HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-10-14 ZBA-Min (2)
Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals
Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall
October 14, 2010
Board Members Present: Chairman - Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, David G. Williams,
Carolyn C. Wilson and Associate Member William P. Kennedy
Staff Present: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and Garry Rhodes, Building
Commissioner
Petition Address: 846 Massachusetts Avenue, Map 22, Lot 74
This hearing had been continued from September 23, 2010 to give the applicant the opportunity
to go before the Historic District Commission regarding the awning sign.
The Chairman read an e-mail from the applicant, Jeanne Ciampa, owner of the Music Wizard
requesting this hearing be continued until November 18, 2010. She was not prepared to be
heard at this hearing.
On a motion by Carolyn C. Wilson and seconded by John J. McWeeney, the Board voted 5-0 to
continue the hearing until November 18, 2010.
Submitted by: Dianne L. Cornaro, Administrative Clerk
2
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals
Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall
October 14, 2010
Board Members Present: Chairman - Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, David G. Williams,
Carolyn C. Wilson and Associate Member William P. Kennedy.
Staff Present: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and Garry Rhodes, Building
Commissioner
Petition Address: 20 Percy Road, Map 39, Lot 41
Petitioner submitted the following with the application for hearing: nature and justification of
request; plot plan; elevations, floor plans and letters of support was received from 24 Percy
Road and 2 Warren Avenue.
Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building
Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Board of
Selectmen, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Administrator and the Historic Districts
Commission Clerk. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:30 pm by reading the legal notice and described
information received from the petitioner relative to the petition.
Donald Briggs, owner of the property, presented the petition.
The applicant is requesting a variance in accordance with the Zoning By-Law section 135-35,
Table 2, Schedule of Dimensional Controls to allow a side yard setback of 9.1 ft instead of the
required 15 ft side yard setback.
The Chairman of the Board asked if the tree by the driveway would be taken down.
Unfortunately the tree has carpenter ants and will need to come down whether they receive
approval for this project or not.
There were no questions from the audience.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition.
The hearing was closed at 7:33 pm.
On a motion by Carolyn C. Wilson and seconded by John J. McWeeney, the Board voted 5-0 to
approve the variance to allow a side yard setback of 9.1 ft instead of the required 15 ft side yard
setback.
Submitted by: Dianne L. Cornaro, Administrative Clerk
3
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals
Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall
October 14, 2010
Board Members Present: Chairman - Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, David G. Williams,
Carolyn C. Wilson and Associate Member William P. Kennedy
Staff Present: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and Garry Rhodes, Building
Commissioner
Petition Address: 187-189 Bedford Street, Map 64, Lot 72
Petitioner submitted the following with the application for hearing: justification of request;
Site Plan, Sign Plans and Photographs.
Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building
Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Board of
Selectmen, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Administrator and the Historic Districts
Commission Clerk. Comments were received the Zoning Administrator.
Letters of opposition were received from Judith Uhrig of 89 Potter Pond and Caroline
Fitzgerald of 55 Gleason Street.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:35 pm by reading the legal notice and described
information received from the petitioner relative to the petition.
Terry Wilkins of Barlo Signs and the owner of the Business, Tony Chiampa, presented the
petition.
The applicant is requesting a special permit from section 135-75A to allow an internally
illuminated double sided sign.
At the hearing Mr. Wilkins presented the Board with pictures of the sign illuminated and un-
illuminated along with pictures of illuminated signs for other businesses in the area.
Mr. Chiampa would like to have the sign illuminated during hours of operation while dark;
4:00 pm until approximately 9:00 pm.
Board members asked how many nights a week is the facility open and at what time does the
last client arrive. They are open Tuesday thru Friday until approximately 9:00 with the last
client arriving at about 8:00.
It was asked if the applicant would agree to a condition that the lights are not illuminated
during the weekend. He would not have a problem with that condition if it was requested.
The Chairman asked if the petitioner had gone to the Design Advisory Committee regarding
this sign. Mr. Wilkins apologized as it was an error on his part that they had not gone before
the DAC.
4
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
The Chairman explained as part of their procedure the Board usually requires the applicant to
go to the Design Advisory Committee for signs.
The Building Commissioner, Garry Rhodes, explained a building permit had been issued for
the sign after meeting with the originally sign company. The plans submitted had shown the
sign as being a non-illuminated sign. The Building Department was unaware there had been a
change in the sign company with new plans for an illuminated sign.
The Board had questioned the need for the light from the sign for safety issues; they discussed
the need for having the sign illuminated somehow.
George Eisenberg of 54 Gleason Road asked because the mistake was made would the sign be
automatically approved by the Board. He had a concern with the light glaring from the sign.
