HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-02-07TOWN OF DRYDEN
Zoning Board of Appeals
Feb. 7, 2017
Members Present: Jeff Fearn (Chair), Ben Curtis, Gene German, Mike Ward, Henry Slater
Absent: 0
Others Present: Ray Burger Director of Planning, Joy Foster, Recording Secretary, ZBA
Residents: Katrina Walker Etna Rd., Elana & Jonathan Maragni Etna Rd., Jared Hale Etna
Rd.
Agenda:
Area variance, Etna Road
Meeting called to order at 7:02 PM
Etna Road. Area Variance
Applicants: Salim Kasimov, Elena Kurbanov, Emin Kasimov, (Agent) Charles Feiszli
Chair Fearn reads the public notice:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Dryden will conduct
a Public Hearing to consider the application of Salim Kasimov who wishes to construct a.
multi -family dwelling on Etna Road, Parcel 41.4-13.32, containing 8 one -bedroom
apartments on a 1.78 acre lot. APPlicant seeks relief from the 2 dwelling units Per acre
maximum densitv limitation set forth in the Town of Drvden Zoning Law. Section 606.
SAID HEARING will be held on Tuesdav February 7. 2017 at 7:00 Pm prevailing time at the
Dryden Town Hall, 93 East Main St. Dryden NY, at which time all interested persons will be
given an opportunity to be heard. Persons may appear in person or by agent.
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.
Chuck Feisxli: speaks on what applicant wishes to do, looking to do 8 single-family units, in
their opinion it's not sufficiently different from what's allowed, because being single bedroom
units is better than being 2-3 bedroom units and number of people occupying the building would
be similar to what is allowed. You have all the data that we submitted before you.
Pearn: anyone have any other questions or concerns at this time?
Curtis: he is not sure this is being heard in proper order before this board? He states that no
building permit application has been submitted to be denied. So with that how are we here, we
have nothing to go with. Other Board members ask the same questions.
Burger: When applicant came to Planning Dept. this 8 unit was not an allowed use in that Zoning
District, so the only option forward was to get an area variance to deal with density
requirements and a special use permit would be required.
Curtis: but they have not submitted any application, and I would think the 1st thing that should
be done is a building permit needs to be denied.
Feiszli: says Mr. Kasimov did speak to Kevin Ezell who told him project was allowed. Then
when he came into office was told he couldn't submit an application as it wouldn't be approved.
So somewhere there was miscommunication from the start.
Curtis to Burger : did he come in for permit? Burger says he knew he had come in but not sure
of conversation.
Slater to Burger : do you still need a zoning permit in addition to a building permit ? Burger
replies that the history on zoning permits is that they are not issued except in question of zoning
issues.
Slater: that is the purpose of a zoning permit, then applicant would have been denied and
would travel along the way to this Board. I still feel he needs to go to Special Use Permit Review
and Site Plan Review then be referred to us. Also wondering about the density requirement the
legislation enactment from 3171 & which was adding section 606 where this density
requirement is derived from, didn't you advise me that with Dept. of Health requirement for
private onsite septic and well service that, the density would be no more than 2 dwelling units
per acre?
Burger: its attempting to track health dept. & septic requirements that were anticipated to be a
control on density.
Slater to Feiszli: have you talked to the health department about whether they would be able to
waive that density requirement on this project.
Feiszli: was not aware there was a density requirement from the health dept., thought the
density issue was from the town.
Slater: also have you done a test well to verify if you have adequate water supply for this
project?
Feiszli: these are all matters that will need to be proven before we are given a building permit.
Slater: this is why we need this type of information before we could decide what the density
requirement which would seem to suggest to me that is designed to assure that we have
adequate water supply and adequate area for septic disposal and stormwater management and
we have not one piece of technical plan that we can look at.
Board discussing all of these issues and asking each other questions and not feeling able to give
a ruling on this variance, they also would like the Town & Planning Boards input/guidance. Also
they are not feeling like they could complete the SEQR, its lacking needed information besides
yes/no answers. They would like a statement from the Health Dept. want to know what the
water potential is. With what little info. we have we cannot make an educated decision. Lacking
much information.
