Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-04 TOWN OF GROTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Public Hearing , - Tuesday , June 49 1985 BOARD ( *present ) PUBLIC PRESENT *J . Bell Phillip Shurtleff *M . Decker Lacey Griep *D . Ofner Mrs . Harry Griep L . Raymond Steven Sutliff r N . Smith Milton DeGraw ', Colleen Pierson , Town Clark George Totman , Chmn . Planning Board Gary Wood , Zoning Officer Public Hearing to consider the application of HARRY GRIEP for a variance of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Groton in regard to road frontage . . , J . Bell opened the Public Hearing with the reading of the Public Notice dated May 20 , 1985s A correction in the Public Notice was noted that Joseph F . Osmeloski did not apply for the variances Phil Shurtleff apllied on behalf of -Harry Griep for the same reason , variance as to road frontage . BELLS Anyone in favor of the Appeal with comments please stand and identify yourself and state . your case . SHURTLEFFs I am aea Estate Broker . I represent Mr . Griep ; he contracted with me to sell some land for him . As I read the Zoning Law , he was short in having 200 - foot frontage to convey . As I read . it , I could not see anything in the law that said it had to be continuous 200 feet . I called-Mr . - Wood ,- I > read the law as I -- saw it to him and said all I see is that he had to have 200 foot of frontage . Mr Griep ' s attorney read the law and he thought 200 foot frontage too . On the basis of that , Mr . Wood said to go ahead with the project but he suggested I call the Health Department , I called the Health Department and explained the situation to them and they said it was fine with them . They felt there was room for the lateral' s or anything else that might be needed . On that basis , after talking with Mr . Wood and the Health Department we ordered a survey . It came in at $489 . 00 . The application was put in by the would be - purchaser and , I understand , the permit was denied . I went back to Mr . Wood and he said he thought the cleanest way of everything and to - save legal hassle , was to come' in and ask for a variance . If you deny the variance , Mr . Griep will lose the sale of the land and will be stuck with the costs incurred so far . I can ' t - see where its going to hurt anybody up there . In fact , on Pleasant Valley Road Mr . Torok was granted a variance for 137 foot frontage to build a building . The idea is not brand new . If it is not the intent of the Zoning law to allow . . . . . . . . . . frontage , I think the law should be amended and made specific ' to be understood by everyone . All I can say at this point uy PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 3- June 4 , 1985 OFNER : I have a question , Phil , did you say the Code Enforcement Officer approved the frontage? SHURTLEFFs He told me he agreed with me in the way the law was written . OFNER : Did he give you a building permit? SHURTLEFFs He told me theirs would be no problem . WOOD : At that time , yes . OFNER : Why are we hers? WOOD : The reason we are here is that I stand in the minority of one . I am the only one that interpreted the law this way . The question was posed to me much as Mr . Shurtleff said . I looked at the book a lot , a lot of at least one acre . If you look at the definition of a lot , contiuous piece of property . It says 200 feet of frontage . The definition of frontage is the distance . measured alone; the street right of way not , a continuous line . I have been biased by the face I know the courts ruled over the years the only legal reason they allow for setting area require- - ments in zoning in an ordinance was to establish density patterns . The net resuli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The literal interpretation of the law is met , then the intent of the law is met . I said _ --- - - -_ it looks good enough to me . i OFNER : Is the sewagg the only reason for the ' 200 foot frontage? WOOD : No . The matter of establishing density patterns in that - - - -- particular land use area . SHURTLEFF : There has never been any buildingI can possibly see on three sides of this . As far as increasing. the density , the Health Department looked at it and they said as far as they were con- cerned plenty of toom for everything . BELL : I have a question . You have approximate 19 acres and you ' re selling approximately 10 acres? hh L . GRIEP : He is selling 10 acres