Caroline Fitzgerald of 55 Gleason Street read the letter she had sent to the Board. She had a
concern with the sign being out of character for the neighborhood.
No one else spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition.
Tony Chiampa spoke to explain the need for the sign.
The Chairman opened the discussion up to the Board as to whether they wanted to make a
decision on this sign or continue the hearing until the applicant goes to the Design Advisory
Committee.
The majority of the Board felt they would be more comfortable making a decision with input
from the Design Advisory Committee.
On a motion by John J. McWeeney and seconded by William Kennedy, the Board voted 4-1 to
continue the hearing until November 18, 2010 at 7:30 pm. David Williams voted not to
continue the hearing.
Submitted by: Dianne L. Cornaro, Administrative Clerk
5
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals
Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall
October 14, 2010
Board Members Present: Chairman - Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, David G. Williams,
Carolyn C. Wilson and Associate Member William P. Kennedy
Staff Present: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and Garry Rhodes, Building
Commissioner
Petition Address: 71 Grant Street, Map, Lot
Petitioner submitted the following with the application for hearing: justification of request;
Plot Plan, Shed Description, Photographs and a petition of support from 10 abutters.
Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building
Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Board of
Selectmen, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Administrator and the Historic Districts
Commission Clerk. Comments were received the Zoning Administrator.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:02 pm by reading the legal notice and described
information received from the petitioner relative to the petition.
Anastasia Galanopoulos and Nicholas George, owners of the property, presented the petition.
The applicant is seeking a special permit from section 135-32C to allow reconstruction after
destruction of the non conforming existing garage and replace it with a shed.
The applicant asked if they were to decide to put the garage back on at a later date when they
can afford to would they still be able to. The Chairman explained they would need to stay
within the setbacks or come before the Board to receive a variance
At the hearing the applicants presented a letter of support from 40 Fletcher Street and
additional photographs of the damaged structure.
The Board questioned the design of the shed and asked if the applicant would have room to
maintain the shed if put in the same spot.
There were no questions from the audience.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition.
The hearing was closed at 8:07 pm.
On a motion by Carolyn C. Wilson and seconded by John J. McWeeney, the board voted 5-0 to
approve the special permit from section 135-32C to allow reconstruction after destruction of a
non conforming structure.
Submitted by: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk
6
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals
Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall
October 14, 2010
Board Members Present: Chairman - Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, David G. Williams,
Carolyn C. Wilson and Associate Member William P. Kennedy
Staff Present: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and Garry Rhodes, Building
Commissioner
Petition Address: 46 Bedford Street, Map, Lot
Petitioner submitted the following with the application for hearing: justification of request; site
plan and sign plans.
Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building
Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Board of
Selectmen, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Administrator and the Historic Districts
Commission Clerk. Comments were received from the Conservation Administrator, the
Historic District Commission Clerk and the Zoning Administrator.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:07 pm by reading the legal notice and described
information received from the petitioner relative to the petition.
Architect Eric Brown presented the petition for the applicant 46 Bedford Street, LLC.
The applicant is seeking a special permit from sections 135-75 and 135-77 to allow
modification of a previously approved special permit for a freestanding sign.
Mr. Brown said they had gone before the Historic District Commission, had clarified the
location of the sign and received approval for the sign design.
The petitioner explained due to the number of tenants they could potentially have in the
building they are asking for permission to allow up to 6 signs individual signs on the directory
sign.
The Board clarified the number of tenants and the parking requirements.
There were no questions from the audience.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition.
The hearing was closed at 8:12 pm.
On a motion by Carolyn C. Wilson and seconded by John J. McWeeney, the board voted 5-0 to
approve the special permit to allow modifications as per plans for a freestanding sign.
Submitted by: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk
7
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals
Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall
October 14, 2010
Board Members Present: Chairman - Nyles N. Barnert, David G. Williams, Carolyn C. Wilson
and Associate Members William P. Kennedy and John T. Gilbert
Staff Present: Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and Garry Rhodes, Building
Commissioner
Petition Address: 300 Patriot Way, Map, Lot
Petitioner submitted the following with the application for hearing: justification of request;
Topographic Plan, Plot Plan, Elevations and Floor Plans.
Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building
Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Board of
Selectmen, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Administrator and the Historic Districts
Commission Clerk. Comments were received from the Conservation Administrator, the
Planning Director and the Zoning Administrator. A letter of concern was received from 50
Shade Street and a petition of concern signed by 9 abutters was received.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:13 pm by reading the legal notice and described
information received from the petitioner relative to the petition.
