ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF ROCHESTER
ULSTER COUNTY
ACCORD, NEW YORK
(845) 626-2434
btetro@townofrochester.ny.gov
MINUTES of the November 19th, 2020 Town of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals, held via Zoom and Livestreamed on Youtube.
Chairman Mallery called the meeting to order at 7:00PM.
Chairman Mallery recited the Pledge to the Flag.
PRESENT: ABSENT: VACANT:
Cliff Mallery, Chair Steve Fornal
Bruce Psaras, Vice Chair
Bill Barringer
Charlie Fischer
ALSO PRESENT: Mary Lou Christiana, Town Attorney. Brianna Tetro, Secretary. Mike Baden, Town Supervisor and meeting host.
Chair Mallery called the meeting to order.
The secretary did roll call.
*Chair Mallery read the following statement before the application was reviewed:
“I have confirmed with the Town’s Counsel that tonight’s meeting has been convened in accordance with the Governor’s March 13, 2020 Executive Order 202.1 which suspends certain provisions of the Open Meetings Law to allow a municipal Board to convene a meeting via videoconferencing. In accordance with the Executive Order, the public has been provided with the ability to view tonight’s meeting via YouTube and a transcript will be provided at a later date.
The Secretary has completed a roll call of the Board Members and there is a quorum present for this meeting. I have also confirmed with the Secretary that this meeting has been duly noticed.
We have fulfilled our legal notice requirements by posting Notice on the Town Clerk bulletin board and outside door, posting legal notice in the Shawangunk Journal , and posting notice on the Town’s website.”
APPLICATIONS:
NEW APPLICATION
2020-06AV/UV- Craig and Allison Williams
Area Variance and Use Variance
533 Queens Hwy./ SBL: 77.1-2-24.100/ AR-3 District
Proposed Use: Create one additional residential building lot (2-lot subdivision). Access strip to new lot will encroach side yard set back at existing garage.
Area Variance Required: Side Yard Set back. Garage is proposed at 30’ 6” from line, 40’ is required.
Use Variance Required: Constructing an accessory structure without principle structure on premises.
Mrs. Nadine Carney from Peak Engineering and Mr. Craig Williams were present on behalf of the applications.
Mrs. Carney explained what the applications were about. She stated the area variance was required due to a proposed subdivision and the use variance was required for a proposed garage without a principle structure on the parcel.
Chair Mallery asked how many garages were on the property.
Mrs. Carney stated there was one existing garage and a second garage currently in the process of being built.
Mr. Psaras asked about the garage that was currently being built.
Mrs. Carney stated it was under construction but currently had a foundation and some framing work.
Attorney Christiana explained that at the present time, the new garage received a building permit because everything is currently on one lot but the proposed subdivision, which was currently in review in front of the Town’s Planning Board, would make the garage “homeless” and therefore in need of a use variance along with an area variance for the existing garage.
Mrs. Carney reiterated what Attorney Christiana had stated.
There was some confusion among the Board due to a letter from the Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) that had been attached to the Zoning Permit. The letter was addressed to the Chair and Board members explaining how the CEO reached his decision and had mentioned that the applicant was to cease and desist construction on the garage being built.
Mrs. Carney stated the applicant never received anything stating the need to cease and desist construction on the garage.
Attorney Christiana said she was understanding the construction would need to stop should the subdivision be approved but that there was never a cease and desist letter sent out from the CEO to the applicant.
Mrs. Carney even added that Jerry Davis, the CEO, had been to the site several times and did not mention any violations.
Chair Mallery commented there seemed to be some inconsistencies.
Mrs. Carney explained as it was at the present time, it was allowed, but the subdivision could not be approved without the variances.
Attorney Christiana stated there needed to be clarification from the CEO.
The Board went through some alternative methods in order for the area variance to not be needed but the suggestions were not feasible with the proposed subdivision.
Mrs. Carney stated the subdivision needed to be approved by the Planning Board due to economic and financial reasons and a new home could not be added to the purposed garage until the existing home was sold first.
Chair Mallery asked why the garage was started already if this problem was anticipated.
Mrs. Carney explained that the building permit was obtained prior to the subdivision application. She reiterated the need for the subdivision to be approved in order to build the new home.
Attorney Christiana stated economics came into play in regards to a use variance. She noted that while there was discussion about the use variance, the application submitted to the Board was for an Area Variance and either the application needed to be amended to reflect the use variance or a new application needed to be submitted as there was currently little information provided for the use variance.
Chair Mallery added that the Town of Rochester Planning Board had sent a letter requesting lead agency for SEQRA for the applicant’s subdivision application.
Mr. Barringer made the motion to consent to the Town of Rochester Planning Board serving as lead agency for the Williams subdivision application. Mr. Fischer seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Mallery- Yes Mr. Fischer- Yes
Mr. Psaras- Yes Mr. Barringer- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried
4 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions, 1 vacancy.
Chair Mallery explained that with an Area Variance the Board followed 140-66(c), but with a use variance was more complicated and would need substantial evidence and circumstances to be approved.
Mr. Psaras made the motion to set a public hearing at the December 17th, 2020 regular meeting on the Area Variance and Use Variance applications, contingent on receiving the fees and the Use Variance application. Chair Mallery seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
4 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions, 1 vacancy.
There was no further discussion.
OTHER MATTERS:
Accepting the meeting minutes from May 21st, June 18th, July 16th, August 20th, September 17th, 2020, and October 15th, 2020 regular meetings.
The Board discussed the minutes. A few Board members had read some but not all the minutes from the past 6 months.
Mr. Barringer made the motion to accept the meeting minutes from the August 20th, 2020 regular meeting. Mr. Psaras seconded the motion. Chair Mallery abstained. Mr. Fischer abstained as well as he had not read the minutes.
Motion not carried.
2 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 2 abstentions, 1 vacancy.
The Board tabled the minutes.
ZBA Process Chart
The Board discussed an application process flow chart provided by Mr. Psaras that had been presented and discussed at the October 15th, 2020 regular meeting. There were some minor changes suggested but otherwise it was agreed it was a good idea.
Mr Fischer asked why the applications were no longer appearing as Pre-Applications.
Secretary Tetro stated that it was her understanding that applications could appear as pre-applications on an agenda if the applicants wanted to have a review with the Board before paying the application fee . She stated if an applicant paid the fee while submitting the application, then they would appear on the agenda as a full application.
Chair Mallery asked if that was in writing anywhere.
Secretary Tetro stated it was in the ZBA’s Procedure Guidelines.
Supervisor Baden added it was also in the Code.
Mr. Psaras made the motion to accept the ZBA Process Chart as amended. Mr. Barringer seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
4 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions, 1 vacancy.
Certification of Minutes to Building Department
Attorney Christiana explained there was a court case going on that involved a structure that the ZBA had denied an Area Variance for in 2019 and had also heard once more in 2020. She said t the owners were providing some inaccurate details to the court about what the ZBA had told them to do. She suggested that the Chair give the Secretary permission to send the certified meeting minutes that the individuals had appeared in front of the Board to the Code Enforcement Office, for their records, as sending them directly to the Court was not advisable.
Chair Mallery stated he would be fine with that.
There was no further discussion.
ADJOURNMENT:
Mr. Barringer made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:47pm. Mr. Fischer seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
4 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions, 1 vacancy.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brianna Tetro, Secretary
Accepted January 21st, 2021