of field , andXeoasx �cXwmaxs�xannue BELL : Just on Sovoccol Hill Rd . frontage is available? L . GRIEP : The field is level on the road front and level part way down the hill . The rest is hilly and up a raven . BELLS What are you c ;oing to do with the rest of the acerage left? L . GRIEP't As far as I. kr!ow it stays with the house that is already there . There is possibly room for a garage back there . Everything is too inaccesable for anything . The field is above this 10 acres . It is not level but fairly level . �r PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 5- II June 4 , 1985 BELLS It depends whether, the Board says ' yes you ', can have the frontage to build back on this acerage ' . SHURTLEFFs If land is 200 foot across front and one acre and now we ' re talking . . . if I wanted to buld within 8 feet of line I would , theoretically , be able to as long as set from the street . I would have all kinds of room on this side . If you allow a mobile home in there , he tells me he eventually plans a house. In any event , he Mould still have in that hundred plus feet more than any offset ycu require . BELLS You ' re talking about 114 as opposed to 200 � feet . You ' re crowding several in as far as density . SHURTLEFF : I don ' t donceivably see any way putrbarn in that area . He wants the barn for horses . When we walked the land clear back of the lot lines for the yarn . L . GRIEP : Where the two trailers set a strip up the middle . The land peaks then the lanJ levels down toward the '' north . Approximately where he would put the trailer ] everything would go that way from it . He needs the area in ;front for ` the driveway . He has -- - — the ' U ' part can make into a circular driveway . He is building trailer on top of t: he hill , in back of the 'llines of the two — - " - trailers . I BELLS Anybody else ' have any comments or questions as far as the Board is concerned? OFNER : I know lot frontage is established for tworeasons , the size -- of the lot too . One reason is density . You talk about density you talk about standard maintaining countryside . You get a higher density of housing with this . SHURTLEFF : i' OFNER : You are putting residential property along 'Ithe road , creating tighter density . I ' m not saying precludedl!'' for not as . . . . . have to consider that aspect in all fairness . BELL : We are here to consider variance in the Town of Groton with regards to road frontage . As far as if the buyer decides to put a trailer on , then he is going to have ' to meet the conditions the Board of Appeals sets , if the Board of '' Appeals decides to grant the variance , . If we say not build in this 114 foot area , you have a variance3 with conditions . DeGRAW : This does not say then , that Mr°. Osmeloski ; can put trailer where he wants to? SHURTLEFFs What I am asking you is to grant the variance , then is Osmeloski does not pay them for the land then I wil get somebody else to PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 7 June 49 1985 BELLS That is why there are variances sothat things set as far as the Zoning Ordinance you can appeal to the very strick conditions . That is what we ' re doing tonight . DeGRAWs What I am saying in this sense , if you did !Iturn down there is no reason he can ' t go to the County and have the land valued as agricultural . BELLS If t trai er is 11 c d legal J9 wYYYYIiX'6XW6u ,j tgim xhYYboXYdaries and �ia variance wQI � �a gr�n a T9 can a �ux � n fge 114 strip . SHURTLEFFs The variance granted to Mr,: - , Torok except that no way get- 200 foot frontage . The stipulation was that he would nct build in that lane . PIERSON : The one Phil is talking about when they placed . the home back there , they are not looking into someone ' s 'iback yard . BELL : Here again , what we are going is granting or not granting a 11 variance for road frontage . Yet you have + 10 acres to build back there . The person building will have '; to meet the Zoning requirements . SHURTLEFFs If you don ' t let him build in the 114 foot1,,� area but fray back . DeGRAWs If you grant .,-this, then the next step is for a building permit? SUTLIFF : In our sgreement the hedgerow would be left but the Hedgerow behind our property could be removed . DeGRAWs We have privacy now . SHURTLEFFs It probably won ' t be conveyed until there is agreement among everybody on the lines . We are asking forMvariance on the road r frontage . BELL : If everybody understands the situation and �,ithere are no more questions , I will close the Hearing . We will make a decision and advise you within 60 days . I MARGARET A;. PALMER9 DO CERTIFY that a e t the Public Hearing for the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Town of Groton for 'la variance in the Town Zoning Ordinance requested by HARRY GRIEP on Sovocool Hill Rd . , Town of Groton held on June 4 , 1985 , I did takerthe minutes of said 'Hearing and the foregoing is a true and exact copy ' to the best" of my ability . �.z/.