2022-12-08-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Virtual, Via Zoom December 8, 2022 Board Members: Chair – Ralph D. Clifford, Martha C. Wood, Norman P. Cohen and James Osten Administrative Staff: Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner Julie Krakauer Moore, Zoning Administrator and Sharon Coffey, Administrative Clerk Address: 99 Meriam Road The petitioner is requesting VARIANCE in accordance with the Zoning By-Law (Chapter 135 of the Code of Lexington) section(s) 135-9.2.2.2 and 135-4.1.1 Table 2 (Schedule of Dimensional Controls) to allow a side yard setback of 6.25’ instead of the required 12’. The petitioner submitted the following information with the application: Nature and Justification, Topographical Plan, Plot Plan, Plans, Elevations and Gross Floor Area Calculations. Also submitted was letters from abutters, a by-right comparison and reasons in support letter. Prior to the meeting, the petitions and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Board of Selectmen, the Planning Director, the Historic District Commission Clerk, Historical Commission, Economic Development, and the Zoning Administrator. Comments were received from the Zoning Administrator, Building Commissioner, Engineering Department and Planning Department. Presenter: William Erickson, Architect at 1723 Massachusetts Ave, on behalf of Pan Wu and Liang Liang The Hearing was opened at 7:06 pm. William Erickson presented the petition. He showed the plans and stated the request is to allow to expand the existing one-car garage to become a two-car garage. The existing garage leads to difficulty in juggling two cars, complicates snow removal, and car outside are subject to sap and needles from trees. They explored a by-right solution but this solution was not a good solution because between Adams Street and Hill Road all the houses have the garage facing the street. They would need to carve out backyard due to a sloping grade and it would not fit with the neighborhood. Number of houses’ that visually look into the backyard. Financially this by-right option would be very expensive. The proposal is more compatible with the neighborhood and the driveway wouldn’t have to change. He discussed the low impact on neighbors of the proposed plan. Part of the proposal is to do work on the second floor but that is all conforming. They are trying to keep the character of the existing house. The hardship is that there is a serious underground issue. The land slopes from Meriam Street down and water flows down. There is an existing system now that collects the water. It would present a financial hardship to abandoned this system. Storm water is regulated and controlled. There are other environmental concerns in terms of affecting vegetation. This is a hardship to the community. A Board Member, Martha C. Wood, questioned if there were comments from abutters (There were 9 letters submitted).