ZBA Hearing Minutes
Address: 34 Camp Half Moon Rd
Date: 8/20/14
Hearing began at: 3:12pm
Members Present: Cynthia Weber, Clerk, Stanley Ross, Robert Lazzarini, Fred Chapman and Ian Jenkins, Alternate
Also present: Rob Akroyd, Geoff Barlow and Don Torrico
The hearing began with Fred Chapman, Acting Chair, explaining the hearing process and then Cynthia Weber, Clerk, read the legal notice (which was posted for 2 consecutive weeks in the Berkshire Eagle and at the Town Hall) and letters from the Conservation Commission and Board of Health. The building permit rejection letter was also read which noted that the rejection was for 2 properties 34 and 36 Camp Half Moon Rd.
Rob Akroyd of Greylock Design Architects was present to review the project. Rob stated that they are seeking a permit for a pre-existing non-conforming structure on a non-conforming lot. The Barlow’s purchased one of the properties in 1946 and the other in 1961. In 1975 the ownership of the properties transferred from one family member to another. Rob explained that Mr. Barlow had embarked on a project that ended up being a violation of the Wetlands Protection Act for which the Conservation Commission has issued an Enforcement Order which has been satisfied. The applicant is only seeking a special permit for 34 Camp Half Moon Rd.
Don Torrico stated that the properties were merged into one by law in the early 70’s but it was never recorded in the registry and the Assessor’s Office was never notified for taxation purposes. A deck was replaced in its entirety at 36 Camp Half Moon and the size was increased which the building department stated was a violation as it was done without a building permit. The applicant is looking to build a deck at 34 Camp Half Moon which does fall within the setback. The deck that had been there was removed prior to the zoning bylaws and therefore is not grand-fathered, this is treated as new construction. Piers have been put in for the deck they are requesting permission to build.
A special permit was not requested for 36 Camp Half Moon Rd under this application and may require a separate filing and hearing.
Don Torrico was asked what the definition of a dwelling is and if both structures have bathrooms. Don Torrico stated that both structures have all the components of a dwelling. Each house has its own septic. The well is shared. They are not year round and are assessed as seasonal camps.
The Board agreed that they are only dealing with 34 Camp Half Moon Rd. at this hearing. There was discussion about whether or not it fell within the 40 foot mean high water line. It was agreed that it did not. The Board was dismayed that the Conservation Commission did not weigh in on the proposed project. Fred argued that the trees that were taken down without permission has a substantially more detrimental effect on the neighborhood. It was noted that these trees that were taken down were not taken down to build the deck they were leaning on the house.
The public hearing was closed and deliberations began. Mr. Barlow was notified of what a negative determination means if the Board doesn’t grant the permit. Cynthia did not feel that this proposal was extreme and had no issue with approving the project.
Ian wanted it on the record that the way this project was handled was sleazy and it affects the detriment to the neighborhood however he understands that dealing with the violations and the fact that work was done without permits is not under the purview of the ZBA and would agree that the proposal was not extreme and would approve it as submitted.
The Board requested a plot plan with
The Board made the following findings:
1. The proposed deck will be 12’ x 24’, there is a second portion which would be 16’ x 4’, a 3’ x 3’ section with a set of stairs (3) to an outdoor shower with an 8 foot platform to a 4 ½’ x 4 ½’ shower. On the front of the house there will be an addition of 56 sq feet to create a front stoop.
2. The non-conformities are insufficient frontage, insufficient lot size, 2 dwellings on one lot and a structure within the setback.
3. The proposed deck additions and outdoor shower increase the non-conforming nature never the less the degree to which they cause detriment to the neighborhood does not warrant the reject of this permit request.
A motion was made to approve the project as submitted. The motion was seconded and approved unanimously.
The Board set the following conditions:
1. The Conservation Commission must be entirely satisfied with the project as approved.
2. Must meet the requirements set by the Board of Health in their letter.
The board concluded that the request was in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Bylaws and will not be injurious, noxious, offensive or detrimental to the neighborhood or town.
The hearing concluded at 4:30pm
Submitted by
Melissa Noe, Executive Secretary
| 