� b TOWN OF GROTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS;; i WHEREAS , application No . 85- 51 - A , a request for a variance of section 353 . 1 . E of the Town of Grotcn Land Use and Development Code was filed on May 31 , 1985 , and it WHEREAS , said application requests a variance to permit a place- ment of a mobile home on property orined by Harry Griep on Sovocool Hill Road , being a portion of Tax Map Parcel 25- 1 - 19 . 2 and '' containing 9 . 72 acres of land, by reducing the required frontage of 200 or 150 feet to 114 feet , and WHEREAS , all members of the board present viewed the property , and WHEREAS , after due notice a public hearing was held by the Board of Zoning Appeals at 8 : 00 p . m . on June 41 1985 to consider the application and WHEREAS , at. said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded , and WHEREAS , all testimony has been carefully cosidered and the following facts noted : ` 1 . The frontage is 114 f3et with no larger frontage available to the 9 . 72 acres . 2 . Landowner was left with a piece of property , with 114 feet of frontage to use fo ^ right of way to ,iget to the 9 . 72 " , - -- acres , . not of his own making . . , _ NOW , THEREFORE , be it resolved that the application of Harry Griep for a variance of Section 353 . 1 . 8 reducing the required frontage be GRANTED to the following extent , and upon _ the following conditions : 1 . No building or structure is � to be constructed closer than 330 feet from the center line of Sovocool Hill Rd . 2 . Any conveyance of the property by deedlwill be subject to -the conditions of this variance . The foregoing Resolution was submitted by : David Ofner seconded by : Mary Decker unanimously adopted by the Board on June -44 , 1985 . fl TOWN OF GROTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WHEREAS , application No . 85- 51 - A , a request for a var: . ance of section 353 . 1 . B of the Town of Groton Land Use and Development Code was filed on May 319 1985 , and WHEREAS , said application requests a variance to perm, :t a place- ment of a mobile home on property owned by Harry Griep on Sovocool Hill Road , being a portion of Tax Map Parcel 25- 1 - 19 . 2 and containing 9 . 72 acres of land , by reducing the required frontage of 200 or 150 fi :et to 114 feet , and WHEREAS , all members of the board present viewed the property , and WHEREAS , after due notice a public hearing was held bit the Board of Zoning Appeals at 8 : 00 p . m . on June 4 , 1985 to consider the application and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were . heard and their testimony recorded , and WHEREAS , all testimony has been carefully cosidered and the following facts noteds 1 . The frontage is 114 feet with no larger frontage available to the 9 . 72 acres . 2 . Landowner was left with a piece of property with 4. 14 feet of frontage to use for right of way to get to the 9 . 72 - acres , not of his own _ making . NOW , THEREFORE , be it resolved that the application of Harry Griep for a variance of Section 353 . 1 . E reducing the required frontage be GRANTED to the following extent and upon_ the following conditionss 1 . No building or structure is ' to be constructed closer than 330 feet from the center line of Sovocool Hill Rd . 2 . Any conveyance of the property by deed will be sub ,; ect to the conditions of this variance . b The foregoing Resolution was submitted by : David Ofner seconded by : Mary Decker unanimously adopted by the Board on June -- 4 , . 