line of the lot". The rear line of a lot is defined as "a line separating a lot from other lots or from land in a different ownership, being the boundary of a lot which is opposite or approximately opposite the frontage street". In the definition of the frontage street it is stated that "when a lot is bounded by more than one street, any one of them, but only one, may be designated as the frontage street by the owner, provided that ... the principal permitted building on the lot is numbered on such frontage street" (all Section 40 of the Zoning By -Law). The letter continues: We understand this to mean that since 1968 the requirement for a 10 ft. rear yard for lots in CB district would apply to a lot bounded by more than one street, and that there is no authority in the Zoning By -Law to waive this requirement in a special permit. In this instance no variance has been petitioned for, nor can hardship be claimed with regard to a proposed building. The Planning Board believes that a rear yard serves a necessary function for access, services, loading, park- ing and maintenance of buildings in CB district. We would question the propriety of any special permit that does not provide for these functions. Mr. Nickerson: That deals with the 10 foot requirement. There's more. At this time, Mr. Nickerson asked the petitioners if they (Giroux & Matheson) Minute Man Park Realty Trust - 7/27/71 -3 ' had a copy of the letter. They said that they did have a copy. The letter goes on regarding the access to underground parking inadequacies, causing a hazard; the turning radius;and sa% that we believe the access to the underground garage and the receiving entrance must be revised and made more safe and convenient in order to comply with Section 12.2. It goes on even further to say that the long corridor from the receiving entrance will not be convenient for deliveries to and collections from the tenants and may result in the use of Massachusetts Avenue and Meriam Street for services to stores, thereby interfering with the safe flow of traffic. The Planning Board recommended that the petition be withdrawn, revised and resubmitted and offered to cooperate with the owners in arriving at a satisfactory design. (letter in its entirety may be found in file folder under "Minute Man Park Realty Trust") The Chairman asked Eric Clarke to clarify the letter. Mr. Clarke: I don't know how it will be resolved. The Planning Board is not in opposition to a building there. The Planning Board is not a diffi- cult Board to get along with and we would like to see the problems resolved. Mr. Nickerson: If this is true what about the 20 foot passageway? Mr. Matheson: It's a roadway not a passageway. It's an accepted street. Somebody (?) Why didn't they bring this up before? (the 10 ft. rear yard) There followed some discussion of the narrowness of the road (Depot Place) and the problems that could result with trucks parked there, as they some- times do at present, creating a potential hazard. Also, discussed was whether the Planning Board was correct in its assumption that a ten foot rear yard is required in this case. Mr. Nickerson: If a 10 foot rear yard is involved, this will effect the variance. We have a unique problem. Would you be willing to withdraw the petition, he asked the owners. The variance does involve allowing a three story building. Mr. Giroux: Under no conditions would we have agreed to the land swap with the Town of Lexington, if we had known that a 10 foot rear yard would be required. In late 1968 we brought this up. It was brought up ;and dis- cussed with Town Counsel ----side yards and rear yards, etc. We depended on the Town Counsel in '68 and '69. We did not plan to have a formal dis- cussion on that tonight. The Chairman read the letter from the Town Engineer. The letter was dated July 27 and listed 11 comments after the statement, "We have reviewed the site plan". (letter in file folder) Mr. Neiley: The egress and turning areas have been studied and we believe them to be operable. We discussed the building with the Town Engineer and it was agreed that all services and problems could be worked out during construction. It has been agreed that the owners will be responsible for installing a brick sidewalk and an obsolete storm drain has been found so that no piping would have to be installed across Massachusetts Avenue. Minute