MINUTES OF March 14, 2013 the Town of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals, held at the Town of Rochester Community Center, Accord, NY.
Chairperson Haugen- De Puy called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Beatrice Haugen- De Puy, Chairperson
Cliff Mallery, Vice Chair
Troy Dunn
Charlie Fischer, Alternate
John Dawson
Also present:
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary. Mary Lou Christiana, Town Attorney.
Because there was not a full Board, as Mrs. Kawalchuk recently resigned, Chairperson Haugen De Puy asked Alternate Fischer to join the Board.
CONTINUED APPLICATION REVIEW
SCOTT MACSCOTT– multiple setback variances needed for addition to existing dwelling, 24 Blevins Road, 59.7-2-57, R-2 Zoning District. (This is an undersized pre-existing lot, therefore the rear and side yard setbacks are 20’ and the front yard setback is 30’.
Mr. MacScott was present to discuss his pre-application presentation.
Chairperson Haugen De Puy noted that Mr. MacScott was present this evening to continue to discuss his request for multiple setback variances needed for an addition to existing dwelling, 24 Blevins Road, 59.7-2-57, R-2 Zoning District. This is an undersized pre-existing lot and the way they left this at the last meeting was for Mr. MacScott to approach the Code Enforcement Office with the idea of trimming the addition to run parallel to the property lines at the distance that they already encroach the setback, so he’d be continuing a nonconforming setback and not encroaching on it any further.
Mr. MacScott was confused after the last meeting and didn’t speak with Mr. Davis, CEO.
Mrs. Christiana, Town Attorney noted that by cutting the corners off of the addition that Mr. MacScott built, would maintain that 3’ setback—the same could be done on the other side. The Code would require that to go to the Planning Board for a Special Use Permit under 140-42. If Mr. MacScott would want to encroach even further on the setback he would need a variance and then a Special Use Permit. Either way he would definitely need to get the part of the building that he erroneously built on his neighbors property off of that. No one could give permission for that.
Mr. MacScott noted that he didn’t mean to build on the neighbor’s parcel. The overhang is closer to the boundary, but under the same thought, it goes with that.
Mr. Dawson noted that the new overhang can go further than the old one, but it couldn’t go over the property line.
Mrs. Christiana noted that if he wanted to remove the portion that is on the neighbor’s property and stay within the old setbacks he would need to go to the CEO and he would need to refer it to the Planning Board for a Special Use Permit. That either has to happen, or he needs to file for an Area Variance and then a Special Use Permit or he is in violation. At some point the CEO would bring Mr. MacScott to court if he doesn’t get this resolved. Again, if he wanted to go closer to the setback he would need to first go to the ZBA for an Area Variance and then to the Planning Board for a Special Use Permit.
Mr. MacScott noted that he was in favor of the path of least resistance. He noted that the left side is no problem, but the 3’ side is an issue because of the two diagonal supports. Structurally speaking he would like to keep that. He would like to speak to the CEO about that and go to the Planning Board for the side that isn’t a problem.
Mrs. Christiana noted that the Planning Board isn’t an automatic yes either.
Mr. MacScott would go and see Mr. Davis, CEO in the morning. He questioned if something didn’t go right with the Planning Board, does he have the right to go back to the ZBA?
Mrs. Christiana noted that he would still need the Special Use Permit.
Mr. MacScott questioned what the difference was between a Variance and a Special Use Permit?
Mrs. Christiana noted that a variance is where something isn’t allowed in the code, so the ZBA has to decide whether or not to vary the code to allow it. A Special Use Permit is something that the Planning Board reviews that is not permitted by right, but through the Special Use Permit process if the applicant can prove to the Board that he can meet certain criterion of the Code.
Mr. MacScott questioned if there was any chance that he would have to take down his house?
Mrs. Christiana noted that no, because his house was pre-existing.
OTHER MATTERS:
Chairperson Haugen De Puy noted Mrs. Kawalchuk had resigned from the Board. She noted that she would send a letter of thanks and recognition.
Mr. Dawson motioned to write a letter to the Town Board requesting that Mr. Fischer, Alternate take Mrs. Kawalchuk’s seat on the Board and fills the remainder of her term and to appoint a new Alternate to the Board. Seconded by Chairperson Haugen De Puy. No Discussion.
Vote:
Haugen- De Puy, Chairperson- Yes Mallery, Vice Chair- Yes
Dunn- Yes Dawson- Yes
Fischer- Yes
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Dawson motioned to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Fischer. All members present in favor.
Since there was no further business, at 7:55PM Chairperson Haugen- De Puy adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary