Minutes of May 8, 2007 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals, held at the Town Hall, Accord, NY.
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Chairperson, Marijane Knudsen.
Present: Beatrice Haugen-De Puy, Vice Chair Absent: Elizabeth Kawalchuk James Kingston Jennifer McKenzie, Alternate Stanley Hudson Marijane Knudsen, Chairperson
Pledge to the Flag.
ACTION ON MINUTES
Mr. Hudson motioned to approve the minutes of the April 10, 2007 meeting. Seconded by Mrs. Haugen De Puy.
Vote: McKenzie, Alt. – Yes Kawalchuk – Absent
Hudson – Yes Knudsen – Yes
Haugen De Puy – Yes Kingston – Yes
PUBLIC HEARING
Robert & Elizabeth Young & John & Linda Parisio– c/o Brooks & Brooks Land Surveyors, 17’ Variance for increasing a side yard setback, yet still not meeting required 40’ side yard setback, Tax Map # 68.1-2-10 & 13, ‘A’ District
David Duffy, grandson to Elizabeth and Robert Young was present on behalf of this application. Mr. Duffy stated that the lot line between the Young’s and the Parisio’s was discovered to go right through the Parisio’s house. Neither party had ever had a survey. They built their houses over 30 years ago, and back then, banks didn’t require surveys. The Young’s were considering splitting a piece of their land off for their grandson. Mr. Duffy had hired Brooks & Brooks to do the survey and this is what they found out. They approached the Parisio’s and the Parisio’s hired an independent surveyor who came up with the same findings. They had all assumed that the stone wall between the houses was the boundary, as it’s the natural one and quite appropriate. They were here to try and take a pre-existing non conforming situation and make it better by conveying the Parisio’s the property up to the stone wall to make that the boundary. This was agreeable to both parties. The Young’s submitted letter dated April 11, 2007 stating that they weren’t interesting in conveying any additional land other than the property up to the stone wall and this would require a 17’ Area Variance.
The Chairperson noted that the applicants have submitted pictures showing the stone wall that would make the natural boundary.
Mr. Kingston had driven by the location and noted that this is a unique situation. The picture summed it up well. There should be no issue of a self imposed problem; it looks like an existing matter of circumstances.
T/Rochester ZBA Minutes May 8, 2007
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARING
Robert & Elizabeth Young & John & Linda PARISIO (CONT’D)–
c/o Brooks & Brooks Land Surveyors, 17’ Variance for increasing a side yard setback, yet still not meeting required 40’ side yard setback, Tax Map # 68.1-2-10 & 13, ‘A’ District
The Chairperson explained in order to grant a variance, the ZBA must consider if the applicant’s benefit to the detriment to health, safety and welfare of the community is substantial.~ The ZBA must consider whether the applicant can achieve this request by other means.~ There is a letter dated April 11, 2007 stating that Mr. & Mrs. Young will not convey any additional land to the Parisio’s so that there house may meet the 40’ side yard set back. They are only interested in conveying them the land up to the stone wall, which would make a natural boundary line. The Planning Board rendered a favorable advisory opinion dated April 18, 2007.
The Chairperson opened the hearing up to the Public. There was no comment.
Mr. Hudson motioned to close the Public Hearing. Seconded by Mr. Kingston. No discussion.
Vote: McKenzie, Alt. – Yes Kawalchuk – Absent
Hudson – Yes Knudsen – Yes
Haugen De Puy – Yes Kingston – Yes
Mrs. Haugen De Puy motioned to declare ZBA Lead Agency and this change will have no negative effect on the environment and therefore there will be a Negative Declaration. The Board took into consideration to have the lot line follow the stone wall which is good. Seconded by Mr. Kingston. No discussion.
Vote: McKenzie, Alt. – Yes Kawalchuk – Absent
Hudson – Yes Knudsen – Yes
Haugen De Puy – Yes Kingston – Yes
Mr. Kingston motioned to grant the variance of 17’ to follow the natural boundary of the stone wall between the Young’s and Parisio’s properties. Seconded by Mr. Hudson.
Discussion:
Chairperson Knudsen noted that this change will not create an undesirable change to the characteristic of the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties or whether the applicant could move his house elsewhere. The request was no substantial and no ill effects and not self created. The letter submitted April 11, 2007 stating that Mr. & Mrs. Young will not convey any additional land to the Parisio’s so that there house may meet the 40’ side yard set back. They are only interested in conveying them the land up to the stone wall, which would make a natural boundary line. The Planning Board rendered a favorable advisory opinion dated April 18, 2007.
Vote: McKenzie, Alt. – Yes Kawalchuk – Absent
Hudson – Yes Knudsen – Yes
Haugen De Puy – Yes Kingston – Yes
The Chairperson would try and write the decision and have it to the Secretary by the morning. She would alert the building dept. of the Area Variance being granted.
