2009-10-22-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

BOA Meeting, September 24, 2009 3 Minutes of the Lexington Zoning Board of Appeals Selectmen's Meeting Room, Lexington Town Hall October 22, 2009 Board Members Present: Chairman Nyles N. Barnert, John J. McWeeney, Arthur C. Smith, Carolyn C. Wilson and Martha C. Wood Staff Present: Dianne L. Cornaro, Administrative Clerk and David L. George, Zoning Administrator Petition Address: 33 Cottage Street, Map 48, Lot 267A Prior to the hearing, the petition and supporting data were reviewed by the Building Commissioner, Conservation Administrator, Town Engineer, Health Director, Board of Selectmen, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Administrator and the Historic Districts Commission Clerk. Comments were received from the Building Commissioner and the Zoning Administrator. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:43 pm by reading the legal notice and described information received from the petitioner relative to the petition. Glen M. Lee, owner of the property, presented the petition. Mr. Lee is requesting a variance from section 135 -35, Table 2, Schedule of Dimensional Controls to allow a rear -yard setback of 8.4 -ft. instead of the required 15 -ft. rear -yard setback. He explained that he had received approval previously on this project but had not acted on it. There are no changes from what he originally was doing. The Board questioned Mr. Lee as the whether the house was ever a 2- family home; what was the hardship and also discussed the concern of the property ever being owned by the railroad. Staff explained to the board the building code issues related to expanding a property adjacent to a railroad. Mr. Lee indicated the house had been converted from a two - family house to a single - family house. In describing the overall project, Mr. Lee acknowledged the front porch had been demolished and rebuilt without the benefit of a building permit. He believed the work was correctly done under a building permit allowing interior work. The Board recommended the applicant see a lawyer regarding the railroad issues. A Board member also asked the applicant to explain the addition on the plot plan. There were no questions from the audience. No one in the audience spoke either in favor of or in opposition to the petition. The hearing was closed at 7:58 pm.