HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-04-03TOWN OF' DRYDEN
ZONING I10ARD Ofi APPEALS
APRIL 33 1990
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jack Baker, Dominic 13ordonaro, Ann
Everett, and Alan LaMotte,
The
Z
+eli.ng
Board
of
Appeals
Meeting,
on
Agri
-1-
0 1990 was
call to
order
at
7:40
PH
by
ChailLman
Jack
Baker.
Two .a.ses were heard and rare as follows:
1) J
N
,5
D
r
a
Z
a
1
r
a
0
S
Y
tt
y
t
V
Ti
eph 1".
is r€
gle tam
den, Ne
her tha
ar:i.aricc
i.ng Ord
J
9
i
W
n
ay
tie
J- y
Y
t
to
n
Jr
s t :1.
fio
ork
lie
5e
Ti ce
tr
m
r
c
Chairman Baker gta.ted :
a
g
e
W i.
eq
tl
f I1
a. v a
at o
th o
(1:1. r e
on 7
Oreystone Drive Dryden,
riance to erect an A -1
r about 139 Southworth Road
illy 96.5 of Recta Frontage
d 125 feet rand :i -s rf rgjleStli.ne
02.1 of the Dryden Town
Mr. Jay is here having been denied permissi.on to
build a home at 139 Southworth Road, which i.s in violati.ntt
of section 702.1 which is inadequate road frontage.
Under practri.Cal, d.i.ff,i- r,ult.i.es rand i.innecessa.ry hardships
are as follows
A porch
t�pproxi
mEI.ps an
m;i,ntts o
a.se offer wa
matel.y 55 a.c
d reality li
F road front
s issued and a.cc -epted on
res of land J,tt Which the tax
st.i.rig stated 1$0 feet plus or
,19e. The sttrvey showed 98 feet
of frontage. Over .f,200.00 is cnmmIi,tted for
survey fees, al, nng w;i.tli an emotional attachment to
the land, wislt to pi.tr• sue a, variance to allow for
a re4i.dence an the SouthwnrCit road frontage as ttit;;
Zott:i ng Permits.
All5o attached i.s a. mitp shtjw:i.ng the property, hoW t}ie
1 �4.nd lays .
QUESTAONS FROM THE BOARD
The Board unclear what t }re map showed, Mr%. JELL came fOr-w:r.rd
and explaincd }tow tine mgeLV had been shaded in to show the
a.Pproxi- matel.y 98 feet. of -frontage a.nd where the property was
7- ncatQd.
A- Everett asked Wh.,.t ttc irttetjti -on s Were for the rest of
t }9e acreage? M1 Ja-y Stated fray field, lKhree or four
horses.
19 Mr. Baker. YOU ttriderstalld the need to come here a,t a:ll' the
Spirit of the law wa.s written to control, den;4ity, to try and
keep a handle on that. '.l'hat' s why the Town decided on tlla
figure fOf a road frontage. .So the law -itself isn't a ov il,
law intending to squash peoples drea,us. But the spgi.r_i.t of
law and the intend of th.e lati, is to control Zon:i_nu in any
.uiven area. So that's what We're about a.nd looking at.
QUESTION I'19RO i TN[F FLOOR
Roder Steve: L'an the land owner on one side and i want to
know the approximate width of the 10t ti, ware I're :i,nI: ends to
built a house up in?
Mr. Jay:
Mr. Steve:
;9 r . .l try
Disc
n e e 4i
requ
inqu
Slop
Mr
pro
a h
run
t h a
U
43i
i
i
e
ljn ,0:rt.a.1.n .
So it ma.y not even he the f2j feet wide?
.Tt "s i1Vo+At 1.00 Yards buclk, p.robab:l.y 3GO feet wade.
scion f
d Width
rements
red as
(downh
St
Per
&acv
off
C h
The
pots
then
befo
home
owne
the
f rom
C
t
Y
i_
of
a
f
to
i .I.
lowed w
n1 dist
or Hea.l,
the di
_E )
i t h input from Mr. Henry
ante in order to obtain
th Department approval+
sta.nc.e from 10h€. cell to
ve stated one of. h;i,s
Y, which has been a
rain h_I_S .front :Fawn
from r,ha.t property.
