1981-03-02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD MEETING March 2, 1981 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Wheaton, with members Friedman, Nichols, Sandy, Sorensen, Planning Director Bowyer and Assistant Planner Asen present. DETERMINATION OF PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL 36. 45 Shade Street, Form A-81/5: A plan showing land on Shade Street and Fairbanks Road was reviewed. Questions were raised about the significance of the line separating two lots in the ownership of the applicant. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Friedman, it was voted unanimously to table the matter until clarification is obtained. ARTICLES FOR 1981 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING The Board met with the following members of the Board of Appeals: Mrs. Morey, Mrs. Riffin, and Messrs. Brodhead, Clarke, Mabee, and Taylor, to discuss cer- tain articles. Article 16, Swimming Pools: There was discussion as to whether to continue to require that all swimming pools receive special permits from the Board of Appeals. Mr. Clarke said that the special permit procedure adds to the work- load of the Board of Appeals and he thought it should be handled by the Building Commissioner. Mr. Sorensen said that in view of the water shortage, he thought it inappropriate to simplify procedures which might have the effect of encouraging more pools and greater use of water. No member of the Board of Appeals could recall a special permit for a swimming pool having been denied. Article 17, Non -conforming Structures: The Board of Appeals offered revised word- ing prepared by associate member William Hays, and suggested that it be inserted as a new paragraph in order to differentiate between non -conforming one- and two-family dwellings and other types of buildings. The Planning Board agreed with these suggestions and the two Boards were in agreement. Article 18, Non -complying Buildings: The Planning Board explained that it intended to delete the words in the fourth and fifth lines of the first paragraph that referred to the Building Commissioner issuing a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. There was discussion as to whether the first part of the article, which states that the buildings would be considered to comply if three conditions are_met would be acceptable to lending institutions. It was decided the best way to find out would be to trytheprovision in practice. Members of both Boards agreed with the article as corrected. The Board of Appeals indicated that it would be appropriate to include in the Planning Board's report that the two Boards had met and concurred on Articles 17 and 18. Article 24, Certificate of Zoning Compliance: There was discussion as to whether the Planning Board should give its formal vote to concur in granting a Certifi- cate of Zoning Compliance. It was noted that the revised wording included a requirement that a copy of each certificate be furnished to the Board of Appeals. Members of the Board of Appeals left the meeting at this point.