Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-08-13BOARD OF APPEALS HEARINGS August 13, 1974 A regular meeting of the Lexington Board of Appeals was held on Tuesday, August 13, 1974 at 7:30 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Office Building. Present were four regular members and one associate member as follows: Chairman, Donald E. Nickerson; Vice Chairman, George P. Wadsworth; regular members: Logan Clarke, Jr. and Ruth Morey; and associate member Robert Cataldo. Also present were: a Minute -Man reporter, LWV Observer and a room full of townspeople. Public hearings were held on the following petitions, notice having been mailed to those who should legally receive them and to town boards and offi- cials who will or might be affected by decisions made and also advertised in the Lexington Minute -Man newspaper. Amory F. Muehlmann and K. Heinz Muehlmann - variance from Section 27 to build an addition to an existing house at 59 Outlook Drive with a sideyard of 10 ft. instead of the required 12 ft. according to plan submitted. Nancy P. Altman - variance of Section 27 to maintain an existing dwelling at 10 Marshall Road which has a side yard of approximately 10 feet instead of the required 15 feet and a setback of approximately 17.2 feet instead of the required 30 feet. Mammola Brothers Realty Trust - special permit pursuant to Section 25.67 and other applicable provisions of the zoning by-law, for the use of the property at 351-353 and 361-363 Massachusetts Avenue as an electrical office and air conditioning showroom, and (2) a special permit pursuant to Section 25.69 and other applicable provisions of the zoning by-law for the use of the prop- erty at 351-353 and 361-363 Massachusetts Avenue as a restaurant. At the present time there exists on the property known as 351-353 and 361-363 Massachusetts Avenue, two two-family houses which will be demolished. Lawrence Lucas, D.M.D. and Mary F. Lucas - pursuant to Section 12.3, a vari- ance from Section 27 to subdivide Lot 3A (Lot 12B on Town of Lexington Asses- sor's Map 41), 2.77 acres, into two lots, 3D and 3F. The present Lot 3A is numbered 7 Bushnell Drive. Both lots will have access from Bushnell Drive. Louis J. Cannizzo - special permit pursuant to Section 25.31 to construct a commercial greenhouse (80 ft. x 25 ft. x 10 ft. 4 in. high) on the property at 331 Concord Avenue. No retail sales will be made from this greenhouse. No signs, advertising or special lighting is requested. Following the hearings the Board made the following decisions, all in public open meeting: Muehlmann - granted unanimously. ' Altman - granted unanimously. Mammola Bros. - (please see next page) August 13, 1974 (continued) Mammola Bros. (1) granted unanimously, use of a portion of the building as an electrical office and air conditioning showroom. (2) voted unanimously to defer decision until September 3, 1974, use of the ground floor of the building as a restaurant until more detailed information is supplied concerning noise and odors. Lucas - denied unanimously. Cannizzo - granted unanimously. All pertinent material is on file in the Board of Appeals" office. The meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m. 1 1 Evelyn F. Cole, Clerk EPA TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Requests for a record of the Mammola Brothers Realty Trust hearing were made by Town Counsel and the Petitioners. The record for this hearing is recorded in the context of the Board's business for 2 regular meetings because of implications that the Board might have been delibera- ting or discussing the Mammola Brothers Realty Trust petition in meeting other than public. Details are included in these minutes for Mammola Brothers Realty Trust hearing only. Details have not been included for the other petitions heard on August 13 or on September 3, 1974. All the following was in open public meeting with an audience. Secretary Clerk, Board of Appeals BOARD OF APPEALS HEARINGS August 13, 1974 A regular meeting of the Lexington Board of Appeals was held Tuesday, August 13, 1974 beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Office Building. Present were four regular members and one associate member as follows: Chairman, Donald E. Nickerson; Vice Chairman, George P. Wadsworth; regular members: Logan Clarke, Jr. and Ruth Morey; and associate member, Robert Cataldo. Also present were: Petitioners or their representatives, a Lexington Minute -Man news- paper reporter, a League of Women Voters observer, and a room full of townspeople. ' Public hearings were held on five petitions, notice