Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-01-06 J TOWN OF DRYDEN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JANUARY 6 , 2004 AGENDA : ( 1 ) Thomas Morgan , Jr. MEM . PRESENT : Chairperson Walter Matyjas , David Sprout , Paul Lutwak ALSO PRESENT : Zoning Officer Henry Slater, Recording Secretary Penny Lisi , Applicant ( 1 ) Thomas Morgan Jr. LEGAL COUNSEL : Randy Marcus ( 1 ) THOMAS MILLER , JR , 7 : 34 PM Chairperson Walter Matyjas opened the hearing of Thomas Morgan , Jr . of 5 Ringwood Knoll , Ithaca , who is requesting permission to construct an accessory use attached carport to his single family home . Mr. Morgan is requesting a variance to Section 702 . 1 of the Dryden Town Zoning Ordinance and NYS Town Law 280a to do so . Chairperson Matyjas read the legal notice and remainder of the file into the record and asked Mr. Morgan if there was anything he wanted to add to the record . T . Morgan : Thomas Morgan , Jr . I just want to apologize first as I didn 't realize I needed a building permit because I just thought it was an open 3-sided deal . When the project originally started out I was going to put up one of those aluminum jobs up and decided against it because I didn 't like the looks of it and figured the stick built would be better looking . I had no idea that the property requires a special use variance . I didn 't realize when it was built that it was built underneath those circumstances so I had no idea as I wasn 't even involved . I just wanted to apologize for being in this situation . H. Slater: You should probably tell them you weren 't the original property owner nor anywhere near it . T. Morgan : Right, I had no idea . W. Matyjas : Any questions or comments from the board ? There were none. I would normally ask if there were any other comments from the audience but there 's no one else in attendance today . I ' ll read into the record any responses . We do have a response from T. G . Miller dated 12/31 /03 . Chair Matyjas read said letter into the record. Henry , do we have any other written responses? H . Slater: No , there are no other comments written or otherwise . W . Matyjas : Any other questions ? P . Lutwak : Nothing from the other two people on the street? There were none. But they were mailed something about this right? W . Matyjas : Yes . H . Slater: The record shows who and when . W. Matyjas : At this point I ' ll close the public hearing (7 :41 pm ) . �� www�w,tw,twww�ew+rwirwsrw,rwtirwww**srwwwvrwwwirwirwirwwwwwsr,t* k*,twwwir***,twwwwws.wsrwwweew�rwirw,twwwr**w*www*w*w 7 : 42 PM Chair Matyjas closed the public hearing and the board began their deliberations for Thomas Morgan , Jr. A . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE WOULD BE PRODUCED IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES WILL BE CREATED BY GRANTING OF THE AREA VARIANCE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : There was no comment by any of the neighbors . This home and two others exist by prior variances dating back to 1971 . Motion : P . Lutwak Second : D . Sprout In Favor : 3 Opposed : 0 Be IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE BENEFITS SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT CAN BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER METHOD , FEASIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT TO PURSUE , OTHER THAN AN AREA VARIANCE , THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : No , given the intended use , and with no public road frontage existing to allow any building without a variance . Motion : D . Sprout Second : P . Lutwak In Favor : 3 Opposed : 0 C . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE REQUESTED AREA VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL , THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : Yes , but with no public road frontage there' s no means for conformance without a variance . ® Motion : P . Lutwak Second : D . Sprout In Favor : 3 Opposed : 0 D . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT , THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS .- As an open sided carport , covering a portion of the driveway , the impacts are minimal if any . Motion : D . Sprout Second : P . Lutwak In Favor : 3 Opposed : 0 E . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELF- CREATED , THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : Yes , but there is three existing homes that share use of this private road , with an existing joint maintenance agreement. ® Motion : D . Sprout Second : P . Lutwak In Favor : 3 Opposed : 0 THIS VARIANCE IS AN EXEMPT / NON = EXEMPT ACTION UNDER SEAR SECTION 617 . 