Man Park Realty Trust - 7/27/71 -4 Mr. Matheson: I met with Mr. McSweeney. He described what conditions ' were needed for connections with utilities. He said, "Would you be willing to put in a brick sidewalk?" We could work this out. I talked to John last night. After we start construction we will work it out. I don't understand the 11 objections. Mr. Nickerson: You were going along with all the things? Mr. Matheson: No sir, we could not get on without going along with the Town Engineer. Mr. Matheson: We have been getting conflicting views and opinions from the various town boards and it's impossible to please them all, although this is what we had attempted to do. As things stand now, we doubt if any building can be built in our lifetimes. Mr. Nickerson: This is an unusual situation! Mr. Cataldo: As you know we have dealt with this problem. Four Articles were put in the Warrant. You saw the results at Town Meeting. Town Meet- ing saw fit not to go along with us. We talked about the Hunt Block. (Central Block) The Board wants to see a building on this property. About the ten foot setback -- we were under the impression that it was settled. I can't understand why the Planning Board have come out with this now. We asked the Planning Board what changes were being made. There was no talk of a ten foot setback. I would like to see the boards sit down and talk it over. I would not want to be in your position. I don't know how we'll solve it, but I assume it can be solved. We were not aware of the ten foot condition. I don't blame Matheson and Giroux for their attitude. Every board should not be trying to hold up the construc- tion of the building simply because they don't like some of its design features. Each Board should stick to and face up to its own responsibilities. Mr. Nickerson: We have been put in a position so that we cannot grant a favorable decision. Another fact is that the Historic District Commission must approve. The advice from the Planning Board on this must be reviewed. Further study would be necessary. I could dredge up 100 more reasons. They asked for the petition June 30th, which was a month ago. We have 60 days to make a decision. I can't see how this could be studied and how we can make a decision within that time. One possible way would be to redate the petition. Mr. Clarke (Eric): Is this a suitable time for me to speak? The Planning Board agrees that this building will be an asset to the town. We must apply the Zoning By -Law to everyone. At least a minority of the Board would like to delay decision for a week. Mr. Nickerson: I'm afraid we can't make a decision within 60 days. All we can do is state the advice of the Planning Board, the Selectmen, Town Engi- neer, Town Counsel, etc. and make it conditional. ' Mr. Clarke: Most of these details will keep. Mr. Nickerson: The thing we can do under the circumstances is deny it. 1 1 F Minute Man Park Realty Trust - 7/27/71 -5 Mr. Nickerson: There is insufficient time and insufficient plans accord- ing to the advice we have. Mr. Matheson: Over 30 years the lot has been under considerable discussion and a tremendous amount of money has been expended. We are going around in circles. The Selectmen, Town Engineer and other town agencies have been in accord. The Planning Board and Historic Districts Commission are not. We have tried to comply. We're back where we started again. This is beyond reason. Mr. Giroux: We feel no building can be built on this site. We unfortun- ately feel that way. Mr. Nickerson: Do you feel that if you could request a reasonable time extension that you would get somewhere? Mr. Matheson: Could we do what? If the Planning Board would give up on the ten feet, why we could go some place. Mr. Nickerson: If you withdraw the variance we could write to the Boards and say that due to the controversies about this we were unable to come up with a decision. It's not the building that you would withdraw. Mr. Giroux: We hate to lose the time. We appreciate the fact that you are trying by unusual emphasis to arrive at a decision. Mr. Perry (attorney): The only serious problem is the 10 foot rear yard. There are two ways to resolve that. Grant the special permit or get approval of the Town Counsel. The second makes more sense as the require- ment on open space needs interpretation ...... that is, as to the meaning of the Zoning By -Law. I will sit down with Mr. Legro. Even if we have to defer until we get Town Counsel's advice that a ten foot rear yard is not required. It seems we could resolve it if we get the opinion from Town Counsel. Mr. Nickerson: If we make no decision and time runs out .... 