1985 . AL TOWN OF GROTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Public Hearing , Tuesday , June 4 , 1985 BOARD ( *present ) PUBLIC PRESENT *J . Bell Phillip Shurtleff #M . Decker Lacey Griep #D . Ofner Mrs . Harry Griep L . Raymond Steven Sutliff N . Smith Milton DeC; raw Colleen Pl. erson , Town Clerk George Totrman , Chmn . Planning Board Gary Wood , Zoning Officer Public Hearing to consider the application of HARRY GRIEP for a variance of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Groton in regard to road frontage . J . Bell opened the Public Hearing with the reading of the Public Notice dated May 20 , 1985 . A correction in the Public Notice was noted that Joseph F . Osmeloski did not apply for the variance ; Phil Shurtieff apllied on behalf of Harry Griep for the : same reason, variance as to road frontage . _ BELL : t Anyone in favor of the Appeal with comments please stand and _identify yourself and state your case . SHURTLEFF ': I ani a/ Rea Estate - Broker . I represent . Mr . Griep ; he contracted with me to sell some land for him . As I read the Zoning Law , he was short in having 200 foot frontage to convey . As I read it , I could not see anything in the lan that said it had to be continuous 200 feete I called Mr . Wood , I read the law as I saw it to him and said all I see is that he had to have 200 foot of frontage . Mr Griep ' s attorney read the law and he thought 200 foot frontage too . On the basis of that , Mr . Wood said to go ahead with the project but he suggested I call the Health Department , I called the Health Department and explained the situation to them and they said it was fine with them . They felt there was room for the laterals or anything else that might be needed . On that basis , after talking with Mr . Wood and the Health Department we ordered a survey . It came in at $489 . 00 . The application was put in by the would be purchaser and , I understand , the permit was denied . I went back to Mr . Wood and he said he thought the cleanest way of everything and to save legal hassle , was to come in and ask for a variance . If you deny the variance , Mr . Griep will lose the sale of the land and will be stuck , with the costs incurred so far . I can ' t see where its going to hurt anybody up there . In fact , on Pleasant Valley Road Mr . Torok was granted a variance for 137 foot frontage to build a building . The: idea is not brand new . If it is not the intent of the Zoning law to allow . . . . . . . . . . frontage , I think = the law should be amended and made specific - to be understood by everyone . All I can say at this point tJ PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARO OF APPEALS - 3- June 4 , 1985 OFNER : I have a question , Phil , did you say the :ode Enforcement Officer approved the frontage? SHURTLEFFs He told me he agreed with me in the way t 'ie law was written . OFNERt Did he give you a building permit? SHURTLEFF : He told me there would be no problem . WOOD : At that time , yes . OFNERs Why are we here? WOOD : The reason we are here is that I stand in the minority of one . I am the only one that interpreted the law' this way . The question was posed to me much as Mr . Shurcleff said . I looked at the book a lot , a lot of at least one tcre . If you look at the definition of a lot , contiuous piece ) f property . It says 200 feet of frontage . The definition of `rontage is the distance . measured along the street right of way no : a continuous line . I have been biased by the face I know the courts ruled over the years the only legal reason they allow fo % setting area require= . - ments in zoning in an ordinance was to establish density patterns . The net result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The literal interpretation of the law is met , than the intent of the law is met . I said ' 1 it-looks good enough OFNERs Is the . sewage the only reason for the 201 foot frontage? WOODS No . The matter of establishing density patterns in that particular-land use area . -- . - -- -- - - SHURTLEFFs There has never been any building I can possibly see on three sides of this . As far as increasing the density , the Health Department looked at it and they said as "ar as they were con. cerned plenty of toom for everything . BELL : I have a question . You have approximate 19 acres and you ' re selling approximately 10 acres? L . GRIEP : He is selling 10 acres of field , aAedXlaast brxxm0 K xxxona BELLS Just on Sovocool Hill Rd . frontage is available? L . GRIEP : The field is level on the road front and :. evel part way down the hill . The rest is hilly and up a rav : :n . BELLS What are you going to do with the rest of the acerage left? L . GRIEP!t As far as I know it stays with the house that is already there . There is possibly room for a garage back there . Everything ` is too inaccesable for anything . The field is above this 10 acres . It is not level but fairly level . 