ZBA Hearing Minutes
Address: 70 Tyringham Rd
Date: 4/13/16
Hearing began at: 3:08pm
Members Present: Jonathan Levin, Chair, Stanley Ross, Clerk, Susan Cooper and Ian Jenkins, alternate
Also present: Michael Germain, Ira Transport, Attorney Valicenti for the Transports, Dave Farrington, Peter Chait,
ZBA member Robert Lazzarini called to say he’d be late, the applicant was given the option to start the hearing late or begin at the scheduled time and go forth with 4 members. He chose to go forward with 4 members and was made aware that granting of the special permit would require 4 votes in the affirmative. Robert showed up during the reading of the legal notice and prior to any testimony being given and was allowed to participate as the 5th member.
The hearing began with Jonathan Levin, Chair, explaining the hearing process and then Stanley Ross, 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 Planning Board, Conservation Commission, and Board of Health.
Michael Germain stated that contrary to the Con Comm’s letter he has already filed an RDA and received a Determination of Applicability; the applicant will follow up with the Con COmm. He explained that the plans are to remove and replace an already existing structure in the same footprint and that there will not be any additional bedrooms. The current structure is on pilings and the proposed structure will have a full basement. Heat and a/c will also be added.
Current habitable square footage is 2034.5 feet. The total square footage with the proposal would be 2,426.75 feet which is less than 25%.
Peter Chait inquired about whether or not a screened porch was considered part of habitable space, but was informed that it is not.
Attorney Valicenti explained that his clients (the Transports) have deeded rights to a portion of this property (in addition to a number of other families) as a beach lot. He inquired about what changes would be occurring in the yard separate from the structure – Michael stated there aren’t any changes in the yard and the propane tank noted on the plans was there in error. Opposition documents were provided to the Board. The main complaint is a fence that was put up which has bisected the disputed parcel. Attorney Valicenti also feels that there is an expansion of the footprint as a result of filling in the space/cutout that is currently between the house and the existing porch which increases the non-conformity. Michael stated that this fence is not new and is a wire fence to
prevent the dogs from interfering with the neighbor’s access. The Board couldn’t see the correlation between granting this permit and a dispute between the neighbors. Attorney Valicenti requested that the Board be clear that there aren’t any approvals for any activity within the disputed area; Michael Germain stated that there aren’t any plans for this area. The Board was very clear that they can only act on the requests stated in the application. The Board was sympathetic to the dispute but noted that it does not fall under their jurisdiction.
It was acknowledged that the paperwork submitted by the applicant was very confusing. As the applicant did not have anything else to present, the Board voted to close the public portion of the hearing and begin deliberations.
The Board made the following findings:
1. The property is in the Lake Shore District.
2. The Property is subject to 25’ set back requirements due to prior lot merger.
3. The property is non-conforming due to the lot size. The dwelling is non-conforming due to side setback intrusion and forty foot lake intrusion.
4. Applicant seeks a Special Permit to permit renovation of the dwelling which will increase the dwelling footprint on the lot by sixty square feet, and will increase the habitable square footage of the dwelling from 2034 sq. feet to 2,427 sq. feet.
5. Applicant seeks relief under Section 5.1.6. The Board believes that the relief sought should actually be under Section 5.1.4.
6. The proposed work will increase the non-conforming nature of the dwelling on the Lot.
The Board set the following conditions:
1. Applicant must obtain Board of Health approval relative to the septic system before proceeding with any work;
2. Applicant must obtain Conservation Commission approval before proceeding with any work;
3. Applicant must complete the re-orientation of the stone steps, which were the subject of a prior Special Permit approval, before proceeding with any work.
The Board voted 5-0 that the proposed increase of the non-conforming structure and the renovation will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood.
The Special Permit for the proposed renovation was approved by a vote of 5-0.
The hearing concluded at 4:15pm
Submitted by
Melissa Noe, Administrative Assistant
| 
