HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 2025-01-07TOWN OF DRYDEN
Zoning Board of Appeals
1-7-25
via Hybrid
APPROVED
1
Board Members (*absent)
Janis Graham, Chairwoman
Ben Curtis
Andrew Henry
Mary Witman (*)
Mike Gill (*)
Henry Slater, (Alternate), (*)
Others Attending
Shelley Knickerbocker, Zoning Officer (Zoom)
Gina Cassidy, Planner
Joy Foster, Board Secretary, (Zoom)
Applicants & Public Attending
Z. Joe Klimkiewicz, (Applicant)
The Public Hearing was opened at 6:00PM
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that a public hearing will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the
Town of Dryden on Tuesday, January 7, 2025, at 6:00 PM to consider the application of Steven
Hartle, acting on behalf of Rodger and Jeannette Stedge, owners, for a Road Frontage Variance to
allow a flag lot subdivision that would increase the road frontage nonconformity of the original parcel at
587 Caswell Road Tax Parcel #23.-1-19.2. Creating a flag lot will result in a remainder lot with 193
feet of road frontage, and this would require 57 feet of relief from the required 250 feet minimum
frontage.
All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. You can either attend the hearing in
person or remotely via internet or telephone. Details on how to connect remotely will be posted several
days prior to the hearing on the Town website at: www.dryden.ny.us You can also submit comments
prior to the meeting or request meeting details by email to: planning@dryden.ny.us Application
mate-rials are available for review at the office of the Dryden Town Clerk at Town Hall and on the
Town's website.
Individuals with visual, hearing or manual impairments and requiring assistance should contact the Town
of Dryden at 607-844-8888 x 216 at least 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing.
Applicants for the 587 Caswell Road were not present.
2
The Board moved on to the next applicant.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that a public hearing will be held by the Zoning Board of the Town of
Dryden on Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 6:15 PM to consider the application of Z. Joe Klimkiewicz,
owner, for a Road Frontage Variance to construct two duplex dwellings at Lower Creek Rd, Tax
Parcel #42.-1-39.9, where road frontage is currently conforming, but would not be conforming were it to
be divided into two lots. If a flag lot is created, the remaining frontage of 227 feet is less than the required
250 feet and thus the 23 feet of requested relief.
All interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. You can either attend the hearing in person
or remotely via internet or telephone. Details on how to connect remotely will be posted several days prior
to the hearing on the Town website at: www.dryden.ny.us You can also submit comments prior to the
meeting or request meeting details by email to: planning@dryden.ny.us Application materials are available
for review at the office of the Dryden Town Clerk at Town Hall and on the Town's website.
Individuals with visual, hearing or manual impairments and requiring assistance should contact the Town
of Dryden at 607-844-8888 x 216 at least 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing.
Z. Joe Klimkiewicz, the applicant, has nothing further to add.
The Boards Discussion/Decision
This recommendation is from the Planning Board
[From 12/17/24] Lower Creek Rd. – Site Plan Review with SEQR, applicant Z. Joe Klimkiewicz
[This is also a variance for less than minimum lot frontage to create a flag lot]
The Board has a discussion with the applicant about his parcel, a 4-acre undeveloped lot. The applicant
is requesting to build two duplex dwellings similar to the ones he has already built in the area. The Board
looks at site plans and survey maps. Each unit will be 2 bedrooms and 2 baths, with a shared driveway,
applicant has septic approval from the health dept. There is one shared well with splitting of supply
water. They will have all electric heat pumps and AC units; all appliances are Energy Star. There will be
an additional small boiler for radiant heated floors. The location and acreage for these are good, it’s the
frontage where it’s a little short. The Board likes what they see on the Site Plan, and they approve the
project with the applicant getting approval from the ZBA for his Area Variance.
Motion: J. Wilson to approve the site plan
Second: J. Kiefer
All in favor – Yes, unanimous
Graham makes a motion to close the public hearing.
