Town of Lenox
Planning Board
January 25, 2011
Land Use Meeting Room
Members present: Chair Joseph A. Kellogg , JK; Vice Chair Steve Sample, SS ; Ken Fowler. KF; Kate McNulty-Vaughan, KMV; and Gary Schiff, GS.
Staff present: Mary Albertson, Town Planner, MA
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm.
Approval Not Required Plans: No plans presented.
Discussion of The Frederick, LLC ZBA Application: JK explained that the new owner of The Frederick (a.k.a. Kemble Inn) wishes to amend previously granted use variances and to seek a special permit from the ZBA as a Great Estate Inn for outdoor functions. Robert Akroyd, Jeff Lynch and Jim Harwood, representing the applicant, were present. Mr. Akroyd said the original variances allowed for uses that the new owner does not wish to continue such as three apartments and a retail use. JK questioned why the owner would discontinue these uses. Mr. Akroyd said the owner realizes that there needs to be give and take. By eliminating prior uses allowed by variance, he hopes to gain support for new uses. Mr. Akroyd gave an overview of the proposed project which include a separate innkeeper’s residence, a new pool and
an area for outdoor functions. Mr. Akroyd also said there are issues regarding the original parking area since a portion of that area has since been sold. Discussion ensued on whether the Board wanted to offer formal comments to the ZBA on the application. JK noted that the purpose of the Great Estate Bylaw was to preserve historic “cottages” such as this building even though there is some question as to whether it is specifically included as a Great Estate in the Zoning Bylaw. SS said there had been discussion last year when the Great Estate Inn bylaw was adopted about adding properties to be considered as eligible. It was noted that the Building Commissioner has requested an opinion from Town Counsel as to whether the subject property is included in the Bylaw as a Great Estate. The consensus of the members was to table this matter pending receipt of the opinion from Town Counsel.
Review Correspondence: Decisions and notices of public hearings from abutting communities, as well as other correspondence were reviewed. MA made a brief report on applications seeking funding from the CPA fund.
Minutes: KF made a motion to approve the minutes of December 14, 2010. GS seconded the motion and the Board voted 4-0-1 to approve. SS abstained as he was not at that meeting.
SS made a motion to approve the minutes of January 11, 2011. KMV seconded the motion and the Board voted 3-0-2 to approve. JK and KF abstained as they were not at that meeting.
Public Informational Meeting: JK opened a public informational meeting at 6:30 pm to hear input on proposed amendments to the Zoning Bylaw. Building Commissioner William Thornton as well as citizens Mark Smith and James Biancolo were in attendance. JK provided a brief review of each of the proposed amendments:
Item 1 – Outdoor Dining
This amendment proposes removal of the regulation of outdoor dining from the Zoning Bylaw and instead have the Board of Selectmen regulate it through adoption of a General Bylaw. It was noted that we are waiting for comments from Town Counsel on the actual language.
Item 2 – Garages, Accessory Buildings, and Structures in Residential Districts
This amendment changes the definition of garages so that they are considered accessory buildings and that detached and attached structures are treated the same. Mr. Smith asked for clarification regarding the definition for garage. Discussion ensued regarding revisions and the consensus of the members was to remove the phrase: “and owned or operated by residents of nearby dwelling units”.
Item 3 – Signs on Public Land
This amendment removes the Planning Board from having a review role in the granting of permission for such signs since past experience has shown that such review has had little or no impact on the final decision. Mr. Biancolo said he is concerned about removing the provision for Planning Board recommendation which he believes is very important.
Item 4 – Customary Home Occupation
This amendment would amend the definition so that such occupations would not be restricted to those presently listed and would provide some flexibility to consider a wide range of occupations as long as they are in harmony with the neighborhood and have limited impact.
Item 5 – Accessory Uses
This amendment corrects a typographical error.
Item 6 – Reconstruction after Catastrophe or Demolition
This amendment is intended to clear up confusion regarding the procedure for reconstruction of existing structures after demolition or catastrophe.
Mr. Biancolo said he would like to offer additional comments regarding Item 2 and asked for clarification regarding the proposed Footnote 7. Mr. Thornton offered input regarding what constitutes a structure in residential districts. Discussion ensued regarding tents. KMV is concerned that many residents do not know that they need to get a permit to have a tent. Mr. Thornton said that local tent companies are aware of the regulations and obtain the necessary permits.
Due to the lack of attendance, it was the consensus of the members that a second public informational meeting on the proposals should be scheduled, possibly for the second Board meeting in February.
KF made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:12 pm. SS seconded the motion and the Board voted 5-0 to approve.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Albertson
| 
