Town of Lenox
Zoning Board of Appeals
Land Use Meeting Room
Minutes
March 4, 2009
Members present: Chair Pam Kueber, PK; Ethan Berg, EB; Ned Douglas, ND; Robert Fuster, RF; Sue Lyman, SL
Staff present: Peggy Ammendola, Land Use Clerk, PA
EB recused himself as he is the owner of Ethylwynde.
Ethylwynde, Yokun Avenue, Map 12 Parcels 2 & 2-1, Review of Decisions regarding petition filed April 11, 2006, Public Hearing May 3, 2006, continued to May 31, 2006. Decision meeting May 31, 2006. There was a review meeting on Nov. 1, 2006, but was continued to 05/02/07. This Decision has been appealed therefore continued from May 2, 2007, November 7, 2007 and September 3, 2008.
EB told the Board that there has not been a resolution to the appeal therefore he wishes to continue the review. ND made a motion to continue to February 3, 2010 and RF seconded the motion. The Board voted 5-0 to continue.
RF made a motion to close this meeting and ND seconded the motion. The Board voted 4-0 to close.
7:00 pm Margaret M. McTeigue and Tom C. Wessel, 22 Cliffwood Street (Map 46, Parcel 72), Special Permit under Sections 3.3.3 and 7.2.1 to allow an accessory dwelling unit in a pre-existing and nonconforming accessory structure.
EB rejoined the Board to sit in on this hearing.
ND disclosed that he teaches the son of Ms. McTeigue and Mr. Wessel. There were no objections to him sitting in on this hearing.
Presenting the petition was the owner’s contractor, Dan Satori, and the owners of the property, Margaret McTeigue and Tom Wessel.
Joe Kellogg, Chair of the Planning Board, was also present.
Mr. Satori told the Board that the accessory structure is a barn of approximately 1600 square feet which has been restored. About 800 square feet is being used by the owners as an art studio and office. The proposed accessory dwelling unit is on the second level and consists of two bedrooms, one of which has a small office space, and one bath. The purpose of this space is to accommodate guests of the owners, not to be offered as a rental unit.
The owners were given building permits to repair and restore the structure and upon final inspection of the space the Building Inspector noted that bedroom furniture was in place in the two bedrooms. This triggered the Building Inspector’s revocation of the permit This then required the owners to appeal to the Zoning Board for a Special Permit for an Accessory Dwelling Unit.
PK expressed her concern that the upstairs 800 s.f. not be later combined with the downstairs 800 s.f. as this would be in violation of the bylaw.
EB queried the reason for this request as there is not a kitchen therefore he does not feel that a permit from the ZBA is necessary.
Discussion ensued regarding the definition of a dwelling unit. The Board was concerned that this was not a “dwelling” unit.
A letter from abutter Susan Danish of 131 Main Street dated Feb. 27, 2009 was read in which she objected to this use as it would impinge upon her enjoyment of her property. She wants the petitioners to provide screening at their expense between her home and the carriage barn. Additionally Ms. Danish claims that the reconstruction of the structure has exacerbated flooding to her property. The proponents responded to both issues as follows:
1.) The owners state that the people who would use this space to sleep are guests who have been guests in the main house all along. This just permits them to have privacy. The building is pre-existing. Ms. Danish has recently purchased her home. Plants for screening would not survive as the ground is too wet.
2.) There were a number of anecdotal example given regarding the history of ponding at Ms. Danish’s property. The Board concurred that this is not a zoning issue.
ND made a motion to continue the hearing to March 18, 2009 at 7:00 pm to permit the Board to consult with the Building Inspector about the definition of “dwelling” and applicability of the ADU permit in this case. RF seconded the motion and the Board voted to continue 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