1 ` y. PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS -5 June 41 1985 BELL : It depends whether the Board says ' yes you can have the frontage to build back on this acerage ' . SHURTLEFFt If land is 200 foot across front and one acre and now we ' re talking . . . if I wanted to buld within 8 feet of line ' I would , 11 theoretically , be able to as long as set from the street . I would have all kinds of room on this side . If you allow a mobile home in there , he tells me he eventually plans a house . 11 In any event , he would still have in that hundred plus feet more than any offset you require . BELLt You ' re talking about 114 as opposed to 2001ifaet . You ' re crowding several in as far as density . SHURTLEFF : I don ' t donceivably see any way put barn in that area . He wants the barn for ' horses . When we walked the land : lear back of the lot lines for the barn . L . G RIEP . Wher e the two trailers set a strip up the middle . The land peaks then the land levels down toward the „ north . Approximately Where he would put the trailer , everything would go that way from it . He needs the area in front for the driveway . He has the ' U ' " part can make into a circular driveway , He is building trailer on top of the hill , in back of the ' linns of the two trailers-. — - - - BELL : Anybody else have any comments or question' as far as the Board is concerned? OFNER : I know lot - frontage is established for twolirea! „ons , the size 11 of the' lot too .— One reason is density . You tailk about density —you talk about standard maintaining countryside . You get a higher density of housing with this .. SHURTLEFF : OFNER : You are putting residential property alongithe road , creating tighter density . I ' m not saying precluded ,lfor not as . . . . . have to consider that aspect in all fairness . BELL : We are here to consider variance in the Town of Groton with regards to road frontage . As far as if the buyer decides to put a trailer on , then he is going to have � to meet the conditions , the Board of Appeals sets , if the Board of ;� Appeals decides to grant the variance . If we say not build in th5s 114 foot area , you have a variance with conditions . DeGRAW : This does not say then , that Mr . OsmeloskiCcan put trailer where he wants to? SHURTLEFFt What I am asking you is to grant the variance , then is Osmeloski does not pay them for the land then I wll get somebody also to s PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 7- June 4 , 1985 BELL : That is why there are variances so that things set as far as the Zoning Ordinance you can eippeal to the very strick conditions . That is what we ' re doing tonight . DeGRAW : What I am saying in this erense , if you did turn down there is no reason he can ' t go to the County and have the land valued as agricultural . hh 11 11 will lie witblo the boundaries BELL : andtt�ia varianceswQI �cna tjrr n a 1ftxcan�txeewbxuillxfnxtnexIY4 strip . SHURTLEFF : The variance granted to Mr,: iTorok except that no way get 200 foot frontage . The stipu7.. ation was that he would not build in that lane . PIERSON : The one Phil is talking at )out when they placed the home back there , they are not looking into someone ' s back yard . BELL : Here again , what we are going is granting or not granting a variance for road frontages . Yet you have ` 10 acres to build back there . The person building will have to meet the Zoning requirements . SHURTLEFF : If you don ' t let him build in the 114 foot area but way back . DeGRAW : If you grant this , then th• e next step is for a building permit? SUTLIFF : In our agreement the hedgerow would be left but the hedgerow , behind our property could be removed . DeGRAW : We have privacy now . SHURTLEFF : It probably won ' t be conveyed until there is agreement among everybody on the lines . We are asking for variance on the road frontage . BELLS If everybody understands the situation and there are no more questions , I will close the Hearing . We will make a decision and advise you within 60 days . I , MARGARET A . PALMERI DO CERTIFY that at the Public Hearing for the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Town of Groton for a variance in the Town Zoning Ordinance requested by HARRY GRIEP on Sovocool Hill Rd . , Town of Groton held on June 4 , 1985 , I did take the minutes of said Hearing and the foregoing is a true and exact copy to the best of my ability . J�_ Zoe 7 i PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 6 - June 4 , 1985 pay them and be sure they undetstand everything . Let him sell the land with conditirns not build withing the 114 foot width . Give him the variance so he can move the land and recoup his money . BELL : The variance will be for a variance on the frontage , only . DeGRAWs I like to know what will happen with the measurment . Will that 114 feet become 103 feet? If everybody is moved over 9 feet the other lot should to too . At one point in time the stack in culvert was moved and the surveyors were taking that as the stack from the corner east . If that is true you still have 114 feet . but as it stands today I got 9 feet less . In my abstract it goes by center of Sincerbeaux Rd . and also military lot line , they are not together anymore . The center of Sincerbeaux Rd . comes into my neic. hbors backyard . As you measure from there that the way the line feeds . For some reason they refused to measure from the military lot li-ne . Mr . Shurtleff keeps saying they are coming to see me . ' SHURTLEFFs There will be no land to convey until the lines are determined right . Going to remove lines 9 feet east from what the map shows . Everybody will be moved 9 feet and the 114 feet will _ still be there . BELLS As far- as- -the - -legal survey and abstract , -we cannot become involved in that . We can grant variances . DECKER = They will still have 114 feet to work with , -OFNER= — It appease to me , the 114 feet and 109 feet , if he builds not in there , it in effect would be a big right of way . Nine feet is not a significant problem in 114 foot right of way . SHURTLEFFs He will have to be back of the line . If he positions it on- - the survey where he does there he won ' t be in the 114 foot strip . L . GRIEPs I would like to state the whole intent of my father was to cut down on his tax burden , that is the reason to sell the property . This is the only open piece to sell to cut down his tax burden . One reason he plans to reture and he would like to cut down on his tax burden . Otherwise he won ' t belabls to pay his taxes . DeGRAWs Like Lacey says , if the Town disapproves so you could not build in there , they could gj3 to the County for a decrease in lot taxes . Why can the Coijnty refuse not to lower the taxes? BELLS I have no idea . DeGRAWs You have the County and the Town . but they are not working together . Y -J PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS -4- June 4 , 1985 SHURTLEFF : Thatts the only tillable land up there . BELL : The reason you had it surveyed out was to get 200 feet on the road? SHURTLEFF : Mr . Griep agreed to sell 200 foot frontage and tillable field . He wants to kusp the rest of it . He does not intend to sell the wooded portion . The wanted something they could make pasture out of . BELLS Mr . Osmeloski is not here tonight? SHURTLEFFs I have a letter from his attorney that in ; essence says if they are granted this variance they will go through with the purchase . It scared him when he did not - get his permit . By then spent quite a lot .of" Mr . and Mrs . Griepfs money . BELL : The problem I have is the placement of .the trailer he wants to put there . OFNER : I have questioi in reference to the frontage . In additon to the description of the frontage in the Ordinance there is also a - - " - diagram of frontage , the diagram designed as a line . It shows one line . Has anyone in any town legal consultant been quarried about this? Hss the Town Attorney b',sen . querried1whether the _ . - _ it is shown in the diagram of way ' s line is versus two lines , which would be in this case? _ WOOD : Yes , the Town . attorney has been consulted and he is of the opinion it has to be continuous . BELL : Who is the attorney who agreed with Mr . Shurtleff? SHURTLEFF : John and Frank Albanese law firm . He agreed with Mr . Woods interpretation ,, He agreed before we spent money on a survey , If we had not that opinion of his , we would not have proceeded . OFNER : Did the Town Attorney give you. , his opinion in writing? WOOD : No , nor did I ask for one . SHURTLEFF : We would not be here if I did not honestly believe we were all right . To be fair to everybody I ask you to grant the variance . BELLS From what I car see we may grant the varianceekmtx 'not grant the variance as far: as frontage concerned for Mr . Griep . As far as placement of the trailer I ' m not sure whether we can