The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2019-11-26 APPROVED ZBA MINUTES APPROVED I Town of Lansing 2 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 3 Tuesday, November 26, 2019 6:30 PM 4 Present Excused 5 Judy Drake Melanie Malone, Alternate 6 Maureen Cowen 7 Linda Hirvonen 8 Peter Larson III 9 Henry (Hurf) Sheldon, Chair 10 11 Other Staff Present 12 C. J. Randall, Director of Planning Lynn Day, Code Enforcement Officer 13 Katrina Binkewicz, Town Board Liaison Sue Munson, Code Office 14 15 Public Present (4) 16 Cordon Payton Christine Payton Bert Fortner Gay Nicholson 17 18 General Business 19 Chair Hurf Sheldon Opened the meeting at 6:30 pm. 20 21 Motion to Approve the Minutes of August 20, 2019 22 Motion by: Judy Drake Seconded by: Peter Larson III (Motion seconded and carried) 23 24 Motion to Open the Public Hearing for Payton Area Variance located at 564 Scofield Road,Tax 25 Parcel #30.-1-6.424 at 6:33 p.m. 26 Motion by: Linda Hirvonen Seconded by: Peter Larson III 27 Roll Call for Attendance and Motion: 28 Judy Drake—Aye 29 Maureen Cowen —Aye 30 Linda Hirvonen —Aye 31 Peter Larson II I —Aye 32 Hurf Sheldon - Aye 33 34 The Official Public Notice was published on November 14, 2019 as required. 600' parcel notices were 35 mailed on November 13, 2019. 36 37 Consideration of an Appeal made by Cordon Payton, Owner and Applicant, of 564 Scofield Rd, Tax 38 Parcel#30.-1-6.424 located in the Rural Agricultural(RA)Zoning District.Requesting an Area Variance 39 from Town of Lansing Land Use Ordinance Section 504, Schedule II which requires a minimum of 60' 40 minimum front yard setback. Applicant is seeking a 30' variance from the minimum Flag Lot Front Yard 41 setback to facilitate placement of a garage over an existing gravel parking area. This is a Type II Action 42 under the State Environmental Quality Review Act 6 NYCRR 617.5(c)(16). Page 1 of 9 APPROVED 43 Brief description from Applicant: 44 - Would like to build a carport with open sides this year to create storage for some of his 45 equipment and car. The requested area is where he currently parks his vehicles 46 - Next year he would like to enclose the carport to keep the weather away from his equipment 47 - The project is in two phases to avoid taking a loan out 48 - Neighbor has written a letter of endorsement, as there is more than enough buffering the 49 neighbor will not see it even in the winter with no leaves on the trees 50 51 Summary of Board Discussion with Applicant: 52 - Large buffer between all neighbors 53 - No land disturbance where proposed site is located 54 - Will be located on the footprint of the current gravel parking area 55 56 Public Comments: 57 - No Public Comments 58 59 Motion to Close the Public Hearing for Payton Area Variance located at 564 Scofield Road,Tax 60 Parcel #30.-1-6.424 at 6:38 p.m. 61 Motion by: Linda Hirvonen Seconded by: Judy Drake (Seconded and Motion Carried) 62 63 AREA VARIANCE FINDINGS AND DECISION 64 TOWN OF LANSING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 65 66 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 67 68 Applicant: Cordon & Christine Payton Variance No: 19-08 69 564 Scofield Road Zoning District: RA 70 Freeville, NY 13068 Public Hearing 71 Published on 11/14/19 72 Mailed 600' Notices on: 11/13/2019 73 Property Location: 564 Scofield Road Notice to County: N/A 74 Tax Parcel #: 30.-1-6.424 75 76 Requirement for which Variance is Requested: Front Yard Flag Lot Set Back 77 78 Applicable Section of Town Land Use Ordinance (the "Zoning Ordinance"): Sec. 504, Schedule II Area, 79 Frontage, Yard, Heights and Coverage Requirements— Drawing 1 Flag Lot. 80 81 RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS 82 83 WHEREAS, Applicants have applied for an Area Variance to build a garage that is not compliant with 84 the 60'front yard setback in (RA) Rural Agricultural Zone. Applicants are asking for a 30' setback on the 85 front side as pictured in the flag lot drawing 1, they would like to minimize their footprint by using the 86 existing gravel pad parking area. Need for a variance is due to existing buildings, solar array, septic and 87 well; and 88 Page 2 of 9 APPROVED 89 WHEREAS, on November 26, 2019 the Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals (the "ZBA")thoroughly 90 reviewed and analyzed: (i) the information and evidence submitted by the applicant in support of the 91 requested area variance; (ii) all other information and materials properly before the ZBA; and (iii) the 92 issues and impacts raised for consideration by neighbors, the public, and the ZBA; and 93 94 WHEREAS, this application is classified as a Type II Action (such that no further environmental review 95 is required) and this matter also does not require a Section 239 review; so, upon due deliberation upon 96 the foregoing, the application, and all evidence and testimony presented to the ZBA, 97 98 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 99 100 1. The Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals ("ZBA") hereby makes the following findings with 101 respect to the specific criteria for area variances as set forth in Town Law § 267-b(3)(b), and other 102 applicable provisions of law and of the Zoning Ordinance: 103 104 a. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a 105 detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance? 106 107 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: Will not be visible to the neighbors 108 109 b. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the 110 applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? 111 112 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: Current request disturbs the least amount to the environment 113 114 c. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? 115 116 Yes _X_ No Findings: Requesting large percentage of the required Front Yard Setback for a 117 Flag Parcel 118 119 d. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on 120 the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 121 122 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: Will not be visible to the neighbors 123 124 e. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created? 125 126 Yes _X_ No Findings: Available land to site the Carport is limited due to a mostly wooded 127 lot and existing structures 128 129 2. DETERMINATION BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS (choose one): 130 131 It is hereby determined by the Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals (the "ZBA") that the 132 following area variance is GRANTED, with any conditions hereafter stated (if any), it being further 133 found and determined that (i) the benefit to the applicant outweighs any potential negative impacts 134 or detriment to the neighborhood or community; and (ii) such area variance is the minimum Page 3 of 9 APPROVED 135 necessary as adequate to grant relief and, at the same time, preserve and protect the character of 136 the neighborhood and the safety and welfare of the community. 137 138 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC VARIANCE GRANTED: 139 140 Area Variance of 30' from the minimum Flag Lot Front Yard Set Back to facilitate placement of a 141 garage over an existing gravel parking area. 142 143 ARE CONDITIONS IMPOSED WITH RESPECT TO THE AREA VARIANCE AS GRANTED: 144 Yes X No 145 146 STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS: 147 1. As variances are exceptions based upon exigent need or emergency, should applicant fail to 148 avail itself of the benefits of the above-described area variance within one year from the date 149 hereof, this approval and such area variance shall expire. In cases where construction may be 150 applicable, "avail itself of the benefits" shall mean a building permit obtained (if necessary) and 151 substantial construction as commenced. Said one-year approval period may be extended for 152 good cause by the ZBA if application for an extension is submitted before the expiration of the 153 then applicable variance period. 154 155 THE VOTE ON THE FOREGOING DECISION, DETERMINATIONS, AND RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF 156 LANSING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WAS AS FOLLOWS: 157 158 Motion by: Maureen Cowen 159 Seconded by: Peter Larson III 160 161 Maureen Cowen -Aye 162 Judy Drake —Aye 163 Linda Hirvonen —Aye 164 Peter Larson III —Aye 165 Hurf Sheldon -Aye 166 167 Dated: November 26, 2019 168 169 Received and filed in the Lansing Town Clerk's Office 170 171 Motion to Open the second Public Hearing for Nicholson Area Variance located at 1 Maple Ave, Tax 172 Parcel #26.-10-13.2 at 6:48 p.m. 173 Motioned by: Judy Drake Seconded by: Linda Hirvonen (Motion seconded and Carried) 174 175 The Official Public Notice was published on December 5, 2019 as required. 600' parcel notices were 176 mailed on August 5, 2019. 177 178 Consideration of an Appeal made by Adele Gay Nicholson, Owner of 1 Maple Ave,Tax Parcel#26.