Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
April 3, 2013
Landuse Meeting Room
Members present: Chair Ethan Berg, (EB); Ned Douglas, (ND); Shawn Leary Considine, (SLC); Cliff Snyder, (CS), Robert Fuster Sr. (RF)
Staff present: Mary Albertson, Town Planner, MA; Land Use Clerk Peggy Ammendola, (PA)
Lee Bank, 450 Pittsfield Road (Assessors Map 50, Parcel 11), Special Permit Sections 3.1.H.16 and 6.12, Drive-Through Facilities, and Site Plan Approval under Section 9.5.
SLC disclosed that as an attorney and with her office located in Lee, she works frequently with Lee Bank. She offered to recuse herself from the Board if anyone had an objection to her participation. There was no objection.
Making the presentation was Attorney Phillip Heller; David Bruce, President of Lee Bank; Matt Puntin of SK Design; and Ross Kunzman, owner of the building at 450 Pittsfield Road.
Also present was Susan Brown of Lee Bank.
Attorney Heller reviewed the petition, site plan and photos. The proposed location is at the south side of building. Lee Bank has a lease agreement with Mr. Kunzman contingent on the approval of the applicant’s request. The space is 3,000 square feet. The only changes proposed are a new door in the front and a drive-up. The property is pre-existing, non-conforming. The existing parking provides more spaces than what is required.
Mr. Puntin said that the main component of this petition is the drive-up teller. Currently there is an existing driveway and the proposal is to expand to two lanes to facilitate the drive-up. A landscape retaining wall will be constructed and there will be a privacy fence to provide a screen for the abutting residential properties. Mr. Puntin said that the vehicle count on Pittsfield Road will increase between 1 and 2 percent with this use, and that site distance is sufficient for safe ingress and egress. The ATM will be accessible inside the bank. It is expected that water use for this business will be will about 75 gallons a day and there will be a new water service for a sprinkler system.
Attorney Heller concluded that the building meets the criteria of special permits, is consistent with the town’s master plan and complies with the site plan review.
Mr. Bruce said that Lee Bank has had a growth period and there are 450 customers of Lee Bank who live in Lenox, making this convenient for the customers. Regarding the stacking of cars at the drive-up, Mr. Bruce stated that five cars stacked has been the max at their drive-up locations, which is unusually high. This location can accommodate six cars. He also said that it is expected that this location will add 4-5 jobs.
Letters, all supportive of the petition, were read into the record. They were from the following:
Pam Roberts
Dan Holmes
Jim Nejaime
Marilyn Haus
Charles Flint
Joseph Toole
CS made a motion to approve the Site Plan and grant the Special Permit as presented. ND seconded the motion and the Board voted to agree 5-0.
Robert and Nancy Dacey, 305 Walker Street (Map 4, Parcel 12), Special Permit from Sections 3.3.5 and 3.3.6 of the Zoning Bylaws to reconstruct a single family home in the approximate location of a single family home that was demolished in 2004.
Representing the petitioners was Attorney Jeff Lynch.
No correspondence was received. There were three abutters present. They were Ken Lagarce, Rachel Krawet and Dr. Jerry Errico.
Attorney Lynch gave a history of the property from when the Dacey’s purchased it in April 2004, just after Lenox’s zoning bylaws were modified which then made this property non-conforming. Due to the condition of the home on the property, the new owners determined that it was not economically feasible to restore and fully intended to rebuild. The state of the economy at that time was not conducive to reconstruction.
There had been a previous petition for a variance, but the Dacey’s withdrew. The proposal at that time was for the structure to be further back on the lot.
There are wetlands on the property and the Dacey’s have received approval from the Conservation Commission.
With the application, the Dacey’s would like to build within an envelope which meets all of the setbacks. They do not have the 150 feet of frontage to be conforming, but instead have 110 feet. The location of the proposed structure would be very close to the original footprint. They wish to build a two story home, up to 2900 square feet, with possibly a walk out basement.
Mr. Lagarce said that he did not have an objection to this petition, stating that the withdrawn petition had proposed to place the structure too close or on the sewer easement. He said that the Dacey’s had not been aware of the easement. Rachel Krawet, stated that the envelope is too big, and she is concerned mostly about the placement of the foundation, i.e., if it is placed at an angle versus parallel to the road. The view is also a concern for her. Dr. Errico, concerned about his view of October Mountain, stated that he didn’t have an issue with the
house as long as it didn’t interfere with his view.
SLC made a motion to grant the petitioner’s request and RF seconded the motion. The Board voted to agree 5-0.
It was noted that the application submitted included a plan dated August 11, 2004 in which a building envelope was indicated and highlighted in yellow. This envelope meets the setback requirements and the house can be located anywhere within that envelope.
RF made a motion to adjourn and CS seconded the motion. The Board voted to agree 5-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 pm.
Approve Minutes: The March 20, 2013 minutes were approved 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