5 ( c ) Motion : Paul Lutwak — Grant request Second : David Sprout VOTE : YES : ( 3 ) Walter Matyjas , Paul Lutwak and David Sprout NO : ( 0 ) ABSTAINED : (0 ) DECISION : VARIANCE GRANTED . ® TOWN OF DRYDEN PLANNING HOARD THURSDAY, OC"TOBER lb , 2003 MEMBERS PRE., SEN' ool Chairperson Barbara Caldwell , Natan Fluffnrran, Tom Hatfield, .foe Laquatra and David Weinstein ALSO PRESENT : Henry .Slater, Penny Lisi — Recording Secretary. Debbie Gross . Debbie "Teeter — Cooperative Extension , George Frantz, Kristic O ' Conner AGENDA : ( 1 ) Debbie Teeter — Cooperative Ext. Tompkins County 7 : 23 PM Debbie "Teeter of Cooperative Extension "Tompkins County was present to discuss the 8 year review of Tompkins County Agriculture District 91 . She stated the time line is a 300 day review process and they are about 90 clays into that process. She was present to answer questions and get comments on active vs . inactive farm land in the agricultural district . Her question to the board was if there was any land that had been developed that the town expects will be receiving sewer and water. Joe Laquatra asked Ms . Teeter if slie had looked at the draft comprehensive plan and felt that would be worth her looking at . APIs . Teeter also asked if there ® Nwere any improved subdivisions. Dave Weinstein stated off Ferguson Road there is a subdivision with septic and asked at what point they start thinking they need to take it out of the AG district . Ails . Teeter stated generally if there is active agriculture going on around a residential area their preference is to keep the residential in the AG district because a significant benefit to farmers is to have the residential land surrounding them be part of the AG district as it gives them some protection . ' Their (TC Coop . Ext. ) goal is to get under or reach the 501K, threshold of active farmland in the district . They have to survey all the farmers to confirm how many acres they are farming and total it to say the AG district is "x " number of acres and they can confirm how many acres is actively farmed and as Iona as that number is 50% or more, they can keep it in the AG district . If it ' s less than 50% then they have to take land out . They are not looking, to take land out the AG district unless it needs to be . Ms. "Teeter stated there is a question in many peoples mind of what actively farmed is . She stated if something isn ' t planted in ten years but is moNved every/every other year so it can go back in to agriculture , reasonably that can be considered actively fanned . She said there was always a possibility the state blocking funding of a water district if too many concerns were brought up but typically they could limit the_ hookups in an agricultural district to existing structures only so if there are any situations such as multiple family homes going up in the next four years in a large scale. the board Would want to put water and sewer there in the next eight years and that is what everyone should look at . Ivls . Teeter stated she does not AA ® expect any surprises. Deb Grass asked about the requirements of the ag district get enforced or implemented in the Town o[ Dryden and asked if it was up to each reviewing board to have those requirements on hand . Ms. Teeter stated that is part of SEQR . Further discussion to explain the process to Ms . Gross followed . Joe LaQuatra asked if the board should adjust the Comprehensive Plan and George doesn ' t feel any adlUStn1el11 is necessary and also stated that the infrastructure finance section is touched on in the plan . Chair Caldwell asked if some change should be made in the rollback provisions by an individual in that ag district who' s enrolled in the plan , does it roll back to the time that the revision took place '? Ms . "Teeter stated Illtit. belly removed from the ag district would not have any impact on their taxes. Chair Caldwell stated that Ms . Teeter and Mr. Frantz would speak further on this issue . 7 * 50 PM Henry handed out a sketch conference for a four lot subdivision for John & Kristie O ' Connor. The property is in the 400 block of- Etna Road and the person who owns it lives out of state and they had mistakenly gorse to record these four lots at the assessment department and tile assessment department refused to take them because they felt it it the deflnillon of the Town of Dryden subdivision and it does . it all has public road frontage and the lots are cookie cutter lots that come out of 187 acres . -this is exempt from Health Department review because it doesn ' t meet. the 55 ® degree rule . 'I'his is a Town road . .toe .was concerned there was too many road cuts allowed and Henry stated the county suggests that as recommendations only . Barb asked what was presently there and Henry stated it was a single family home . Ms . O ' Connor stated Ardis owns the 187 . 