- 179 10-13.2 located in the Residential — Moderate Density (R2) Zoning District. Requesting an Area 180 Variance from Town of Lansing Land Use Ordinance Section 504, Schedule II which requires a 60' Page 4 of 9 APPROVED 181 minimum front yard setback from the center of the road. Applicant is seeking an Area Variance 182 of 29' from the minimum yard setback requirement to facilitate placement of a carport over an 183 existing gravel parking space. This is a Type II Action under the State Environmental Quality 184 Review Act 6 NYCRR 617.5(c)(16). 185 186 Brief description from Applicant: 187 - Would like to put up a carport where Applicant parks her car and to do so will need an area 188 variance 189 - Would like to buy an electric car. 190 o Will need a charging station 191 o Would like to have some protection from weather 192 o Both those needs will be met with the proposed carport 193 - The Carport will only have two support legs 194 - The Variance is needed as the Zoning doesn't really line up with the small parcel sizes in the 195 Hamlet of Ludlowville 196 Summary of Board Discussion with Applicant: 197 - The Highway Superintendent, Cricket Purcell as well as the Deputy Superintendent, Mike 198 Mosley have reviewed this request and had no concerns about the positioning of the carport 199 - County Planning have also reviewed this request with no adverse impacts indicated 200 - The open-air carport with two legs will not be turned into an enclosed structure 201 - Code Officer would like to make sure that the structure will be able to handle the wind and 202 snow loads required by code. Stating that the picture presented today may have to be slightly 203 altered to comply. 204 - The electric service lines will be buried from the house to the support for the charging station 205 206 Public Comments: 207 - No Public Comments 208 209 Motion to Close the Public Hearing for Nicholson Area Variances at located at 1 Maple Ave, Tax 210 Parcel #26.-10-13.2 at 7:08 p.m. 211 Motion by: Judy Drake Seconded by: Peter Larson III (Seconded and Motion Carried) 212 213 AREA VARIANCE FINDINGS AND DECISION 214 TOWN OF LANSING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 215 216 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 217 218 Applicant: Adele Gay Nicholson Variance No: 19-09 219 1 Maple Ave Zoning District: R2 220 Lansing, NY 14882 Public Hearing Published on 11/14/19 221 Mailed 600' Notices on: 11/13/2019 222 Property Location: 1 Maple Ave Referral to County: 11/5/19 223 Tax Parcel #: 26.-10-13.2 224 225 Requirement for which Variance is requested: Minimum Yard Set Back 226 Page 5 of 9 APPROVED 227 Applicable Section of Town Land Use Ordinance (the "Zoning Ordinance"): Sec. 504, Schedule II Area, 228 Frontage, Yard, Heights and Coverage Requirements. 229 230 RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS 231 232 WHEREAS, Applicant applied for an Area Variance to build a carport that is not compliant with the 60' 233 front yard setback in (R2) Residential — Moderate Density Zone. Applicant is requesting an Area 234 Variance of 29' from the minimum yard setback requirement to facilitate placement of a carport over 235 an existing gravel parking space. 236 237 WHEREAS, on November 26, 2019 the Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals (the "ZBA")thoroughly 238 reviewed and analyzed: (i) the information and evidence submitted by the applicant in support of the 239 requested area variance; (ii) all other information and materials properly before the ZBA; and (iii) the 240 issues and impacts raised for consideration by neighbors, the public, and the ZBA; and 241 242 WHEREAS, this application is classified as a Type II Action (such that no further environmental review 243 is required); and 244 245 WHEREAS, a November 13, 2019 letter from Katherine Borgella, Tompkins County Commissioner of 246 Planning, pursuant to §239 -1, -m, and -n of the New York State General Municipal Law determined the 247 proposal has no negative inter-community, or county-wide impacts; and upon due deliberation upon 248 the foregoing, the application, and all evidence and testimony presented to the ZBA, 249 250 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 251 252 1. The Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals ("ZBA") hereby makes the following findings with 253 respect to the specific criteria for area variances as set forth in Town Law § 267-b(3)(b), and other 254 applicable provisions of law and of the Zoning Ordinance: 255 256 a. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a 257 detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance? 258 259 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: Applicant has taken the design, traffic and neighbors into consideration 260 261 b. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the 262 applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? 