ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Town of North Greenbush 2 Douglas Street Wynantskill, NY 12198

Transcription

1 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Town of North Greenbush 2 Douglas Street Wynantskill, NY Attendance: Richard French (Chairman), Thomas McGraw, Leanne Hanlon (Secretary), Michael Miner (Building Department), Michael Masone, John Dalmata, John Hicks (Legal Counsel), William Fiacco (Absent). Chairman French opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance and explained the Zoning Board function to the public. Application #12-19, for the area variance request of Richard Carpinello, 292 Peck Road, Wynantskill, NY 12198, for relief from maximum square foot coverage of an accessory building of 900 square feet for the purpose of constructing a 1200 square foot accessory building at 292 Peck Road, in an AR district, having parcel ID#: Mr. Carpinello explained his application to the Board. He would like to put up a pole barn 40x40. There is a small metal shed on the property. He is willing to take down the metal shed if necessary. The new barn would be for storage of tractor, etc. He has almost 4 acres on the property. The pole barn is expected to be a simple metal building with metal sides metal roof per Mr. Carpinello and approximately 15 feet in height. The neighbor next to him has no concerns per Mr. Carpinello. The color will match home per applicant and will have crushed stone floor. Public Hearing opened: Andrew Mair, Brinker Drive, asked about conditions. Would the board have conditions about not having water, plumbing etc? Chairman French stated that would be a condition. Motion made to close the public hearing by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone. All in favor, motion carried. County: Per Mr. Miner, local consideration shall prevail, does not impact county plans. Undesirable change be produced in character of neighborhood: No Can benefits sought be achieved by other method other than area variance: Not feasible per board. Substantial: No Adverse affect on physical or environmental: No

2 Page 2 Old barn on property collapsed over 5 years ago and is now gone per applicant. Conditions: No interior plumbing One year separation Motion made to approve with above conditions made by Mr. Masone and seconded by Mr. McGraw. Roll Call Vote: Masone, Dalmata, French, McGraw. All in favor, motion carried. Application #12-20, for the area variance request of Sharon Cardazzi, 12 Guiliana Circle, Troy, NY 12180, for relief from rear setback requirements of 20 feet for the purpose of allowing a deck 13 feet from the rear property line at 12 Guiliana Circle, Troy, NY 12180, in a PDD district, having parcel ID# Ms. Cardazzi spoke regarding her application. She distributed a sketch of the property. She would like to extend the deck with composite decking which matches what is in the development. Chairman French explained that there is common property owned by the homeowners association that borders the property lines for the homeowners. This application has common property behind it. Public Hearing Opened: Andrew Mair, Brinker Drive, asked if this is a back property line, and it is. Mr. Miner explained how these homes are laid out on the property and into the setback slightly. Mr. Mair asked if any on the agenda had to do with side setbacks and Chairman French stated no. He also asked if anything or if there is a restriction that nothing can be built on the common areas. Mr. Miner stated a permit would be necessary for the homeowners association to do anything on the common area. Motion to close public hearing by Mr. McGraw and seconded by Mr. Masone. All in favor, motion carried. County: Local consideration shall prevail per Mr. Miner. Undesirable change be produced in character of neighborhood: No Can benefits sought be achieved by other method other than area variance: No Substantial: No Adverse affect on physical or environmental: No

3 Page 3 Privacy fence: Applicant stated possibly shrubbery or extending the existing privacy fence. Conditions: Mutually agreed upon privacy separation between deck and adjacent property is needed and is consistent with the others that have come before the board. One year separation. Motion made to approve with above conditions made by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone. Roll Call Vote: Masone, Dalmata, French, McGraw. All in favor, motion carried. Application #12-21, for the area variance request of John & Lois Beaudoin, 14 Guiliana Circle, Troy, NY 12180, for relief from rear setback requirements of 20 feet for the purpose of allowing a deck 13 feet from the rear property line at 14 Guiliana Circle, Troy, NY 12180, in a PDD district, having parcel ID# Mr. and Mrs. Beaudoin spoke regarding their application. They would like to extend the deck with composite decking which matches what is in the development. Same as above request. Most likely the same builder for above application. Public Hearing Opened: No one speaking. Motion to close public hearing made by Mr. McGraw and seconded by Mr. Masone. All in favor, motion carried. County: Local consideration shall prevail per Mr. Miner. Undesirable change be produced in character of neighborhood: No Can benefits sought be achieved by other method other than area variance: No Substantial: No Adverse affect on physical or environmental. Conditions of neighborhood: No

