 |
|
Town of Lenox
Zoning Board of Appeals
Land Use Meeting Room
Minutes
August 15, 2007
Members present: Chair Pam Kueber, PK; Cliff Snyder, CS; Jim Overmyer, JO; Shawn Leary Considine, SLC; Daniel Mintz, DM
Meeting was called to order at 7:10 pm
7:15 p.m. Ryan, Valerie, 35 Cliffwood St., Map 46 Parcel 3, SP under Section 5.5 to extend existing porch, demo rear staircase and replace with new staircase; Variance from section 8.4 to allow for greater lot coverage, from 40% to 41.8%. (District allows 20%.) Making the presentation was Attorney Phil Heller and Mark Smith, the designer of the project.
Mr. Heller stated that the plans are to renovate the existing rear stair case, which is violation of the building code and construct a small addition. The house is non-conforming. The footprint will increase by 104.11 square feet.
Mr. Smith presented the elevations and floor plan.
Two letters were received that were in support of the project. They were from Nate Winstanley and Eileen and Marc Rosenthal. No other letters were received nor were abutters present.
SLC made a motion to grant the petition as presented and JO seconded the motion. The Board agreed 5-0.
7:30 p.m. Buccaneer Development, Inc., 12 East St., Map 4 Parcel 34, SP under Section 9.6 to construct 16 duplex buildings containing two dwelling units and two buildings each containing one single family dwelling unit. Units restricted to person 55 years of age or older.
PK explained to those present that this is the first time that there have been two Special Permits and separate factors before two Town boards at the same time.
There were 26 residents at this presentation.
Making the presentation were:
Attorney Emil George
Jim Scalise of SK Design
Don Ferris, architect with Bradley Architects
Also present to represent the applicant were:
Sarah Schulze of SK Design
Jonathan Griffis
Jason Berger
Mr. George began the presentation by stating that there is a Purchase and Sale Agreement between Bernard Starr, owner of the property, and Mr. Griffis. Mr. Starr will retain 1.1 acres of this parcel with the remainder being proposed for development with condominium ownership and open space. The planned reconfiguration of this property will create frontage of 150 feet for Mr. Starr and 150 feet of frontage for the proposed development.
The plans are for a retirement community within 18 buildings that will be served by Town sewer.
Mr. George explained the evolutionary process as a result of meetings with the Conservation Commission and Planning Board, abutters and Town Planner Joellyn Warren.
Mr. Scalise discussed the following:
Conservation Restriction
Open space plan
Erosion control
Drainage
Utilities
Traffic Study
Lighting
The proposed driveway is to be 680 feet in length. Fire Chief Dan Clifford has reviewed the plans and has stated he wants 4 hydrants rather than the 2 proposed.
Mr. Scalise stated that this project is as clustered as it can be under the Retirement Community provision of the Zoning Bylaw.
Mr. Ferry said that each unit footprint would be 4000 square feet. There would be full basements.
There was also discussion about potentially including 4 units that could be classified as affordable.
Public Comment:
Jim Herrick
Val Herrick
The Board decided to have a site visit and continued hearing.
Site Visit: August 20, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Continued Hearing: September 5, 2007 at 7:40 pm
8:30 p.m. Griffin, Tracy and Holly, 35 Brown St., Map 4 Parcel 50, Variance from Section 2 Definitions, Fencing, eight foot privacy fence.
Mr. and Mrs. Griffin presented their petition. They also had photos to show the topography of the property in the location of the proposed fence. They explained that there is an incline between the properties and a fence built by right at six feet in height would not be effective. The petitioners submitted a petition they had neighbors sign. The petition stated the Griffin’s proposal to erect an 8 foot privacy fence that would be 56 feet in length and two feet higher than the zoning bylaw allows. Twelve neighbors signed the petition supporting the proposal. Additionally four letters from abutters, all in support, were submitted.
CS suggested the petitioners plant arborvitae shrubs that would create a more affective barrier, but the petitioner prefers the fence which would be an instant barrier.
Citing topography, the Board said a Variance would be in order.
SLC made a motion to grant the Variance for a fence that would be 56 feet long and 8 feet high. JO seconded the motion and the Board approved 5-0.
SLC made a motion to impose a condition that the fence height starts at the height of six feet near the street, for a length of 9 feet up to the 56 feet length of 8 foot high fencing. DM seconded the motion. The Board approved 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| ||
 |
|
  |