HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-09-01TOWN OF DRYDEN
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
• The
Zoning
Board
of
Appeals
met
J. Baker,
A.
Everett,
N.
LaMotte,
C1
L�
and Z.O. H. Slater present. Also
K. Garlock, Mr. & Mrs. P. Snyder, R.
W. Knapp.
REVIEW OF LEGAL PROCEDURES:
September 1, 1987
September 1, 1987 w /members
P. Brellochs, C. Hatfield,
resent; Town Attv. M. Perkins.
Sovocool, J. Kingsbury, &
Meeting called to order 7:OOPM.i' General discussion & review
of questions as per Aug. 26 letter to atty. M. Perkins gave
Board members reference sheets on zo'ining procedures.
1. Can a motion be made to grant OR deny a variance?
Yes - May reverse
order of re
a) What if there is
Board must make
affirmhwholly or partly, or modify
r
quiremen to
no motion made?
a decision to either grant, deny, or
nullify.
2. Can chairman or acting chairman make a.motion or second?
Yes - Presuming Board hasn't adopted other rules.
30. If only 3 members are present at public hearing, must
resolution be adopted unanimously to carry?
Yes.
4. In the absence of the chairman or designated acting
chairman, who is allowed tolchair a public hearing?
i
Members can appoint temporary chairman.
i
50 a) In the absence of recording secretary, should
hearing be held?
6.
0 7 .
No - unless Board membi
b) Who is responsible for
The chairman.
,srs keep minutes.
I
s substitute recording,sec?
What is, if any, time limitation for recording sec. to
transcribe minutes of the meeting & for chr. or act. chr.
to write Notice of Decisione
60 days to process & makeildecision.
Should Notice of Decision write up be reviewed & adopted
by resolution of Board, same as minutes of meetings?
Probably yes. Are occasions where nothing needs to be
done. ie; applicant failslto show burden of proof,or
doesn't appear for hearing.
i
- 2 -
8. Who is legally required to write up Notice of Decision
• if chr. did not attend public hearing?
Acting chairman.
a) Could chairman write decision from minutes?
Probably.
9. Whose responsi
will be presen
Chairman - I
a hearing,
know.
bility'is it to ascertain that a quorum
t at scheduled public hearings?
f someone knows they won't be attending
they should call chr. or sec. to let them
10.
Does Board have right to reject variance request
from
being discussed or acted upon in scheduled public
hearing
if applicant did not comply w /submission requirement?
ie;,
payment of filing fee or lack of site plan.
Yes - As administrative function, you shouldn't
begin to
hear it until you have jurisdiction over
it &.all
preliminary steps have been taken.
11.
Should minutes of public hearings be reviewed &
accepted
by resolution at next scheduled meeting?
Yes.
a) What if that meeting is not scheduled until
60 days
later because mtg /public hearing not scheduled
after
30 days in absence of variance requests?
Suggested hearing be held, Board go back
into
deliberation, & as soon as possible Board
should,
deliberate each case';& make preliminary resolutions
on decision of findings, then secretary circulate
to
Board members to refresh memory.
-7:30 PM
Chairman stated would continue questions at a'later
date,
and
called public hearing to order.
HEARING I
Public hear
erect double wid
private road ( #2
• variance to sect
uses) of Dryden
ing to consider
e mobile home or
Snyder Heights
ion 702.3 (stree
Town Zoning Ordi
1
application
modular ho
Rd) in Town
t frontage)
nance.
of Paul G. Snyder to
me & private garage on
of Dryden & is requesting
& section 701 (allowed
- 3 -
Chr read memo from Z.O. stating reason for request was no road
. frontage. Noted variance had been granted in 1979 for double wide
but hadn't been`used. After 1 year, building permit & variance
considered abandoned & void.
Mr.
&
Mrs.
Snyder
& Roger Sovocool
present.
(Mr.
Sovocool
rep-
resenting
maps dating
1961
Snyders)
Reminded Board
members
Snyder
Heights
Road
was
privately
owned
& had been developed
by
Mr. Snyder's
father
ordinance
against
mobile
homes
execpt
in
mobile home
parks,
approx
HUD
1944.
