Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-10-17r BOARD OF APPEALS HEARINGS ' October 17, 1972 A regular meeting of the Lexington Board of Appeals was held on Tuesday, October 17, 1972 at 7:30 p.m. in the selectmen's meeting room of the Town Office Building. Present were Chairman Donald E. Nickerson, regular members Howard -H. Dawes and George P. Wadsworth and associate members Haskell W. Reed and Robert Cataldo, as well as several interested townspeople. Public hearings were held on the following petitions, notice having been mailed to the petitioners, to the owners of all property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby as they appear on the most recent local tax list, to town boards who will or might be affected by decisions made, and also adver- tised in the Lexington Minute -man: Cabot, Cabot & Forbes by Thomas P. Hutchinson - petition for a Special Permit (Sec. 12.2) covering the construction in the use proposed by Honeywell Radia- tion Center as shown on preliminary site plan and for a Finding and Determina- tion that a proposed 81,066 sq. ft. (2 -story building) located on a 15.2 acre. lot, southwesterly side of Forbes Road in the Cabot, Cabot & Forbes Minuteman Research Park, all as shown on plans submitted, will constitute a suitable development and will not result in substantial detriment to the neighborhood, in accordance with Section 13 of the Town of Lexington By -Laws. Also, unless the Building Inspector determines the same to be unnecessary, a petition for a Variance from Article 10 of the Lexington Building By -Law and other applic- able provision thereof so as to permit construction and use of a 2 -story build- ing on this lot of second-class construction with an area between firewalls not exceeding 40,533 sq. ft., the area limit now being 16,667 sq. ft. when certain sprinklers and exterior fire fighting space are installed and provided as set forth in the Article. The address is 2 Forbes Road (later changed to 3 Forbes Road). The owners are Trustees of Lexington Office Center Trust, Boston, Mass. (Cabot, Cabot & Forbes). The plans are for Honeywell Radiation Center, Minute- man Research Park. Peking Garden, Lexington Enterprises, Inc., Chester C.K. Chi, Treasurer,- peti- tion for permission to erect a third sign to be located on the side of the building at the entrance of the Peking Garden Restaurant at 27 Waltham Street. This sign will consist of stainless steel letters for the word "Cocktails" (size to be 6" x 1" x 1"). Permission has been granted by the Historic Districts Commission subject to Board of Appeals approval. Lawrence Trebino - petition for a variance of the Lexington Zoning By -Law in order to maintain the present dwelling at 33 Blake Road with a setback of 25 ft. instead of the required 30 ft. and to build an addition (approximately 1,144 sq. ft.) which will leave a setback of 21.5 ft. from Blake Road instead of 30 ft. and a side yard of approximately 19.5 ft. instead of the required 20 ft. Frank R., Jr. and Joan A. Denton - petition to vary the provisions of the Town of Lexington Zoning By -Laws to permit the existing dwelling located at 10 Lee ' Street to have a sideyard of 8.5 feet instead of the required 10 feet and a front yard of 29.2 feet instead of the required 30 feet; and (2) for a variance from the provisions of the Town of Lexington Zoning By -Laws for permission to construct a carport having a front yard setback of 20 feet instead of the re- quired 30 feet. October 17, 1972 hearings continued: -2 ' LeRoy M. Titelbaum, M.D. - petition for a variance of the zoning by-law to subdivide the parcel of land at 246 Concord Avenue into two (2) lots as shown on Plan of Land in Lexington, dated August 10, 1972, prepared by Joseph W. Moore Co., Inc., Civil Engineers. Lot No. 1 as shown thereon as containing 30,048 square feet in the pre- sent state conforms with the zoning by-law. Lot No. 2, containing the present house, as shown on said plan contains 47,460 square feet more or less, and the petitioner seeks a variance of this lot for a frontage of 86.68 feet on Concord Avenue. Pasquale P. Barbieri - petition to vary the Lexington zoning by-law in order to extend the existing automobile service facilities of Europa Auto Imports, Inc. by adding a 50 x 70 ft. extension to the existing building, plus 17 additional parking spaces, in the rear of 153 North Street at the southeast- erly corner of Lowell Street., 30 ft. of which would extend into RO District. Also to vary the side yard requirement from 20 ft. to 10 ft., the Common- wealth of Massachusetts having taken this land for highway purposes. Following the hearings the Board made the following decisions, all unani- mous and all in open meeting. Honeywell Radiation Center - finding and determination granted subject to the following conditions: ' 1. When Massachusetts Avenue is extended they shall construct an access to Massachusetts Avenue, subject to the Public Works/Engineering Director. 2. Parking spaces must be provided for 350 cars. 3. No excessive lighting may be used except for parking areas and for safety. 4. Hours shall be from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. with occasional work on Saturdays and evenings, except that hours must be staggered if traffic becomes so dense that it would be advisable. 