4 Page 4 Privacy fence: same as above. Conditions: Mutually agreed upon privacy separation between deck and adjacent property is needed and is consistent with the others that have come before the board. One year separation. Motion made to approve with above conditions made by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. McGraw. Roll Call Vote: Masone, Dalmata, French, McGraw. All in favor, motion carried. Application #12-22, for the area variance request of Winter Whiteview, LLC, 9 Killkenny Ct, Schenectady, NY 12309, for relief from rear setback requirements of 20 feet for the purpose of allowing a deck 14 feet from the rear property line at 74 Lorenzo Drive, Troy, NY 12180, in a PDD district, having parcel ID# Application #12-23, for the area variance request of Winter Whiteview, LLC, 9 Killkenny Ct, Schenectady, NY 12309, for relief from rear setback requirements of 20 feet for the purpose of allowing a deck 14 feet from the rear property line at 76 Lorenzo Drive, Troy, NY 12180, in a PDD district, having parcel ID# and have been withdrawn by applicant. Application #12-24, for the area variance request of Winter Whiteview, LLC, 9 Killkenny Ct, Schenectady, NY 12309, for relief from rear setback requirements of 20 feet for the purpose of allowing a deck 6 feet from the rear property line at 92 Lorenzo Drive, Troy, NY 12180, in a PDD district, having parcel ID# Heard at the end of the meeting. Motion made to hear both applications by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone including Public Hearing. Board reviewed a map of the entire area. County: Local prevision shall prevail, per Mr. Miner Public Hearing opened: Andy Mair: They are asking for a 73% variance although there is common space behind them.

5 Page 5 Motion made to close public hearing by Mr. McGraw and seconded by Mr. Masone. All in favor motion carried. Undesirable change be produced in character of neighborhood: No Can benefits sought be achieved by other method other than area variance: No Substantial: No based on the green space. Adverse affect on physical or environmental conditions of neighborhood: No Conditions: Privacy fence or separation Materials consistent with existing. One year separation. Motion made to approve with above conditions by Mr. Masone and seconded by Mr. Dalmata. Roll Call Vote: Masone, Dalmata, French, McGraw. All in favor, motion carried. Application #12-25, for the area variance request of Winter Whiteview, LLC, 9 Killkenny Ct, Schenectady, NY 12309, for relief from rear setback requirements of 20 feet for the purpose of allowing a deck 6 feet from the rear property line at 94 Lorenzo Drive, Troy, NY 12180, in a PDD district, having parcel ID# See above. Old Business Application #12-16, for the area variance request of Shane Cahill (Realty USA), Realty USA, 20 Aviation Road, Albany, NY, for relief from minimum lot size requirements of 30,000 square feet for the purpose of constructing a single family home on a parcel having 13,950 square feet and for relief from side setback requirements of 30 feet for the purpose of allowing side setbacks of 20 feet at the property located at Van Dyke Drive North, in an RS district, having parcel ID#: No one present for this applicant and Mr. Miner has not heard from him as well. Chairman French stated it was posted this month as well. Chairman French reviewed what was discussed last month. Public Hearing reopened:

6 Page 6 Andrew Mair: Brinker Drive: Asking that this application be disposed of one way or the other. Withdraw or vote. Chairman French stated that asking that the board deny without applicant being present is not the process the board uses out of courtesy. Mr. Mair stated that because you don t have a request from the applicant to withdraw could state that they have given up on the application. That means he has abandoned the application. He also stated that the board should not adjourn when the applicant has not requested. Mr. Dan Hennessey, 46- Highway 43, Rensselaer. Distributed a letter to the board and read it. He is requesting it be denied. Mr. McGraw asked what the outcome of the lawsuit was. Mr. Hennessey stated that they did not submit the papers in a timely fashion, statute of limitations so the suit was thrown out. Mrs. Serian, 19 Van Dyke drive just spent 10,000 to fix her cellar because of water pumping in. She stated the signs appear to be on the other lot and not the lot it should be and she stated she feels more neighbors would be here tonight if the sign was placed correctly. Sherry Sidor, 17 Mountainview. She stated she feels that Mr. Cahill seemed confused and may not know he was suppose to be here this month. Mr. Mair spoke again: He said the signs are posted on the farmhouse next door and appear are not on the property. Chairman French stated that would be in contrary to his request to dismiss. Because if the signs were not on the correct location it cannot be dismissed it would need to be continued per Mr. French. Mr. Mair also stated that he does not think the signs were posted 10 days and Ms. Sidor stated they were because she saw them. Mr. Mair feels because the applicant is not here he feels it is abandonment of the application. And because there is no request for a continuance or adjournment it should be dismissed per Mr. Mair. He also stated that the variance is substantial (53 1/2 %). He feels there is a width and setback issue. Chairman French stated that a width and setback issue cannot be determined until there is a house plan. He also suggested again that the applicant purchase some land adjacent. Mr. Mair also agreed with Mr. Hennessey about the property he spoke of in his letter that had water problems and feel there would be water problems here too. Mr. Mair is asking it to be denied because it would be a detriment to the neighborhood. Mr. Hennessey also noted that the farmhouse is the Schermerhorn mansion. Mr. Miner stated he has not heard from Mr. Cahill but does not know if someone in his office has because he was not in today.

