1980-12-18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

BOARD OF APPEALS December 18, 1980 7:30 p.m. The Board of Appeals held a regular meeting in the Selectmen's Meeting Room. Present and acting on hearings: Ruth Morey, Chairman Also present: Eric T. Clark, Woodruff M. Brodhead Associate Irving H. Mabee Natalie H. Riffin Thomas G. Taylor Public hearings were held on the following petitions. 1734 Mass. Ave., Gaye Pickrel, d/b/a Goodys to Go - special permit for take out food. 222 Lincoln St., Simon Prensky - variance of dimensional controls for an addition. 5 Raymond St., Winfield S. Caouette - special permit for protruding sign (CB district). 150 East St.,'Doran Greenhouses, Inc. - renewal of special permits for operation of a roadside stand for the sale of flowers, plants and other nursery and farm goods; also for the sale of Christmas trees, wreaths, etc. in the appropriate season. Lawn Ave. & Blossom St., Frederick D and Richard R. Corazzini and Joel Greenstein and Donald Jenkins, Jr., d/b/a JIG Home Builders - special permit for a cluster develop ' ment for 12 house lots. Decisions filed with the Town Clerk. 1734 Mass. Ave. - SP granted unanimously. 222 Lincoln St. - V granted unanimously. 5 Raymond St. - SP granted unanimously. 150 East St. - SP renewed through 12/31/82 - unanimously. Corazzini et al - SP granted unanimously. Erik Lund, having been invited by the Board to appear before the Board, acknowledged that he would be happy to represent the Board of Appeals in the case - Lexington Planning Board v. Lexington Board of Appeals - "Butts" - 258 Marrett Rd. He said that he had been in touch with Pat Hagedorn (attorney for the Butts) and obtained copies of the relevant information from her file. Her initial impression on a review of the papers and the relevant statute and provisions of the zoning by- law is that the Butts' petition placed before the Board a question of fact, i.e. whether or not the adjacent lots had been combined, that the Board had the power to decide that question of fact, and that the decision made by the Board is justifiable. He said, "This is strictly a preliminary impression, but I believe that the case is not as clear-cut as Palmer & Dodge claims. In June, 1967 the Planning Board's article to do away with the protection of the zoning by-law for these contiguous lots which were in a single ownership was presented to Town Meeting by me. It failed and this probably accounts for the strong recollection of the event." Board members expressed gratitude and thanks to Erik Lund. The meeting adjourned at 9:53 p.m. R;,M tfullysubmittedt Evelyn F. Cole, Adm. Clerk, Board of Appeals