60 days..... I'll be 1,000 miles from here at that time. The decision must be unanimous or a vote of 4 to 1. What time would be saved or lost if we redate the petition? Mr. Cataldo: I hate to see this all go down the drain. In my opinion we could defer the decision temporarily. The Board could get together within ten days with other Boards and get this resolved. Each Board will have to look at each thing they are responsible for and only look at that which is their problem and thereby not hold this up unnecessarily. Each Board has a different responsibility. If it goes 60 days it's not our fault. Mr. Nickerson asked Mr. Abbott's opinion and the Board of Appeals members exchanged their feelings briefly among themselves. (actually this was not done in any secret manner. The acoustics of the Bird Room made it almost impossible to accurately record the conversation.) Mr. Abbott: If the petitioners are willing to give us more than the 60 days required by law for a decision, if we need it, and Town Counsel is wiiling,we can get it solved. Minute Man Park Realty Trust - 7/27/71 -6 The petitioners agreed to give the additional time if needed. Mr. Clarke: I don't want to give the impression that the Planning Board is unreasonable. I am in complete agreement that we can resolve this problem. Mr. Nickerson: Do the Board members have any other questions? Mr. Abbott: You have not said anything about how the ingress and egress of the ramp will be resolved. Mr. Matheson: Mr. Neily, our architect, can answer questions about that. Mr. Nealy: If the Planning Board's requirements can be loosened up, we could do it. Mr. Nickerson: You do have a copy of the Planning Board letter? You should have a copy. It shows that they sent you one. You'll get it. Mr. Nickerson: Does anyone wish to speak in favor? Mr. Adams (Editor of Lex. Min. -man and abutter): This is not design of building being discussed. I'm generally in favor of the building. I'd like to be so recorded. There will be no additional hardship if we take all things into consideration. A building here will be an asset. Dick Michelson (Chamber of Commerce): We are registering in favor of the Board's taking positive action. Al Buss: I'd like to ask Mr. Cataldo to speak in favor for the Selectmen. Ruth Morey: If the plans for the building were filed with the Board of Appeals when the request for a hearing was made, according to standard procedure, then all the problems previously discussed would have been avoidued. I think it is unfortunate we can't move ahead. We have to move on & come/th th some action. The plans should have been ready with the application for the permit. Mr. Nickerson: I told Mr. Giroux that he would need plans and that he'd be under pressure. We never should have accepted the petition. Mr. Giroux: I take strong exception to the remark by Mrs. Morey. The four month delay caused by the Town will cost us money for the next 20 years. Mr. Tropeano: We need this kind of apartments. The need is tremendous. Many people want smaller apartments. Captain Parker Arms Apartments has had 12 or 15 calls during the past few weeks. The new apartments would accomodate middle aged persons who could not afford to live in Captain Parker Arms, even if space was available, and whose income were too high for them to qualify for Greeley Village. Mr. Cataldo: The Board of Selectmen wants to be recorded in favor of this petition. We lost one (4 in favor). We would not want to see them lose this construction here. 1 Minute Man Park Realty Trust - 7/27/71 -7 No one spoke in opposition. The hearing was declared closed at 9:30 p.m. VOTE: The Board of Appeals voted unanimously to defer its decision until the various objections could be further studied and advice of Town Counsel could be obtained as to whether a 10 ft. rear yard must be required. The Board will reconvene at a later date. PRESENT AT THE HEARING: Chairman Donald E. Nickerson, Charles T. Abbott, George C. Sheldon, George P. Wadsworth, all regular members of the Board, and associate member Irving H. Mabee, and secretary Evelyn Cole. Also: William Cataldo (Manager