agree on that at thie: point . SHURTLEFF : We can leave. that to the Health Department and as long as set back from ' the property line . . PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 2- June 4 , 1985 is the fair thing is to grant the variance ' and I hope you will do it . I think we all hope to be used in a fair manner . There seems to be some doubt in the neighbors minds about the survay . I would like to say that before the land is conveyed the line will be corrected to its proper place . Milt DeGraw says the line should be 9 foot further east . That the most westerly line is 9 foot too far to the west . The distance will be the same even though you move the map 9 feet sideways . BELLS It does not affect the frontage? SHURTLEFFs No . DeGRAWs It affects ay frontage . The west line does not follow the military lire . OFNERs That would cut 9 feet off your lot ? DeGRAWs I have a house and farm and field there . I talked to the surveyers and told them they were 9 feet short . They agreed they were 9 feet off . I asked them about it and they have not gotten back to me . I want my 9 feet back . It is either in my neighbor ' s yard west of me or also into Mr . Sutlifffs '!. It is Just not a proper refer3nce . -- OFNERs -- - - - - - -You are saying it should be 9 feet "over into the property we are looking at n3w? - DeGRAWs I have an abstract ; I have been surveyed . To "the west side of me there are t* 3 different military lines that have gotten crossed over . SHURTLEFFs Before any conveyance of property is made , we will be sure the lines are correct . It would not affect the question we are debating heret . The whole map would be moved 9 feet to the east . OFNERs You are saying it would compress the present 114 feet ? BELLS What you are saying is it would go 9 feet into the Sutliff property? SUTLIFFs I understood the hedgerow between DeGraw and Our side was the boundary between the two properties . When , they surveyed , I noticed the stack was into my prrperty . I lost 9 or 10 feet on the east , which made the lot in between my trailer and the next one down farther . - SHURTLEFFs As I see it , it is 9 foot too far west ; need to go 9 foot to the west . PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - 6- June 4 , 1985 pay them and be sure they undetstand everything . Let him sell the land with conditions not build withing the 114 foot . width . Give him the variance so he can move the land and recoup his money . BELLS The variance will be for a variance on the frontage , only . DeGRAW : I like to know what will happen with the measurmsnt . Will that 114 feet become 103 feet? If everybody is moved over 9 feet the other lot should be too . At one point in time the stack in culvert was moved and the surveyors were taking that as the stack from the corner east . If that is true you still have 114 feet . but as it stands today I got 9 feet leas . In my abstract it goes by center of Sincerbeaux ' Rd . and also military lot line , they are not together anymore , iThe center of Sincerbeaux Rd . comes into my neighbors backyard . As ' you me, :sure from there that the way the line feeds . For some reason thi :y refused to measure from the military lot line . Mr . Shurtle • 'f keeps saying they are coming to see me . SHURTLEFF : There will be no land to convey until the lines ; ire determined right . Going to remo_v_e_linee 9 feet east " from what the map -- shows . Everybody will be moved 9 feet and the 114 feet will still be. there . -- - - :.- - BELL : As far as'--the legal survey and -abstract , - - we cannot become involved - - in We can grant variances . DECKER : They will still have 114 feet to work with . OFNER : It appears-to—me , the 114 feet and 109 feet , if he builds not in there , it in effect would be a big right of way . Nine feet is not a significant problem in 114 foot right of way . SHURTLEFF : He will have to be back of the line . If he positions it on• • the survey where he does there he won ' t be in the 114 foot strip . L . GRIEP : I would like to state the whole intent of my father was to out down on his tax burden , that is the reason to sell the property . This is the only open piece to sell to cut down his tax burden . One reason he plans to reture and he would like to cut down on his tax burden . Otherwise he won ' t be , able to pay his taxes . OeGRAW : Like Lacey says , if the Town disapproves so you could not build in there , they could go to the County fora