HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-04-02I
LA
Town of Dryden April 2,1985
Zoning Board of Appeals
i The Zoning Board of Appeals met on April 2,1985 with
members P. Brellocks, D. Rose, N.1aMotte, C. Ha.tf field, and Zoning
Officer S.Stewart present. The meeting was called to order by
acting Chr. D. Rose at 7935 P. M.
HEARING I 7:35
The Public Hearing to consider the application of Frank
Frost, (1926' Slaterville Rd.. Ithaca) to build a. second story on
a building at 381 Mt. Pleasant 'Rd. and is requesting a variance
to Sec.804 of the Town Zoning Ordinance which requires that a
building be at least 70 feet from the road center :line.
Mr. Frost said he would be using the addition for storage.
(He leases the existing building to C.U. and plans to do the
same with the addition.) The existing building is mostly .jn
ground and had been used for potato storage. The addition will
have a side entrance with a single over head door.
No one was present to speak for or against the request.
Mr. Frost had a letter from Michael Pichel stating he had no
objections. (Mr. Pichel owns property across the road.)
Hearing closed 7;40
HEARING II 7:42 Pm
The Public Hearing to consider the application of Charles
Snowberger Jr.. (2 Etna Rd.) to build "a two unit family dwelling
at 2 Etna Rd. and is requesting a variance to Sec. 754 of the
Town Zoning Ordinance which requires a 2 family dwelling have
at least 125' frontage on a public road.
Mr.Snowberger showed the drawings he'd made. He discussed
building on the Upper Creek side but there was a problem with an
existing sewer and drainage from Etna Rd. ending there, so he
decided to build on the other side. 'The area. slopes to the
rear so drainage would. be good,
D.Rose questioned the 125' frontage.
S.Stewart stated that there wasn't 125' frontage for a new house
and no way to make two lots the way it's located.
Pr Rose----- How much frontage do you actually have?
Mr.Snotirberger -On the side I want to put the house on there is
127' from the center of Lower Creek Rd. to the
boundary of my property, but we're on a corner
with a Y in the road. From the center of Lower
. Creek Rd. to the Center of Upper Creek Rd. there
is 156'. The depth is240' on Upper Creek side and
403' on the other. There is a. natural drainage
ditch approximately 6.8 feet wide which dries up
In July or August. I don't know if It can be
moved or not.
2.
D. Rose-----___ I guess I still don! t, understand the 125'.
S.Stewart---- -The way he's laying!,this out he doesn't have the
125' for the house he wants to build. He wishes
to put the new one behind the existing house. The
• way it's situated, there would be no way to make
two lots.
P. Brell oc hs-- - There is one slight technical difficulty- -the
advertisement makes reference to Sec. 754- -it
should be 753.
D.Rose------- _Is anyone an one here to speak for or against the
request?
Ward Staubitz- I live at 30 Upper Creek Ad. I'm really here for
information. I want to find out if there is any-
thing I should object to. The building will
basically be across from where I live. (After
looking over the plans, Mr.Staubitz had no objections.)
P.Brellochs ... Do you plan to maintain title to this property?
C.Snowberger- -Yes.
Hearing closed 7;53 (Mr.Snowberger will call S.Stewart
in A.M. for decision.)
HEARING III 7:55P.M.
• The Public Hearing for Charles J.Rumsey(292 Halseyville Rd.,
Trumansburg) to build a.garage at approximately 385 Beam Hill Road
and is requesting a variance to Sec.804 of the Town Zoning Ordinance
which requires that a building be at least 70' from the road center
line.
Mr.Rumsey---____As you can see by the pictures, I "ve already started
building the garage. I didn't realize that there
was zoning there. I kept the garage closer to the
road to lessen the shoveling distance in the winter.
The road is a secondary one and the electric lines
are on the opposite side of the road. There are
already spruce trees growing there in front. I't
hoping to build a house 'up there in the future. I
do hope you'll grant this request, and again I'm
sorry for not realizing about the zoning:
D. Rose---______ Ts anyone here to s peak for or against this request?
John Christie - -I live at 4.37 Beam Hill Rd. and own property adjacent
to the Rumsey property on the South side of the hill.
My wife and I have no objections to Mr. Rumsey building
a garage. There are already garages there built right
at the edge of the road.(Probably built before the
• ordinance.) The Rumsey garage will be partially
hidden by the existing pines.
