Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-06-01 �i yt hl Zoning Board Meeting C 01104 Attending: Paul Lutuak, Walter Maty.jas, David Sprout, Tom Quinn, Oers Kelen ►en, Randall Marcus 7:30 I'M Walter officially opens the meeting. Application of Ernest and Anna Salducci of 37 Yellow Barn Road 14ree.viIle, Nev-p York request permission to construct an extension of their existing 37 Yellow Barn Road hotne 10 ' 8 .5" rather than the required 15 ' to the north side. boundary line. This would be consistent with the. existing home setback and are requesting a variance to Section 703 .2 of the 'Town Zoning Ordinance to do so. • Jim Droop, Mr. BalduccPs neighbor, presented a blue print of the new structure to be built onto the existing house. v • Site plan dated May I , 2004 drawing i1S- 1 . Letter dated May 1 , 2004 reference proposed for said plan article 1 , existing structure was erected in 1965 463) square foot. This structure is an existing nonconfonning structure. • The new structure will require access to cross the adjoining neighbor' s property at 33 Yellow Barn Road that is owned by Jim Droop. Said neighbor has granted permission , • Due to the current coning setback requirements for the property, and the nonconformance for the front and side yard set backs from current zoning, there is no alternate solution to ad on to the residence without significant impact. on the owner and the existing structure without adverse impact on the existing non-conformances. • Existing structure is approximately 1656 sq . ft., built in 1965 , The addition is east of the building on the north of building, side wall of the current building will remain the same. Walter read a letter from T. G . Miller surveyors who reviewed the application and OK 'd it. • Henry Slater said there, was nothing from the Planning Board and no responses from the letters sent to surrounding neighbors. • Walter closed the public hearing at 7 :43 PM BOARD FINDINGS AFTER PUBLIC HEARING : 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 the granting of the area variance . The Zoning board ofappeals finds as follows: 1 . The adjoining neighbor not only spoke favorable about the proposed project, he designed it. 2 . The addition will have no visual effect from the road or nearby neighbors, and is consistent with the existing nonconforming structure . 3 . Tom moved to accept and David 2"d. 5-0 IS B. In considering whether the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by slime other method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, the zoning board of appeals Prods as follows : I . Due to the proximity to the southern boundary and the location of the septic system as well as the layout of the house; this is the only practical location . 2 . David moves to accept and Paul 2°`I . 5-0 C. In considering whether the requested area variance is substantial , the zoning board of appeals finds as follows: I . The proposed addition does not increase the existing non-conformity . 2 . Oers moves to accept and Tom 2". 5-0 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: 1 . See A . above. An impervious patio already improves the majority of the proposed addition space. 2 . Oers moves to accept and Paul 2"d. 5-0 L_ In considering whether the alleged difficulty was self-created . The 'Zoning Board of Appeals finds as follows : I . Yes, see above. 2 . David moves to accept and Torn 2id. 5 -0 THIS VARIANCE IS AN EXEMPT ACTION UNDER SEAR SEC`1' ION 617. 5o, 12 & 13 7 : 45 P, M . Public Hearing for Alexander Kazimirov of 51) Crystal Drive, Dryden, NY Application from Alexander Kazirnirov requesting permission to place a 12 ' x 8 ' storage shed 10 feet from his 50 Crystal Drive rear property line where 25 feet minimum is required and is requesting a variance to section 703 .2 of the Dryden Town Zoning Ordinance . • Legal notice sent to neighbor and no negative feedback was sent back • Northern edge of property for storage shed for garden tools, about 10 feet from the northern boundary and 50 feet from the cast boundary, size 12 ' x 8 ' x8 % frame 4x4 poles, walls plywood, roof, shingles • Shed will not be noticeable from the road. • Applicant showed pictures where the shed would go on his property . • No comments from anyone present. • Walter read a letter from T. G . Miller surveyors who reviewed the application and OK ' d it. • Walter closed the public hearing at 7 : 55 P. M _ BOARD FINDINC AFTER PUBLIC HEARING : 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 the granting of the area variance. The "Zoning Board of Appeals finds as follows : I . There were no negative comments and the applicant stated he spoke to a northern neighbor who had no objections. 2. Oers moves to accept and David 2od. 5-0 fV B . 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: I . It is feasible to move the proposed site of the shed 15 ' further into conformity, however, it would have a greater visible impact 2 . Paul moves to accept and David 2od. 5-0 C . In considering whether the requested variance is substantial . The Zoning Board of Appeals finds as follows : 1 . Although the relief requested is substantial ( 15 ' out of a 25 ' setback), the proposed location provides a better visual buffer than a conforming location . 2 . Paul moves to accept and David 2"d. 5-0 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 : I . The 12 ' x 8 ` footprint is minimal . See A -C above. 2 . David moves to accept and Paul 2"d. 5d1 E . In considering whether the alleged difficulty was self-created . The Zoning Board oi' Appeals finds as follows : 1 . Yes 2 . Paul moves to accept and David 2"d. 5 -Q THIS VARIANCE IS AN EXEMPT ACTION UNDER SEQR SECTION 61750, 12 & 13 Walter closes meeting at 8 :30 P. M .