Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-03 TOWN OF DRYDEN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS • MARCH 59 1991 MEMBERS PRESENT : Chairman John Raker , Dominic Bordonaro and Alan LaMotte . Also Present but not limited to : Henry Slater , Lee Most , William Temple and Lee Temple . The Zoning Board of Appeals meeting was called to order on Tuesday March 5 , 1991 at 7 : 30 by Chairman John Baker . Chairman Baker stated there were two cases on the agenda and the first was heard as follows : John F . Randolph is here having been denied permission to construct a separate two car garage and a one story connection ( breezeway ) to the existing residence at 31 Lower Creek Road , Dryden , New York . It is in violation of Section 754 Yards and Landscaping , # 1 , of the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance . Under Practical Difficulties and / or Unnecessary Hardships are as follows : The location of the proposed garage beyond the 70 foot required set back would double the cost of the proposed driveway by doubling its length , and would increase the length and cost of the connection ( breezeway ) . It would result in doors situated such that the garage would need to be increased approximately three feet in width or length to allow for swing clearances , and would place the proposed garage directly in the path of desirable views of the property from the large enclosed porch at the rear of the existing residence . , It ' s signed John Randolph . QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD J . Baker : Q . Is there anything physically that would impede you locating the garage where it belongs according to the laws of the Town ? Any physical encroachments ravines , gullies ? L . Temple : A . A beautiful tree that we ' re going to have to take down . Most of the houses along that area are set back like the existing house is and the garages and so forth . It seems to me that since our proposed location for the garage is set back further from the center line from the road than the existing house is , that it would be in keeping with the ® general feeling of the neighborhood there . ZBOA 3- 5 - 91 PG . 2 L . Temple con . It certainly wouldn ' t add any potential ® danger in terms of being too close to the road . It seems to me there is a nice character along that part of road . It has houses with its porches and garages and so on . We felt in addition to the reasons that we listed setting it back further would change that . W . Temple : A . I would have to stress that the very tall conifer that is directly behind where we ' re placing the garage is one of the prime niceties on that very flat and large yard . J . Baker : Q . Could you give me a location ? W . Temple : A . Directly in line with the porch . J . Baker : Q . Would you consider that tree to be a blockage of the existing views to that direction ? L . Temple : A . No . ® D . Bordonaro : Q . I assume that the driveway currently is on the opposite side of the house and I assume that is also the entrance . Why wasn ' t the proposed garage then placed on the side that li they are currently using for egress ? W . Temple : A . In view of the creek . That ' s their prime view , in the mornings the breakfast area - living room to look out onto the creek . Thy have oriented their upstairs and living arraignments toward that view , since there basically right up on the road and to place a garage in that view , they wouldn ' t even consider that . A . LaMotte : Q . Where might the existing septic , well that type of thing be located ? L . Temple : A . Mr . Randolph indicated that it wasn ' t in the area of the garage but in looking down stairs and talking with him , I can ' t remember where the main waistline was exiting , so I can ' t answer that for sure . ZBOA 3 - 5 - 91 PG . 3 J . Baker : Q . What kind of dollars and cents would you be talking about if you had to locate the garage in compliance with the law ? W . Temple : A . To make it relative to budget , extremely limited budget for the garage it self . Any where 20 to 25 , 000 for its construction . The additional length of the driveway and the connector - the connector would probably add another 1 , 500 . 00 - the driveway 12 to 15 hundred , so anywhere from three to four thousand dollars . The extra width of the garage - depending on what would be involved in having to make the changes anywhere from 2 , 500 to 6 or 7 , 000 . QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR PROCEDURES EXPLAINED FOR DECISIONS HEARING CLOSED AT 7 . 47 PM 7 ". 49 PM HEARING FOR GREAT AMERICAN FOOD STORES ® They are here having been denied permission to erect a roof sign at Great American Store at 12 Freeville Road in Dryden . It is in violation of section 1507 of the Sign Ordinance . Under Practical Difficulties and / or Unnecessary Hardships are as follows ". The use of standard identity . The sign is in stock and to produce a smaller version would have caused an opening delay of three to four weeks at an additional cost of approximately $ 8 , 000 to $ 10 , 000 . 00 . The size of the sign does not exceed the size allowed but the existing wall space was not sufficient to mount the sign to . The only place it could be mounted was on the roof . Signed by Lee Most , agent for Great American Food Stores . QUESTIONS J . Baker : Q . Henry did you send any mailings out to affective neighbors on this particular issue ? H . Slater : A . Sure , Village of Dryden , Contel , People who live in the Village of Dryden on the other side of the road , people who live along that ® side of the road , Dryden Enterprises , anybody who is in the area . ZBOA 3 - 5 -91 PG . 