Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 2024-07-09DRAFT TOWN OF DRYDEN Zoning Board of Appeals 7-9-24 DRAFT via Hybrid 1 Board Members Present Janis Graham, Chairwoman Ben Curtis Mary Witman Mike Gill Board Members Absent Andrew Henry Henry Slater - Alternant Others Attending David Sprout, CEO & Zoning Officer Gina Cassidey, Planner Joy Foster, Board Secretary, (zoom) Applicants & Public Attending Mike Hall James Dean Kat McEldowney, (applicant) Steve Gordon. (applicant) Chairwoman Graham opens meeting at 6:00PM After determining that everyone present has read the legal notice, motions to waive the reading of the notice. Motion: Graham Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Dryden will conduct a Public Hearing to consider the application of Steve Gordon for an area variance at 410 Thomas Road, Tax Parcel ID 75.-1-30.34. This parcel is in the Neighborhood Residential zoning district and the Code of the Town of Dryden prohibits accessory structures in the front yard. This area variance is to place a single car garage in front of the single-family home. 2 SAID HEARING will be held on Tuesday July 9, 2024, at 6:00 pm at Dryden Town Hall, 93 East Main Street, Dryden, NY 13053, at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. You can either attend the hearing in person or remotely. To attend remotely you connect to the hearing via internet or telephone. Details on how to connect will be posted to one day prior to the hearing on the Town website at: 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 at www.dryden.ny.us. Individuals 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. Graham, applicant has nothing further to add we will take comments from the audience. Mike Hall lives on Peaceful Dr. across from the Thomas Rd property and I’m supportive of the project. Graham, we have a letter from Kelly White and her husband who reside at 398 Thomas Rd. and they have no objections to the project. (attached) I move to close the public part of this hearing and the Board will now go over the questions. Motion: Graham Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes 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: The preconstructed garage and its location would be very much in keeping with the character of the neighborhood, due to the challenging terrain. The steep slope in this area prevents most properties owners from using the depth of their lots. This is at least the third appeal made by parties living on Thomas Road in the recent past that the ZBA has reviewed, all of which were similar in nature to this one. It should be noted that the Board has recommended to the Planning Dept, Planning Board and the Town’s Zoning law consultant that the character of the neighborhood should be taken into account when formulating the laws. In addition, the law that states “an Accessory Structure shall not be permitted in the front yard of a Principal Use” should be made more concise by stating the “required” front yard. It should also be noted that two neighbors, one who lives next door, voiced their support for this project. Motion made by: Curtis Second: Graham All in favor – Yes 3 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: There is no other appropriate place to put the garage. The burden on the applicant to place it elsewhere would far outweigh any benefit to the community. Motion made by: Witman Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes C. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE REQUESTED AREA VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: It is indeterminate whether the request is substantial or not, given that the structure is either in or not in the front yard. But it is a considerable distance from the road, will not be visible from the road and is not in the required front yard. Motion made by: Curtis Second: - Graham 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: There will be no apparent physical or environmental impact. It is in keeping with other houses nearby. Motion made by: Gill Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes E. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELF- CREATED. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: The topography of the lots throughout this area creates the difficulty. Motion made by: Graham Second: Witman All in favor - Yes 4 Motion made by: Curtis to classify this as SEQR exempt type II action 6CRR-NY 617.5(C)(12) per the recommendation of the Planning Department. Second: Graham All in favor - Yes Decision on Variance: Variance is granted as requested with no conditions. Motion made by: Graham Second: Curtis All in favor After determining that everyone present has read the legal notice, motions to waive the reading of the notice. Motion: Graham Second: Witman All in favor – Yes NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Dryden will conduct a Public Hearing to consider the application of Kathleen McEldowney for a use variance at 1729 Slaterville Road, Tax Parcel ID 71.-1-11.1. This application is for the proposed use of a retail liquor store with limited hours and delivery service and is in the Neighborhood Residential zoning district. The Code of the Town of Dryden prohibits Retail Business in this zoning district. SAID HEARING will be held on Tuesday July 9, 2024 at 6:15 pm at Dryden Town Hall, 93 East Main Street, Dryden, NY 13053 at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. You can either attend the hearing in person or remotely. To attend remotely you connect to the hearing via internet or telephone. Details on how to connect will be posted to one day prior to the hearing on the Town website at: 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 at www.dryden.ny.us. Individuals 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. 5 Graham, the applicant, has nothing further to add and will answer questions as they come up. There are no comments from the audience. Comments from the Board. • There is no financial data to show hardship. • There is income from 6 rental units. • The applicant bought the property without contacting the Planning Dept. to see what the legal uses were and if a liquor store would be permitted. The applicant relied on the realtor and attorney. Marty Moses on zoom has concerns about how a liquor store could be in a residential area with children and families. Concerns about the small, limited parking area, and traffic and hours. This just sounds like an odd location in a neighborhood and the garage doesn’t seem big enough for this type of business. James Dean, I’m the owner of a bar in Ithaca, I’m looking to rent the garage space for a liquor store, mainly whiskey and bourbon. Space to store and ship out products. I have a good customer base being Cornell staff, Grad students, and tourists that are out of state, and I need to expand to be able to ship off premises. Hours would be Wednesday, Friday and Saturday from noon till 6 or 7 pm. Most of my business would be online pickup delivery. The building would be an office and shipping space. Food trucks were mentioned but not an issue if not allowed. I live down the road and have been looking in residential areas to try to expand my business and get out of the busy downtown Ithaca. I have a mobile bar that would be parked here, this is a business to take to wedding venues, but that could be sacrificed as well. Graham, we have 2 letters of support for this business and the County Review letter with their recommendations being limited use as a retail liquor store with limited hours and a small delivery service. (letters attached) Graham, I move to close the public part of this hearing and the Board will now go over the questions. Motion made by: Graham Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes A. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence. It is evident that the applicant already realizes a reasonable return, given that the property has six income-producing apartments. This is a grandfathered use in a residential zone which now would only allow a single-family home on the lot. In addition, the applicant has not supplied any financial proof of lack of return. Motion made by: Curtis Second: Graham All in favor – Yes 6 B. The Alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood. Nothing appears to be unique. The only potential uniqueness is that there is an existing building that used to be a detached garage which could easily be converted back to its original use. Motion made by: Witman Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes C. The requested Use Variance if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. It would alter the character of what is currently a residential neighborhood by opening the door to more commercial land in the area. It would also increase traffic. Motion made by: Curtis Second: - Graham All in favor – Yes D. The alleged hardship has not been self-created. The problem was self-created. Due diligence would have revealed the problem. The information was available, the law was clear and there were people who could have helped, for no charge, in the Planning Dept. Motion made by: Gill Second: Curtis All in favor – Yes Decision on Variance: Variance is denied. Motion made by: Graham Second: Curtis All in favor - Yes 7 Approval of May and June minutes Motion to approve May 7, 2024, minutes Motion made by: Gill Second: Witman All in favor 3 yes, 1- nay (Curtis) Motion to approve June 4, 2024, minutes Motion made by: Graham Second: Witman All in favor 3 yes, 1- nay (Curtis) ADJOURNMENT J. Graham Motions to adjourn 6:45PM Second: Witman All in favor - Yes Respectfully submitted, Joy Foster Recording Secretary