2013-09-12 ZBA Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

BOA Meeting September 12, 2013 2 Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Selectmen’s Meeting Room September 12, 2013 Board Members Present: Chairman – Carolyn C. Wilson, Jeanne K. Krieger, Leo P. McSweeney, David G. Williams and Martha C. Wood Staff Present: David George, Zoning Administrator, Town of Lexington’s Legal Counsel Attorney Mina Makarious Address: 68 Winter Street, Map 88, Lot 80 This hearing had been continued from August 8, 2013. The Chairman continued the hearing by asking the applicant and the Attorneys if the parties had met and a settlement had been agreed on. SPECIAL PERMIT The applicant is requesting a in accordance with U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts, Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-12261-GAO and the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section 135-4.3.4 and section 135- 9.4.2 to allow a 50 ft. antenna and supporting structure instead of the maximum allowed 40 ft. antenna and supporting structure. The Town of Lexington’s Legal Counsel Attorney Mina Makarious was present for the hearing. Fred Hoppengarten spoke on behalf of the owner of the property, Mauri Niininen stated the position they take is that negotitions were done with the Town of Lexington and they had come to an agreement on the settlement with the Town. Attorney Arthur Goldberg on behalf of the neighbors opposing the granting of this special permit requested the Board not to go forward with the settlement. The parties have made an effort but have been unsuccessful in coming together on the settlement. John Cahoy of 5 Magnolia Lane, Jay Kansara of 8 Magnolia Lane and Brent Feldman of 6 Magnolia Lane spoke in opposition to the settlement. The Chairman asked for the Boards comments as to how they would like to proceed with this hearing. She was hoping to hear a reason to continue but not hearing any reason from the parties involved she would like a motion from the Board. A Board member said he was disappointed that he did not see any movement towards a settlement between the 2 parties and felt a motion to reject the settlement needed to be made. A Board member asked how the motion needed to be worded and Attorney Makarious advised the Board that it could be motioned anyway as long it was understood what the motion meant.