Snyders
are seeking confirmation
of
original
State
variance
Federal
regulations,
or granting
of new variance!
Mr.
Snyder
has been
in bad
health
hardship.
&
is on disability.
Snyders
would like
to
be on one
floor
& cannot
maintain
larger home.
Mr. Snyder stated mobile home would cost 2 to 5 thousand dollars
less essentially. (Modular would need insulation, interior
finishing, extra plumbing where this would already omplete w /mobile
home), but is willing to erect modular home.
Warren Knapp.- 1143 Ellis Hollow Rd. - Concerned with effect
development may have on drainage pattern.
Board had copy of Health Dept. report. General discussion & Mr.
Knapp looked at maps & sketch presented by Mr. Snyder.
Chr. read letter from John Kingsbury to Board - on file. Mr. Kingsbury
also present.
Public hearing closed.
Discussion
-
Health
Dept. approval,
proposed
lot
size 144
x 300 ft,
maps dating
1961
before
zoning,
use
of existing
driveway,
maintenance
of road,
lot
of record,
ordinance
against
mobile
homes
execpt
in
mobile home
parks,
HUD
seal,
factory
manufactured
homes,
State
&
Federal
regulations,
original
variance,
lack
of
hardship.
M. Perkins reminded Board members the only variance consideration
• required was for lack of frontage, that Mr. Snyder had already agreed
to•place modular home on property if variance granted.
C. Hatfield asked what life of variance was.
a
4 -
M. Perkins - A variance, once it's given, is permission to do
• something that otherwise is'not allowed. Someone comes to Z.'0.
and makes out application for building permit. That's the way
we determine what you can do & cannot do. If Z.O. denies
application, that person has right to appeal decision to Z.B.A.
If applicant proves practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship
and Board grants variance, that decision replaces Z.O. decision.
Board has directed Z.O. to issue building permit. Once permit
issued, applicant has 1 year to complete or substantially complete,
construction. Z.B.A. decision is same thing as building permit.
N. LaMotte - Is there anywhere that is in writing?
M. Perkins - Yes - Town Law, section 267. Your own ordinance does
that w /proper exercise of lease clause, so projects aren't strung
out. Year starts from day after decision.
P. Brellochs - Issue tonight really.is should original variance
issued be re- established as binding, or should new variance be
sought for lack of frontage on public road. I want to point out
road is being used by all the people living there by easement &
it is owned by Mr. Snyder*.
M.
Perkins -
This
being lot of record may
answer a
lot of questions,
you'll
have
to make
findings. Remember,
if variance
is granted,
you
are
varying
requirements
minimal amount that
will
accomplish need.
If
lot
did have
road
frontage, you could
build
on
it, because
no
set
back
variance
is required. You'd
be further
supporting
case.
Distinguish
between
hearing and meeting.
Hearing
is taking
evidence
in
formal
custom. Once you close
public
hearing & go
into
your
deliberation,
you can't reopen hearing.
N. LaMotte - What wording should be used to go from hearing to
deliberation, recess?
• M. Perkins - Not recess, because you want to have closure to
evidence gathered & get on to next step. You need particular reason
to recess ie; 1. Bring someone else in.
2. More evidence.
3. Someone is not present yet.
0
•
5 -
If
-
-you
recess
it
contemplates
going to
reopening
a resolution,
public
hearing.
should recite findings
You can't
discuss
may be
a couple
anything
want to deal with.
until
you've
ended &
closed
public
hearing.
N. LaMotte - Should findings be included in motion, or could you
merely refer to them?
M. Perkins
-
Minutes
will reflect
findings, but when someone is
going to
offer
a resolution,
the resolution
should recite findings
because
there
may be
a couple
you
want to deal with.
N. LaMotte - What if you have more questions that come up after
you get into discussion phase? Perhaps we want to go out & look
at site? What would procedure be?