having been mailed to those who should legally receive them as specified in the law and to town boards and officials who will or might be affected by decisions made and also advertised in the Lexington Minute -Man newspaper: Amory F. Muehlmann and K. Heinz Muehlmann, Nancy P. Altman, * Mammola Brothers Realty Trust, Lawrence Lucas, D.M.D. and Mary F. Lucas, Louis J. Cannizzo. The first two hearings preceeding the Mammola petition were requests for vari- ances from Sec. 27, the first to build an addition to an existing house with a side yard of 10 ft. instead of 12 ft. and the second to maintain an existing house with insufficient sideyard and setback; the fourth, the Lucas petition, requested per- mission to divide a lot; the last, the Cannizzo petition, requested permission to construct a greenhouse: All pertinent material is on file in the Board of Appeals' office and the Town Clerk's office. * MAMMOLA BROTHERS REALTY TRUST - 7:45 p.m. ' The chairman read the notice as it was published in the Lexington Minute -Man newspaper and as mailed to the proper persons: LEGAL NOTICE Published in the Lexington Minute -Man: July 25 and August 1, 1974 August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros.) -2 'Chairman: The Board of Appeals will hold a public hearing on the petition of MAMMOLA BROTHERS REALTY TRUST for (1) a special permit pursuant to Section 25.67 and other applicable provisions of the zoning by-law, for the use of the property at 351-353 and 361-363 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE as an electrical office and air conditioning show- room, and (2) a special permit pursuant to Section 25.69 and other applicable pro- visions of the zoning by-law for the use of the property at 351-353 and 361-363 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE as a restaurant. At the present time there exists on the property known as 351-353 and 361-363 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, two two-family houses which will be demolished. The hearing will be held in the TOWN OFFICE BUILDING on TUESDAY, AUGUST 139 1974 at 7:45 P.M. Chairman: Mr. Dailey,you are representing the petitioners? William J. Dailev, Jr., Attornev: Yes. Chairman: Mr. Dailey, you have provided us with nine drawings by R. A. Petrie entitled: 1 of 9, Front Elevation; 2 of 9, Right and Left Elevations; 3 of 9, Rear Elevation; 4 of 9, Lower Level Plan; another copy of 4 of 9, same title and Seating Plan; 5 of 9, First Floor Plan; 6 of 9, Second Floor Plan; 7 of 9, Precast Floor Slabs, First and Second Floor Identical; 8 Of 9, Roofing Framing Plan; also a Plot Plan by Miller and Nylander dated July 12, 1974 showing the land, six lots with 120.13 aggregate feet of frontage, the location of the new building 90' x 40' sewer ' easement along the back line of the lot and a diagrammatic drawing showing parking for 40 cars, 32 in front, 2 at one side and 6 at the rear of the building, and showing no two 2 -family houses. Also, you have given us a letter dated August 1 which amplifies the petition somewhat: Contents of the letter: "In accordance with recent request and a similar request which we received from Mr. Briggs, we are enclosing a plan showing the proposed seating arrangement for the restaurant. It will be proposed at the time of hearing that permission be granted to oper- ate the restaurant seven days per week. The hours from Sunday through Thursday would be 12:00 noon to 10:30 p.m. The hours on Friday and Saturday would be 12:00 noon to 11:00 p.m. The restaurant will be located in the basement and as such would occupy approxi- mately 33% of the building. The first floor will be occupied by four stores, and the second floor will be occupied by four offices. The electrical office and air conditioning showroom will occupy approximately 25% of the second floor. Outside lighting will consist of the Colonial lights shown on the exterior of the building and two Colonial post -lights located within the parking lot. We are also enclosing et this time a copy of the plot plan showing parking for 40 cars. It is expected that there will be two access --egress points as shown on the plan." Mr. Dailey: Thank you. The five Mammola brothers presently own the two 2 -family houses. The Building Inspector has issued a building permit. As you know, no Board of Appeals' permission is required forthe building. Special permits are required for the two uses as covered by the petition. The two proposed uses of the structure include a restaurant and combined air-conditioning showroom and business office for