D.Rose-- -___-__Are there-'any questions?
•
3.
N. Lamotte------How far back is the garage?
C. Rumsey------ -The closest part of the garage is 45' from the
center of the road and 25' from the ditch line.
C.Hatfield---- -Where do you plan to build your house?
C.Rumsey------ -I bought the land less than a year ago- -it's all
60' pine now. There is a clearing back in, garage
on left, follow driveway back to the clearing- -
like a horseshoe. That's where'the house will be
with a carport for summer.
P.Brellochs-- What about the walls you've already constructed.- -
what are they made of?
C.Rumsey- ------7' sections. 8' tall,
on top, single plate
footers, texture; 111
when finished.
16 10 on center, double plate
on bottom, lag into concrete
siding which will be stained
P.Brelloch.s--- -.Are you now aware when the Zoning Ordinance was
adopted?
C.Rumsey----- - -yes. I sure am. I just didn't think about it
before I got started. One day I was talking to
some town men about road repair and they asked about
a building permit. That's when I stopped workingl
P.Brellocks-- What depth are
• you have tied
concrete?
the footers, about how much money do
up in them, and did you use ready -mix
C.Rumsey------ -The ground slopes, so they range from 2' to 3' deep.
I have approximately ,$400 and 3000 sweat hours in
and I mixed my own concrete about 14" thick.
Public Hearing closed 8:05 P.M.
HEARING IV 8;lOPM
The Public Hearing to consider the application of Allen Hayes
(59 Yellow Barn Rd. Freeville) to have a Sples and Service Model
Railroad Equipment /Accessories in the basement of his home and is
requesting a variance to Sec.701 of the Town Zoning Ordinance,
Mr. Hayes------ -I think the letter I wrote to you explains about
the surgery I had and how it didn't enable me to
do what I'd hoped. I'm looking at a. redirection
more than a change. I'll probably want to work
on a car from time to time but I'll be cutting
way back. The present railroad shop is being
operated in the village by Mr.Trencansky,in the
• garage. I didn't want to tie up my garage and
since I'd started to put a den in my basement, I
thought that would be a good place for the rail-
road shop. There wouldn't be any exterior changes
made to the house.
Jz
4-.
P.Brellochs - ---- -What would your expected clientele be, how
many would you,.expect at one time and what hours
do you expect to have?
A.Hayes--------- -I °m anticipating 3 evenings a week, possibly
part of Saturday. I haven't set anything definite.
Mr. Trencansky---I'm open from 6 -9 three times a week. Last year
I was open a half day on Saturday, but with working
a full time job and with two young children, I had
to cut back. Even with limiting the hours to two
evenings per week, I,'m not that busy at one time.
I only have a two car driveway and never had any
parking problems.
P.Brellochs----- -How would the public enter your shop?
A. Hayes---------I'm not certain yet. At the moment they'd have
to come through the `garage and down the stairs.
P.Brellochs------Can you separate your car repair activities from
the railroad shop? How much traffic will be
generated and where will the clientele park?
A.Hayes--------- -I plan to alternate days- -maybe three days for
one, two days for the other -- whatever I feel I
can handle. On the average I'm probably only
working on cars two days a week as it is. There
are times when I don't have any cars for a week.
If you park vehicles diagonally there is probably
• room for 3 or 4 plus a spot along the garage for
a couple .more.
P.Brellochs------How
many
vehicles
do you generally have on the
site
at
one time
now?
A.Hayes---------- I don't believe I've ever had more than two
at one time.
D. Rose--------- - -What kind of hours are you talking; about on the
autos you're presently doing -- repairs that take
a couple hours or a ,couple days?
A. Hayes--- ---- -- Generally anything
may take me longer
take most of a day
garage, but maybe
chargeable labor.
I've done on a car (where it
than the average guys) may
for the car to be in the
I'll only do 2 or 3 hours of
N.LaMotte------ - -So you're saying it's less than 10 hours a week
that you're actually working on cars?
A.Hayes----- --- - -Oh, yes.
P *Brellochs--- -- -How would you react to a restriction that says
you can't have your shop open for business on
Sundays?
A.Hayes---- ------I hadn't planned on having any hours on Sunday.
The repair shop isn't open Sunday either.