Slater motion:
That we continue this hearing into the future with no time limit until such time that we have had
some input from both the Planning and Town Board relative to how they feel about this
application far 8 dwellings, and also that an application be submitted and denied either a
building permit or a zoning permit of some kind.
Second: Curtis- Yes
All in favor - Yes
Board asks the audience if they would like to be heard. Audience has a friendly discussion with
the applicant. The audience is the same that has written letters. All the letters are here for the
record.
Thank you for coming and voicing your concerns.
INSERT LETTERS NEXT
Zoning Appeals Public Hearing Feb 7, 2017 Opposition
Jared Hale Dhale278@gma8.coml
Mon 2/6/20171:26 PM
= �----�-----.._.._._.._ Good Afternoon,---------- ----------._.- ------------ _—._---------------- –
I have attached my opposition regarding the construction of the 8 unit apartment building to be
discussed at the public hearing on February 7, 2017.1 have also copied the text Into the body of this
email and included a Word doc and pdf version attached here. I look forward to discussing this further at
the public hearing. Thank you for your time.
Regarding the Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing of the 8 unit apartment complex on Etna
rd scheduled for February 7, 2017 at 7:00pm.
I, Jared Hale, wish to first express my opposition to the proposed construction. I have been a
resident of Etna rd since 2009.and I own and live in one of the homes referenced in Mr.
Kasimov's appeal. My home is located at 520 Etna rd, and is mentioned specifically within Mr.
Kasimov's variance appeal as being similar to his proposed structure. My home is a duplex
designed for two single families, and thus contains collectively only 2 kitchens and two baths for
the entire duplex (one for each half of the duplex). I live with my partner in one half and rent the
other half to a mother and her minor daughter, so the kitchen/bath count and occupancy is not
remotely similar to the 8 units/families Mr. Kasmiov is requesting. My home also contains only
two gravel driveways, each designed for a maximum of two vehicles, and is thus very distinct
from Mr Kasimov's proposal of a parking lot for an 8 unit apartment.
Similarly, one property referenced in Mr. Kasimov's appeal (501 Etna Rd) is discussed as though
it were a single building containing a similar number of units. However, this property is two
separate duplexes that have the same layout as my home. Thus, these two duplexes are each
designed for a total of two families, and have only two kitchens and two baths for each duplex
(one for each half)
The character of the neighborhood would be adversely affected by such an apartment complex
being built, because the neighborhood currently contains only duplexes. Accordingly; the
addition of a large building with 8 units would have a detrimental effect on the appearance of the
neighborhood and additionally create considerable car traffic at an already -dangerous blind
curve. The blind curve is dangerous dub to the speed limit and mature trees on property own by
Cornell University that block view around the corner. Mr. Kasimov's proposed number of units
and building location would mean a high chance of spill-over vehicles parking along the road
0
and increasing the danger to pedestrians and other vehicles, due to the blind curve and because
there are no sidewalks in the area.
I also have additional environmental concerns regarding the storm drainage, water runoff, and
our high water table. The undeveloped area surrounding our properties is protected wetlands and
my concern lies with the proposed parking lot and how that will negatively impact storm runoff
of water and contaminants from the 8 units' vehicles into the protected wetlands.
In conclusion, I feel that the requested variance is a very substantial change compared to the law,
will negatively impact the neighborhood safety and appearance, and may negatively impact the
--_---__--protected wetlands -in the-undeveloped-areas-tilong-Etna-rd-%look-forward-to-discussing-these
points in person during the Public Hearing.
Sincerely,
Jared Hale
Mon 2/6/2017 5:20 PM
Etna Rd Zoning Variance Project - OPPOSITION
j
dthursti@twony.rr.com
3
For your consideration and, in response to the post card notification received:
uensity variance request
I am adamantly opposed to this rbquest.
My husband, David, and I have lived in our home for 28 years.
We raised our son in this home.
This.has always been a very quiet residential neighborhood.
I have every reason to believe that the building of multiple unit dwellings in
this neighborhood will have a detrimental affect on my property value.
I am concerned that the natural 'areas surrounding adjoining land parcels may be
compromised, due to the increased traffic and water consumption.
The recent building of five new duplex units has already stripped this area of a
significant amount of trees and wooded area.
I vote NO to eight, single -bedroom apartments AND any three-bedroom units being
built so close to our property. Changing this zoning to accommodate this
request, opens the door to more multiple dwelling construction.