Attorney Robert Buckley presented the petition for the applicant, Shire HGT, Inc. Also present
was Jim Winiarski of Shire Pharmaceuticals, Attorney Peter Corbett of Goulston & Storrs, John
Hart, Civil Engineer with Symes Maini & McKee Associates, and Michael Giardina, Design
Principal with Kling-Stubbins.
For the record Attorney Buckley wanted to clarify that they are before the Board to amend the
special permit for Building 300. They are not altering the definitive use plan; they are in full
compliance with the original SPS as adopted.
The applicant is seeking to amend the January 2008 SPS as modified on November 2008 for
Building 300 specifically. The applicant seeks to further develop the site by constructing a
27,600 sq ft cafeteria, office space and conference expansion to the existing Building 300. The
expansion would be located adjacent to the Route 2 portion of the campus.
Attorney Buckley gave a brief history of the property.
The Civil Engineer, John Hart, explained the changes to be made to the building.
Architect Michael Giardina also walked the Board thru the architectural design changes. The
building is being designed as required in the DSUP.
The Chairman asked if this would require a reduction in the 100 and 600 buildings. They will
not need to have a reduction in size since they will still be within the permitted square foot area
permitted under the approved DSUP. There will be no loss in parking spaces.
8
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
A Board member questioned the plans showing the addition will be going on the green space
between the wall and the parking lot. The stone wall will be rebuilt adjacent to the parking
area; the only green space will be where the footprint of the building is.
Another Board member asked if they were going to go for Leed certification for this. They are
waiting for a ruling to see if this project would qualify since this is a retro fit to an existing
building.
The Chairman brought up the noise issue for discussion.
The Attorney spoke of the obligation they have under the conditions of the DSUP and the
discussions and meetings they have had over the summer with the peer group consultant to
develop the scope and the methodology to be used by the peer review consultant to address the
issue. A contract has been awarded and the Building Commissioner has picked the consultant
company but has not met with them yet.
The Chairman discussed the possibility of adding a condition to the modification that the
certificate of occupancy would not be issued unless they were in compliant with the noise
condition. Attorney Buckley doesn’t think it is necessary since they have the obligation
already under a condition of the DSUP to comply with the noise bylaw.
Garry Rhodes told the Board the town has received the money for the consultant and has sent
the contract to Cavanaugh Tocci Associates but has not met with them to determine a timetable
for when the testing will begin. First step for the consultant is to determine what the ambience
level is.
A Board member asked if this addition will have more mechanicals on the roof. It will have
additional mechanicals but different from the production area. They will be the same you
would see on a traditional building. They will also have a screening around the mechanicals to
add additional sound barriers.
It was asked by a Board member if the contract with Cavanaugh Tocci Associates is with the
town. Mr. Rhodes said yes and moving forward any contact to the consultant by Shire or the
neighbors must go thru him. The town has been paid for the consultant and has been put into a
special account. The town will be paying the fees.
Richard Canale, 29 Shade Street spoke as a legal abutter to the site. Thought the Board could
not close the hearing tonight because it has not been 30 days from the submittal and the Board
has not received all the reports necessary. The Chairman asked Mr. Canale what report they
were missing. Mr. Canale said there was not a report from the Planning Board. The Chairman
read a report received from the Planning Board.
Mr. Canale requested the Board not close the hearing for two reasons: 1) Shire’s submittal
indicated they have met with abutters and they have not. There are some abutters are not
prepared because they thought they would be meeting with Shire. 2) Applicant has draft
findings in respect to the DUSP which are different than the original DSUP with respect to the
Conservation areas that have not been met.
9
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
Mr. Canale addressed the Board regarding a letter sent to the Board dated October 8, 2010 with
the abutter’s recommendations for the Board of Appeal’s action on findings of fact and
conditions of approval. He is speaking in favor of the petition as long as the Board puts
conditions on the special permit.
Attorney Buckley responded to Mr. Canale’s comments. They have met twice with abutters;
once as a continuation with their interaction with respect to the noise issue and another time to
talk with the abutters about the plans for building 300 before they went public with the plans.
There has been ample public notices in the paper of various open meetings with the town
boards where no one has shown up.
The Conservation condition is in the Zoning. Their findings say they are in the process of
refining and approving a Conservation restriction easement. A draft version of this has been
submitted to the Conservation Commission as part of Shire’s obligation. This has nothing to do
with this building.
Attorney Buckley also responded to Mr. Canale’s concerns with the determining the standards
for the noise measurements.
Vickie Blier of 41 Shade Street spoke on the concern with the many ways of measurement
there is to measure sound. She is worried as to how they will come up with what they are
going to compare noise with. Proposes the consultant come up with the method.
