The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-05-19 BZA MinutesDanby Board of Zoning Appeals  Minutes of Hearings and Meeting  May 19, 2015 Present: Allen Becker Gary Bortz Sarah Elbert David Hall Joe Schwartz Others Present: Secretary Pamela Goddard Code Office Planner CJ Randall Public Leslie Connors, Diahann Hesler, Sue Sammis BZA Chair, Joe Schwartz opened the Hesler hearing at 7:00pm PUBLIC HEARING to Consider a Request for Variance of the minimum 30 foot side building setback required pursuant to the subdivision plan approved by the Town on 6/24/92 for Fieldstone Circle Subdivision Planned Development Zone, in order to construct a 24x24-ft. attached garage at 108 Fieldstone Circle; and further to Consider a Request for Variance of the un-dimensioned front building setback line shown on the subject lot on said subdivision plan, to allow the existing house, built in 2002, to encroach into the front building setback by between 5 and 10 feet. The approximate front building setback as-built is 110 feet. Tax parcel 2.-1-52.6, Paul A. and Diahann S. Hesler, Owners. Public Comment Email correspondence between Paul Hesler and John Sammis was received by the Board related to this request. Diahann Hesler explained the reasons for their request for variances. They discovered the front building setback problem when they began plans to construct a garage. A discrepancy between maps, drafted in 1990 and 2000 reflect a change in setback rules between those two dates. The 2002 build- ing was set in this location to mediate a problem with a wet area behind the house, and approved on review of an inaccurate map. This house is in alignment with other houses in the neighborhood. There was a brief discussion between members of the BZA and the applicant as to how to the need to correct the 2002 error and so bring the building into compliance. It was agreed that this vari- ance request would be approved. D Hesler answered questions regarding the planned construction of a garage. This is planned to be in the original location shown on the design plans. For various reasons, the owners had not gotten to building the garage until this time. Hesler stated that neighbors they have spoken to are OK with the garage being built. Sue Sammis, the neighbor at 106 Fieldstone Circle, asked questions and made comments. She asked whether a variance is solely granted due to hardship? BZA Chair Schwartz clarified the issues to be considered in approving or denying a variance: the character of the neighborhood, whether a benefit can be achieved in alternate plans, how substantial the variance may be, and whether the vari- ance will have a negative impact on the area. Sammis stated that she and her husband were concerned about the resale value of their house should the variance for the garage be granted. Becker noted that there would still be a 19 foot set back and tree buffer between the two properties. The trees are on the Hesler property. Q - have the Sammis’ consulted with a realtor? Yes, and were told that resale value could go either way as to whether a buy- Board of Zoning Appeals_Minutes_20150326 • Tuesday, June 2, 2015 Page ! of ! 1 3 er would be concerned or not. A realtor consulted by the Heslers gave the opinion that building the garage would enhance the value of all of the nearby properties. The board asked several questions as to whether there could be an alternate location for the garage, either making the garage long and narrow (stacking two cars in) or building the garage behind the house. Hesler stated that the building plans they have received is for a two car, side by side, garage. This is their preferred design, and the design which was originally envisioned for the house. Hesler stated that building this garage would put the house into the character of the neighborhood. 108 is the only house in the neighborhood without a garage. The hearing was closed at 7:12 pm Hesler Variance Discussion There was further discussion between members of the BZA. Bortz stated that he understood the neighbor’s concern and would suggest a different orientation for the garage. Elbert reported that she had visited the property twice and could confirm that most houses there have garages. This addition would be in character of the neighborhood. She asked further questions of Sammis, regarding how much of a problem the garage would be for them? Sammis stated that she was concerned about the size of the garage as well as the placement. There is a two car garage at 106 Fieldstone Circle which is smaller that 24x24’. There was a discussion as to the current size of cars and that impact on the size of new garages. Elbert stated that she was persuaded that this was a rea- sonable variance