Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.pdfF:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 1 - Minutes for the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting July 15, 2013 Present: Members Chair J. Young, A. Watkins, A. Shull, R. Parker and Alternate M. Eisner Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross, Attorney R. Marcus, VCH Deputy Clerk A. Podufalski, Members of the Public 1. Meeting called to order  Meeting called to order by Chair J. Young at 7:02 pm.  Chair J. Young appointed Alternate M. Eisner as voting member for this meeting. 2. Variance Applications A. 10 Highland Park Lane  Chair J. Young reviewed the public notice.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross informed the Board the original public notices sent out for tonight’s variance applications had the wrong date. New notices were sent out with the correct date.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross gave a background summary on the case and answered questions for the Board. Code Enforcement Officer Cross disclosed to the Board he received one phone call from a complaining neighbor; however the complaint did not involve the variance request.  The applicant was granted the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request.  Public comment- No members of the public wished to comment.  Attorney R. Marcus disclosed to the Board he has represented the applicant in the past on an unrelated matter. The Board had no objections to Attorney R. Marcus representing the Village during tonight’s proceedings.  Attorney R. Marcus informed the Board the variance request is a Type II action exempt under Section 617.5(c) #12 of SEQR.  The Board answered the findings questions as follows: VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON JULY 15, 2013 FOR APPEAL NO. 2013-6 F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 2 - Motion made by: M. Eisner Motion seconded by: A. Watkins WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following p roposed action: granting of an area variance to allow construction of a new covered porch to be located at 22’ from the front property line, which is less than the 25’ required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. The property in question is known as 10 Highland Park Lane (see attached map) tax map # 6.-1-13; and B. On July 15, 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 July 15, 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) # 12, 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 July 15, 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: 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. F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 3 - Finding: YES_____ NO X because: 1) It enhances the appearance of the property 2) The project is only roofing an existing entryway. 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 are no other means to achieve the enclosure. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES_____ NO X because: There is only a 12% reduction of the setback. 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: No negative impact could be determined. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES X NO______, because: The applicant wants to cover the porch. 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: F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 4 - Granting of an area variance to allow construction of a new covered porch to be located at 22’ from the front property line, which is less than the 25’ required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. Conditions of Variance: The porch must be constructed substantially as proposed. The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows: AYES: R. Parker NAYS: None J. Young A. Watkins A. Shull M. Eisner The motion was declared to be carried. B. 316 Comstock Rd.  Chair J. Young reviewed the public notice.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross gave a background summary on the case and answered questions for the Board. Code Enforcement Officer Cross has received no comments from any of the neighbors.  The applicant was granted the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request.  Public comment- No members of the public wished to comment.  Attorney R. Marcus informed the Board the variance request is a Type II action exempt under Section 617.5(c) #10 and #12 of SEQR.  The Board answered the findings questions as follows: VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON JULY 15, 2013 FOR APPEAL NO. 2013-7 Motion made by: A. Watkins Motion seconded by: M. Eisner WHEREAS: F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 5 - A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance to allow construction of an 8’ high wood fence at 0’ (perpendicular) to the side property line, which is less than the 15’ setback required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. The property in question is known as 316 Comstock Road (see attached map) tax map # 6.-3-9; and B. On July 15, 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 July 15, 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) # 10 and #12, 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 July 15, 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: 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: 1) No negative comments have been received 2) Before the neighbor cut back the shrubs there was natural screening. F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 6 - 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 X NO______, but the other options would not be compatible with the layout of the yard. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES X NO______, because: There will be a 100% reduction of the setback, but this is mitigated because only a small portion of the perimeter is affected. 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: Any impact would be minor. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES X NO______, because: The applicant wants to build the fence, but this is mitigated because the neighbor cut back the natural screening. 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 construction of an 8’ high wood fence at 0’ (perpendicular) to the side property line, which is less than the 15’ setback required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 7 - Conditions of Variance: The fence must be constructed substantially as indicated in the plans presented to the Board. The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows: AYES: R. Parker NAYS: None J. Young A. Watkins A. Shull M. Eisner The motion was declared to be carried. C. 204 Comstock Rd.  