Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 2023-07-12TOWN OF DRYDEN Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 2023 via Hybrid APPROVED 10-3-23 1 Board Members (*absent) Janis Graham, Chairwoman Ben Curtis Henry Slater Others Attending Ray Burger, Director of Planning Joy Foster, Board Secretary, (zoom) Applicants & Public Attending Jason & Hope Kiley, Applicants Nicholas & Max Brenner, Applicants Michael Authur Barry Hutchinson James Whalley The Public Hearing was opened at 6:00 PM, by Chairwoman Graham. After confirming those present had seen the notice Graham motions to waive reading the notice. It is noted that the Legal Notice was published in the Ithaca Journal on 6-24-23, as follows: Second: Curtis - Yes All in favor – Yes NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Dryden will conduct a Public Hearing to consider the application of Hope Kiley for an area variance at 210 Dryden-Harford Road, Tax Parcel ID 50.-1-11.2. This parcel is in the Neighborhood Residential zoning district and the Code of the Town of Dryden requires a 50 foot front yard setback for structures. Applicant requests 21 feet of relief to allow an attached lean-to garage to be constructed within 29 feet of the road. SAID HEARING will be held on Wednesday July 12, 2023 at 6:00 pm at Dryden Town Hall, 93 East Main Street, Dryden, NY 13053 at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. You can either attend the hearing in person or remotely. To attend remotely you connect to the hearing via internet or telephone. Details on how to connect will be posted July 11 to the Town website at: dryden.ny.us You can also submit comments prior to the meeting or request meeting details by email to: planning@dryden.ny.us Individuals 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. 2 210 Dryden-Harford Road Tax Parcel ID# 50.-1-11.2 Neighborhood Residential Zoning District Hope & Jason Kiley, the homeowners at 210 Dryden-Harford Road, requests relief from the Town of Dryden Code Section 270-6.1, in order to construct an attached lean-to garage within the required 50 foot front yard setback. They were requesting 21 feet of relief to allow an attached lean-to garage to be constructed within 29 feet of the road. After a discussion with the board and their contractor it was determined that they need 21.5 feet of relief and 28.5 feet from the road, in order to accommodate the projection of the roof eave. This is an open lean-to that could be closed at a later date for a garage as long as they apply for proper building permits with the Dryden Town Building Dept. and follow all Building and Fire Codes. At the conclusion of the Boards discussion, Chairwoman Graham confirmed there were no residents who wished to speak regarding this variance request. With that Chairwoman Graham moved to close the Public Hearing at 6:10 pm Second: Curtis - Yes All in favor – Yes Discussion/Decision At the request of Chairwoman Graham, the Board proceeded with the required questions for an Area Variance; the responses given by the ZBA members, were as follows. After discussion with the Board, the applicants amended their variance request to 21.5 feet of relief from 21 feet in order to accommodate the projection of the roof eave. A. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE WOULD BE PRODUCED IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES WILL BE CREATED BY GRANTING OF THE AREA VARIANCE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: There would not be undesirable change. The lean-to would hardly, if at all, be visible from the street. If anything, there would be an improvement to the neighborhood since it would shelter the boat and consolidate, in one area, the other various items to be stored. Motion made by: Curtis - Yes Second: Graham - Yes 3 All in favor – Yes B. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE BENEFITS SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT CAN BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER METHOD, FEASIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT TO PURSUE, OTHER THAN AN AREA VARIANCE, THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: There are other locations for the lean-to, but none are as logical, given that other locations would not provide driveway access and would not allow attachment to the existing garage. The burden to the applicant to re-site the lean-to would way outweigh the benefits –if there are any—to the community. Motion made by: Slater- Yes Second: Graham- Yes All in favor – Yes C. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE REQUESTED AREA VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: The variance is substantial but that has minor importance given how the structure will be almost entirely screened from view. Motion made by: Slater - Yes Second: - Curtis - Yes All in favor – Yes D. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: The structure will be small, 15.6 feet by 30 feet, will attach to an existing garage and will be well screened by ample surrounding vegetation, so there will not be an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. Motion made by: Curtis- Yes Second: Graham- Yes All in favor – Yes 4 E. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELF- CREATED. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: The difficulty was self-created, but the proposed lean-to is in a good location that takes advantage of the existing driveway. Motion made by: Graham - Yes Second: Slater - Yes All in favor – Yes Motion made by: Curtis to classify this as SEQR exempt type II action 6 CRR-NY 617.5(c)(16), ), per the recommendation of the Planning Dept. Second: Slater- Yes All in favor – Yes This action is not subject to Regional GML-239 review pursuant to Inter- governmental Agreement Section II. E. Consideration of Ag & Markets requirements is not required for area variance requests (Ag & Markets 25-AA, NYS Town Law 283-A) A motion was made by Curtis to approve the Area Variance as amended for 21.5 feet of relief based on the above findings. Second: Graham– Yes All in favor – Yes Congratulations your variance is approved. 