11, and if his well
tax ma
nt7.al,
e t1youl
re the
owner
r Howe
e i S r1
runof
P 1r
buyw
d no
la.n
S .
ver,
o cl ;4
f.
Sla.te.r of. the
the needed
Mr. ,Steve
se Pt :I.0 and the
concerns about this whole
corn field, J,s that when there is
fills up with mud from the
He has a well at the base of
is gone h'i.s house is worthless.
formation Ilas been incorre
r had asked the, property o
t have been the convern wh
d was surveyed, stakes werr,
The ]_a.nd was misrepresents
the concern is about drai.
tch out ley r.>h�e road to cor
c t a. n d -1..f 4r
wner on either s:i,de,
ich was shown when
e plaaced on existing
d by the previous
nage and presently
rect the dra.'LrLa.ge
Mr. Baker: Our focus is and the reason that we are having
the hearing at. all is strictly krhether it's feasible in the
Towris eyes to reduce, the road frorkrage requirements to allow
him 1'o build in t.her•e at all. it's good to have hearings
like this because r.oncerns 'like this come up a.nd 5.t give s
you a chance to say something that maybe you wouldn't hiave a
chance to be .,a:Ld .
Barbara F'i,oratice a.l_so requested f[Arther ideri-L-;i_ficati.orr on
the snap here sir. Jai- intonded to placce the home. Where the
set back would be and exactly where the home would be
placed.
111
El
(.3)
Cene Rotunda stated he had been bcicl< on the logo and +wou.l.d be
the' builder for the home.. The lleal.th I)epartment
requirement, the Town sex back and si.d0 lat regu.i.rement all.
hits to be taken into consideration and Mr. Jo.y ha.s enough
land r.o acoompl.i_sh this. As far as some of the land being
pUt into lawn shpu]_d help wi-th runoff as compared to bare
dart as it is now. If he wanted ion, it's l,ev.l_ for him to
build a road and place thirty houses there if he wanted too
and you couldn't stop h;i.m. It's a normal subdivision
proc;es6, so to have one house seems to be less dense then to
have thi.-rity houses back there.
MI
wha.
. Jay
Lit
stated
is
like
he now
to live
l,;i.
es on
on top
Gra,ystone
of everyone
Drive
and
arLd
doesnrC
kooks
wart
that
eit
hiF
Mr. Baker reiterated the .issued is the road frontage not the
issues of sub divisions etc., the concerns of locating the
house and what kind of density Js the other big concern. How
it effects the character of the ne:i,ghborhood those are all
concerns and 10he7_r all issues; and all need to he sail.
Mrs. F
are no
tht.t t
Gonsci_
JEIy W4
I
t
h
D
Ll
oranc
c'lea
ev to
us of
]_d pu
o 1, t
r 0 �1
rcha
I th
sho
wo y
d .f e
se 1
ink i. t:
w a mo
ears :!
otage
and Wi
1 S
re
001<
r e q
the
u
.9
L
.
U
U
n
c
n
1
t
fort
c 1A r EL
.reme
t h 43
unate
to pos
r prop
rl t s an
requi
that
iti.on
erty
d q LL e
red r
the
a rk
S t01
oad
reco
he s
J are
On wh
f roll
rds
tated
super
y Mr.
tags.
Again Mr. Rotunda pointed out the error in the tax maps and
until it was surveyed hUd no idea the l�qnd wa.s not as
r-opresented . The 'loco.]_ ]1ea.l.tor took t }tem out to the land,
and with the ourners word, measured off the footage: .a.nd.
placed the stal <e that Mr. Steve found on hJ.8 land as the
represented piece of property.
Mr. Steve upsein because no one asked him where the property
boundaries were prI.or to purci,ase.
A. La —Motte asked :i.f this (Southworth Road) was the only
ELCCCSS to the property.
Cdr. JRY said JA was and lie wanted to be a. gaud neighbor.