request. Hall stated that going from a 30 foot setback to 19 feet seemed substantial and that he would like to hear more creative options. Hall and Becker asked questions about the existing back deck; its con- figuration, what access there is from the house? Hesler reported that access is through sliding doors at the kitchen. Schwartz expressed concern that locating a garage at the back of the house would mean the applicant would lose the deck and windows to the back yard. Helser noted that the house was built for a garage to be attached and that there is already the re - quired fire wall at their desired location. There was some discussion as to whether the applicant could consider a smaller garage, so as to minimize the side building setback impact for the neighbor. The applicant explained that this would not be feasible with the vehicles they currently own. There was a discussion regarding maintaining and enhancing a vegetative buffer between the two properties as a mitigating measure. Hesler stated that they have no intention to cut the existing trees and would be happy to improve and maintain the buffer in the future. Becker made a motion to accept as proposed, in two parts. The first part would address and cor - rect the front yard set back error. The second part would approve the garage location, with the re- quirement that the existing tree buffer be maintained and fortified. Code Planner, CJ Randall suggest- ed that this be native vegetative screening. Following discussion regarding the height and length of the buffer, it was agreed to require a buffer 10 foot high and 30 feet in length along the property line with year ‘round foliage. The Request for Variance was Approved MOTION TO GRANT VARIANCE: The Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Danby approves the variance as proposed, to correct a defi - ciency of the un-dimensioned front building setback line shown on the subject lot on said subdivision plan, allow- ing the existing house, built in 2002, to encroach into the front building setback by between 5 and 10 feet. The approximate front building setback as-built is 110 feet. Tax parcel 2.-1-52.6, Paul A. and Diahann S. Hesler, Owners, and Further approves the variance, of the minimum 30 foot side building setback required pursuant to the sub - division plan approved by the Town on 6/24/92 for Fieldstone Circle Subdivision Planned Development Zone, in order to construct a 24x24-ft. attached garage at 108 Fieldstone Circle with the following conditions: Board of Zoning Appeals_Minutes_20150326 • Tuesday, June 2, 2015 Page ! of ! 2 3 There shall be, maintained by the applicant/property owner, a perennial vegetative screen (preferably of native vegetation) at least 10 feet high along the 30 foot property boundary on the west side of the house be- tween the two properties. Moved by Elbert, Second by Becker, the motion passed  David Hall AYE  Allen Becker AYE  Gary Bortz NAY  Sarah Elbert AYE  Joe Schwartz AYE ! BZA Chair, Joe Schwartz opened the Pavek hearing at 7:39pm PUBLIC HEARING to consider a request for variance of the minimum 50 foot front yard setback required in Sec- tion 600, Para. 6 of the Town of Danby Zoning Ordinance in order to construct a 20’ by 24’ shed approximately 38’ from the road right-of-way line at 300 Brown Road, tax parcel number 16.-1-7.2; Todd Pavek, Owner. Public Comment No written correspondence was received related to this request. The applicant was not able to attend. The hearing was closed at 7:40pm Pavek Variance Discussion Schwartz noted that this is in an older neighborhood with many structures which pre-date zoning. This request is to replace a shed on the same foot-print as one which fell down. Hall asked whether the project needs a variance, as it is not a permanent structure? Becker noted that while the shed, as an agricultural building, does not need a building permit it does need a variance. The Request for Variance was Approved MOTION TO GRANT VARIANCE: The Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Danby approves the variance as proposed; Request for variance of the minimum 50 foot front yard setback required in Section 600, Para. 6 of the Town of Danby Zoning Ordinance in order to construct a 20’ by 24’ shed approximately 38’ from the road right-of-way line at 300 Brown Road, tax parcel number 16.-1-7.2; Todd Pavek, Owner. Moved by Bortz, Second by Becker, the motion passed  David Hall AYE  Allen Becker AYE  Gary Bortz AYE  Sarah Elbert AYE  Joe Schwartz AYE Adjourn The Meeting was adjourned at 7:49 pm. !!! ____________________________________ Pamela Goddard, Board of Zoning Appeals Secretary Board of Zoning Appeals_Minutes_20150326 • Tuesday, June 2, 2015 Page ! of ! 3 3