5.
D. Rose------ - -- Is there anyone here that wishes to speak for _.or
against this variance?
• John W.Harding - -(55 Yellow Barn Rd. Freeville). Our driveways
are right next to one another. I have no objections.
We've never had any problems with the repair shop.
My son has been a customer of Mr.. Trencansky's
and. I'm familiar with his operation and I can't
foresee any problems.
Floyd Lovelace (63 Yellow Barn Rd. Freeville) I'd like to ask
some questions. A few years ago, in 1972 I com-
pleted a. one bedroom basement apartment in my
house. I was jumped on by the entire crowd who
lives in the surrounding 11 homes on the east side,
I have the papers here. It never went to court
because the tenant passed away. However, my original
deed has a restrictive covenant on it, as all these
houses have on them from the Windy Knoll Development.
The covenant reads that no lot shall be used except
for residential purposes. How do we reconcile this
fact? Does the Zoning Ordinance in the Town of
Dryden supercede any restrictive covenant
on any deed?
D.Rose---------This is a separate situation. An area can have more
restrictions if the residents so desire and want to
have these different than the zoning ordinance, but
the town doesn't actually recognize those. If any-
• one has problems with a covenant that's been put up
by their own area, then they would have to proceed
with this on their own. The town would not be in-
volved in such a private situation. All we act
upon is the zoning for the whole town, according
to what the rules are for a, particular zone.
Mr.Lovelace --- -Thank you. That's what I needed to know. Then for
me, if I object, I will have to get the neighbors
together and go through the same procedure as was
handed to me back in 1972- -take it to court.
D.Rose------___Yes - -I, guess so.
P.Brellochs .... Your objections could be two fold- -one is to the
proceedings here(the zoning ordinance of the Town
of Dryden) and the other matter would be the aspect
of the covenance which may or may not be objectionable
to that property. So, we have two separate issues.
I presume you're here to help us review the case as
it applies to the Town Zoning Ordinance.
Mr.Lovelace--- -I see -Since I bought my house and moved in, there's
been a computer business move in across the street.
As it stands now I could rent that apartment to
• another family and it wouldn't interfere with the
Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Dryden.
D. Rose------___ That Is different-
-I don't know what the rules are for
that area. Sib, what's the zoning in that area?
n
U
•
02
S.Stewart-- .- TTro family dwellings are permitted there. It's an
RB zone.
D.Rose-------- As town representatives, we can not be involved in
a development rule of some kind. That's something
they would have to handle on their own.
Hearing closed 8923
HEARING V 8:25
The Public Hearing to consider the application of John Dedrick
for a variance to Sec. 751 of the Town Zoning Ordinance allowing
him to use the lot on Rte 13 and between Kirk Rd. and Etna Lane for
a fruit and vegetable stand for the sales of fruits, vegetables,
farm products, etc., and general merchandise.
Mr.Dedrick---- ~The purchase of the property is pending on the
variance decision. The cost of the property is
high, so I probably wouldn't be building too much
right away. I'm more or less looking down the
road to the future possibilities.
P.Brellochs--- - - - - .In what sense do you think you're at variance
with the ordinance 7 I'm trying to find what
portion of section 751 in fact you're requesting
your variance for.
S. Stewart ------ In R. B 1 that's not` an allowed use.
P.Brellochs--- - -Under allowed uses are road side stands for the
sale and distlay of farm products provided that
said stand is 50' from the center of the road.
S.Stewart--- - ~-- I think this will be more than your average road
side stand.
P.Brellochs---- OK. How about farm buildings, gardening,
nurseriea,greenhouses and raising of livestock
and poultry? Maybe I need more information- -
greater detail.
J.Dedrick------ I was under the impression that R.B zone was
more residential. Under general merchandise I
was thinking of garden tools,f ruit baskets,
kitchen utensils, maybe a little flea market.
That's long range of course.
P. Brellochs- ...you're correct ,about R.73 but it does make specific
reference to allowed uses that are near to the
kind of thing °you'ri`eferring to. A concern is the
preciseness air; imprecision of what the property is
to be used for. I guess we're concerned about
just exactly what general merchandise may be.
(General discussion-- questioned'pa.rking, driveways, and imprecise-
ness of wording.
J.Dedrick------ I was hoping to put a driveway in from Kirk Ade
near the bridge.
