Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Building a pool sparks heated zoning debate

June 12, 2024 | Framingham City, Middlesex County, Massachusetts



Black Friday Offer

Get Lifetime Access to Full Government Meeting Transcripts

Lifetime access to full videos, transcriptions, searches, and alerts at a county, city, state, and federal level.

$99/year $199 LIFETIME
Founder Member One-Time Payment

Full Video Access

Watch full, unedited government meeting videos

Unlimited Transcripts

Access and analyze unlimited searchable transcripts

Real-Time Alerts

Get real-time alerts on policies & leaders you track

AI-Generated Summaries

Read AI-generated summaries of meeting discussions

Unlimited Searches

Perform unlimited searches with no monthly limits

Claim Your Spot Now

Limited Spots Available • 30-day money-back guarantee

This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Building a pool sparks heated zoning debate
In a recent government meeting, the board discussed a variance request for the construction of a 16 by 30-foot in-ground pool at 30 Millward Circle. The applicant, Lucas Santos, represented the property owner, who is seeking to build the pool closer to the property lines than zoning regulations typically allow. The request includes variances for side and rear setbacks, as well as a finding for the extension of preexisting nonconforming lot coverage.

Santos explained that the original plan was for a larger pool, but adjustments were made to accommodate the property’s layout. He indicated that the pool would be positioned approximately 17 feet from the house, which is closer than zoning regulations permit. The board members expressed concerns regarding the application, particularly about the lack of detailed responses to the variance questions, which are critical for approval.

Board members emphasized the importance of neighbor input, especially since the proposed pool's location could impact adjacent properties. One neighbor, who lives to the left of the proposed site, stated that they had not been consulted about the plans and expressed concerns about the removal of a tree that straddles their property line.

The board concluded that there was insufficient information to grant the variance at this time. They suggested that the applicant engage in further discussions with neighbors and possibly seek legal or architectural advice to better address the variance requirements. The board agreed to continue the discussion in a future meeting, allowing the applicant time to gather necessary information and community feedback.

View full meeting

This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.

View full meeting

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Massachusetts articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI