Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-07-14 Zoning Board We: [ino W14(,'04 Attending: Paul Lutuak , Waher Maryjas, David Sprout, Tom Quinn and Oers Kelemen , Randy L1arCUS and Henry Slater. oibers in attendance: Jason and Carol Cricp , Brian and Eileen Me Kt] vey and Tom Vann . 7m30 PM Walter read legal notice for Jason and Carol Griep . Jason and Caro] Griep cuMntly of Groton, New fork are requesting variance consideration Car a proposed single Cannily home site, a _42 +,'w acre parcel at or abotu 492 Sheldon Road Preeville, NY which provides 74 . 2 rfct afp Lib lie filoritaga wbert 125 feet of publie frontage is required, The Gricps are requesting authority to construct a single Iamil )` home ; Although the Gricp ' s propose a single Family home, all allowed uses within the FCC Zone require 125 feet of public Fra0Mge including multi-fancily homes Wlfich is Iisted sep¢ralely under Section 803 . 2 _ One and two fancily home frontage requ! rements are established under Section M11 , as are accessary use. structures. This request, being any area variance relief request, is SLQk exempt under 6 NYCPR Part 617 Section 617 _5 ( 13) : Area Variance one., two &. tbree family ho rnes Appeal is also exempt from General Municipal Law 239 L& M, Count}' Planning keview. Walter road the appeal dote and considerations . There was no %vritton reply from the surrounding neighbors. Walter opened the meerI for questions from the board . Oers asked for clarilicarion Orr the size . (74. 2 or 72A) It is 72 .4 , Walter had Jason show the board on the map where eXtictly he wanted to put the 1301=_ 'Porn Quiimi asked about the small parcel on the survey that is not the Griep 's. This parcel belongs to Joy Goyette , • Walter asked if the side setback was going le be a problem and Henry said no . � • Tom asked what was on either side of the property and Jason said there ' s an apartment building on one side and a trailer on the other side , Walter read into tho record the correspondence from T. G . Millcr stating the application does not need further engineering rcvie "rlE)g or comment. Walter asked if anyone else had any questions , there were no questions . Henry suggested that it might be better to close the public commL�nt purtion ofthe headng first and Icave the hearing itself open until such time a decision can be made . (2Xan1pIV ; if you should decide IaTer that You ' re not ready to make a decision and the licarino 19 already closed, then you have a hard time to continue without going through problems to rt-tstablish ncu hearing and re=open ir) . Then nt�icialIy elose thy. hearing. • Walter closed the public comment part of the hearing;. (7 :45 p.m . ) 7:45 P. M. Brian and Eileen McKeleey of 51 Sapsucker Woods , Ithaca , NY are requesting a statement of zoning compliance for an existing detached private garage structure built in 1982 which is closer than 15 feet from the side lot boundary. Relief requested for consideration is a side yard of 6 . 25 feet. 'Phis structure was an unapproved setback violation. The Town of Dryden began administration of setback requirements September 1969 and enforcement of a building code January 1984 . At the 1982 construction of the subject-detached garage, there did not exist a town construction permit requirement, but project sponsors were responsible for zoning setback conformance. There does also exist the possibility the project sponsor did seek and obtain a side lot setback variance . We have reviewed variance decision files determining none exist. Application is SEQR exempt under M'CR.R Part 617 Section 617 . 5 - 12 & 13 . The site being immediately adjacent to the village of Cayuga Heights, the appeal is subject to 239 LLCM review and has been submitted to County Planning for review and recommendation. Walter read legal notice for this hearing and attachments concerning the problems with this property. • 'There were 3 alternatives suggested to resolve this issue, buy some land to make it legal, remove the building or get a variance. Applicant has exhausted the first two options and is now asking for a variance . • The applicant tried to buy land from the neighbor for $ 1 ,000 . but he wanted S7, 500. plus all legal expenses . That price put that option out of their reach and would not be a legal subdivision. ® They then looked into the option of taking down the building, contacted Burt Carson of Carson design and remodeling. He indicated it would cost $ 75 .00 to S80.00 per square foot totaling $21 , 246 . The applicant also got a second estimate from Jeff Borst who confirmed that the value of the building is in this range . • As references attachments there were letters from J R J Construction, Henry Slater, Brian and Eileen McKelvey, Burt Carson, and Shaw Real Estate. ■ Walter asked for any questions or continents. ■ Mr. Mckelvey did receive call from a house moving company from Syracuse, after the application was already submitted and the company said it would cost $ 10, 000. just to move the house, not including any other such a new foundation or getting the building rewired . • Tom Quinn asked if it was a shed or a garage . There were two different maps and one said shed and the other said garage and the estimate submitted talked about carpeting, sheet rock, electricity, and cable . ■ Air. McKelvey said when they purchased the property, it was a finished studio and shed roof garage. When they found out they had an encroachment they removed the shed roof garage. The building that is left standing has the carpet, sheet rock, electricity and cable , • Mathew Everhart, owner of the adjoining property, brought pictures of the property. Mr. Everhart was very adamant about not granting the variance. 