Laserfiche WebLink
January 10, 2008 ZBA Minutes 7 <br /> Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals <br /> Selectmen's Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall <br /> December 13, 2007 and January 10, 2008 <br /> Board Members Present: Chairman — Arthur C. Smith, Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, <br /> Judith J. Uhrig and Carolyn C. Wilson <br /> Staff present: David George, Zoning Administrator and Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk. <br /> Petition Address: 94 Reed Street; Map and Lot: 0072000009 <br /> The relief sought is for the following relief from the Zoning By -law (Ch. 135 of the Code of the <br /> Town of Lexington): a variance in accordance with section 135 -35, Table 2 Dimensional <br /> Controls to allow a front yard setback of 13.6 -feet instead of the required minimum 30 foot front <br /> yard setback, and a special permit in accordance with section 135 -29A to modify an existing <br /> non - conforming structure at 94 Reed Street. <br /> This hearing had been postponed from December 13, 2007 due to bad weather. Chairman Arthur <br /> Smith and associate members Jill Hai and David Williams had met to postpone the hearing until <br /> January 10, 2008. <br /> The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:04 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 Agent, Board of Selectmen, <br /> Zoning Administrator, Planning Board and the Historic District Commission. Comments were <br /> received from the Zoning Administrator. <br /> Stephanie Littell, owner of the property, presented the petition along with the architect, Richard <br /> Leaf. The petitioner seeks to construct a porch on the front of the structure and to add an <br /> addition over the garage. <br /> Mr. Leaf explained the design of the porch extension to the Board. <br /> The Board asked questions about the design of the porch and the hardship for the variance. The <br /> Board and the applicant discussed changing the design of the porch to be more conforming. <br /> There were no questions from the audience. <br /> No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition. <br /> The hearing was closed at 8:25 pm. <br />