|
Lexington Home Page
|
Help
|
About
|
Browse
Search
2006-05-25-ZBA-min
Breadcrumb Navigation:
TownOfLexington-Public
>
WEB PUBLISHED-PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
>
MINUTES-REPORTS-COMMITTEES ARCHIVE
>
Board of Appeals-ZBA
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
2006-05-25-ZBA-min
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/25/2019 11:34:10 AM
Creation date
12/18/2007 12:13:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Archives
Keywords or Subject
Minutes - ZBA - Zoning Board of Appeals
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
May 25, 2006 Minutes 4 <br /> DRAFT MINUTES of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals May 25, 2006 <br /> Present: Chairman — Judith J. Uhrig, Nyles Barnert, Maura L. Sheehan, Arthur C. Smith and <br /> Associate Carolyn C. Wilson <br /> Petition Address: 58 Reed Street <br /> The relief sought is for a Variance in accordance with 135 -35, Table 2, Dimensional Control to <br /> allow side set back of 16.7 -feet instead of the required 20 -feet minimum setback requirement to <br /> construct an addition. <br /> The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:15 PM by reading the legal notice and described <br /> information received from the petitioner relative to the petition. <br /> Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building <br /> Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Zoning <br /> Enforcement Officer, Planning Board and the Development Review Team. No comments were <br /> received. <br /> Peter Scopa, owner of the property, presented the petition giving the background of the home <br /> and the plan for the proposed addition. <br /> The Board had questioned: <br /> • What will happen to current garage; Mr. Scopa explained that it was never used as a <br /> garage and will continue to be used for storage only. <br /> • Had he considered going to the rear. They hadn't considered it because of the extensive <br /> patio work that had been done and the small size of the backyard. <br /> • He is planning no garage to park cars in. He would like to make the driveway wide <br /> enough for 2 cars. <br /> • Would he consider shrinking the addition by 3 feet as to not need a variance. Feels as <br /> though it would look awkward. <br /> There were no questions from the audience. <br /> No one spoke in favor or in opposition. <br /> The hearing was closed at 8:26 pm. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.