4 L . Most stated that the sign was put on there actually from a misunderstanding from the beginning when I talked to Henry on the phone . He thought it was just going to be a little bit above the roof . Back and forth with discussions , confusion , I put it on the roof . Henry didn ' t know , I didn ' t know I couldn ' t , he didn ' t know that ' s how far up it was going . That ' s way it wound up there already . They wanted to get the store open and not wait another three or four weeks . They were pushing to get the store back open and wanted to open both stores together . D . Bordonaro : 0 . I ' m surprised , Great American is not a " mom and pop " operation , they are large , there professional and they go into every Town around and they must know there is Zoning Laws and I would think that the first thing they do , before opening a store is to check the Zoning Laws or Zoning Officer to see what is nonconforming and what isn ' t . H . Slater : A . They did , twice . L . Most : A . The more we did it the more we confused each other . D . Bordonaro : 0 . There ' s no ambiguity about the writing of the law . It says " No part of the sign will ® be above the facie " it ' s very clear ? L . Most : A . I didn ' t see the writing . We spoke twice before , I make the effort and I was rushed because they wanted to get the store opened . He told me 25 % of the building and I found out the exact size of the wall was I had to work with . I knew I couldn ' t put it on the wall , we had investigated doing that , it would have been to close to the end of the wall and window , it would have looked terrible . It would have been high enough so kids could jump up and hit it and that wouldn ' t have been good . That was the only thing we had in stock and we didn ' t have the time . It wasn ? t the issue of expense as it was time . D . Bordonaro : 0 . Obviously they would have to buy another sign , but they have enough stores so they would reuse this sign , chances are ? L . Most : A . I have several in stock . D . Bordonaro : Q . Are they all the same size ? ZBOA 3 - 5-91 pG . 5 L . Most : A . I have some smaller ones in different locations . But there weren ' t any sufficient for this location in time . Had I had enough time I could have had one here . I would have still had a physical problem because , the way the building is constructed . The upright wall is finished on the inside , I ' d have to bolt through , because there is nothing on the outside to fasten the sign to secure it . Which meant J would have a finished wall inside with through bolts which wouldn ' t have been very nice either . We were able to tie it to the steel structure of the roof and we did bolt through the structure . Even on the wall that would have presented a problem with a set of letters . They had to go on a race way because we bolt transformers , we couldn ' t go inside because there was no access . It ' s a very low building with no facade on the roof to mount it to . A . LaMotte : Q . Are you a Great American Employee or are you a contractor who does the signs for Great American ? ® A . I have been a contractor for Great American who has done the signs for Great American ever since Great American started . J . Baker ; Q . Do you know the eave height on this building ? A . About 11 feet . O . How tall is that sign ? A . 5 feet — G & A — lower case letters are 42 inches . A . LaMotte : Q . What does the whole thing weigh ? A . The word GREAT is in three sections ( approx . 210 lbs ) . The word AMERICAN is three sections about the same . One is 15 feet long the other 16 the other is 161311 , seven or eight hundred stretched over the area . Because there on a race way , the letters are away from the wall . If they were under- the eave the water gets behind the race way and when they freeze th.e ice just tears them apart . ZBOA 3 - 5 - 91 PG . 6 J . Baker : Q . Henry does the sign meet the criteria otherwise ? A . The only problem is it ' s on the roof . A . LaMotte inquired if there were other roof signs in the area ? J . Baker stated Quick Shake had one , it may have been pre existing . Hills has one . Mr . Most stated that on all of their stores they have a mansard roof and therefore the sign is mounted there . If this had had one that is where the sign would have been mounted . HEARING CLOSED AT 8 : 07 PM MEETING CALLED AT 9 : 15 FOR DECISIONS ( ATTACHED ) Re-6p. ctfully submitted , Je -qan , S retary ® i NOTICE OF DECISION TUESDAY MARCH 59 1991 A public hearing to consider the application submitted by GREAT AMERICAN FOOD MARKETS of 12 Freeville Road , Dryden , New York to erect a Commercial Sign on the roof of the Great American Food Market at their 12 Freeville Road Facility and are requesting a variance to . section 1507 of the Dryden Town Zoning Ordinance . A public hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday , March 5 , 1991 with members present : Chairman , John Baker , Dominic Bordonaro , and Alan LaMotte . FINDINGS : 1 . The applicant failed to prove uniqueness . 2 . The applicant failed to prove the Zoning Ordinance caused significant economic injury to his property . A motion was made by Dominic Bordonaro that the variance • be denied to Great American Food Markets based on the findings . Second to the motion was made by Alan LaMotte VOTE YES , ( 3 ) J . Baker , A . LaMotte , D . Bordonaro . NO ( 0 ) ABSTAINED ( 0 ) DECISION : VARIANCE DENIED . Respectfully submitted , John Baker , Chairman jr NOTICE OF DECISION TUESDAY MARCH J , 1991 A public hearing to consider the application submitted by JOHN F . RANDOLPH of 31 Lower Creek Road , Ithaca , New York to erect a private garage closer than the required 70 feet ' from the center of Lower Creek Road and connect it by means of a breezeway , to his existing single family home and requesting a variance to section 754 . 1 of the Dryden Town Zoning Ordinance . A public hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday , March 5 , 1991 with members present : Chairman , John Baker , Dominic Bordonaro , and Alan LaMotte . FINDINGS : 1 . The applicant failed -to prove significant economic injury in this application . A motion was made by Dominic Bordonaro that the variance be denied to John Randolph based on the finding . Second to the motion was made by Alan LaMotte VOTE YES ( 3 ) J . Baker , A . LaMotte , D . Bordonaro . NO ( 0 ) ABSTAINED ( 0 ) DECISION : VARIANCE DENIED . Respectfully submitted , ® ohn Baker , Chairman Jr