Motion made by: J. Graham
Second: - A. Henry
All in favor – Yes
3
MEMO from the Planning Department, Gina Cassidy,
Lower Creek Road • Tax Parcel 502489-42.-1-39.9 • Rural Residential Zoning District
Summary
Applicant, Z. (Joe) Klimkiewicz, requests relief from Town of Dryden Code §270-6.1 Area and Bulk
Regulations Table requiring 250 feet minimum lot frontage. The existing tax parcel 42.-1-39.9 is +/- 4.29
acres and has +/- 252 feet of road frontage. The applicant is applying for a road frontage variance to show
that he is able to subdivide this existing tax parcel into two parcels, one to be fronted by a flag lot of 25
feet road frontage and the remaining lot acres to be fronted by a nonconforming +/- 227 feet. Flag lots are
permitted by Town of Dryden Code (hereinafter “Code”) §270-6.3 Flag Lots in RR, RA and CV Districts:
A lot in the RR, RA, or CV Districts may derive its Frontage and access by means of a narrow portion of
land connecting the Public Highway and the larger rear portion of the lot, provided that no portion of the
access from the frontage shall be less than 25 feet wide.
The purpose of the road frontage variance request is in support of this applicant’s application for a site
plan review to build two (2) two-family dwellings (for a total of 4 units) on the 4.29-acre unsubdivided
lot, as permitted by §270-6.7 Density in Rural Residential and Rural Agricultural Districts (A) Single-,
two-, and multifamily dwellings are permitted subject to a maximum allowable density of two dwelling
units per acre. The maximum number of dwellings that can be built on a lot is equal to the maximum
number of conforming lots that could be created if the lot were subdivided in accordance with Chapter
240 subdivision of Land, as calculated by the Town Planning Director. The grant of this frontage
variance will allow the determination that two (2) lots could be created, and therefore, site plan approval
to construct two (2) dwellings could be granted.
SEQR, County review
• The requested variance is a Type II Action under State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) 6
CRR-NY 617.5(c)(16) …granting of individual setback and lot line variances and adjustments and
therefore requires no environmental review.
• This requested variance has not been referred to Tompkins County Planning for Regional GML-
239 review per Inter-governmental Agreement, dated August 31, 2016, which states: II Items to
be Excluded from Review (A) Lot frontage, width or depth variances for residential uses.
Department Comments/Recommendations the Planning Department does not know of
any reason to deny this request.
At the request of Chairwoman Graham, the Board answered the required questions for an Area Variance;
the responses given by the ZBA members, were as follows.
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 would be no change in the neighborhood. The variance simply permits a new line on the ground to
alter the road frontage for the lot.
Motion made by: B. Curtis
Second: J. Graham All in favor – Yes
4
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:
Subdividing the lot does not appear to be achievable in another manner. The division line could
not be drawn differently.
Motion made by: J. Graham
Second: A. Henry
All in favor – Yes
C. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE REQUESTED AREA VARIANCE IS
SUBSTANTIAL. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Not substantial for the reason that the relief sought is 23 feet, which is less than 10% of the
required road frontage.
Motion made by: B. Curtis
Second: - A. Henry
All in favor – Yes
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:
See response to A
Motion made by: A. Henry
Second: J. Graham
All in favor – Yes
E. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELF-
CREATED. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
Yes, the applicant purchased a lot knowing what the zoning for it allowed
Motion made by: B. Curtis
Second: J. Graham
All in favor – Yes
Motion made by: J. Graham to classify this as Type II Action under State
Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) 6 CRR-NY 617.5(c)(16) and also is 239 exempt from
County Review, per the recommendation of the Planning Dept.
Second: A. Henry
All in favor – Yes
5
The ZB noted the following: It came to the understanding of the ZBA, after it had discussed
and decided on the five conditions, (above), that the applicant has no intention of subdividing.
Instead, the purpose of the appeal is show that the applicant can meet the conditions of
subdividing required by Local Law 270-6.7. Board members Graham and Curtis indicated that
they had not received the Planning Department’s explanatory memo in their mailed packets and
so did not understand exactly what was being appealed.
A motion was made by B. Curtis to Grant the Area Variance as submitted with the
following explanation and condition:
The granting of the variance is to show that it is possible that the parcel could be developed as
two lots. The relief granted will terminate if the parcel is not subdivided within 30 days of the
date of this hearing, January 7, 2025.
Second: A. Henry
All in favor – Yes
The Board has a discussion whether they can do the case if the applicant is not present.
After looking through the Laws and not finding the answer the Board decides to leave the
hearing open for 587 Caswell Road until the applicant can be present.
Motion made by: B. Curtis to table the 587 Caswell Road variance because the Board
is not comfortable proceeding without the applicant present.
Second: J. Graham
All in favor – Yes
ADJOURNMENT
J. Graham Motion to adjourn 7:45 PM
Second: A. Henry
All in favor – Yes