T/Rochester ZBA Minutes May 8, 2007
Page 3
ACTION ON MINUTES
Mr. Hudson motioned to approve the minutes of the April 10, 2007 meeting. Seconded by Mrs. Haugen De Puy.
Vote: McKenzie, Alt. – Yes Kawalchuk – Absent
Hudson – Yes Knudsen – Yes
Haugen De Puy – Yes Kingston – Yes
OTHER MATTERS
The Chairperson invited the Chairman of the Planning Board, Steven Fornal, to the table for a discussion.
Chairperson Knudsen noted that Mr. Fornal is also the Co-Chair of the Zoning and Planning Task Force where she is also a member and where they have been changing the zoning maps and making different districts and she had been telling her ZBA members if they had attended any of these meetings she would count them as trainings. They are now up to the point where they are re-writing the zoning code and it is very very difficult. They are using Tom Shepstone’s Company to help work on it. At last night’s meeting they were working on the section about animals and there were a lot of people there about animals and she remembered distinctly that Mr. Hudson was on that task force that created the law that is in effect now. She questioned Mr. Hudson why horses were required to have 3.1 acres?
Mr. Hudson noted that at the time on Samsonville Road by Frieldlander Drive, there was a guy and he had horses and he had them in his garage and everyplace. And they decided that if you wanted to have horses it would be required to have 3.1 acres. The point 1 acre was put in the law because they wanted to make it so that it had to be more than 3 acres. This was done back in around 1991.
Ms. McKenzie noted that she has horses and has gotten mixed information from people.
Mr. Hudson noted that there was a place that had an acre and a half and had so many chickens, ducks, turkeys, and a cow and 2 horses. These things are what brought these laws into being made.
The Chairperson stated that this was similar to last night’s Zoning Task Force Meeting. One of the things that one lady said that maybe they just needed to define the standard so that they would avoid another Patty’s Angel’s and abuse situation. This was what had happened at last night’s meeting.
Ms. McKenzie noted that she had gotten calls from all of her friends with horses about the meeting because they were afraid the laws would be changed and they wouldn’t be able to have their horses anymore.
The Chairperson noted that the Zoning Laws were being re-written and the next meeting was May 21, 2007.
They are trying to make a better plan for the Town and change districts and zoning so that it won’t be 1 dwelling per acre.
Mrs. Haugen-De Puy wanted to know what would happen with property that already existed?
Mr. Fornal noted that things that exist are the way they are.
T/Rochester ZBA Minutes May 8, 2007
OTHER MATTERS (cont’d) Page 40
Chairperson Knudsen urged the Board members to attend some of these meetings. It is really important to hear what is going on. And until there is a new law in place, the Chairperson determines what a training is. To her, attending these meetings will be considered a training. It is very important that Board members are aware of what is going on and to have input.
Chairperson Knudsen asked Mr. Fornal to attend to discuss a proposed new law. As of January members of Planning Boards and ZBA’s have to have a minimum of 4 hours training per year and it can be carried over if there is more. She revised the draft law a little along with input from Mr. Fornal, the Planning Board Chairman to present to the Town Board to adopt as a local law. The draft is as follows:
ESTABLISHNG QUALIFYING TRAINING ACTIVIES FOR THE MUNCIPAL PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS AS REQURED BY NEW YORK STATE LAW, CHAPTER 662 OF THE LAWS OF 2006
WHEREAS, the Town of Rochester has primary responsibility to regulate private land use through citizen planning boards and zoning boards and their actions have a profound impact on state and local land use policies and individual land owners, and
WHEREAS effective January 1, 2007, New York State Law, Chapter 662 of the Laws of 2006, Mandatory Training for Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals Members, requires a minimum of four hours of training be received by municipal planning and zoning board members and their alternates each year, and
WHEREAS, New York State Law, Chapter 662 of the Laws of 2006, provides that a planning and zoning board of appeals members and their alternates shall not be eligible for reappointment to such board if they have not completed the required training; and
WHEREAS, training received by planning and zoning board member in excess of four hours in any one year may be carried over by the member into succeeding years; and
WHEREAS, Town Law Sections 267 and 271, Village Law Sections 7-712 and 7-718, and General City Law Sections 27 and 81 provides that the legislative body of the town,village and city specifies which activities qualify as training to satisfy the state requirements;
RESOLVED, that the following list of agencies, commissions, associations, universities, other organizations and private firms or individuals are approved to provide training to meet the requirements of New York State Law, Chapter 662 of the Laws of 2006 when the training they provide pertains to municipal planning, zoning, community design, environmental issues, economic development, and local or county government functions and practices:
1. State Agencies including: the NYS Department of State; Department of Agriculture and Markets; Office of the State Comptroller; Department of Health; Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental Conservation; Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation; Hudson River Valley Greenway, and other state agencies; and