5. The advices of the Planning Board letter of October 17, 1972 must be followed particularly in regard to the Public Works/Engineering Depart- ment, the Board of Health and the Massachusetts Department of Natural Resources. 6. The Fire Department must be consulted and its requirements be followed. 7. Construction must be started within one year from this date. (10/17/72) The issuance of this special permit and finding and determination shall not in any manner affect the requirement that a building permit be obtained. The petitioner shall have the obligation to record a notice of this condition per- mit and finding and determination as required by statute. Peking Garden - denied. Lawrence Trebino - granted with the condition that construction must begin within one year. ' Frank R. Jr. and Joan A. Denton - granted with the condition that construction must begin within one year. LeRoy M. Titelbaum, M.D. - denied. October 17, 1972 hearings continued: Pasquale P. Barbieri - decision deferred on a unanimous vote, Mr. Cataldo making the motion and Mr. Reed seconding the motion. The validity of the earlier permit granted in 1967 was questioned. Whether the old variance granted in 1967 is still legal was discussed, no time limit having been imposed. It is now the Board of Appeals' habit to insist that construction be started within a year from its decisions. The Board will meet at 7:20 p.m. on November 14 to discuss this petition further and attempt to come to a decision. (see minutes for Barbieri hearing). Note: In public session on November 14, 1972 the Board of Appeals denied -3 Pasquale P. Barbieri's petition. The vote was 4 to 1, Mr. Reed voting in favor of the petition. In addition to the usual 4 statements of a denial the Board added the following: Traffic has increased tremendously on Lowell Street since the 1967 petition was granted. This petition has been denied. All pertinent material is on file under the name of each petitioner in the Board of Appeals' office. The meeting of October 17, 1972 adjourned at 11:58 p.m. Evelyn F. Clerk LJ' Cole r PASQUALE P. BARBIERI HEARING (re: 153 North Street) Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office Building Tuesday, October 17, 1972 This hearing was the sixth hearing of the evening, the last on the agenda. Others: Honeywell Radiation Center, Peking Garden, Lawrence Trebino, Frank R., Jr. and Joan Denton, L. M. Titelbaum. Board of Appeals' members acting on this petition were: Chairman Donald E. Nickerson, Howard H. Dawes, George P. Wadsworth, all regular members, and the following associate members, Haskell W. Reed and Robert Cataldo. Also present were town's people, a room full, who remained throughout the hearing. The time: 9:12 p.m. according to the selectmen's clock. The Chairman read the notice as follows: September 28 and October 5, 1972 The Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing on the petition of Pasquale P. Barbieri to vary the Lexington zoning by-law in order to ex- tend the existing automobile service facilities of Europa Auto Imports, Inc. by adding a 50 x 70 ft. extension to the existing building, plus 17 addi- tional parking spaces, in the rear of 153 North Street at the southeasterly corner of Lowell Street., 30 ft. of which would extend into RO District. ' Also to vary the side yard requirement from 20 ft. to 10 ft., the Common- wealth of Massachusetts having taken this land for highway purposes. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 17, 1972 in the selectmen's meeting room, Town Office Building, at 8:20 p.m. Chairman: This notice was published in the Lexington Minute -man as required by law and persons deemed interested notified. Mr. Barbieri's son represented his father Pasquale P. Barbieri. Chairman: Mr: Barbieri, you have submitted to us a drawing by Miller and Nylander, dated August 1, 1972, entitled "Plot Plan of Land in Lexington and it shows your acreage on the corner of North and Lowell Streets with the present building on it and the proposed addition which would be 50 ft. by 70 ft. Now, may I inquire first, Mr. Barbieri, are you Pasquale -Barbieri? Mr. Barbieri: No, I'm representing my father. He still owns the property. Chairman: Is he still interested in your business? Mr. Barbieri: Yes. Chairman: Is he in Lexington? Is he retired? IMr. Barbieri: No, he's in Florida. I own and operate the business. Chairman: Why did you petition us? We issued a permission on this some 5 years ago in 1967 to your father who was active in the business at that time. It was for a smaller one and it was never built. Mr. Barbieri: He will be doing the building. It's his building. It's his property. He will be the owner of the property. He is the owner of the business. I only operate the business. Chairman: You've confused me. Now, we are not talking to you, we're talking to Pasquale. You are his agent. He wants, from his retirement in Florida, to build this building and if he doesn't get a permission to build it this size (50' x 70') he's going to revert to his previous permission? (to build the same type building, except that it will be 50' x 50') Mr. Barbieri: Yes. I understand, we'll be able to do that. Yes. Chairman: Well, I don't know. We have