Zoning Board of Appeals
Minutes
February 12, 2014
Auditorium
Members present: Chair Ethan Berg, (EB); Cliff Snyder, (CS) Robert Fuster Sr. (RF); Robert Fuster Jr., (RFjr); Ned Douglas, (ND)
Absent with notification: Shawn Leary Considine, (SLC)
Staff present: Land Use Clerk Peggy Ammendola, (PA); Mary Albertson, (MA)
Christine M. Schaefer, 31 Old Town Way, (Map 39, Parcel 46).~ Special Permit under Zoning Bylaw Section 3.3.5 to allow the stairway and landing, or in the alternative a Variance under Section 3.3.4. The required front yard setback is 35’. The stairway and landing are located in the 35’front yard setback.
Christine Schaefer presented her application and explained that she had secured the building permit and was advised that as per the building code, a landing had to be included with the stairs. After completion of her project and during the inspection the Building Inspector noted that the construction fell within the setback and therefore a Special Permit would be required. The Building Department issued a Certificate of Occupancy, but advised that it was with the condition that Ms. Schaefer file a petition with the ZBA. The previous stairs, built at the time the house was built, were also within the setback; therefore they were non-conforming. The new construction created more of a non-conformity as they encroached into the setback an additional 3 feet.
RF made a motion to grant the permit as requested and RFjr seconded the motion. The Board voted to approve 5-0.
Brushwood Nominee Trust 36 Pittsfield Road (Map 17, Parcel 41), for: (1) Special Permits Section 3.1.F.11, 5.1.7, 5.2.4(3); (4) & Footnote (3) of Section~4.1.1; and (5) Site Plan Approval under Section 9.5 of the Lenox Zoning Bylaw re: construction of a 92 room hotel on 6.68 acres. Originally scheduled for December 18, 2013 because there were only four members of the five member board present, it was continued to January 8th. Continued from January 8, to January 22, 2014. At that meeting, it was agreed to have a site visit on January 25th at 10:30 am and continued to February 5, 2014. Because of snow emergency on February 5th, the hearing was continued to February 12, 2014.
The continued hearing was re-opened for public comments from anyone who had not had an opportunity to speak before or had something new to add.
Bernt Ruediger, a building contractor of Peterborough VT, said that he has known Joe Toole for over 30 years and stated he supports the Tooles and feels that this is a fantastic project.
Michael Hashim, an attorney, spoke on behalf of June Hashim, his aunt, who owns the property known as Brushwood Farm. He said that over the years numerous developers have approached them, but he has felt their projects would not be acceptable to the town, so he has not encouraged them. He feels that this proposal is a good step forward and he feels “it doesn’t get any better than this”.
Dilip Desai, the owner of a Comfort inn and Best Western as well as a resident of Lenox, said he feels this project is best for the town and the taxpayers.
George Jordan felt that the balloons at the site visit were not affective and recommends there be another site visit.
Jim Harwood said he didn’t think the design had changed much, and the height and number of stories were still a concern to him and he felt there were ways to make it better. He added that bad development was worse than no development.
Bernt Ruediger spoke in response to Mr. Harwood to say that he is a preservation building contractor and that the design is a classic building that is stunning.
No one else requested to speak.
Attorney Heller summarized the petitioner’s request and pointed out the following:
- Hotels are allowed in the 3CA zone by special permit.
- Only 5% of the land in Lenox is commercially zoned, and 3CA consists of only 2.9 %. Ninety five percent of the land in Lenox is zoned residential.
- This project conforms with regards to acreage, setbacks, and density
- The hotel is setback 300 feet from the road and the meadow will remain open.
- There are no environmental impacts.
- All town services are adequate. The water and sewer has been reviewed by the DPW and the town engineers, Weston and Sampson and deemed to have enough capacity.
- All safety codes will be compliant, building will be sprinkled, and the Fire Chief has provided a letter stating that he is satisfied with the safety including the building height.
- There is no adverse impact
- MEPA has reviewed and determined that this project does not exceed any thresholds
- The design of the building is consistent with other buildings in Lenox and Berkshire County.
- A footnote in the zoning bylaw allows for heights up to 50 feet to be considered by the ZBA.
- A 3 story hotel would increase the foot print by 50 feet wider and would be pushed into the meadow and would result in issues with wetlands and storm water.
- This is a compact design that will be well screened.
- Compliant with all provisions of a site plan review. They are asking for a special permit for a larger directional sign to mark the entrance and exit to the hotel.
- They are asking to be allowed to have 24 parking spaces in front instead of 20.
- This hotel will attract a different demographic and it is a project which fits in with the long term planning for tourism. It is a tax generator unlike commercial or residential property because of room and meal tax. The real estate tax is expected to be $75,000.00. The payroll is estimated to be $1,000,000.00.
- This plan is consistent with the Lenox Comprehensive Master Plan of 1999.
CS made a motion to close the public hearing and ND seconded the motion. The Board voted to agree 5-0.
RF made a motion to grant the permit requested. RFjr seconded the motion.
Each member voiced individually their opinion their review and thanked the applicants for working with the Board and addressing their concerns. RF said that reading the correspondence aloud was not practical due to time constraints, but that he would acknowledge the writers and their opinions when writing the decision.
George Jordan argued that in the past the ZBA has read letters and he felt that all of the letters should be read. RF responded that there were no statutory or case requirements or rule or regulation that he is aware of in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that requires the Board to read the correspondence. He stressed that all of the correspondence is public and anyone can look at it. He assured Mr. Jordan that the members of the board have read everything that has been submitted. He acknowledged that letters have been read in the past, but due to the volume of correspondence, time did not allow that to be done.
A question raised by the audience prompted a Point of Order as the public hearing had been closed therefore no further comment could be taken. Both letters received from the Planning Board (December 17, 2013 and January 29, 2014) were read aloud as well as the letter received from the Conservation Commission.
RF made a motion to grant a special permit pursuant to Section 3.1.F.11 for the construction of a motel as requested and proposed. EB seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
RF made a motion to grant a request for a special permit pursuant to Section 5.1.7 for the reduction in parking requirements. He then asked Attorney Heller for clarification who advised that the request was for an increase in the amount of parking by four spaces, not a reduction. RF made a motion to amend his motion to say “to grant a request for a special permit pursuant to Section 5.1.7 for an increase of four spaces for parking in front of the building for a total of 24. EB seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
RF made a motion to approve the request to grant the special permit pursuant to Section 5.2.4 (3) for the sign request. EB seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
RF made a motion to grant the waiver requested of the maximum height requirements under Footnote 3 of Section 4.1.1. RFjr seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
RF made a motion to vote to allow the site plan approval under Section 9.5 as has been presented which includes the plantings. RFjr seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
Attorney Heller thanked the Board members for their participation at the hearings, in reading all of the materials and attending the site visit.
Approve Minutes: RF made a motion to approve the minutes of January 22, 2014. CS seconded the motion and the Board voted to approve 5-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Ammendola
| 