8000 pin
HEARINO CLOSED
El
[111
A p
app
tr
sit
fro
Off
and
the
ubli
lica
Ceti
c P1
m 46
ice
are
Dry
c hear
tion o
Dryde
an Rev
5paCe
loca-te
reque
den To
i
f
n
1
s
S
W
(4)
ng was cond
SCHLECHT E
New York
ew Board :gyp
to ,35 SPac
at the Sam }
1,ing is vari
n Zoning Or
Chairman Jack I1alcer stated:
U
\
P
e
e
3.
d
C
G
O
r
s
n
i
ted to cans
INEERINC of
reduce the
oved Parkin
tLt thei.r E
1.2 9 No.r,th
ce to s0cti
nance to do
1
1
n
t
0
der the
129 North
r existing
lot plan
g:i.rkeeririg
r'eet add re8ti
n 1401 AD of
so.
Under
The
next
case
subm'i.ttad
diffic,ul.ties
iknd unnecessary hardship
are a.s
by
Mr.
Schlecht.
He is here
having
been
denied
perm:i.ssi
ork
to
reduce
the ':i_ze of the new
parking
lot
at
129
through
.I j5
No.rith
.street,
Dryden. It's
in
Violation
o
:f.' Art.
14,
Section
1.4.01..:I.Q.
Under
practical
diffic,ul.ties
iknd unnecessary hardship
are a.s
fci1.l,ows:
It's a letter to Kenry S]_ate,r and says the followai_ngr
Dear Henry, (Letter read in its nt'l,retY)
I
:1
Henry M. Slater
Zoning & Building
Town of Dryden
65 E. Main Street
Dryden, New York
Dear Henry:
(S)
GEORGE ScHt.t:CIVIS
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER
PROFESSIONAL, LAND SURVEYOR
22 GEORGE STREET
P.O. RO`( 727
DRYDF.N. NEW YORK 13053
Code Enforcement Officer
13053
TELEPHONE
607 - 844 -8837
March 21, 1990
This
letter
is my
explanation
in
support of zoning
appeal
for parking
requirements
at 129
North
Street,
Dryden, New
York.
Article 14, Section 1401 of the Town of Dryden zoning
ordinance requires 46 spaces for the proposed project.
A site plan was developed and approved by the Town of Dryden
Board, showing the 46 spaces and is included on a drawing dated
8/28/89.
These parking requirements, if strictly imposed, cause an
unnecessary hardship. The required parking is 31 spaces greater
than the maximum number of parked cars ever generated by our
business in the last ten years.
The extra spaces represent an increase in construction costs
which is unnecessary. They also result in increased maintenance
costs and plowing. It further imposes a hardship by increasing
rain runoff from the paved parking surfaces.
The requirements of Section 1401 for professional offices is
not logically pertinent to our situation, inasmuch as most of our
employees are in the field. They come to work in the morning or
sometimes go directly to the job, but at any rate pick up work
and go out in the field to do surveying. They do not typically
park their vehicles on the site for long periods. Further, we do
riot have many "drive -in" clients. The vast majority of our work
and orders for same are mailed to us. In our previous location
we had only 2 or 3 spaces for clients and rarely had them full.
i
( 6 )
Therefore, we request a reduction in the required parking
from 46 spaces required, to the 35 spaces, as shown nn the new
plan. The 35 spaces are still far in excess of what we need now
but logically fit into the site and will provide for future
growth.
In conclusion a favorable outcome from this appeal will
enable us to better, develop the site and to provide for enhanced
landscaping, thereby, resulting in a better project for the Town
of Dryden.
PBS:igh
encs.
Yours truly,
Patricia Schlecht
I
A. Everett*
(7)
QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD
Q. C
b
A. I
b
a
0
W
a
C
U
�
g
d
f
E
C
0
i
g
t
d
f
s
C
rge i
ldin;
! we
by e
ition
ice d
maki
eSS q
s
7
a
A
C1
0
n
f
your'3 the on
re a6Verri=ing
1:c£e cont@mpl
1 building. p
an t I WEi
f about ]] spa
what -e need.