of Gold Ribbon Farm's) Robert Cataldo (Chairman, Board of Selectmen) Alan Adams and Becky Adams (owners of Adam's Building & editors of Lex. Min. -man) Steve Politi (Lex. Min -man Reporter) Herbert Eisenberg (Design Advisory Committee) Eric T. Clarke (Planning Board) A.P. Tropeano (an Attorney) Al Buss (Selectman) Dick Michelson (Chamber of Commerce) Natalie Riffin (Selectwoman) Barbara Gilson (Clerk, Historic District Commission) Fred Bailey (Selectman) Ruth Morey (Historical Society & Assoc. Board Marjorie Blanchard (1310 Massachusetts Ave.) Charlotte Sanderson (resident) Ralph Lux (1540 Mass. Ave., Fed. Say. & Loan) David Rich (1 Pelham Rd) Katherine Speliotis (22 Ingleside) Eleanor Aronin (20 Ingleside) George Emery (Assoc. B. of A.) Dennis E. Speliotis (22 Ingleside) George Matheson Ernest Giroux Mr. Perry (petitioners" attorney) Mr. Neily ( " architect) Donald Hill 4th (Davenport petition) Robert Cass (JoJen Realty) LloydE. Kleypas (Latter Day Saints) Mrs. Hadley (41 Middle St.) Ruth Sebell (Village Artisans) (Mrs. Sebell 25 Depot Square present - I of Appeals member) said that she was did not see her -ec) Note: No papers were passed around the room for signatures. The following were recognized by the secretary, who takes full responsi- bility for their names appearing on this list. Respectfully submitted, _11,Xoa_r� Evelyn F. Cole Clerk, Board of Appeals BOARD OF APPEALS GOLD RIBBON FARMS HEARING ' July 27, 1971, 7:50 p.m. Bird Room At 7:58 p.m. with regular members, Mr. Abbott, Mr. Sheldon and Mr. Wadsworth, and associate member Mr. Mabee present, the Chairman declared the hearing on Gold Ribbon Farms open. The Chairman read the notice of the hearing as it was advertised in the Lexington Minute -man, copies of the notice having been sent, also, to abutters. William Cataldo, manager of Gold Ribbon Farms, represented Anthony R. Cataldo. Mr. Nickerson: This is your usual request to continue? Mr. Cataldo: Yes. We arn't asking for anything more. jr. Nickerson: There has been a question of trucking on the property beyond 5 p.m. and early in the morning. You have been asked to refrain from any unnecessary trucking that might bother your neighbors. Are you endeavoring to comply? Mr. Cataldo: At 5 p.m. I like to go home. I haven't worked outside those hours. Mr. Nickerson: Except in emergencies? Mr. Cataldo: Yes. Mr. Nickerson: Are there any questions from the Board members? There were none. Nobody spoke in favor. Mr. Nickerson: There are some people here to speak in opposition. Dr. Dennis Speliotis; 22 Ingleside Rd.: I think this trucking problem is serious. As an abutter to the property I have seen trucks enter the premises often and as early as four in the morning and the police have been called in to investigate. At four in the morning big trailer trucks come in. The entry at the back is narrow so that large trailer trucks make considerable noise as they manuever back and forth to make the turn. The police department orally told me that the trucks were bringing fruits from Florida for the processing plant. I've seen a number of smaller trucks with the Gold Ribbon Farm insignia painted on the side. This happens very frequently -- dozens of times in the year. There should be a restriction to see that this is enforced. We have written to the Building Inspector. We have had no answers to letters to the Building Inspector. There should be no materials stored outside or discarded boxes. Wooden crates and boxes are strewn around the place and in piles quite high and there has been no attempt to remove them. Those regulations should be observed. Gold Ribbon Farms, July 27, 1971 -2 Louis Aronin, 20 Ingleside Rd.: I feel a serious error was made in grant- ing that permit to allow a celery plant in a residential area. It has opened a Pandora's box. It has become very annoying. Mr. Aronin read from a paper dates and times he had observed trucks on the premises after hours: June 23, 4:50 a.m. I was awaken by a Gold Ribbon Farms' truck starting the engine at 4:55 a.m. It awakened me. It was a Gold Ribbon Farms' truck, not Season's Four. Another habit ---large refrigerator trailer trucks have been there at mid- night. Police have identified them as part of the celery operation. I have a list of dates. June 23, 4:50 a.m.; June 10, 6:10 p.m.; June 4, 5:20 a.m.; June 3, 5:42 a.m. and 6:07 p.m.; June 2, 7:11 p.m.; May 28, 