August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros.) -3 Mammola & Sons, Electricians. The business office for the electrical company and the air-conditioning showroom will occupy approximately one-fourth of the second floor. In total, the first floor will be occupied by four stores and the second floor will be occupied by four offices. It is proposed that a 37 -table restaurant will be located at the basement level and as such will occupy approximately one- third of the building. Chairman: The seating plan shows 37 tables indicating a probable maximum of 148 customers, if all are filled at one time. Mr. Dailey: Yes. The hours will be noon to 10:30 p.m. from Sunday through Thursday and 11 p.m. on Friday and Saturday. No extra lights are required except if neces- sary for safety purposes. Although the CB zone does not require on-site parking, 40 parking spaces will be provided in the front of the building and 6 to 8 would be available to the side and rear. If needed, provisions will be made for extra park- ing for employees on adjacent business properties. The building will be of first class construction. Mr. Dailey continued by explaining that Patrick would operate the restaurant, Robert the air-conditioning showroom and electrical office, and Paul the Beauty Shop, these people being 3 of 5 Mammola Brothers. The trust con- ducts restaurant businesses in two locations in nearby towns. The building will be air-conditioned. The air-conditioning unit for the building will be concealed by the roof structure, housed in an enclosure on top of the roof, vented above the roof and will be shut off when business closes. The exhaust system is designed to allow fumes to be carried upward to the roof and out. Both lights and air-condi- tioning will be terminated at the closing hours except for minimal protective ' lighting. The rest of the building, for which no permits are required from the Board of Appeals, will be open for use, except for Sunday, during normal business hours. Mr. Dailey presented a number of sheets of a petition signed by approximately 150 Lexington residents registering themselves in favor of the special permits. "We the undersigned residents of the Town of Lexington wish to express our support for the petition of Mammola Brothers Realty Trust to operate a restaurant and an electrical office and air-conditioning showroom at 351-353 and 361-363 Mass. Avenue. We believe that the restaurant and electrical office and air-conditioning showroom will provide a service and a public convenience not now available." Mr. Dailey continued, "There are no requests for a sign at this time, that will be considered later, if necessary. Mr. Briggs (Planning Director) was contacted. The Building Inspector, Don Irwin, is familiar with the operation." The Chairman described the foremat of the hearing: "The notice was read, the peti- tioners' case has been presented. I'll begin by asking questions, the Board will question the petitioners, and then those who wish to speak in favor and in opposi- tion will have the opportunity to do so. When it comes time for you -to speak, I would ask that you not be repetitive. If you agree with the previous speaker please just register in favor or opposition." The Chairman asked questions relating to the type of food to be served, i.e. Italian? ' and whether there would be take-out service. Answer: American and Italian. Sit down service. Chairman: I have asked my questions. Do Board members have questions? August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros.) -4 ' Robert Cataldo: There are no plans for the mechanics of air-conditioning or the exhaust system. Mr. Dailey: The exhaust will go straight up from the kitchen to the roof. Mr. Cataldo: That's not shown on the plans. What kind of materials? metal? asbestos? There are no details showing any of that. Mr. Dailey: An exhaust system will be provided. The roof is pitched in front. It's a tar and gravel roof. The air-conditioning will be housed in an enclosure on top of the roof. The exhaust system is designed to be carried upward to the roof and out. Mr. Cataldo: There's nothing on the plans to show the exhaust. Will it be air- cooled or water-cooled? There should be details on the plans. How will the noise from the refrigeration unit be eliminated and how will kitchen odors be controlled? Answer: They will be taken care of. George Wadsworth asked questions in relation to sec. 25.67 of the zoning by-law and wanted to know what, exactly, the Board of Appeals was expected to consider in order to grant a permit. The Board of Health has their requirements. What speci- fically