Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.pdfZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.doc - 1 - Minutes for the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting January 9, 2013 DRAFT MINUTES PRIOR TO BOARD APPROVAL Present: Members Chair J. Young, K. Sigel, A. Shull, R. Parker and Alternate M. Eisner Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross, Attorney R. Marcus, VCH Clerk M. Mills, Absent: Member A. Watkins Members of the Public 1. Meeting called to order Meeting called to order by Chair J. Young at 7:05 pm. 2. Minutes APPROVING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5, 2012 RESOLVE, that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of November 5, 2012 meeting are hereby unanimously approved. Aye votes – Chair J. Young, K. Sigel, R. Parker, A. Shull, Alternate M. Eisner Nay votes- none 3. Variance Requests A) 210 E Upland Rd • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross gave a background summary on the case and answered questions for the Board. • The applicant was given the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request. • Public comment- Members of the public were given the opportunity to comment on the variance request. o Code Enforcement Officer Cross this fence is located approximately 0’ to the side property line, which is less than the 15’ side yard setback required by Zoning Ordinance Section 6 yard requirements. o Resident This fence is not considered a deer fence. The fence is mainly for privacy from the adjacent neighbor’s home. o Resident from 214 E Upland Rd He admitted to not seeing the fence until receiving a letter from Mr. Cross and indicated he had no comment against the fence. o Resident from 204 E Upland Rd Also said he didn’t notice the fence as it blends in and is a good example of being attractive and not out of place. His recommendation was to leave the fence in place. • Attorney R. Marcus informed the Board the variance request is a Type II action exempt under Section 617.5(c) of SEQR. • The Board discussed the findings questions. ZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.doc - 2 - VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON JANUARY 9, 2013 FOR APPEAL NO. 2013-1 Motion made by: K. Sigel Motion seconded by: M. Eisner WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance to allow an existing 6’ high wood fence to remain located at approximately 0’ from the side yard, which is less than the 15’ required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: Yards. The property in question is known as 210 E. Upland Road (see attached map) tax map # 10.-6-9; and B. On January 9, 2013 the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing regarding such action, and thereafter thoroughly reviewed and analyzed (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant(s) in support of this appeal, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations; and C. On January 9, 2013 in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), and 6 NYCRR Section 617.5 (c), the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals determined that the proposed action is a Type II action, and thus may be processed without further regard to SEQR; and D. On January 9, 2013 in accordance with Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX #21, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals, in the course of its deliberations, took into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the area variance is granted as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals hereby makes the following findings with respect to the specific criteria for such area variance as set forth in Section 712- b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX #21: Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting the area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO___X___, because: The fence has existed for many years without complaint. ZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.doc - 3 - Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO___X___, because: The applicant wishes to keep the existing fence where it is. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES___X__ NO______, because: The requested area variance is substantial but is mitigated by the small portion of the property line impacted. Whether the proposed area variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Finding: YES_____ NO___X___, because: There were residents who gave testimony in favor of keeping the fence in place. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES__X___ NO______, because: The fence was built by the current residents. 1. It is hereby determined by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals that the following variance is GRANTED AND APPROVED (with conditions, if any, as indicated), it being further determined that such variance is the minimum necessary and adequate to grant relief and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community: Description of Variance: Granting of an area variance to allow an existing 6’ high fence to remain at/near side property line, which is less than the 15’ front side yard setback required by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: Yards. Conditions of Variance: The fence must remain substantially as it exists. The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows: ZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.doc - 4 - AYES: J. Young, K. Sigel, R. Parker, A. Shull, M. Eisner NAYS: No nays The motion was declared to be carried. B) 404 Highland Rd • Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross gave a background summary on the case and answered questions for the Board. • The applicant was given the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request. • Public Comment- Members of the public were given the opportunity to comment on the variance request. o Code Enforcement Officer Cross The fence is located at approximately 0 feet to the side property line which is less than the 15 foot side yard setback required by Zoning Ordinance Section 6 – Yard Requirements. o Resident this is a privacy fence and she would like to extend the fence down the hill away from the road into the yard on the north side of the house. The material and style of the extension will match the original fence. o Resident Ms. Tierney provided an email. She commented on finishing hammering in the nails sticking out on their side of the fence. o Resident from down the street spoke in favor of keeping the fence and said he could barely see it. • Attorney R. Marcus informed the Board the variance request is a Type II action exempt under Section 617.5(c) of SEQR. • The Board discussed the findings questions. VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON JANUARY 9, 2013 FOR APPEAL NO. 2013-2 Motion made by: M. Eisner Motion seconded by: R. Parker WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance to allow an existing 6’ high wood fence to remain and be extended at approximately 0’ from the side yard, which is less than the 15’ required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: Yards. The property in question is known as 404 Highland Road (see attached map) tax map # 13.-3-5; and B. On January 9, 2013 the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing regarding such action, and thereafter thoroughly reviewed and analyzed (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant(s) in support of this appeal, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations; and ZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.doc - 5 - C. On January 9, 2013 in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), and 6 NYCRR Section 617.5 (c), the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals determined that the proposed action is a Type II action, and thus may be processed without further regard to SEQR; and D. On January 9, 2013 in accordance with Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX #21, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals, in the course of its deliberations, took into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the area variance is granted as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals hereby makes the following findings with respect to the specific criteria for such area variance as set forth in Section 712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX #21: Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting the area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO___X___, because: The fence is primarily visible to the two homeowners who are both in favor of leaving the existing fence and have no complaint. The extension of the new length is supported by the new neighbor. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. Finding: YES_____ NO___X___, because: There is only 14’ between the two properties; the only other option would be vegetation – which the resident indicates has been unsuccessfully do to being too shady. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES__X___ NO______, because: Yes, it is substantial but mitigated by the fact the total length will only be 50 feet. Whether the proposed area variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Finding: ZBA 1-9-2013 minutes.doc - 6 - YES_____ NO___X___, because: Half of the fence already exists; the additional fencing will not block anything other than the view and will not be any more visible to the road. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES__X___ NO______, because: The additional 25 feet will be added by the owner. 1. It is hereby determined by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals that the following variance is GRANTED AND APPROVED (with conditions, if any, as indicated), it being further determined that such variance is the minimum necessary and adequate to grant relief and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community: Description of Variance: Granting of an area variance to allow an existing 6’ high wood fence to remain and extend on the side property line. Conditions of Variance: 1. The fence must remain substantially as it exists. 2. The new portion of the fence must be built substantially the same as the existing fence. 3. The total fence length, including the new portion, must be no greater than 50 feet. 4. The new portion of the fence must be finished on both sides. 5. The fence must be no greater than 7 feet high. The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows: AYES: J. Young, K. Sigel, R. Parker, A. Shull, M. Eisner NAYS: No nays The motion was declared to be carried. 4. New Business Code Officer Cross indicated that are approximately five remaining cases. The regular meeting date would be February 4th. 5. Adjourned Meeting adjourned at 7:44pm. Submitted by: Clerk Mills