5 The Public Hearing was opened at 6:25 PM, by Chairwoman Graham. After confirming those present had seen the notice Graham motions to waive reading the notice. It is noted that the Legal Notice was published in the Ithaca Journal on 6-24-23, as follows: Second: Curtis - Yes All in favor – Yes NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Dryden will conduct a Public Hearing to consider the application of Nicholas Brenner for an area variance at 181 Lake Road, Tax Parcel ID 48.-1-88. This parcel is in the Neighborhood Residential zoning district and the Code of the Town of Dryden requires a 50-foot front yard setback for structures. Applicant requests 16 feet of relief to allow an attached deck to be constructed within 34 feet of the road. SAID HEARING will be held on Wednesday July 12, 2023 at 6:15 pm at Dryden Town Hall, 93 East Main Street, Dryden, NY 13053 at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. You can either attend the hearing in person or remotely. To attend remotely you connect to the hearing via internet or telephone. Details on how to connect will be posted July 11 to the Town website at: dryden.ny.us You can also submit comments prior to the meeting or request meeting details by email to: planning@dryden.ny.us Individuals 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. 181 Lake Road, Tax Parcel ID# 48.-1-88, Neighborhood Residential Zoning District Nicholas Brenner, owner of the above referenced parcel, requests relief from the Town of Dryden Code Section 270-6.1, in order to construct an attached deck within the required 50 feet front yard setback. He requests 16 feet of relief from the 50-foot required front yard setback. The original dwelling was granted an area variance in 2016 to construct the house within 40 feet of the road. After a discussion with the Board and the applicant, the applicant decided to request 17 feet of relief and 7 feet beyond the original grant of 10 feet, to accommodate the projection of the roof eave. At the conclusion of the Boards discussion, Chairwoman Graham confirmed there were no residents who wished to speak regarding this variance request. With that Chairwoman Graham moved to close the Public Hearing at 6:30 pm Second: Curtis - Yes All in favor – Yes 6 Discussion/Decision At the request of Chairwoman Graham, the Board proceeded with the required questions for an Area Variance; the responses given by the ZBA members, were as follows. After a discussion with the Board and the applicant, it was decided to request 17 feet of relief and 7 feet beyond the original grant of 10 feet, to accommodate the projection of the roof eave. A. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE WOULD BE PRODUCED IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES WILL BE CREATED BY GRANTING OF THE AREA VARIANCE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Although the house is closer to the road compared to neighboring homes, the addition of a front porch is consistent with the style of nearby properties and will actually improve the neighborhood’s character. Motion made by: Slater - Yes Second: Graham - Yes All in favor – Yes B. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE BENEFITS SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT CAN BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER METHOD, FEASIBLE FOR THE APPLICANT TO PURSUE, OTHER THAN AN AREA VARIANCE, THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: A front porch has special characteristics in that it is a place that connects a home and its inhabitants to the larger community. A long-standing architectural tradition, it has historically served as a place for receiving visitors, staying connected with neighbors and keeping an eye on the safety of nearby properties/residents. These benefits can only be achieved with a front porch such as that proposed. Motion made by: Curtis - Yes Second: Graham- Yes All in favor – Yes 7 C. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE REQUESTED AREA VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: The variance is substantial in that 7 feet of relief is being requested in addition to the 10 feet of relief granted in 2016 when the home was proposed to be built. But given the topographical constraints of the site, it seems reasonable. Motion made by: Curtis - Yes Second: - Graham - Yes All in favor – Yes D. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: It is a small addition to the existing home and as such, it will have a small, but positive, visual impact. Thus, no adverse effect on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. Motion made by: Graham - Yes Second: Slater - Yes All in favor – Yes E. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY WAS SELF- CREATED. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Yes, but given the unique and challenging topographical constraints of the site, it is a logical extension to the development of the lot. Motion made by: Graham - Yes Second: Slater - Yes All in favor – Yes Motion made by: Curtis to classify this as SEQR exempt type II action 6 CRR-NY 617.5(c)(16), per the recommendation of the Planning Dept. Second: Slater- Yes All in favor – Yes 8 This action is not subject to Regional GML-239 review pursuant to Inter- governmental Agreement Section II. E. Consideration of Ag & Markets requirements is not required for area variance requests (Ag & Markets 25-AA, NYS Town Law 283-A) A motion was made by Graham to approve the Area Variance as amended for 7 feet of relief in addition to the 10 feet of relief granted in 2016, based on the above findings. Second: Curtis– Yes All in favor – Yes Congratulations your variance is approved. Graham moves to approve the minutes from June 6, 2023 Second: Slater – Yes All in favor – Yes ADJOURNMENT Graham Motion to adjourn 6:50 PM Second: Slater – Yes All in favor – Yes