adopted a practice of stating that ' any building like this should be started within one year and this has gone on for five years. It's highly debatable whether the Building Inspector would issue a building permit. However, we know you are acting as an agent for your father. Now, I have used a lot of words. Do you want to state your reasons why this repetitive petition and the reason for the larger building. Mr. Barbieri: The larger building will be 50' x 70', completely open. It will add additional space to increase service. The room we are doing business in now is very small. Chairman: The building you are now in is 50' x 40', is that right? You want a 50' x 70' extention of your present building? Mr. Barbieri: We're asking for a 50' x 70' instead of the 50' x 50'. It would be of concrete block, flat roof, a completely open area. Chairman: One-story, concrete block building, a service area to service automobiles. Mr. Barbieri: Yes, to bring your automobiles in for service. Chairman: Any questions from Board members? I think by determining the owner- ship and operation and all that that I've gone a long way in asking questions. ' Prof. Wadsworth: I'd like to know if there's any possibility of additional parking space without going 30 feet into an RO district? Mr. Barbieri: The reason for going to 30 feet? it Barbieri Hearing 10/17/72 (cont.) -2 Mr. Barbieri: He owns the property. I run the business. Chairman: Well, you've answered my question. Still in all, if that is the situation, if he's out of it except as the owner of the land you should have come before us in your own name with an agreement to show that you are run- ning this business under lease with him or whatever. We issued a permission on this some 5 years ago in 1967 to your father who was active in the business at that time. It was for a smaller one and it was never built. Mr. Barbieri: He will be doing the building. It's his building. It's his property. He will be the owner of the property. He is the owner of the business. I only operate the business. Chairman: You've confused me. Now, we are not talking to you, we're talking to Pasquale. You are his agent. He wants, from his retirement in Florida, to build this building and if he doesn't get a permission to build it this size (50' x 70') he's going to revert to his previous permission? (to build the same type building, except that it will be 50' x 50') Mr. Barbieri: Yes. I understand, we'll be able to do that. Yes. Chairman: Well, I don't know. We have adopted a practice of stating that ' any building like this should be started within one year and this has gone on for five years. It's highly debatable whether the Building Inspector would issue a building permit. However, we know you are acting as an agent for your father. Now, I have used a lot of words. Do you want to state your reasons why this repetitive petition and the reason for the larger building. Mr. Barbieri: The larger building will be 50' x 70', completely open. It will add additional space to increase service. The room we are doing business in now is very small. Chairman: The building you are now in is 50' x 40', is that right? You want a 50' x 70' extention of your present building? Mr. Barbieri: We're asking for a 50' x 70' instead of the 50' x 50'. It would be of concrete block, flat roof, a completely open area. Chairman: One-story, concrete block building, a service area to service automobiles. Mr. Barbieri: Yes, to bring your automobiles in for service. Chairman: Any questions from Board members? I think by determining the owner- ship and operation and all that that I've gone a long way in asking questions. ' Prof. Wadsworth: I'd like to know if there's any possibility of additional parking space without going 30 feet into an RO district? Mr. Barbieri: The reason for going to 30 feet? it Barbieri Hearing 10/17/72 (cont.) ' At this point in the hearing the Chairman with the aid of the plot plan clarified the zoning problem. The present Europa Auto Imports, Inc. building is in a business zone. The proposed new addition would extend into the residential zone and of course, the zoning by-law does not permit a business in a residential zone. L' 1 -3 Prof. Wadsworth asked if it was just a parking lot that he was requesting. Chairman: It means going from a 2,000 sq. ft. building to a 5,500 sq. ft. building. The Chairman read the PREVIOUS PERMIT granted to Pasquali P. Barbieri. Chairman: This building (granted in the previous permit) would have been 50' x 50'. It extended into the residential district. Consideration was given to the land taking. Now he wants a building 50' x 70' adding 40% more to the size of it. Mr. Barbieri: The reason for going out that way would be to put an entrance to the side. There'd be a better access. There was discussion among members to the effect that there might be advantages with the new proposal with the entrance that would give better access to the building and because the Board could impose controls now lacking. The validity of the earlier permit was still in question. The one year time limit for building was not imposed on the permit granted in 1967. How long does a permit remain valid? Could Mr. Barbieri use the former permit to build the 50' x 