1•le said he called the applicant to set up a time to get together and see if they could come to some kind of agreement. The applicant didn ' t show up for the meeting; and Mr. Everhart called again and didn ' t get any response , He thought that they should have gotten together before going in front of the Zoning Board and that did not happen. ® 2 Mr. Everhart said that he would have negotiated the price. The real estate representative was pushing to get a price and 57 , 500. was the price he gave but he was willing to negotiate . ■ Walter asked if the two numbers noted in the records were accurate and Mr. Everhart said they were . ■ The McKelvey ' s cut the concrete pad off right to the line of the Everhart property and the Everhart 's didn ' t like that. • iv1r. Lverhart was also upset because the McKelvey 's had a for sale sign in front of their property. • Walter clarified that the variance is granted to a property not a person . • Walter asked if there was a shared easement or encroachment on the gravel driveway. Mr. Everhart showed on the pictures that the gravel drive is actually on his property. ■ Walter asked Randy Marcus if the footprint of the pad is a zero variance or do they count from the structure 6.25 from the nearest corner. • The pad is grade level so it would not be considered a structure because it is not above grade so there is no requirement for variance. • ivTrs . McKelvey read a sentence fi•om a letter from Susan Lewis from Caldwell Bankers. The stated that Susan asked Mr. Everhart if he would consider taking $3 ,000. for the land and he refused. Ia Walter entered the letter ftom Caldwell Banker dated July 8 , 2004 for reference. • Henry had gone to check if the Everhart ' s could actually sell the property and it turned out that they didn ' t own enough land to sell without them getting a variance themselves. There was more discussing about this application and then afterwards the board moved to table this hearing until the next board meeting so the two parties can maybe corne to some kind of agreement for either the McKelvey ' s or the Everhart 's asking for a variance. Walter read the letter from T. G . Miller stating there was no further engineering review or comment and closed the hearing at 8 : 25 p . m. Lisa Westc.ott of 142 Southwoilli Road, Dryden, NY is proposing to add a 10 ' by 10 ' front porch ; entryway to a 1990 era home which was constructed at exactly 70 feet fi•om the center of Southworth Road. The porch / entryway would create a setback of 60 feet fi•om the center of Southworth Road . There is an attached copy of a September 1996 variance decision as the home was built in error too close to an adjacent side property boundary. Walter read legal notice for Lisa Westcott. There was an attached sketch in the application for the porch and a survey. The applicant' s home was struck by a hit and run driver, which hit the preexisting deck that was 20 square feet, used to enter the home . Walter asked for questions; • Oers asked what part of Southworth Road is this on. Lisa said it was. on the flat side near Breck ' s before the curve . • Ocrs asked if she was replacing the. original deck and she said she was making the porch bigger. This will not be a covered porch. ■ Torn asked if Lisa asked the neighbors if this addition would bother them and she said it wouldn ' t bother the Alexander 's or the 13reck ' s but she did not ask the people across the street because they were up over the hill and she had bushes in the front of the house and they wouldn ' t see anything. • There was no written response from any of the other neighbors . • Walter read the letter from T. G . Miller stating that they do not need further engineering review or comment and also read a letter from the Tompkins County Department of Planning stating that there is no negative impact on the community or countywide . ■ Lisa asked why there was a requirement of 70 feet from the Road and Randy Marcus said that ' s just the way the law is. Walter closed the public comment part of the hearing at 8 : 35 p. m. The hearing was open for discussion for the McKelvey application. This was tabled until the next meeting to see if the two parties could settle on an agreement. Ores moved and Tom Second-3 to continue and 1 abstain (Walter won ' t be here for the next meeting) at that time either the McKelvey application will be decided on or the Everhart 's will have to have a variance to sell to the McKelvey ' s . The board went on to discuss the Wescott application. There were no negative comments for this application . Walter went on to read the findings and application was approved. MOVED: OERS KL•: LEMEN SECOND: DAVE SPROUT AYES : 4 NAYS : O NO NAYS NO ABSTAINS, THIS VARIANCE iS AN EXEMPT ACTION UNDER SEQR SECTION 617. 5 © 12 & 13 Next, the board went on to discuss the Griep application . Randy Marcus suggested that if they grant the variance, the applicant not ask for a variance to subdivide because the land is already maxed out because of how little road frontage there is . No more than one residential dwelling in respect for safety issues. Walter read the findings and application was approved for section 803 . 1 for single family dwelling unit and not 803 . 2 for multiple family dwelling unit. MOVED : DAVID SPROUT SECOND : OERS KELEMEN AYES : 4 NAYS : 0 NO NAYS NO ABSTAINS. THIS VARIANCE iS AN EXEMPT ACTION UNDER SEQR SECTION 617.5 913 Meeting was closed at 9 :30 p.m.