99 acres and there is no land actively being farmed . Henry stated in the mid 1980 ' there was a small gravel pit there and the land is quite flat along .with the fact there is enough land to do something constructive . Henry also added there is 3000 foot. of road frontage . There was a question to the access to a particular parcel that is land locked and where to put the access to that lot. Tom stated 11e would like to have that issue addressed now versus later. Ms. O ' Connor stated eventually Ardis is planning to put a house in a particular location (showed the board on the slap) . Joe asked if provisions should be added now. Natan stated he was not clear where the owner would be putting the cut to access the new house and Tom stated that was the point to the issue he just raised . Torn staged hard to decide where cut should be without looking at the property itself'. Mr. O ' Connor spoke to where the house is currently and stated there is plenty of space to access the land .where the drive is now. Henry stated the wetland and floodplain review would be done at a later time. The board closed that discussion at 8 : 07 pill . 8009 PM Barb stated after the last meeting with the Town Board there were some things for George to address tonight. The Planning Board thought: they had it settled in May and Nlaholn said they had not and there needs to be an informational hearing and then take the plan back to the board . There were questions as to when to put tale Comprehensive flan on the town website and it was decided to be put on betbre the informational meetings . The Planning Board decided to have a Few informational meetings and at a later time have a public hearing on the Plan . Further discussion of some changes followed . One suggested change was to the water:sewer service area map. Another issue was to the zoning ordinance and having additional setbacks off Ferguson/lrish Settlement Road . George stated it will take a week to ten days to make the changes. Tam suggested adding two or three sentences oil the ag district . The board decided to have three informational meetings : 1 ) Varna Community Center; 2 ) Freeville and 3 ) Dryden Fire hall with a definite time ( i . e. 7-9pm ) . David motioned for the Planning Board request the Town Board f)r $ 3 ,000 or a sufficient amount for mailings to inform the public of these meetings . The Planning Board unanimously passed that motion . if the funding in not available, the board will go to other resources . The Planning Board decided to have George make dle Following changes and put it on the website : 1 ) revise water/sewer north of the village ; 2) check on the agricultural protection plan and develop a language ; 3 ) Fe.rguson/irish Settlement Road — low access thruway ( people coming 38 South to avoid Dryden ) and having big setbacks and few roadcuts; 4) in Varna , change the highway to Main Street to give drivers the feel of a " Main Street" and slow the speed down . The board decided to go with the previous changes and put the Comprehensive flan up on the website by the 30'1' . The meetings will be held as follows : December 9 'h — Freeville/ Etna; December i 1 'h - Vau'na/Ellis Hollow; 18'h — Dryden . Henry was to coordinate them with the time to be 7- 9pm . Superintendent Varvayanis was present and Chair- Caldwell spoke to him regarding the monies for mailings and he was okay with that request pending, the Town Board approval . 9 : 04 i' rM Joe LaQuatra handed out a newsletter and CD Rom to the board for their review, " Partnering for a better New York " . 9 * 06 PM Chair Caldwell stated the last: item on the agenda is for the board to provide input on the expansion of the Commercial Residential subdivision on Dutcher Road in the late 1980 ' slearly 1990 ' s . The parcels on Dutcher road were designated residential and the Inner Loop where this facility is across from Mullen ' s Body Shop was designated by the zoning district as commercial . The Yellow Freight Company evolved shortly after the subdivision was approved and till the residential lots have been sold and built on . The Yellow Freight Company lasted about a year as a transfer station . David Duff' offered to br.iy the property in 1996 and sells water treatment products . He ' s grown to the point where lie needs additional storage . When the approval was given to Mr. Duff, it was suggested that one of the things lie would do if he wanted to expand , by special use permit, was to present to the planning board for their review and comments and recommendations on 1 ) appropriateness for the neighborhood where it is situated and 2 ) to avoid piecemeal development. Henry, stated not he was not sure on an individual site what piecemeal development would mean and stated that with any expansion it is done a piece at a time. The question is should he be considered by putting some storage on this site is a piecemeal and maybe next year lie wants to dig something different to expand his business capabilities or should he be planning to make one big addition at once. Mr. Duff informed Henry he had no plans to do anything other than provide this warehousing capability for his growing business . The one thing Henry stated to the board for possible consideration was what Mr. Duff is planning on storing in the tanks . Mt Duff has been asked and has not. responded to Henry at this date . David asked if there had been any neighbor complaints and there had been none . The nearest neighbor is 300 leet away . Chair Caldwell