Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-11-15-BZA-FINALTOWN OF ULYSSES BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, November 15, 2017 Approved: December 20, 2017 Present: Board members Steve Morreale, David Means, Cheryl Thompson, and alternate member Jon Ferrari. Andy Hillman and Bob Howarth were excused. Mr. Ferrari was named a voting member. Public in Attendance: Ann Filley, Steve Heslop, Doug Lockwood, Don Cole, Mr. and Mrs. Philip Smith. Call to Order: 7:04 p.m. Mr. Means MADE the MOTION to nominate Mr. Morreale to serve as Board President for the evening meeting, and Ms. Thompson SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was unanimously carried, 4-0. Public Hearing: Appeal by Steve Heslop for an area variance under 212-167A of the Town of Ulysses Zoning Law. This is for the purpose of constructing an accessory building with a height of approximately 24 feet 8 inches, where twenty (20) feet is the height limit for accessory buildings. The property is located in the R1-Rural Residence District at 4011 Dubois Rd, Town of Ulysses, Tax Parcel Number is 27.-3-17.5. Mr. Heslop told the Board he is looking to build a 40-by-80 foot barn in a classic barn style with hemlock boards and batten siding. Though the approximate building height is 24 feet 8 inches, Mr. Heslop expects the final height to be less. The barn will be used as a workshop and for storage of tractors, lawn equipment and a utility trailer. The barn will rest on a cement foundation. Asked if he would be permitted to install two cupolas with the night’s approval, the Board said such a request would require a separate BZA approval. Mr. Ferrari liked the plan and commended Mr. Heslop’s efforts to construct a barn that matches the area’s pastoral character. Mr. Means MADE the MOTION to approve the variance, and Ms. Thompson SECONDED the MOTION as follows: The BZA reviewed the record and weighed the benefits to the Applicant against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood if the variance is granted by considering the five statutory factors. The benefit sought by the applicant is to construct an accessory building with the height of 24 feet 8 inches where 20 feet is the height limit for accessory buildings. Board of Zoning Appeals November 15, 2017 2 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variances. The accessory building height is not likely to produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor be a detriment to nearby properties. The neighbors’ view would not be negatively affected by the difference in a building of 20 feet versus 24 feet 8 inches. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The building could meet the 20 ft limit with different rafters; however, the applicant prefers the aesthetic of the steeper pitched roof. 3. Whether the requested area variances are substantial. The height variance of 24 feet 8 inches feet instead of 20 feet is substantial. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. It is not likely that the variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood. The accessory building will still be built but the difference will be in the roof pitch. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty is self-created because the applicant could change the roof pitch and meet the height requirement. 6. Considering all of the statutory factors set forth above, the Board of Zoning Appeals concludes as follows, the accessory building will not have a negative impact on the character of the neighborhood, nor on the physical or environmental conditions. The roof pitch can be changed to meet the height requirement; the proposed variance is substantial; and the difficulty is self-created, however the benefits to the applicant outweigh the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood. For the reasons set forth above, and upon the evidence, law and facts, the BZA hereby grants the area variance requested by the applicant to construct an accessory building of 4 feet 8 inches higher than the 20 foot limit. The vote was as follows: Mr. Morreale AYE Mr. Ferrari AYE Mr. Means AYE Board of Zoning Appeals November 15, 2017 3 Ms. Thompson AYE Result: Variance granted Public Hearing: Appeal by Philip Smith for area variances under 212-47 F and H and 212-48 of the Town of Ulysses Zoning Law. This is for the purpose of constructing a single family residence with a front yard setback of approximately 10 feet where 50 feet is required and a rear yard setback of approximately 30 feet where 35 feet is required. In addition, the residence would not meet the 50 foot stream setback requirement and is proposed to be located approximately 15 feet from the top of the stream bank. The property is located in the R2-Moderate Density Residence District at 2125 Lake St Extension, Town of Ulysses, Tax Parcel Number is 13.-2-16. Mr. Smith said the existing house he currently occupies is his late father’s, and, over the years, he has been unable to get the deed transferred over to him. The house sits about 4 feet from the creek and is in terrible condition. He has proposed building a new home – considering several dimensions – further up the yard, where the topography is slightly higher and the proposed house would be sited farther away from the creek. The existing house needs to be torn down, he said, and an existing garage has already fallen down. He could site the new house on the old footprint, but he would prefer to build away from the creek. Asked about the location of the existing septic, Mr. Smith said it is located about 55 feet west of the existing house, near where his new house would be built. With a 1,000-gallon tank, the septic system was installed 17 years ago and was originally designed for a three-bedroom house. Mr. Smith said he considered connecting to the village’s sewer line, but he would have needed right-of-way access from neighbors and pumps to send waste to the village system. The estimated cost was $10,000 instead of $3,000 for a septic system. The new house would be built atop a new garage, and a planned driveway would follow an existing gravel drive off Lake Street, loop around the existing house and run perpendicular to the creek by about 10 feet. House dimensions were discussed, as well as the fact that the village/town line runs right through his property. Mr. Smith said he prefers a 30-by-40 foot house, however such a size would encroach over the village line, and he is unsure what the village tax ramifications would be. He is also considering a 30-by-30 foot house and other alternative sizes. He cannot borrow money to build a house because he does not own the land; the deed has been an ongoing issue for several years. The existing house currently has a huge leak in the roof. He said he needs a new house as soon as he can get ownership of the property. An existing pool was briefly discussed, with Mr. Smith saying his intention was to retain it, but he and his wife agreed they could remove it to make way for the new house. At this time, the Board took comments from the public. Mr. Cole, a Cayuga Street resident and neighbor, said he has not seen anyone swim in the Smith pool for years and is concerned about property debris getting into the creek and lake. He said he is in favor of Mr. Smith getting a new house, so long as he moves it off the creek and works to protect nearby water resources. Board of Zoning Appeals November 15, 2017 4 Mr. Lockwood, a Cemetery Road resident and neighbor, said the creek setback is his main concern, and he agreed with Mr. Cole’s assessment of the property pool. He is also concerned about the new driveway being so close to the creek and noted that the property has junk and old stoves on it; it could be maintained better. He spoke in favor of Mr. Smith getting a new house, and would prefer to see a longer, narrower residence. The Town received two written correspondences that are included as supplementary documents to these minutes. Board members were in consensus agreement that more accurate information was needed in order to approve the variance request. The Board felt Mr. Smith should further explore the tax implications of crossing the village/town line with a new house, and the possibility of siting the driveway to the north, on the streetside of the septic’s leachfield. Mr. Ferrari also requested more information as to how the existing house would be demolished and where it would be disposed of; some homes are leveled and pushed into the foundation, which would create environmental concerns in this case, he said. Mr. Means MADE the MOTION to table the discussion of the Smith variance request until the Board’s next meeting, and Mr. Ferrari SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was unanimously carried. Meeting Minutes Review (10/18/17) Mr. Means MADE the MOTION to accept the October 18, 2017 meeting minutes, and Ms. Thompson SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was carried, 3-0, with Mr. Ferrari abstaining from the vote. Mr. Morreale MADE the MOTION to adjourn the meeting, and Mr. Means SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Louis A. DiPietro II on November 29, 2017.