Pi
40
7.
Fred Melberg(kresident of Almode, located across the road from
the proposed site f,or fruit and vegetable market.
"I have no objections to this business coming in --
however I was concerned about potential traffic
hazard at Kirk Road. There is a crest in the road
there and visibility is extremely poor. Access
would be much safer if it were to be nearer to or
off of Etna Lane.
J.Dedrick--- .(Agreed to not wanting any traffic hazard, maybe
Etna Lane access would be safer. After discussion
he decided to withdraw application for reconsider-
ation at another time. If this operation was to
be a duplicate of the present fruit stand it is
allowed use in RB Zone.
Hearing closed 9;10 PM
DECISIONS
HEARING I
All hearing reopened at 9;15 PM
The hearing was reopened for Frank Frost and
discussion on motion by C.Hatfield and seconded by
all members voting cast a unanimous ballot for the
variance as requested in his application.
VOTE- ALL YES -- VALIANCE GRANTED
HEARING II
with no further
N.LaMotte and with
granting of
Discussion: When considering something like this we have to look
down the road as to possibility of property being sold
etc. The way it's layed out now the property couldn't
be split- -and you can't put two dwellings on the same
lot. P.Brellochs made motion to postpone decision
until next month when more information could be obtained,
D.Aose---- My feeling is to.reject the application rather than
to table it.
P.BRELLOCHS WITHDREW HIS MOTION TO POSTPONE AND MADE A MOTION TO
REJECT THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. SECONDED BY D.ROSE.
Discussion-- checked the tax maps for clearer description of
boundaries etc. It was,general agreement that more
specific measurements and drawing to scale would be
needed.
P.Brellochs and D.Rose withdrew their motion and second to reject
application. D.Rose stated a typographical error had been made and
should be corrected.(Section 754 should be Section 753.) In his
opinion there was no hardship established.
P.Brellochs made a motion to postpone an action concerning request
of variance to be discussed again at the next Public Hearing in May
and requested that tho applicant provide a more detailed map drawn
to scale with accurate dimensions of existing and proposed dwellings
to all site boundaries. C.Ha.tfield seconded the motion.
VOTE ALL YES MOTION CARRIED,
8.
HEARING III
D. Rose---------This is the type of thing that
had zoning for 16 years, then
about it and go ahead without
think this sets a. precedent,
much
bothers me', We've
people say I didn't know
checking into it. I
It bothers me very
P.Brellochs-- My question is - -Is there any practical difficulty
to have kept you from building back further from the
road? (Such as specima.n pines etc.) I presume this
is a financial difficulty more than a practical one,
I'm sure you've invested a lot of effort and time
and some money , but if you had known the set back
requirements how would you have felt about it?
C.Rumsey------ -As soon as I realized there was an ordinance and
zoning` I stopped work immediately. I realized I was
too close to the road when I came for a, building
permit, As I mentioned before, the only reason I
kept the garage closer,to the road was to keep from
having to shovel snow any further than absolutely
necessary, I'm sorry 'I didn't check into this before
I started,
P. Br.ellochs - -- The difficulty we have with this kind-of request is
as the chairman stated- -we've had several cases along
these lines,
D. Rose------- -The big problem we have' to be concerned about is
setting a. precedent, Maybe where you're located.
there is no problem but somewhere else they may not
have trees to hide it (Btc.
C.Hatfield - - - -I agree with everything that's been said, You should
have known,you should have checked and asked questions.
We have rejected and granted these kinds of requests
before. I'm going to move we approve this application.
SECONDED BY N.LAMOTTE
VOTE-La
cause
tte -Yes Hatfield Yes
f the location,trees
Brellochs No Rose Yes
etc.
MOTION CARRIED
D. Rose------ - -I do hope you've learned a lesson. If it had been in
some other area without the trees I probably would have
voted no - -we do hope you'll spread the word that people
should check about zoning and ordinances before they
start any projects,
HEARING IV
P.Brellochs moved that the variance be granted to Allan Hayes
with the stipulation that the variance be restricted to the individual
that owns the property and that the business not be operated on Sunday
Seconded by C. Hatfield.
VOTE ALL YES MOTION CARRIED
HEARING V
Applicant withdrew request for variance,
MEETING ADJOURNED 10;30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,