7 Page 7 Motion made to close public hearing made by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone. All in favor, motion carried. Chairman French stated that the board only on one occasion dismissed an application the next month when an applicant does not show and there were reasons he explained for that. He also stated that there is a possibility that the signs were not placed correctly and that is an issue. He did say he doesn t feel there is any way a home can be built on the lot in question. Because of the fact that the signs may not have been posted correctly and not knowing the applicants intent it is difficult to make a determination. Mr. Mair stated that he spoke to Mr. Secor and stated that the applicant was going to withdraw the application and that is why he was not here tonight. Chairman French stated we cannot assume that and we don t have that information. Any defects in the signage do not denote the benefit of the applicant and the detriment is to the public not the applicant. Counsel stated the board or building dept. needs to send the applicant a letter and if he does not come next month it should be considered withdrawn. Motion to adjourn to contact applicant to determine intention and if he does not come next month it will be considered withdrawn. If he does wish to come back it will be re-posted and another public hearing. That motion made by Mr. Masone and seconded by Mr. Dalmata. All in favor, motion carried. Application #12-17, for the area variance request of Sheri Sidor, 17 Mountainview Terrace, from restrictions prohibiting an accessory building in a front yard for the purpose of constructing a carport attached to and in front of the existing garage 11 feet from the front property line at 17 Mountainview Terrace, in an RS district, having parcel ID#: Ms. Sidor and Robert Pushing explained the application. They have clearer measurements from last month. Mr. Pushing distributed some information to the board and photos where there are issues with other neighbors on pre-approved variances. Chairman French read a previous application that the above applicant noted ( Lazano) and how and why this was approved. It will be 11 feet before the line and was also measured by Mr. Miner. That was unclear last month. Public Hearing re-opened:

8 Page 8 Andy Mair, Brinker Drive. If this was to be attached there would be setbacks but since it is detached there are no set back requirements and this type of structure is not permitted in a front yard. It makes no sense that a structure that is not attached does not have setback requirements. Chairman French clarified that there are set back requirements but not permitted for front. This defies logic and it is because it is not allowed at all. Mr. Mair is asking that this board apply setback requirements which would be attached. Also Mr. Mair asked if this is this a use variance or an area variance? He stated he saw the property and it seems as if it is a short distance and only one vehicle can fit according to what he saw and feels the posts for this would be too far out and obstruct the view which causes a safety issue. He is asking that it not be granted because it is too much. 40 feet setback if connected to water. No water setback is 50 feet per Mr. Miner. Mr. Mair also stated after looking at the photos it looks as if the vehicles are touching and wants measurements. Mr. Pushing stated car port goes 11 feet out and is over 16 feet from the carport poles. The carport is going to be 14 feet out. 25 to the town 5 foot line. Home is attached to water so there would be a 40 foot setback and they are asking for an 11 foot setback. Mr. Pushing also requested that this be approved similar to the one in 1994 which was 11 feet from town line. Motion made to close public hearing by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone. All in favor, motion carried. Undesirable change be produced in character of neighborhood: No but character is subjective depending on who you ask. No public issue with the exception of Mr. Mair last month. Can benefits sought be achieved by other method other than area variance: Yes but not conveniently. Substantial: Yes because it is not allowed by code. Adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions of neighborhood: No Chairman French stated that if the board cannot answer the questions to the satisfaction of the board they cannot approve. Motion made to deny by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone. Roll Call vote to deny: Masone, Dalmata, French, McGraw. All in favor to deny.

9 Page 9 Motion made to approve April Meeting minutes by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. Masone. Motion made to approve May minutes by Mr. Masone and seconded by Mr. Dalmata. Mr. McGraw abstained. July 11 th Mr. Dalmata will not be present. Motion made to adjourn at 8:29pm by Mr. Dalmata and seconded by Mr. McGraw.