vas concerned about the possible storage of hazardous materials . Henry suggested the Planning board voice the concerns to the Town Board . As the business has grown , he Could be storing these materials already and the 'Yown doesn ' t know. Mr. Duff sells to large operations by truck with no walk- in business . The Planning Board asked if there are any state or town regulations for this and wondered if the town should check with the DEC . The simplest thin(, to do would be to ask him for his MSDS forms and that describes what the product is . Henry stated as far as the storage is ® concerned . there are building code regulations and Kevin does the inspectlons at this facility . Natan stated if Mr. Duff is goin(), to a larger facility it would be assumed to he more secure . Henry stated any building code violations have already been fixed and the Planning Board is raising recommendations for the 'Town Board . Joe LaQuatra suggested having Debbie Gross do sorne research such as the type of materials are being handled and what applicable regulations come in place here ( i . e . Federal , State or local ) . If Mr. Duff is handling anything hazardous it should be lined with FENIA and the board needs to know that . The Board recommended the following : Mr. Duff be prepared at the time of the public hearing to explain what ' s in the tank and what assurance of what ' s in the tank won ' t end up in the ground water or what might be on site at any one time. The board closed the meeting at 9 : 20pm . STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS TOWN OF DRYDEN In the matter of the appeal of CERTIFICATE 'I HOMAS iMORG' AN , JR . The property located at 5 RINGWOOD KNOLL; (f own of Dryden Tax Map Parcel No . 65 . - I - 1 . 61 ) I , WALTER MArryJAS, Chairperson of the Town of Dryden ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS . do hereby certify pursuant to Rule 6 of the Rules of Procedure 01' such Board , that the foregoing are the f ndin s of fact and decision approved bbysuch Board on : JANUARY 6, 2004 Dated : Dryden , New York Date : 12004 Walter Mat-ve NOTICE OF DECISION PruESDAY ,IANUARY 6 , 2004 A public hearing was held to consider an application submitted by Thomas Morgan , Jr. of 5 Ringwood Knoll . who was asking for relief from Article 7 Section 702 . 1 of the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance and "fown Law 280a . Said hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday .Ianuary 6. 2004 vwith members present : Chairperson Walter Nlatyjas , David Sprout . and Paul Lutwak , AREA VARIANCE APPLICANT : 'CHOiV1AS MORGAN, .TR . A . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN UNDESIRABLE: CHANGE WOULD BE PRODUCED IN Tl-Ir CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DF1` RIMENT `1'O NEARBY PROPEWHES WILL BE CRI"ATED BY GRANTING OF THE AREA VARIANCE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : There was no comment by any of the neighbors . This home and two others exist by prior variances dating back to 1971 . Motion : P . Lutwak Second : D . Sprout In Favor: i Opposed : 0 13. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE BENEFITS SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT CAN BE ACHIEVED BY SOMb" OTHER METHOD , FEASIBLE. FOR THE APPLICANT TO PURSUE, OTHER THAN AN AREA VARIANCE , HE ZONING 13OAKD OF APPEALS F THE AS FOLLOWS : No , given the intended use, and with no public road frontage existing to allow any building without a variance . Motion : D . Sprout Second : P . Lutwak In Favor : ti Opposed : U C . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE REQUESTED AREA VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL :, THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL, .SS FINDS AS FOI : LOws : Yes, but with no public road frontage there ' s no means for conformance without. a variance . Motion : P . Lutwak Second : D . Sprout In Favor : 3 Opposed * 0 D. 1N C: ONSIDER1NG WHETHER THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL. HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE. PHYSICAL . OR ENVIRON ►MENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE.. NE10HBORHOOD OR f_) ISTRICT. Ti,n.4 ZONING BOARD Ol� APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : As an open sided carport., covering a portion of the driveway , the impacts are minimal if any . Motion : D . Sprout Second : P . Lutwak In Favor: 3 Opposed : 0 E . IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELIa - CREATED , 1411E ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS : Yes, but there is three existing homes that share Use of ( his private road , with an existing joint maintenance agreement . Motion * D . Sprout Second : 11 . Lutwak In Favor : 3 Opposed : 0 THIS VARIANCE IS AN EXEMPT / NON - EXEMPT ACTION UNDER SEAR SECTION 617 . 5 c Motion : Paul Lutwak — Grant request. Second : David Sprout VOTE : VES : ( 3 ) Walter Matyjas , Paul Lutwak and David Sprout NO : ( 0) ABSTAINED : (0) ' EU . DECISION : VARIANCE GRj\ N"I