should the Board consider? (There's no explanation, it says"SP") They had something in mind when the article passed town meeting. ' Chairman: The last electrician the Board gave a permit to was Mr. Bogosdan. Town Meeting passed a warrant article putting these two uses under section 25 and now these things have to go before the Board of Appeals to get approval for a special permit to see that nothing is too far wrong. We can add conditions. The electri- cal office section has been there a long time. The restaurant section about 2 years. Ruth Morey: Will they expect to get a liquor license? Mr. Dailey: There is do request at this time for one. Chairman: Any other questions? There were no more questions at this time from the Board. Chairman: Now, we have come to the place where we ask for those who wish to be recorded in favor. IN FAVOR: Leonard Chayet, 377 Lincoln St.: It's a proper structure for the zone. Lots of people will be coming into town in the next few years. Restaurants are already crowded. I want to be registered in favor of this one. Brad Giddings, 3 Stetson St.: I have known the family for 15 years and have watched the management of the two other restaurants. I am in favor. ' Al Durkin, 18 Manley Ct.: It will be a big asset to the town. I'm in favor. Lawrence Potter, 9 Emerson Gardens: I'd like to be registered in favor. Chairman: Anybody else in favor? No response. August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros.) -5 Chairman: Now, we come to those in opposition. Would anyone wish to register in ' opposition? IN OPPOSITION: Seymour Moskowitz, 36 Brandon St.: Are those plans signed by a'registered engineer? There's nothing that shows professional status, no license and no stamp. They are not in conformance with State requirements. There's no fire protection shown. The town fire marshall will object. Do they have approval from the fire marshall? Mr. Mammola defended Mr. Petrie's status as a registered engineer. Chairman: We will accept your vouching for him. Unless we are discussing an f&d we do not insist that complete mechanical details be shown. We will be sure the building is vented, etc. We can put conditions on the permit. Mr. Cataldo: Do the plans show fire exits, fire lines and a sprinkler system? Is;the building over a sewer line? Has the town checked? Logan Clarke wanted specific criteria for granting a special permit for these uses. Dr. Wadsworth: They put this section in the by-law. They must have had something in mind when they did it. (Town Meeting passed the warrant article inserting the section in the by-law.) Afterall the Board of Health has to inspect restaurants anyway. ' Chairman: The granting of an SP under Section 25 should insure that there is a public hearing and that abutters are notified. The hearing provides an opportunity to attach conditions to permits, if warranted, (thus insuring that the public's welfare has been considered and hopefully the status of the neighborhood will not be impaired ). Somebody spoke at length rushing in with strong comments about the White Hen Pantry and the noisy air conditioning and made reference to a case in Worcester ....•the State College had to shut down at night." Reference was made to the EPA code, to a fire at the White Hen Pantry allegedly caused by "the dump in back --storage for refuse" and to the increasing businesses located in this area -- Arlex Oil and gas stations. The question was asked, "Has the fire marshall seen the plans? Children play around the areas where they put the refuse. The train goes through and kids run out onto the tracks." Other responses came from the floor, not audible for accurate recording. The Chairman asked the audience to be more orderly. Please limit your remarks to the areas of this petition. Roland W. Gubisch 627 Mass. Ave., questioned and commented in regard to a special permit tending to destroy the neighborhood. This is a mixed residential and busi- ness area and two buildings would be torn down. He made reference to the similar- ity of the Bedford Street "mix". Russ Cutter, 32 Brandon St., who said he lived behind the restaurant, was shocked that they had "knocked down garages". "I don't want a restaurant in back." Mr. Mammola interjected comments. August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros.) -6 Chairman: Zoning allows restaurants in this district. Town Meeting created it (the section). The Board has to act on these. Someone: Is this over the MDC sewer line? John McCarthy, 339 Mass Ave. asked about the posting of the Building Permit. Somebody: "14 ft. back --- 4 ft. between