Attorney Buckley spoke of the need to avoid individual conditions on special permits so that
Michelle Ciccolo of 50 Shade Street doesn’t have any issue with the expansion. The abutters
had obtained a measurement instrument and had some readings in the 60’s over a period of
several hours. Her concern was that it will be up to the abutters to put in complaints before
more measurements are done. Thinks that the Board should put into place protocols for when
the measurements should be done and that Shire is held to high standards.
Town meeting member Steven Heinrich of 11 Potter Pond, a S. Lexington resident and member
of the S. Lexington Civic Association spoke of the need for strong conditions to protect
neighborhoods.
David Manuel of 41 Shade Street wanted to let the board know there has never been any
opposition to the project; there only concern is that the noise issue be addressed.
Vickie Blier of 41 Shade Street spoke again regarding pharmaceutical companies buying each
other out all of the time. Shire wants to be a good neighbor and is working hard to fix the noise
issue but what happens if someone else takes over that is not as nice. She gave a list of
headlines of companies being taken over by other companies. Conditions need to be in writing
that will require them to comply.
Phil Jackson of 50 Shade Street asked the Board to take their time to make sure what has to be
done is done.
10
BOA Meeting, October 14, 2010
The Chairman asked Mr. Rhodes if he will be asking the consultant to set up protocols for the
methodology. Mr. Rhodes has asked people to submit questions and comments of what they
think should be included in writing to him. He would like to involve everyone to best
determine how this should be done.
The Chairman recommended that the hearing be closed and the Board had a discussion as to
whether there needs to be a condition included regarding the testing being done before the
occupancy of the new addition.
Comment [d1]:
Additional comments were given by Attorney Buckley, Garry Rhodes and Michelle Ciccolo
Comment [d2R1]:
regarding the testing timetable.
Comment [d3R2]:
Deleted:
On a motion by Carolyn C.
The hearing was closed at 9:25 pm.
Wilson and seconded by William P.
Kennedy, the Board voted 5-0 to approve
the modification to the special permit/site
Decision
plan originally approved January 24,
2008 as modified in , 2008 with the
following conditions:¶
On a motion by Carolyn C. Wilson and seconded by William P. Kennedy, the Board voted 5-0
¶
Conditions: ¶
to GRANT from the Code of the Town of Lexington (Zoning By-Law) an Amendment to an
¶
approved SPS for Building 300 in accordance with §135-42F in accordance with § 135-12, §
The project will be constructed according
135-13, and the November 2009 Amended PSDUP at 125 Spring Street, 100, 200, 300, 400, to the DSDUP and its plans and
covenants as well as the materials
500, and 600 Patriot Way subject to the following Building 300 specific conditions:
submitted for review and approval by
Applicant that are referenced herein, as
such materials may be specifically
1) The project will be constructed according to the DSDUP and its plans and covenants as
amended or approved conditionally by
well as the materials submitted for review and approval by Applicant that are referenced herein, the terms hereof.¶
The project will be constructed in
as such materials may be specifically amended or approved conditionally by the terms hereof.
accordance with applicable federal, state,
and local regulations.¶
Prior to installation of plant material the
2) The project will be constructed in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local
Applicant will revisit the proposed
regulations.
planting plan to explore options for
evergreen screening between the north
side of Building 400 and the adjacent
3) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of Building 300, the
Shade Street properties. Such planting
will include evergreen screening
Applicant shall submit to the Building Inspector for review and comment a construction
immediately north of the proposed
management plan which shall detail, among other things, parking; material storage; traffic
Building 400 parking, or closer to the
property line, depending on field
circulation and utility installations during construction of the project.
conditions such as ledge and existing tree
canopies. The Applicant’s Landscape
4) Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit for the addition to 300 Patriot Way, the
Architect will engage with a
representative of the Shade Street
Applicant/Property Owner shall submit to the Building Commissioner a supplemental analysis
neighbors prior to the final selection of
prepared by a qualified noise engineer in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Building
planting species and locations. The
applicant will provide notice to the Board
Commissioner which measures any increase in dBA related to the operations at the entire site
of the outcome of any such meeting. ¶
over the ambient noise levels previously calculated, to confirm compliance with the Noise
Prior to the issuance of a building permit
for construction of Building 400, the
Bylaw. Any increase in dBA over what is permissible within the Noise Bylaw shall necessitate
Applicant shall submit to the Building
the installation of appropriate noise mitigation measures before the occupancy permit can be
Inspector for review and comment a
construction management plan which
issued."
shall detail, among other things, parking;
material storage; traffic circulation and
utility installations during construction of
the project.¶
¶
Formatted: No underline
Formatted: Font: Times New
Roman
Formatted: Font: Times New
Roman
Formatted: Font: Times New
Roman