Loading...
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.