2021-06-10-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

A Board Member, Martha C. Wood, questioned the basements egress problem (Mr. Goldberg stated according to the building code in order to have a bedroom they would need egress windows. There are no egress windows, they are too high and too small.) A Board Member, Nyles N. Barnert, stated the comment for the Conservation administrator stated it would a challenge to do something in the backyard. That is different from saying you can't do something. He stated his concern for making a vote before they go before the Conservation Commission (Mr. Goldberg stated they are happy to continue and go before the Conservation Commission. They haven't done a soil report. Doing something in the back would create an issue of rear setbacks and require a rear setback variance). Chair, Ralph D. Clifford, stated it appears a portion of the lot in the lower left corner is within setback but outside of wetland area which seems to be available for development. He asked if there has been any attempt to look at that in terms of other possibilities (Mr. Saltzman stated it could be considered but it would not give them the living space they need). Mr. Clifford stated it looks like there could be development done outside of the wetland area. If it hasn't been examined it mitigates against the hardship. No one is saying they can't have a second floor. A half story is limited in size as a matter of right. In terms of hardship it is comparing a 2.5 story which can be built by right with a 3 story that cannot be done without a variance. That mitigates the quantity of the hardship. He then stated the current square footage on the first floor is 1,872 and its 40%. He stated they could have a 750 square foot half story which is a difference of 400 square feet and again greatly mitigates the hardship. Mr. Clifford asked where the hardship is (Mr. Goldberg stated it is not being able to reasonably use the property in the manner that is allowed by the zoning requirements due to the circumstances with the topography. The zoning code cuts of the story issue. The basement is not a livable space, it is one story. The hardship is limiting the economic use of the property by constraining it). Mr. Clifford stated this is not being caused by the zoning. It is being caused because the building exists. They could rebuild a house that is in the same footprint. Xiamoma Lu, property owner, questioned if the Chair was suggesting they tear down the house and rebuild. They talked to a few builders and were told because they are so close to the water it would be limited and no way could they build a new house. Economically it is not possible. He then described the basement conditions. Mr. Clifford stated the question is whether or not they are going to allow them to build a bigger and taller house than the zoning bylaws allow. The Board needs to explore whether or not this proposal fits within the strict requirements in terms of dealing with Variances. Mr. Goldberg stated generally where only dimensional Variances are involved even a very minor hardship can justify it. A use Variance is a completely different discussion. There is precedence here. The dimensional Variance is a technicality in the Lexington code under height. Mr. Clifford stated one of the major issues the Town is facing is how to keep housing so that is available for all economic levels. One of the ways to do this is by insisting it be of a certain size, the 2.5 story rule. They have chosen as a Town to implement these other considerations in the Zoning ordinance. He questioned how this does not just add another multimillion house (Mr.