263 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: The lot itself creates limitations 264 265 c. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? 266 267 Yes _X_ No Findings: Requested Set Back equals the existing previously granted Set Back, 268 allowing a structure on the other side of the front yard 269 270 d. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on 271 the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 272 Page 6 of 9 APPROVED 273 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: Not much of a change to where Applicant currently parks her vehicle. 274 As noted in the fourth Whereas on page 1 no negative impact decision from the County 239 review 275 276 e. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created? 277 278 Yes _ No _X_ Findings: In the Applicants neighborhood, homes are historically close to the 279 road 280 281 2. DETERMINATION BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTORS (choose one): 282 283 It is hereby determined by the Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals (the "ZBA") that the 284 following area variance is GRANTED, with any conditions hereafter stated (if any), it being further 285 found and determined that (i) the benefit to the applicant outweighs any potential negative impacts 286 or detriment to the neighborhood or community; and (ii) such area variance is the minimum 287 necessary as adequate to grant relief and, at the same time, preserve and protect the character of 288 the neighborhood and the safety and welfare of the community. 289 290 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC VARIANCE GRANTED: 291 292 Area Variance of 29' from the Minimum Yard Set Back requirement to facilitate placement of a 293 carport over the existing gravel parking space. 294 295 ARE CONDITIONS IMPOSED WITH RESPECT TO THE AREA VARIANCE AS GRANTED: 296 Yes X No 297 298 STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS: 299 1. Carport may not be enclosed 300 301 2. As variances are exceptions based upon exigent need or emergency, should applicant fail to 302 avail itself of the benefits of the above-described area variance within one year from the date 303 hereof, this approval and such area variance shall expire. In cases where construction may be 304 applicable, "avail itself of the benefits" shall mean a building permit obtained (if necessary) and 305 substantial construction as commenced. Said one-year approval period may be extended for 306 good cause by the ZBA if application for an extension is submitted before the expiration of the 307 then applicable variance period. 308 309 THE VOTE ON THE FOREGOING DECISION, DETERMINATIONS, AND RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN OF 310 LANSING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WAS AS FOLLOWS: 311 312 Motion by: Judy Drake 313 Seconded by: Linda Hirvonen 314 315 Maureen Cowen -Aye 316 Judy Drake —Aye 317 Linda Hirvonen —Aye 318 Peter Larson III —Aye Page 7 of 9 APPROVED 319 Hurf Sheldon -Aye 320 321 Dated: November 26, 2019 322 323 Received and filed in the Lansing Town Clerk's Office 324 325 Report from the Chair 326 327 Regarding previously rendered decisions by the Zoning Board of Appeals: 328 329 Town Law §267-a(12) allows an Applicant to request a rehearing, but only by unanimous vote of the 330 ZBA. 331 332 The ZBA may, at any time, vote to reconsider a matter on which it already has rendered a 333 determination, even in the absence of new facts or circumstances. That is an opportunity to convince 334 the ZBA that its original decision was erroneous based on the following: 335 • A motion must be made to rehear the matter and that motion must pass by unanimous vote 336 of all members present; 337 • The hearing must be noticed again; 338 • Following the new hearing, a unanimous vote of all present is required in order to change the 339 original determination. 340 341 Zoning Board Procedure: The Rehearing Process Posted on August 13,2013 POSTED IN ZONING BOARD 342 343 If an applicant is aggrieved by decision of their local zoning board, he or she may request a rehearing 344 of the application. It is commonly thought that a zoning board can only rehear an application if there 345 are new facts or a change of law. This assumption in not entirely correct, however, and does not stem 346 from the Town Law provisions relating to zoning board procedures. 347 Town Law §267-a(12), which addresses the rehearing process simply provides that "[a] motion 348 for the zoning board of appeals to hold a rehearing to review any order, decision or 349 determination of the board not previously reheard may be made by any member of the board." 