Thank you for your time,
Emily Thurston
521 Etna Rd
0
ZBA: apartment building on Etna Rd.
Katrina J. Walker [kjw33@cornell.edu]
Tue 2/7/2017 10:45 AM
I live at 519 Etna Rd., the Drop-er-ty directly west -of the -proposed -building -unit.
This area of Etna Rd. is a small, quiet neighborhood trying to be rural. The
` addition of an 8 -one bedroom apartment. building would irreversibly alter the
character of this neighborhood.
# This area of Etna Rd., west of the intersection with Hanshaw, is quite rural.
The road itself narrows and goes through wetlands and woods. Many people use
this stretch of Etna Rd. for walking, running, biking and dog walking. The
addition of an apartment building would greatly increase traffic here, reducing
? the multi -use possibilities of the road and neighborhood.
The wetland, which is located directly behind and across the road from the
proposed apartment complex, could not help but be negatively impacted if such a
large unit is built. Additional runoff, the increase of wastewater, and the
? possibility of depleting the aquifer that feeds the wetland would all be
consequential.
Lastly, as my house is directly next to the plot of land in question I am very
concerned about noise, lack of privacy and how water use would affect my well. I
can not help but feel that an eight -bedroom apartment building next door would
drastically affect my quality of life.
In summation, here are the main reasons why I oppose this variance:
i The negative impact of the apartment building on:
Wetlands
Road use by non-motorists'such as walkers, runners, bikers, Water quality Aquifer
` level This is a quiet, rural neighborhood that would like to remain that way.
Thank you,
Katrina Walker
t
In addition to my previous comments below I would like to odd my concern
regarding the area of the property that would have to be turned into a parking
lot for an might -bedroom apartment building. You could assume that most of the
tenants would have a roommate or be part of a 'couple' which would require parking
for more than 8 vehicles in total. Thank you, Below is my original lmtter.
I live at 519 Etna RU,^ the property directly west of the proposed building unit.
This area of Etna Rd. is a small, quiet neighborhood trying to be rural. The
addition of an 8 -one bedroom apartment building would irreversibly alter the
character of this-neiQhbochoo* -
This area of Etna Rd., west of theintersection with Hanshaw^ is quite rural.
The road itself narrows and goes through wetlands and woods. Many people use
this stretch of Etna Rd, for walking* running, biking and dog walking. The
addition of on apartment building would greatly increase traffic here, reducing
the multi -use possibilities of the road and neighborhood.
Thewetland, which, is located directly behind and across the road from the
proposed apartment complex, could not help but be negatively impacted if such a
large unit is buiIt. Additional runoff, the increase ofwastewater, and the
possibility of depleting the aquifer that feeds the wetland would all be
consequential.
Lastly, as my house is directly next to the plot of land in question I am very
concerned about noise, lack of privacy and how water use would affect my well. I
can not help but feel that an eight -bedroom apartment building next door would
drastically affect my quality of life.
In summation, here are the main reasons why I oppose this variance:
'
The negative impact of the apartment building on:
Wetlands
Road use by non -motorists such as walkers, runners, bikers, Water quality Aquifer
level
This is a quiet, rural neighborhood that would like to remain that way.
Thank you,
Katrina Walker
Motion made by: Curtis to adjourn meeting 7:45 PM
Second: Fearn- Yes
All in favor - Yes
Respectfully submitted,
Joy Foster, Recording Secretary
.1 mf
Feb. 7, 2017
Re: 02-2017ZBA -Area Variance
Etna Road
Parcel 41.-1-13.32
Distribution: Salim Kasimov
Town Supervisor,
Town Clerk, PB Chair, ZBA Chair
Edward C Marx, Commissioner of Planning
Planning Department 93 East Main Street
Dryden, NY 13053
T 607 844-8888 Ext. 216
F 607 844-8008
joy@dryden.ny.us
www.drvden.nv.us
A hearing was conducted by the Town of Dryden Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday Feb. 7, 2017, regarding
one area variance.
DECISION:
That we continue this hearing into the future with no time limit until such time that we have had some
input from both the Planning and Town Board relative to how they feel about this application far 8
dwellings, and also that an application be submitted and denied either a building permit or a zoning
permit of some kind.