Town of Lenox
Planning Board
Minutes
August 22, 2006
Land Use Meeting Room
(The August 8, 2006 meeting was cancelled. The next scheduled meeting is September 12, 2006.)
Members present: Chair Kim Flynn, Kate McNulty-Vaughan, Joe Kellogg
Absent with notification: Steve Sample
Absent without notification: Pam Mackie
Also in attendance was Joellyn Warren of Berkshire Regional Planning Commission.
6:30 p.m. Minutes of July 25, 2006: Joe made a motion to approve the minutes and Kate seconded the motion. The Board approved 3-0.
7:00 p.m. Emil George, Informal-CVS
Attorney Emil George, representing CVS Pharmacy, was present. Joining Mr. George in presenting this proposal was David Morello, of Gershman Brown Associates. They were seeking the initial reaction of the Planning Board for a proposal to build a CVS at the present location of Knights Inn, a motel located on the east side of Pittsfield Road between the Howard Johnson and Wagon Wheel motels. The Knights Inn would be demolished. The size of the parcel is 1.64 acres. An easement will be sought from the owners of the Howard Johnson motel to provide for the 30 foot setback needed for parking.
The parking set back from the highway is 15 feet and the proposal is for 61 parking spaces versus the required 43 parking spaces. Mr. George said that they would need two curb cuts. As this lot has frontage on Routes 7/20, a State highway, the applicants would have to get approval from Mass Highway for curb cuts. The preferred traffic pattern would be to loop around the building, feeling this would be better for traffic flow.
Joellyn reminded the Board and the applicants that there are amendments to the Zoning By-Law, involving a change in the Site Plan Review process, which could affect the applicant’s petition. The amendments were approved at the Annual Town Meeting in May 2006, but are awaiting final approval of the Attorney General. Copies of the amendments were given to the applicants.
The proposed structure is a Cape style with simulated shingles and dormers and will have a drive-thru for dropping off and picking up prescriptions.
Board members said they would prefer the existing location of CVS, on the west side of Pittsfield Rd. (Hwy 7 & 20) which is where Price Chopper is located. The applicant does prefer that location as well, but said that they have been unable to negotiate such an expansion with the property owners and management of that shopping center. Board members queried as to whether drive ups are allowed since they are not a listed use in the Zoning Bylaw, but it was noted that Lenox National Bank , Burger King, and Legacy Banks, all have drive ups. CVS feels there is a need for a drive up to accommodate older residents and parents of small children.
Mr. George said that their purpose in attending the meeting was to discuss with the Board the viability of this project in this location. He feels that it is reasonable.
The Board voiced concern that this use is substantially more intensive from a traffic generation perspective than the existing motel. The Board feels the parking is excessive and that this creates more impervious surfaces. A suggestion was made to reduce the parking and to plant trees in islands in some of the space.
The applicant will look into these suggestions:
· With regards to the easement from Howard Johnson’s, it is believed that the grantor’s property can not be made any more non-conforming through the granting of such an easement. The easement is required to meet the setback for the parking.
· Substantial vegetation in front and along both side property lines.
· Change the southern curb cut from two-way to one-way in only.
· Traffic studies should be done to study the increased impact.
· Walkways between abutting properties should be considered.
7:30 p.m. Tim Face, Form A, 25 East Street, Map 4 Parcel 22 (Rescheduled from July 25 and August 8) Presenting his application was Tim Face. In November Tim purchased the corner lot abutting his home at East and Walker Street. There is a 59 foot strip adjoining his driveway of his existing home that he wishes to take from the newly purchased lot and add to the lot where his home is located. This will reduce the corner lot from approximately 4 acres to 3.3 acres.
Joe made a motion to approve the Form A and Kate seconded the motion. The Board approved 3-0.
7:45 p.m. Foresight, John Campetti, Stoneledge, Form A. Rob Hoogs was present with two applications, both of which involve the Stoneledge property.
The first application involves 1.62 acres owned by Judith Pavlosky that she wishes to convey to Tom Spencer who owns the Stoneledge subdivision. This property abuts the Stoneledge property and does not have frontage. The result is that the total 1.62 acres will then be added to three lots that are a part of Stoneledge. These lots will then be reconfigured. The reconfiguration will increase the size of the three lots, going from .5 and .6 acres to one acre lots, making the lots more saleable.
Joe made a motion to approve the Form A for Pavlosky and Kate seconded the motion. The Board approved 3-0.
At this point Kim invoked the Rule of Necessity. There were only three of the Board members present, and a vote requires three. Kim works for Phil Heller, an attorney who represents Tom Spencer.
The second Form A is to reconfigure eight existing lots of 16 total lots in Stoneledge. No new building lots are being created, but the property lines are being revised. All are becoming more conforming.
Joe made a motion to approve the Stoneledge Form A and Kate seconded the motion. The Board approved 3-0.
8:00 p.m. Joellyn Warren, BRPC-Continued Open Space
Joellyn started the discussion by inquiring of the Board if they had reviewed the Town’s Five Year Action Plan and Open Space and Recreation Vision that had been handed out at the previous meeting. She discussed the need for revamping the coordination section of the Five-Year Action Plan. There is a shortage of committed volunteers and too many committees proposed by the Plan. Other agencies outside of Lenox are already doing environmental stewardships. It is felt that the Planning Board should have more in-depth discussions about general open space protection needs. There has been little progress on the previous Plan’s goals and objectives.
In looking over the materials, the group felt that the three tier approach is lengthy and needs to be abbreviated and be more specific. An important goal would be to determine how to have both affordable housing and land preservation.
The Board discussed both the development of a survey that could be sent out quickly as well as how to best reach all who live in Lenox---property owners, renters, second home owners, etc. The Town Census would be the best source of addresses and second home owners could be identified through tax records. The information could also be put on the website.
Joe, having been involved in the previous survey, suggested the Board use that survey as a base. Creating a survey takes a considerable amount of work, and it would be wise to start with it.
Joellyn made the following suggestions about the next survey:
1. Have fewer questions
2. Limit to two pages
3. Multiple choice
4. Ask housing questions
5. Have a focused meeting whether the vision and objectives are still valid and if they can be consolidated.
6. Have a draft survey and have community representatives’ review.
An All Boards meeting is scheduled for September 26. Part of that meeting will probably have discussion regarding the Community Preservation Act plus discussion and input on the survey.
The Select Board is looking for information on income, house prices, needs, household sizes, and age groups to be included on the survey. It was suggested that Realtors be surveyed as well regarding their experience and opinion of housing needs.
Joellyn will speak to Town Manager Greg Federspiel and get a draft to the Planning Board by the first meeting of September. The Board can review, but not discuss among themselves until the meeting later in September. She will also look for the 1999 survey and get a copy to the members.
The Board had a brief discussion regarding the possibility of starting meetings at 5:30 p.m. versus 6:30 p.m. This will be determined later.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