sewer line.' Jane Stumpp, 29 Charles St. was concerned about an increase in traffic from this operation. She made reference to the Bora Bora restaurant. Why doesn't it have to come up for a special permit? Chairman: Two years ago, approximately, Town Meeting passed a warrant article on this use (restaurants) and we have to see that they are not obviously incorrect in any way. A --question from somebody: The proximity of so many restaurants, so much traffic increase, doesn't that affect the application? Chairman: The emphasis is not on traffic. A previous speaker from the audience spoke again: Are they allowed to bring in a repair shop and do repair work on the premises? ' Response: There will be no repair work on the premises. Chairmen: They petitioned to use the premises as an electrical office and air- conditioning showroom and to operate a restaurant. Does anyone else wish to register opposition? Please limit your remarks to the requests in the petition. Lillian McArthur, 33 Charles St.: There are too many commercial establishments in the neighborhood. I'm opposed. Chairman: Anybody else? No response. Chairman: We have a letter from the Planning Board. "The Planning Board has reviewed the petition of Mammola Brothers Realty Trust for a special permit under Section 25.67 and Section 25.69 of the Zoning By-law for office, retail and restaurant use, for permission at 351/353 and 361/363 Massachusetts Avenue. The Planning Board recommends that the curb cuts for access and egress be approved by the Town Engineer. In the opinion of the Planning Board, the construction of this building 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 Zoning By-law." Somebody: Section 13? The hearing was declared closed at 8:35 p.m. Many in the audience left the room. Others came in to be present at the hearings which followed: Lawrence Lucas, D.M.D. and Mary F. Lucas; and Louis J. Cannizzo. 1 1 August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros,) -7 Following the hearings the Board made the following decisions in so-called "executive session" in open, public meeting and dictated the wording of the permits for: Muehlmann, which was granted unanimously. (see permit for variance for details.) Altman, which was granted unanimously. (see permit for variance for details.) Mammola Brothers Realty Trust: (discussion & deliberation by the Board.) George Wadsworth expressed the feeling that the petition should be divided into two parts and voted on separately. He said that he was in favor of the electrical office and air-conditioning showroom but was opposed to granting a restaurant permit. The Chairman said that he didn't feel we could deny the petitions. Robert Cataldo agreed with G. Wadsworth that the two petitions should be handled separately. Proper conditions should be included also. Ruth Morey expressed the opinion that if the petitions were taken in two parts, the Board could grant one and deny the other, if it so chose. Chairman: Since you agree to separate them, I'm waiting for a motion. George Wadsworth: I'll make the motion to grant the first part, (1) as stated in the petition for an electrical office and air-conditioning showroom. Logan Clarke seconded the motion. It carried unanimously. GRANTED UNANIMOUSLY, PERMISSION FOR AN ELECTRICAL OFFICE AND AIR-CONDITIONING SHOW- ROOM ON THE PROPERTY AT 351-353 and 361-363 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE. Chairman: Now, we have the second part, the restaurant. Mrs. Morey made a motion to grant permission for the restaurant. Logan Clarke seconded the motion provided that conditions could be imposed to insure it would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. The motion did not carry, since it takes a vote of at least 4 to 1 to grant a permit. The makers of the motion withdrew their motion. George Wadsworth question the amount of jurisdiction the Board had on granting resp taurants in an already crowded area and made statements implying that more space (area) should be required for a restaurant so that it wouldn't be detrimental to the neighborhood. It's difficult to eliminate odors and noise. There has to be a greater distance between restaurants and other buildings. Robert Cataldo was concerned that there was nothing on the plans to indicate how ' these problems would be resolved. They don't tell us how they will resolve them -- exhaust fumes, the noise of refrigeration units running 24 hours a day, odors from the restaurant. Chairman: The lighting will be minimum and shut off completely after hours. Pro- August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mannola