2. Associations and Professional Organizations: as offered by the NYS Association of Towns, the NY Conference of Mayors, the NYS Association of Counties, the NY Planning Federation, the American Planning Association, the Upstate New York Chapter of the American Planning Association and the Metro New York Chapter of the American Planning Association, Association of State Wetland Managers, Urban Land Institute, NYS Bar Association; and
3. New York State Regional Planning Commissions and Boards including: the Capital District Regional Planning Commission, Central New York Regional Planning and Development Board, Herkimer-Oneida Counties
T/Rochester ZBA Minutes May 8, 2007
OTHER MATTERS (cont’d) Page 5
4. Comprehensive Planning Program, Lake Champlain-Lake George Regional Planning Board, Long Island Regional Planning Board, Southern Tier Central Regional Planning and Development Board, Southern Tier East Regional Planning Development Board, Southern Tier West Regional Planning and Development Board, Genesee-Finger Lakes Regional Planning Council, Hudson Valley Regional Council, Tug Hill Commission, and Adirondack Park Agency; and
5. County Planning Boards and Federations including: any county planning board, regional council, or county planning federation established pursuant to Article 12 of New York State General Municipal Law; and
6. Universities and Colleges: the Albany Law School Governmental Law Center, Pace Law School, Cornell University and its cooperative extension, SUNY ESF and other universities and colleges with a degree program in land use law or planning; and
7. Approved Local Municipal Training: any training that has been approved by resolution for planning board members by a legislative body of a municipality in Ulster County
8. Private Firms and Individuals: where such training is sponsored by any of the above
9. On-Line Planning and Zoning Training Programs: as offered by the New York Municipal Insurance Reciprocal, Pace University and Land Use Law Center, and the Lincoln Institute of Land Use Policy; and
10. Other Approved Training: as offered by a NYS Soil and Water Conservation District and that portion of any meeting of the local planning and zoning board designed to provide training on issues consistent with the above including updates on land use laws, environmental statutes and programs, and case law as documented in minutes and agenda of the Board.
10. Trainings as approved/ deemed necessary by the Chair of the Planning Board/ Zoning Board of Appeals.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that except where the Town of Rochester itself provides the training, it is the responsibility of the planning and zoning board of appeals members to submit written confirmation of training attended to the Town Clerk to receive credit.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that any new planning board or zoning board of appeals member appointed to fill the last three months of a term shall not be required to have attended training to be reappointed to a first full term, but must thereafter comply with the municipal training policy as provided elsewhere herein; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary shall create and maintain a system of tracking the training individual members complete annually. Such information shall be reported to the Town Board on December 1st of each year and an individual’s training records shall be presented to the Town Board prior to considering a member for reappointment.
The Board agreed that this was acceptable.
The Chairperson wanted to ensure that the 3 Boards (Town Board, Planning Board and ZBA) remain separate and that the Town Board doesn’t micromanage the other 2 Boards.
Mrs. Haugen De Puy agreed, but wanted to read comments from the Daily Freeman by The Town Supervisor, Pam Duke. These comments were dated May 7, 2007. She stated that these were only hours that we were
T/Rochester ZBA Minutes May 8, 2007
OTHER MATTERS (cont’d) Page 6
talking about and her definition of this “Training” law is that 2 trainings should be 2 different topics. Mrs. Haugen De Puy felt that these were her hours and she was given them because she knows she has to do this training. They shouldn’t be thought of as “only hours”—this was her time—and was important to her. And as for being able to carry them over to the next year, you should be able to. You carry the knowledge with you to every meeting. She found this statement to be dead wrong and it bothered her a lot. So, yes she agrees with what the Chairperson has come up with.
Mr. Fornal felt that Mrs. Duke’s point was that for example, he had attended a seminar that was 8 hours long and that would be technically 2 years worth of training. She is thinking that because new things happen, it would be beneficial to study different topics.
The Chairperson reiterated that there were 3 distinct Boards and the Town Board has no say and with this law it would reinsure that.
Mrs. Haugen- De Puy stated that this was why there were 3 branches of government—so no one had total control.
Mr. Fornal wasn’t sure if they could exclude the Town Clerk from keeping the attendance records. That may be a State Law. The PB/ZBA Secretary could still keep track, but report the attendance to the Town Clerk.
Chairperson Knudsen and Mr. Fornal would work on the revisions and go from there.
The Board members then further discussed the up coming changes. Mr. Fornal noted that he has asked the Supervisor if Tom Shepstone, who is working for the Town to help the Town change the Codes, could train the Boards and certain Town Employees once it has been adopted.
TRAININGS
Mrs. Haugen- De Puy noted that the Board has not yet heard back from their Liaison, Alex Miller regarding the potential to get a training on “How to Deal with Difficult People” here to the Town. The Board would try to contact him again on this.
Mr. Hudson motioned to adjourn seconded by Mr. Kingston. No discussion. All members in favor.
As there was no further business to discuss, Chairperson Knudsen adjourned the meeting at 8:35 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary