2007-11-08-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

November 8, 2007 Minutes 3 Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Selectmen's Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall November 8, 2007 Board Members Present: Chairman — Arthur C. Smith, Nyles N. Barnert and Associate Members Leo P. McSweeney, David Williams and Martha Wood Staff present: David George, Zoning Administrator and Dianne Cornaro, Administrative Clerk. Petition Address: 15 Hunt Road, Map and Lot 0048000010 The relief sought is for a variance in accordance with section 135 -35, Table 2: Schedule of Dimensional Controls of the Zoning By -law (CH. 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington) to allow front yard set back of 25.25 -feet instead of the rquired 30 -feet front yard set back. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:48 PM by reading the legal notice and described information received from the petitioner relative to the petition. Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Agent, Board of Selectmen, Zoning Administrator, Planning Board and the Historic District Commission. Comments were received from the Conservation Administrator and the Zoning Administrator. William Erickson, Architect for the project presented the petition for the owner, Peter and Maureen McAvoy. Mr. Erickson explained the construction plans for the two -story addition and portico. Mr. Erickson stated that the existing house is nonconforming on the lot; the section of the structure that would be affected by the variance is within the front yard setback. They are seeking a variance to construct the portico in the area of the existing front steps. Mr. Erickson explained the hardship for the variance as the uniquely shaped lot that falls at the 90- degree bend at Hunt Road, and topography issues affecting the lot. . The Board clarified the relief needed and questioned the design of the foyer and the steps. Board members were interested in whether the front steps would be covered, whether the overhang over the second floor addition was in violation of zoning, and clarification of the relief sought. There were no questions from the audience. No one spoke in favor or in opposition of the petition. The hearing was closed at 7:57 PM.