II bu
for
a t e R
ossit
Ch is
Ces I
Si�eaS in thr
rental Space
doing any
ly a small
twe poilit I
3 tar in
Mr. SchlecEt pointed out on the approved mar the aycE Which
is 4eSignated for parking, six spaces for the two aPErtments
in the farm house with emOUG§ Space if need be to place the
deleted park i ng, if approled, back into existence. Mr.
Schlecht stated Et the time he didn't have the time to
appeal So he went ahead and developed it.
3 =1e PM
E
THERE WERE HO QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
HEARING CLOSED
8 :j0 rk REOPENED THE' PUBLIC EEARINC FOR THE FOLLOWING
DEGIdIO §S ( i CORY IN MINUTE BooE, ORDINAL SIGNED DOCUMENTS
IN 2.13.A. FILE IN TOWN CLERKS OFFICE)
8=40 PM NEETINC ADJOURNED
II
P ectf,ll' Submitted,
]e£ kyam
Rec. Sec, for Z. G.A.
El
U
i
A pub],
constr
feet o
a vari,
i
u
f.
c hearing to
ct a. single
road fronta
nce to secti
c.on
fami
ge r
on '7
S i.
I
at
01
NOTICE OF DECISION
Tu11SDAY APRIL 3, 1990
derb the application submitted by JOSEPH F. JAY to
home on a. parcel of property that has only 96.5
her than the required 125 feet and is requesting
.2 of the lie Be Zon:i.ng District Sect.i.ons.
A public hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Board of Zoning
Appeals on Tuesday, April, 3, 1990 with members present: Ann Everett,;
Chairman John (Jack) Baker•; Dominic Bordonaro; and Alan L:ai•lotte.
FINDINGS
1. The applicant
applied in h:i.
welfare of th
adversely aff
demonstr
s case ar
e communi
ect the r..
ated that the restrictions as strictly
e unr•el.ated to the public health, safety or,
ty, and granting the var*i.ance will riot
ommuni. ty .
Ann Irverett moved that i•lr. Jay be granted a. vari.a.nce to construct a. single
family home on his parti.a.l of land which has 96 feet of road frontage.
The mot,i.on was second by Dominic; Bordonaro.
Vote Yes (4)
DECISION:
Jr
No (0)
VARIANCE CHANTED
Respectfully submitted,
l
een
ack Raker, (chairman
I
A p
ENC
S:i, t
spa
add
Tow
u
I
e
C
r
n
bl1,c
NEi;:11I
Plan
es at
ess a
Zoni-
he
NR
nd
ng
. .1. r
0
ev
he
a
0
ing to c
f 129 No
iew Boar
:i.r Engin
re reque
rd:i_nance
0
r
d
e
S
n
t
e
r,
t.
NOT.[CE OF DEGTSION
TUESDAY APRIL 3, 1990
sider the appl:i-cation submitted by SCHLECHT
h Street, Dryden, New Fork to reduce their e.xi.sti.ng
Approved Parking Lot plan from 46 spaces to .ZS
ring Office :Located at the same 1.29 North Street
:i-ng a. var:i.ance to section 1401.10 of the Dryden
o do so.
A public hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Board of Zoning
Appeals on Tuesday, April. 3, 1990 with members present: Ann Everett;
Chairman John (Jack) Baker; Dominic Bordonar•o; and Alan LaPtotte.
F1:NDINC8:
1. The applicant demonstrated that the restrictions as strictly
applied in his case are unrel i.ted to the pub] - ,-i.c health, safety or
welfare of the community, and granting the variance will not
adversely affect the community,
® 2. That the room does exist on the lot to add additional spaces if
business cond ,-i.ti-ons warrant (a.t the discretion of Mr. Schlecht),
Domi.nic Bordonaro moved that, a variance be granted to Schlecht Engineering
of 129 North Street, Drvden to reduce the parking lot plan from 46 to 35
spaces as applied here.
The motion was second by A.l.a,n La.MoL•te,
Vote Yes (4)
DECISION
Lmmg�
,j r
No (0)
VARIANCE CRANTED
Respectfully
submitted,
CJack Baker, Cha-irman