Bros.) -8 vision for parking is shown although they are not required to show parking places in this district. The seating arrangements have been submitted - 37 tables and probable 120-140 people at one time. He said that he doubted that the Board needed to go into the details of noise and odors. Zoning allows restaurants in this district. They have assured us there won't be any odors and they have to meet the Board of Health requirements. Mr. Cataldo referred to the Lexington Mews restaurant permit and reminded the Board of past problems with the Stop and Shop property. Chairman: How could they come back under the new rule now? This by-law addition has only been under the Board of Appeals for 2 years. Ruth Morey: We could impose a condition on hours to be open. Mr. Cataldo: We should impose a condition "no parking on Massachusetts Ave." Chairman: They don't have to provide parking in this zone and yet they have. There continued to be some uncertainty as to the type of controls the Board should and could impose on restaurants. Mr. Cataldo continued to be concerned that the plans did not contain the kind of information that would assure him that it wouldn't be detrimental to the neighbor- hood. i.e, fumes, refrigeration, noise, smells, etc. Logan Clarke checked the by-law sections, referring first to Section 12.2, Special Permit, in the Zoning By-law: 12.2 Special Permits - To hear and decide applications for special permits for exceptions as provided in this By-law, subject to any general or specific rules therein contained, and subject to appropriate conditions or safeguards imposed by the Board of Appeals. Such special permit may be granted when in the judgment of the Board of Appeals the public welfare and convenience will be substantially served thereby and where a requested permit will not tend to impair the status of the neighborhood. He referred to 25.67 "Sale of air conditioning, heating, refrigerating......", which showed SP under CG and CB districts, and to Section 25.69 "Restaurants and other places for serving food, including.... etc ....... "which showed the same SP designation. He also made reference to Section 13. Chairman: This air-conditioning etc. section has been in the by-law for 25 years. The restaurant business section, for less than 2 years. Logan Clarke: If you go to the f&d (section 13) it says..... Chairman: This is not an f&1. ' G. Wadsworth: It will be a detriment to the neighborhood. L. Clarke: Does it belong in this particular neighborhood? August 13, 1974 (hearings) (Mammola Bros.) -9 Chairman: The restaurant would serve the neighborhood. We can impose conditions to take care of the noise of refrigeration and odors from the kitchen or we can wait for another date to decide. We can defer decision to give them an opportun- ity to give us better plans. Would that be acceptable, Bob? Mr. Cataldo• Yes. Chairman: Mr. Dailey, would your clients agree to defer the time for decision to September 3 and submit more detailed plans? Mr. Dailey: My clients are here, I'll ask them. Mr. Dailey: They agree. The Board of Appeals VOTED unanimously to defer the decision and give the petitioners an opportunity to come back with better plans re. noise and odors. George Wadsworth made the motion. Logan Clarke seconded it. The Board continued its deliberations, voted and dictated the denial of the "Lucas" petition (see denial in the Board of Appeals' files or Town Clerk's records) and the permit for "Cannizzo" (see permit in the Board of Appeals' files or Town Clerk's records), all in open, public meeting. The meeting for August 13 adjourned at 11:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Evelyn F. Cole, Secretary/Clerk NOTE: Between meetings, the Board received the following letter: August 21, 1974 Re: Application of Mammola Bros: Realty Trust Dear Mr. Nickerson: In accordance with the colloquy that took place during the Board of Appeals hearing on August 13, 1974, I wish to reiterate on the part of the Petitioner that any time requirement pertaining to the time within which the Board of Appeals must act with regard to this Petition, is waived by the Petitioner. We hope to have the additional information to the Board of Appeals within a short period of time. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, /s/ William J. Dailey, Jr. WJD:em The notice posted with the Town Clerk in regard to the adjourned meeting on ' Mammola Brothers Realty Trust, which will be continued on Sept. 3, 1974 may be seen on the next page. August 13, 1974 (hearings) & Sept. 3 (Mammola Bros.) -10 Dear Miss McDonough: Please post the following notice. On SEPTEMBER 3, 1974 at 7:15 P.M. the Lexington Board of Appeals will con- tinue its deliberations RE: THE MAMMOLA BROTHERS REALTY TRUST PETITION 341-353 and 361-363 Massachusetts Avenue, which hearing was held on August 13, 1974. The Board will meet in the SELECTMEN"S MEETING ROOM, TOWN OFFICE BUILDING. Very truly yours, Istif Evelyn F. Cole, Clerk Board of Appeals (During the three weeks elapse of time on the hearing, additional information and rawings were supplied by the petitioners' attorney. A letter from Cox Engin- eeri g Company dated August 26, 1974, accompanying two drawings dated August 16, showing details of the kitchen hood and a letter from Edgar S. Bunker, Project Engineer, showing and describing the method of venting the kitchen area were received. September 3, 1974 On September 3, 1974 in open, public meeting the Board met to continue the deferred meeting to consider further and vote upon the petition of Mammola Brothers ' Realty Trust pursuant to Section 25.67 for permission to operate a restaurant. The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:15 p.m. with the same members of the Board in attendance and several townspeople. Subsequent to a thorough discussion by the Board members and consideration of the additional drawings, letters and evidence, the Board made its decision. The Board was not unanimous in its findings. Mr. Cataldo said that he could not say he was satisfied or approved. He ex- pected more details. He felt the drawings were not adequate. We should not have asked them to come back. The plans lack the detailed information as to how the noise from the refrigeration unit would be eliminated and as to how kitchen odors would be controlled. The Board was so adament last time that I expected a set of drawings tonight which we could nail something down to. Dr. Wadsworth had reservations as to whether another restaurant in this parti- cular neighborhood was appropriate. It would be a mistake to grant it. Mrs. Morey voiced some reservations about the restaurant being in the basement but this wouldn't cause her to deny the petition. Mr. Clarke indicated some skepticism about some of the statements made in one of the latest letters received in regard to the petition. The decision: Mammola Brothers petition for a restaurant was denied. The vote: (2 to 3) In favor: R. Morey, D. E. Nickerson. In opposition: G. Wadsworth, L. Clarke and R. Cataldo. August 13, 1974 (hearings) & Sept. 3 (Mammola Bros.) -11 The Board of Appeals VOTED 3 to 2 in favor of the "rote" findings of a denial. In so doing, the Board, 3 to 2, finds that in its judgment the public convenience and welfare would not be substantially served by the granting of the petition requested, it might tend to impair the status of the neighborhood, and it will not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the regulations in the Lex- ington by-laws. In addition, George Wadsworth requested that a statement that an additional restaurant in this neighborhood would not be appropriate be added to the findings. It was agreed to list this first under the findings of the Board on the Denial. The Chairman indicated that he did not speak before because he did not wish to use his position as chairman to influence the Board's vote. He said that he felt that the final vote was wrong, that the Mainnolas had every right to request the restaurant use, and he said that he felt that the petitioners had done every- thing to comply. The Board has voted. THE PETITION IS DENIED. one of the petitioners asked if he could respond to some of the objections but was reminded that this was executive session, it was public and in open meet- ing, he could listen, but he could not speak. This meeting on September 3 in regard to the Mammola Brothers' petition ad- journed at 7:45 p.m. * After a brief recess the Board assembled with two new members of the Board sitting on four scheduled hearings. These were also held in open, public meeting, all of which had been advertised and notices mailed as required by law, etc. Lexington Mews, Amalia G. Samoylenko, Associate, on behalf of Stephen Minasian, Kitchen & Kutchin, Inc., Lexington Chalet Inc., Richard H. Soule. Decisions were made after hearings were held and permits and denials dictated. All pertinent data is on file in the Board of Appeals' office and the Town Clerk's office. The meeting of September 3, 1974 adjourned at 12:25 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Evelyn F. Cole, Secretary/Clerk ' * An altercation took place in the hall outside the hearing room.