decrease in lot taxes . Why can the County refuse not to lower the -taxes? BELL : I have no idea . DeGRAW : You have the County and the Town . but theylars not working together . PUBLIC HEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS -4 - June 4 , 1985 SHURTLEFF : That ' s the only tillable land up there . BELL : The reason you had it surveyed out was to get 200 feet on the road? SHURTLEFF : Mr . Griep agreed to sell 200 foot frontage and tillable field . He wants to keep the rest of it . He does not intend to sell the wooded portion . The wanted something they could make pasture out of * BELL : Mr . Osmeloski is not here tonight ? SHURTLEFF : I have a letter from his attorney that in e3sence says if they are granted this variance they will go throjgh with the purchase . It scared him when he did not - get his perm'i : . By then spent quite a lot of Mr . and Mrs . Griep ' s money. BELL : The problem I have is the placement of .the - ; railer he wants to put ' there . OFNER : _ I have question in reference to the frontage . In additon to the description of the frontage in the Ordinance ► there is also a diagram of' frontage , - the diagram designed a: i a line . It shows one line . Has anyone in any town legal con, iultant been quarried about this? - - Has the Town Attorney been quer •ried whether the � 1 iine._as it is shown in the . disgram . of way a line is versus two- - ; lines , which would be - in this case? WOOD : Yes , the Town Attorney has been consulted and he is of the opinion it has to be continuous . BELL : Who is the attorney who agreed with Mr . Shur•tleff? SHURTLEFF : John and Frank Albanese law firm . He agreed with Mr . Woods interpretation , He agreed before we spent, money on a survey , If we had not that opinion of his , we would not have proceeded . OFNER : Did the Town Attorney give you; ihis opinion in writing? WOOD : No , nor did I ask for one . SHURTLEFF : We would not be here if I did not honestly believe we were all right . To be fair to everybody I ask you to grant the variance . BELL : From what I can see we may grant the varianc3 ; Wwkxxwt grant the variance as far as frontage concerned for , her . - Griep . As far as placement of the trailer I ' m not sure whether we can agree on that at this point . SHURTLEFF : We can leave. that to the Health Department and as long as set back from the property line . . PUBLIC BEARING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - Z- June 4 , 1985 is the fair thing is to grant the variarce and I hope you will do it . I think we all hope to be used in a fair manner . There seems to be some doubt in the neic; hbors minds about the survay . I would like to say that before the land is conveyed the line will be corrected to its proper place . Milt DeGraw says the line should be 9 foot further east . That the most westerly line is 9 foot too far to the Wiest . The distance will be the same even though you move the map 9 feet sideways . BELL = It does not affect the frontage? SHURTLEFF : No . DeGRAW : It affects my frontage . The west line does not follow the military line . OFNERs That would cut 9 feet off your lot ? DeGRAW : I have a house and farm and field there . I talked to the surveyers and told them they were 9 feet short . T 'iey agreed they were 9 feet - off . I asked them about it and they have not gotten back A, to--me---I--went-my 9 feet back . It is either in my neighbor ' s yard west of me or else into Mr . Sutliff ' s . It is Just not a proper reference . - - - OFNERs You are saying it should - be - -9' -feet over . into the property 'we are looking at now? DeGRAW : I have an abstract ; I have been surveyed , lTo the west side of , me there are two different military lines that have gotten crossed over . SHURTLEFF : Before any conveyance of property is made , ' we will be sure the lines are correct . It would not affect the question we are debating here . The whole map would be moved 9 feet to the east . OFNER : You are saying it would compress the present 114 feet ? BELLS What you are saying is it would go 9 feet into the Sutliff property? SUTLIFF : I understood the hedgerow between DeGraw and Our side was the boundary between the two properties . When :, they surveyed , I noticed the stack was into my perperty . I lost 9 or 10 feet on the east , which made the lot in between my trailer and the next one down farther . SHURTLEFFs As I see it , it is 9 foot too far west ; reed to go 9 foot to the wast .