350 See, Town Law §267-a(12).[11 There is no requirement in the statute for new facts, a change to 351 the application or a change in the law, in order for a zoning board to rehear an application. 352 So why is it commonly thought that new facts or a change in the law are necessary for 353 rehearing? The notion stems from the common law doctrine of administrative res 354 judicata. Administrative res judicata prevents a party from seeking the same relief from an 355 administrative board or agency that has previously been determined in a prior 356 application. Calapai v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Village of Babylon, 57 A.D.3d 987 (2d Dept. 357 2008); Freddolino v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Village of Warwick, 192 A.D.2d 839 (3d Dept. 358 1993);Jensen v.Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Village of Old Westbury, 130 A.D.2d 549 (2d Dept.), 359 Iv. denied, 70 N.Y.2d 611 (1987). 360 However, New York Courts have held that a zoning board's authority to reverse an earlier 361 determination is not subject to the requirement that there be new facts or circumstances 362 presented, where the two determinations arise in the same proceeding. See, Matter of Ireland 363 v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Queensbury, 195 A.D.2d 155, 158 (3d Dept. 1994). In other 364 words,while an applicant may not make repeated applications seeking the same relief, a zoning Page 8 of 9 APPROVED 365 board has the express statutory authority to modify or annul its original determination, in the 366 context of the same application. See, Matter of Ireland, 195 A.D.2d at 158 (emph. added). 367 • Procedurally, the Town Law provides that a unanimous vote of all members of the board then 368 present is required for a rehearing to occur. Thereafter, a second unanimous vote of all 369 members present is required upon rehearing in order for the board to reverse, modify or annul 370 its original order, decision or determination See, Town Law §267-a(12). 371 • A rehearing of an application is best pursued before a written decision is issued and filed with 372 the Town Clerk in order to avoid a statute of limitations problem since the statute of limitations 373 for commencing a CPLR Article 78 proceeding challenging a decision of the zoning board is 374 relatively short — only 30 days from the filing of the decision with the Town Clerk. See, Town 375 Law § 267-c(1). An applicant who wishes to have its case reheard should be mindful of the fact 376 that the rehearing process does not suspend the statute of limitations, and proceed with 377 caution so as not to jeopardize his ability to challenge a zoning board's decision while pursuing 378 a rehearing of the application. 379 Last, a party seeking a rehearing of his application will also have to check the particular zoning 380 board's rules of procedure, since the zoning board may have its own rules relating to 381 rehearings. Such local rules have been upheld by the Courts. See, Sammartino v. Scheyer, 24 382 A.D.3d 681 (2d Dept. 2005)(board acted properly in denying a second hearing where board had 383 a rule providing that if an application is denied, new application cannot be accepted unless 384 there is a substantial change in such application). 385 386 Discussion about re-appointments of Zoning Board of Appeals members and recommendation 387 letter to send to the Town Board 388 389 Dear Supervisor LaVigne and Town Board, 390 391 At the request of the Zoning Board of Appeals; a recommendation to the Town Board to re-appoint 392 Melanie Malone our current alternate, as a voting member of the ZBA Board for a term of five (5) 393 years. Effective January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2024 to fill Linda Hirvonen's position. 394 395 In addition, Linda Hirvonen is stepping down which will leave a vacancy for an Alternate 396 Position. The Zoning Office will post a Vacancy on the Town Website and in the Ithaca Journal with a 397 deadline for applications set on January 7, 2020. 398 399 In addition, the Zoning Board of Appeals recommends that the Town Board slate the Officer as 400 follows: Hurf Sheldon, Chairman. 401 402 Motion to recommend to the Town Board re-appointment and advertisement of vacant Alternate 403 Position 404 Motioned by: Judy Drake Seconded by: Maureen Cowen (Seconded and Motion Carried) 405 406 Motion to Adjourn Meeting at 7:45 p.m. 407 Motion by: Linda Hirvonen Seconded by: Hurf Sheldon (Seconded and Motion Carried) 408 409 Minutes executed by Sue Munson Page 9 of 9