5:15 a.m., 7:00 p.m., 7:08 p.m.; May 27, 6:56 a.m., May 26, 10:15 p.m.; May 21, 6:30 a.m. Mr. Nickerson: You're going backward? Mr. Aronin: I started with the latest date first. I have not finished. There are more. Let me give you some more examples. Mr. Nickerson: You have all these times written out? You've given us enough times. I think we get the idea. Mr. Aronin: Let me point this out. Sometimes we can't determine what it is they're doing. Taken in its entirety it's outrageous. You have to look at the whole operation. You have to consider all that's going on there. I'm asking the Board of Appeals to bring its power to bear and keep the character of this residential area as it should be. Mr. Nickerson: I've listened to you before. There must a distinct differ- ence between the operations going on there. Please refrain from including everything at this hearing. We're talking about Gold Ribbon Farms. Don't mix up the two. We recognize the complexity. Mr. Aronin: The owner is responsible for everything. David Rich, 1 Pelham Rd.: I have the impression that all you're concerned about is the trucking after hours. That's merely being kind. It's not the biggest problem. I remember your saying that you were sure there'd be no problem if there's a switch between farming and this processing business. It should be stopped. The time is now. Mr. Nickerson: Is there anyone else in opposition? Dr. Speliotis: I want to be here when the decision is made. When will the meeting be held to decide on this? Mr. Nickerson: We have 5 hearings tonight. At the close of the fifth ' we'll discuss each one in turn and vote all 5 in order. So, in I'V number of minutes we'll go back to the first hearing. The Board will discuss it, vote on it and write it up. I'll dictate the wording of the permit to the secretary. A guess .... might be 10:30.......11 p.m., or maybe earlier. Now we have to take up the Central Block. We'll notify the petitioner of the decision. Gold Ribbon Farms, July 27, 1971 -3 Note: The two who were in opposition and their wives, as well as Charlotte ' Sanderson and Steve Politi (Lexington Minute -man Reporter) stayed through all hearings and deliberations. "Deliberation time" for this hearing occurred at 10:05 p.m. under the open meeting law. Mr. Nickerson: The first permission for Gold Ribbon Farms was granted in 1952 and has been granted annually since that time. Mr. Wadsworth: The time has come to establish whether or not there have been infractions of requirements which were set down. There must be some infraction to the trucking problem. I know it has been allowed for a long time, but they have an obligation to live up to the requirements. It can't go on like this indefinately just because they're under the Grand- father clause. Mr. Nickerson read the memorandum dated June 10, 1971, subject: Information on 1265 Mass. Ave., re Land Uses and Operation, which had been distributed to the Board of Selectmen, Town Counsel, Planning Board, Board of Appeals, Building Inspector, Assessors Office, Town Engineer and Police Department and had been published in the Lexington Minute -Man (excerpts used in reporting form). Mr. Aronin: I have a copy of the 1962 and 1968 permits. No by-products from the use or materials used shall be stored outside the building. The premises shall be kept in a neat and orderly condition, sufficiently high screening shall be installed at the rear of the manufacturing building so as to make it reasonably invisible from the rear and the concrete blocks must be painted, etc. The Chairman and members examined these permits. Mr. Mabee: I agree generally with what Mr. Wadsworth said, earlier. I have been aware of this problem for some time. When I was a member of the Board of Selectmen we were involved with the operations of the Gold Ribbon Farms. Flagrant violations had and are taking place. All the requirements should be spelled out again and the permit issued on a short term basis. Mr. Abbott: I make a motion it be issued for 3 months and include all restrictions, especially those of 1962 and 1968. Mr. Mabee: I second the motion. The wording of the permit was dictated at this time. The permit is on file under Anthony R. Cataldo. Those people appearing in opposition continued to remain even after the secretary was dismissed. The deliberation for this hearing ended at 10:30 p.m. Evelyn F. Cole Clerk