50' building? Chairman: Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of this petition? IN FAVOR: (two persons spoke in favor) Mrs. Joseph Graziano 162 North Street: I live across the street. I'm in favor. Paul Morascio, 653 Lowell Street: I'm in favor. Chairman: Anybody in opposition? OPPOSITION: (5 spoke and 19 expressed in writing their opposition) Mrs. Charles Ward 588 Lowell Street: I'm an abutter to an abutter. Five years ago when the original petition was heard I was in favor of it and I don't remember whether I was silent or whether I actually wrote a letter. You'd have to check the correspondence. The reason for not objecting then was because it was only a small family business involving some type of enter- prise and they had regular customers and they didn't really anticipate an expansion in the volume of business. The reason they wanted the extension on the building was that they could increase the automobile service that they would provide. I just want to say that you have already increased the auto- mobile service in the area by allowing the mobile station to be built just across the street. There's more than adequate automobile service in that area. I'm against the petition. 1 1 1 Barbieri Hearing 10/17/72 (cont.) Chairman: Anyone else in opposition? -4 William Fraser, 533 Lowell Street: There are a few things I'd like to say and the first thing I'd like to say is that a variance under Massachusetts General Law, under 12.2 (Lexington zoning by-law), this would constitute a detriment to the neighborhood. I'd like to say that the proposed building is out of character as to material and the residential nature of the neighborhood. The increased traf- fic created by more people using this is also a safety factor and therefore it should not be allowed. The noise is going to cause quite a few problems because there will be an enlarged facility in the area and the neighborhood is sufficiently R0. It has been completely residential for many years and the area all around there. If we start again breaking down by-laws as previously has been challenged, I think we are going to lose a great deal in the Town itself and I don't think the injury caused to the petitioner will be as it will be to residents in this neighborhood. It would cause a substantial derogation to the intent and purposes of the zoning by-law within the meaning of the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 15, Section 12.2, of the Lexington Zoning By -Laws. Introduction of new business activity, increased activity, and granting a variance would disregard the main purpose of the by-law. Substan- tial hardship must relate to a specific. I would like to challenge your statement that any citizen has the right to challenge and sue this Board. I think this Board should serve the interests of the Town. I think...... Chairman: Wait a minute. A statement I made when? What previous hearing? Dr. Fraser: At a previous hearing, a man stood up, said he was an attorney, said that a court battle was lengthy and expensive. To this statement you said that if they would like to delay it with a court battle they could pursue it. Chairman: Any statements from previous hearings are not relevant to this hearing. Confine yourself to this hearing, please. Chairman: Now is there anyone else who wishes to speak against this petition? Mrs. Codier, 564 Lowell Street: (Ruth) We bought these places understanding that they were residential. There is an encroachment of industry on Lowell St. This will add to it. I'm against the petition along with my neighbors. Jean Fleming, 560 Lowell Street: For the same reasons stated, I am against it. Sal Mosca, 566 Lowell Street: For the same reasons, I'm against it. Chairman: By any chance have any of you people who have spoken against this petition signed a paper against it? or written a letter? No response. Chairman: We have received 17 form letters signed by 17 of you and 2 letters with original wording. So we have 19 people who have expressed opposition 1 J 1 Barbieri Hearing 10/17/72 (cont.) in writing to this petition. The Chairman read a copy of the form letter which begins as follows: Name: Address: Respectfully request the Board of Appeals to DENY "the petition of PASQUALE P. BARBIERI to vary the Lexington zoning by-law in order to extend the existing automobile service facilities of Europa Auto Imports, Inc. by adding a 50 x 70 ft. extension to the existing building, plus 17 additional parking spaces, in the rear of 153 NORTH STREET etc...............(to the end of the notice which appeared in the Lexington Minute -man and was sent to abutters, etc.) The Chairman read the two letters in opposition. (see file folder) The hearing was declared closed at 9:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, cap - Evelyn F. Cole, Clerk Board of Appeals NOTE: Discussion followed later. Decision deferred until 11/14/724 the vote being unanimous. -5 In public session on November 14, 1972 the Board of Appeals denied Pasquale P. Barbieri's petition. The vote was 4 to 1, Mr. Reed voting in favor of the petition. In addition to the usual 4 statements of a denial the Board added the following: Traffic has increased tremendously on Lowell Street since the 1967 petition was granted. This petition has been denied. (see denial)