M. Perkins - You have two choices. Table discussion pending on
opportunity for Board to personally inspect premises. You've
already closed public hearing & you're in deliberative state.
Or you could adjourn, announcing decision cannot be reached until.
Board can look at property. Adjourn public hearing & it will be
readvertised & that will 'give opportunity to do that. Your function
here is not to prove applicants case, quite the contrary. You are
to uphold integrity of zoning ordinance & act as:slight buffer of
strict interpretation where applicant has shown hardship or practical
difficulty but NOT otherwise. If any members have been to site, that
should be reflected in findings. Board will rely upon that to
observation. During public hearing you may mention to applicant
that you had been to property & observed whatever, and ask what
they have to say. That will be part of minutes. So someone
reviewing this will be able to determine what you based your opinion
on. If applicant feels you acted on arbitrary or capricious manner
or not followed law, he has right to have your decision reviewed by
the court. But, he must demonstrate to court what he feels you did
wrong. If there is no minutes, or no reason for the way you did
something, he'll win. You should start from presumption of validity
of ordinance. Your obligation is to uphold ordinance & only vary it
the littlest amount required upon demonstration of economic hardship
or practical difficulty. If applicant hasn't demonstrated those
things, your findings will be- simple, applicant did not offer
evidence in support of variance.
•
6 -
J. Baker - What is definition of economic hardship?
M. Perkins - One that is NOT self made or one that could not have
been avoided and allows no reasonable return from property by any
other means.
P. Brellochs - Do we have a motion to either deny or grant variance?
N. LaMotte
- _Having
submitted following findings to Board,
I make
it inappropriate for chairman to write decision if
motion to
grant Paul Snyder variance
to erect modular home & private
meeting?
garage at
# 2 Snyder
Heights Road.
Findings;
1)
It
is lot of
record.
2)
Lot
meets all
set back requirements.
3)
Lot
has Health
Dept. approval.
4)
Neighbors
support
variance request (letter
on file)
5)
One
neighbor
expressed concern about surface
drainage
- after
discussion Board felt
there would
not
be significant
change in drainage
pattern.
6)
No
existing
access present.
7)
No
hardship
explained - Mobile verses
modular.
8)
50'
frontage
on roadway belongs to Mr.
Snyder.
Seconded by C. Hatfield. No discussion.
VOTE ALL YES variance GRANTED
M. Perkins suggested Board request that all doccumentary evidence
(notification to neighbors; sketches, maps, etc.) be copied & in
front of all members before hearing to speed deliberation.
P.
Brellochs
- Is
it inappropriate for chairman to write decision if
he
hadn't
attended
meeting?
M. Perkins - I don't think so.
• of Board,
Basically you.are going by direction
• HEARINd II
Public heari
of Mr. Joseph All
residence at 333
variance to secti
ng conti
ington t
Ferguson
on 701 o
7 -
nued from 8 -3 -87 to consider application
o establish Auto Repair Business at his
Road in Town of Dryden & is requesting
f Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance.
P. Brellochs - Board has always had difficult time w /home business
as to what degree it is. Volume of business obviously will make
big difference on impact to neighborhood. Ordinance does allow
home occupations. We must decide what is & is not home occupation.
M. Perkins - This is NOT a home occupation.
P. Brellochs -
individual who
commercial gar
• do rather than
I'm not trying tc�make case for applicant but an
services one-or two cars can't be compared to as
age. He'd have to tell us what he was attempting to
simply saying "I want to - operate a garage."
A. Everett - He did indicate he'd need at least a 5 car lot, would
have 2 employees,& business hours would be from 8 - 5 or maybe 7 &
work on Sunday if need `arises.
M. Perkins - Need to make your findings. Use variance very difficult
to establish. Look at definitions section of ordinance book, (home
occupations). A Subordinate use of commercial or service nature
located on a lot whose primary use is residential & which is NOT
detrimental to residential character of said lot. Concept of home
occupation is something which is not "obtrusive.
P. Brellochs - There is some what of contradiction on home occupation
aspect', Some activities such as lawyer consulting w /clients as
compared to carpentry & plumbing trades.
