Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 3.5.2012 Minutes.pdfZBA 3-5-2012 minutes Minutes for the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting March 5, 2012 MINUTES Present: Members J. Young, K. Sigel, A. Shull and A. Watkins. Alternates M. Eisner and R. Parker Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross, Attorney K. Gutenberger, and VCH Deputy Clerk A. Podufalski 1. Meeting called to order Meeting called to order by Chair J. Young at 7:05 pm. Chair J. Young appointed Alternate M. Eisner as a voting member. 2. Approval of February 6, 2012 Minutes Motion: A. Watkins Second: A. Shull APPROVING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 6, 2012 RESOLVE, that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of February 6, 2012 meeting are hereby approved. Aye votes – K. Sigel, M. Eisner, A. Shull, J. Young and A. Watkins. Opposed- None 3. Variance Requests A. Area variance for 906 Triphammer Road  Board member K. Sigel recused himself from voting on this variance.  Alternate R. Parker arrived at 7:18pm. Chair J. Young appointed Alternate R. Parker as a voting member.  B. Cross gave a background summary on the case.  The applicant was given the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request.  Chair J. Young opened the floor for public comment.  Neighbor P. Martin spoke in favor of the variance.  Attorney K. Gutenberger informed the Board the interpretation of the ordinance is Type 2 SEQR exempt.  The Board discussed the findings questions.  The following resolution was then discussed and voted upon: ZBA 3-5-2012 minutes VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON MARCH 5, 2012 FOR APPEAL NO. 2012-5 Motion made by: A. Watkins Motion seconded by: M. Eisner WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance at 906 Triphammer Road, Tax ID# 10.-6-5.1, to allow an existing structure to remain in its current location and be treated as a Portable Shed as defined in Local Law No. 1 of 2011: Portable Sheds. The structure’s dimensions are 10’x14’x13.5’, of which two of the dimensions exceed the 12’x12’x10’ allowed by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Ordinance; and B. On March 5, 2012 the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing regarding such action, and thereafter thoroughly reviewed and analyzed (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant(s) in support of this appeal, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Boards deliberations; and C. On March 5, 2012, in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ASEQR), and 6 NYCRR Section 617.5, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals determined that the proposed action is a Type II action, and thus may be processed without further regard to SEQR; and D. On March 5, 2012, in accordance with Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX '21, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals, in the course of its deliberations, took into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the area variance is granted as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals hereby makes the following findings with respect to the specific criteria for such area variance as set forth in Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX'21: ZBA 3-5-2012 minutes - 3 - Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting the area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: The shed has already been constructed and there have been no objections from neighbors. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: It is not feasible for the applicant to reduce the size of the structure. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES X NO______, because: The change in the volume of the shed is substantial. Whether the proposed area variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: There have been no objections from neighbors and the shed is already constructed. The structure poses no environmental impact. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: The Zoning regulations have changed through the processes and the applicant has made every attempt to comply. 1. It is hereby determined by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals that the following variance is GRANTED AND APPROVED (with conditions, if any, as indicated), it being further determined that such variance is the minimum necessary and adequate to grant relief and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. ZBA 3-5-2012 minutes - 4 - Description of Variance: The granting of an area variance at 906 Triphammer Road, Tax ID# 10.-6-5.1, to allow an existing structure to remain in its current location and be treated as a Portable Shed as defined in Local Law No. 1 of 2011: Portable Sheds. The structure’s dimensions are 10’x14’x13.5’, of which two of the dimensions exceed the 12’x12’x10’ allowed by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Ordinance. Conditions of Variance: The shed must remain as currently constructed. The existing structure also has 3 foot eaves which are allowed to remain. The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows: AYES: A. Shull A. Watkins M. Eisner R. Parker J. Young NAYS: None The motion was declared to be carried. B. Area Variance 107 Highgate Rd  Chair J. Young appointed Alternate R. Parker as a voting member.  Chair J. Young read the Code Enforcement Officer’s report. Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross also gave an overview of the variance request.  The applicant was given the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request.  Chair J. Young opened the floor for public comment.  Attorney K. Gutenberger advised the board the request is Type 2 SEQR exempt.  The Board discussed the findings questions.  The Board discussed and voted on the following resolution: VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON MARCH 5, 2012 FOR APPEAL NO. 2012-6 Motion made by: K. Sigel Motion seconded by: A. Watkins WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance at 107 Highgate Road, Tax ID# 6.-9-1.2, for an area variance to allow an existing 8’ high fence to remain on the property line along The Parkway, which is less ZBA 3-5-2012 minutes - 5 - than the 25’ setback required by Zoning Ordinance Section 6: Yard Requirements. Pursuant to the Village’s current Zoning Ordinance, the property is deemed to have two front yards since it faces two streets; and B. On March 5, 2012 the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing regarding such action, and thereafter thoroughly reviewed and analyzed (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant(s) in support of this appeal, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Boards deliberations; and C. On March 5, 2012, in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ASEQR), and 6 NYCRR Section 617.5, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals determined that the proposed action is a Type II action, and thus may be processed without further regard to SEQR; and D. On March 5, 2012, in accordance with Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX'21, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals, in the course of its deliberations, took into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the area variance is granted as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals hereby makes the following findings with respect to the specific criteria for such area variance as set forth in Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX'21: Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting the area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: The fence is already constructed, is well hidden by existing shrubbery, and occupies less than 50 percent of the frontage on The Parkway. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: There are no other means to protect that area of the yard due to its unusual shape. ZBA 3-5-2012 minutes - 6 - Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES X NO _____, because: The set back is 0 feet instead of the required 25 feet. Whether the proposed area variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Finding: YES_____ NO X, because: The fence is already constructed and poses no environmental impact. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES X NO______, because: The applicant built the fence. 1. It is hereby determined by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals that the following variance is GRANTED AND APPROVED (with conditions, if any, as indicated), it being further determined that such variance is the minimum necessary and adequate to grant relief and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community: Description of Variance: The granting of an area variance at 107 Highgate Road, Tax ID# 6.-9-1.2, for an area variance to allow an existing 8’ high fence to remain on the property line along The Parkway, which is less than the 25’ setback required by Zoning Ordinance Section 6: Yard Requirements. Pursuant to the Village’s current Zoning Ordinance, the property is deemed to have two front yards since it faces two streets Conditions of Variance: The enclosed area shall not be expanded within the required set-back. The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows: AYES: A. Shull A. Watkins K. Sigel R. Parker J. Young NAYS: None The motion was declared to be carried. ZBA 3-5-2012 minutes - 7 - 4. No other business  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross reported he has 41 letters to go out to residents regarding fence compliance.  Chair J. Young thanked Attorney K. Gutenberger for her service and dedication to the ZBA Board as tonight was her last meeting. 5. Adjourned Meeting adjourned at 10:00pm