Chair J. Young reviewed the public notice.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross gave a background summary on the case and answered questions for the Board. Code Enforcement Officer Cross informed the Board he received a letter of support from the property owners at 104 Klinewoods Rd.  The Board discussed the concern that the public notice identified the setback issue, but did not mention a possible reduction in lot coverage. The Board decided to only consider the setback issue and not discuss the lot coverage matter. Should Code Enforcement Officer Cross’ calculations later determine there is a reduction in lot coverage, the matter will need to be brought before the Board.  The applicant was granted the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request.  Public comment- No members of the public wished to comment.  Attorney R. Marcus informed the Board the variance request is a Type II action exempt under Section 617.5(c) #12 of SEQR.  The Board answered the findings questions as follows: VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON JULY 15, 2013 FOR APPEAL NO. 2013-8 Motion made by: A. Watkins F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 8 - Motion seconded by: R. Parker WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance to allow construction of a new covered porch to be located at 20’ from front property line, which is less than the 25’ setback required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. The property in question is known as 204 Comstock Road (see attached map) tax map #6.-8-5; and B. On July 15, 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 July 15, 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) # 12, 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 July 15, 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: 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. F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 9 - Finding: YES_____ NO X because: 1) It enhances the appearance of the property 2) The project is only roofing an existing entryway. 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 existing stoop is already over the setback. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES_____ NO X because: There is only a 20% reduction of the setback. 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: 1) The footprint is already there. 2) No negative impact could be determined. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES X NO______, because: The applicant wants to cover the porch. 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: F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 10 - Description of Variance: Granting of an area variance to allow construction of a new covered porch to be located at 22’ from the front property line, which is less than the 25’ required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. Conditions of Variance: 1) The porch must be constructed substantially as proposed. 2) If a 12” shift in the positioning of the porch relative to the front door is necessary, applicant must receive approval from Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross. AYES: R. Parker NAYS: None J. Young A. Watkins A. Shull M. Eisner The motion was declared to be carried. D. 304 Comstock Rd.  Chair J. Young reviewed the public notice.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross gave a background summary on the case and answered questions for the Board. Code Enforcement Officer Cross has received no comments from any of the neighbors.  The applicant was granted the opportunity to speak to the Board regarding the request. The applicants showed the Board a signature page with endorsements from several neighbors.  Public comment- No members of the public wished to comment.  Attorney R. Marcus informed the Board the variance request is a Type II action exempt under Section 617.5(c) #12 of SEQR.  The Board answered the findings questions as follows: VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON JULY 15, 2013 FOR APPEAL NO. 2013-9 Motion made by: J. Young Motion seconded by: M. Eisner F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 11 - WHEREAS: A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an area variance to allow construction of a new 6’ high wood fence at 0’ (parallel) from the rear property line, which is less than the 15’ setback required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. The property in question is known as 304 Comstock Road (see attached map) tax map # 6.-3-14; and B. On July 15, 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 July 15, 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) #12, 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 July 15, 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: 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: F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 12 - YES_____ NO X because: 1) It enhances the appearance of the property 2) The neighbors are in support of the fence. 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 X NO _____ but relocating the fence to be compliant would not tie into the existing shed and would not allow a backdrop for the garden. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. Finding: YES X NO _____ but only 48’ of the property will be affected. 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: 1) There will be no change in the footprint. 2) No negative comments have been received. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Finding: YES X NO______, because: The applicant wants to build the fence 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: F:\ZBA\ZBA 2013\7.15.2013\ZBA 7-15-2013 minutes.doc - 13 - Granting of an area variance to allow construction of a new 6’ high wood fence at 0’ (parallel) from the rear property line, which is less than the 15’ setback required by Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Section 6: YARDS. Conditions of Variance: The fence must be constructed substantially as proposed to the Board. AYES: R. Parker NAYS: None J. Young A. Watkins A. Shull M. Eisner The motion was declared to be carried. 3. Minutes APPROVING MINUTES OF MAY 6, 2013 RESOLVE that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of May 6, 2013 meeting are hereby unanimously approved. 4. Other Business  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross discussed possible upcoming cases. 5. Adjourned  Meeting adjourned at 8:16pm.