M. Perkins - I think they're referring to having office in home as
opposed to doing the actual carpentry or plumbing work etc. on site.
a
8 -
. P. Brellochs - In past, similar cases have had some type of hard-
ship involved such as medical problems etc. where circumstances
warrented personal hardship.
C. Hatfield - Can you put stipulations on variance?
M. Perkins - Can't put stipulationSthat are personal to applicant.
Once variance granted, it goes w /land. You can reverse, affirm
(wholly or partly) or may modify order of requirement decision in
determi.nation. That's been construed as attaching conditions to member
which you've done. Again, You must make findings. Applicant must
make showing that he can't get reasonable return from property &
that his circumstances are unique to him & not common to whole
neighborhood & integrity of ordinance. Remember, you start w /pre-
sumption you can't do it. He has burden of proof. Don't hesitate
to ask Board members if there is general consensus on findings
before you make resolution.
. N. LaMotte- Tragic part of procedure is applicants lack of knowledge7?
M. Perkins - I think Town Board feels if applicant is made to do
their job, the Zoning Board won't have as many hearings & won't
have such a fragmented community where you have commercial garages
in the middle of residential neighborhoods. You would be preserving
integrity of ordinance. I'm not saying there aren't cases where
variance should be given, when applicant is able to demonstrate
hardship or difficulty.
P. Brellochs - Is there a motion?
A. Everett - Made motion to deny variance request.
Findings: 1)Applicant did not demonstrate inability to
realize reasonable return under any uses permitted
by zoning ordinance.
2)Based on proposed size & character of business,
character of neighborhood would be changed.
3)Applicant failed to demonstrate unique circumstances
in respect to this parcel.
J. Baker seconded motion. No discussion.
•
0
9 -
VOTE 4
YES (Everett,
from 8 -3 -87
to
Baker,
Hatfield,
LaMotte)
1
Abstention
(Brellochs)
N.Y.
variance
DENIED
HEARING III
Public hearing continued
from 8 -3 -87
to
consider
application
of Darla VanOstrand, P.O.
Box
37,
Brooktondale,
N.Y.
to erect
single family structure
at 265
Ringwood
Road
in Town
of Dryden
& is requesting variance
to section
801.3
of
Town of
Dryden Ordinance.
There would be easement
from
her
father,
but
no road
frontage.
VanOstrand requesting to
use
2 acres
of
16 acre
parcel.
GENERAL DISCUSSION: C
Discussed map present
w /further property sa
whom & when, aestheti
to provide emergency
lack of demonstration
Hatfield & A. Everett had been to site.
ed, underground pipeline, potential situation
le, etc, lack of frontage being created by
c conditions, & Towns biggest concern w /how
care w /long poorly maintained driveways, &
of economic hardship.
P. Brellochs made motion to table request. Seconded by N. LaMotte.
No further discussion.
VOTE
HEARING IV
of w
resi
vari
Public .h
m. & Moni
dence, 46
ance to s
ALL YES
earing
ca Cut
3 West
ection
request TABLED
continued from 8 -3 -87 to consider application
hbert to erect pole barn /garage at their
Dryden Road in Town of Dryden & is requesting
804.1 of Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance.
GENERAL DISCUSSION: Location of property,
locations for garage, property dimensions,
significant economic hardships.
driveway, alternative
possibilities of fill &
A. Everett made motion to deny variance request.
Findings: 1)Information in Zoning Ordinance that deals w /sec.
804 - Yards & landscaping - provides for reduction
of side yard fronting road by 25 /.
•
•
•
- 10 -
2)Topographical conditions were man made hardship.
3)Applicant did not prove substantial economic
hardship.
Seconded by J. Baker. No further discussion.
VOTE 3 YES (Everett, Baker, Hatfield)
1 NO (LaMotte)
1 Abstention (Brellochs)
A. Everett made motion to adjourn.
VOTE
ALL YES
variance DENIED
Seconded by J. Baker.
Meeting Adjourned
12 :03 A.M.
Secretary,