ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF ROCHESTER
ULSTER COUNTY
ACCORD, NEW YORK
(845) 626-2434
torpbzba@hvc.rr.com
MINUTES of the April 19th, 2018 Town of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals, held at the Town of Town of Rochester Community Center, Accord, NY.
Chairman Mallery called the meeting to order at 7:00PM.
Pledge to the Flag.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Cliff Mallery
Steven Fornal
Erin Enouen
Charles Fischer
Bruce Psaras
Also present:
William Barringer, Alternate. Rebecca Paddock-Stange was present as Secretary.
Continued Application – Public Hearing
Stanley Wright
2018-01 – Area Variance
298 Samsonville Road, Tax Map #68.3-4-21.100, AR-3 Zoning District. 1.5 Acres.
Proposes constructing a house 50 feet from stream. Section 140.12 E of the code states “Water front yards. Each lot fronting on a named stream depicted on USGS Maps shall include a setback of 100 feet in depth from the high water mark of such stream.”
Stanley Wright was present on behalf of the application.
Chairman Mallery asked Mr. Wright to present his application to the Board.
Mr. Wright stated that he wants to build a small home off of Samsonville Road. A stream cuts through the property and the home cannot be within 100 feet of the stream. He stated that the lot was only 1.5 acres. He added that the property used to be Linscott’s Store years ago but that in 2004 he had the tanks removed and cleaned everything up.
Chairman Mallery stated that the Board would need to see the Department of Environmental Conservation paperwork from the removal of the tanks.
Mr. Wright said okay and that the tank was removed years ago.
The Board reviewed the maps.
Mr. Psaras asked if there was a septic done.
Mr. Wright stated that the septic was done in December 2017.
Mr. Psaras asked if the home was going to be a 2 bedroom.
Mr. Wright stated that he was only doing a 1 bedroom home. He added that he replaced the existing septic.
Mr. Fornal asked if the applicant could turn the proposed home.
Mr. Wright stated that turning the home would make it hard to get into the garage.
Mr. Fornal stated that he would rather look at a frontage variance than a stream one in the flood plain.
Mr. Wright stated that the land was not in the flood plain. He stated that the stream was 4 feet below bank and didn’t flood during Irene. He stated that the water never wanted in the flat surface. He stated that there was a big drop off down the stream.
Chairman Mallery asked if he would follow the original foundation.
Mr. Wright stated that no, they would be closer to the road and property line.
Mr. Psaras asked if the home could go on the clear part of the parcel.
Mr. Wright stated that the property dropped down.
Mr. Fornal asked how much road frontage the applicant had.
Mr. Wright stated that he had about 300 feet of road frontage. He showed pictures to the Board on his phone.
Chairman Mallery asked if the applicant could print the pictures out for the next meeting.
Mr. Wright stated that he could build on the lower part but it would probably be too wet. He stated that it was almost impossible to put anything 100 feet away from the stream. He stated that he couldn’t really move the septic; he added that the department of health and the engineer came up with the location of the septic.
Mr. Fornal stated that the applicant could move the proposed home 100 feet away from the stream and about 15 feet from the road.
Chairman Mallery stated that it would minimize the variance. He stated that the sustainability of the variance was a big factor.
Mr. Fornal stated that the home moved closer to the road they would need a front and back variance. He added that they would not be able to get 100 feet away from the stream but farther away is better.
Chairman Mallery asked if the Board would be comfortable granting two variances.
Mr. Fornal asked what they distance from the road should be. He stated 20 feet.
Mr. Wright stated that 20 feet would not leave a lot room for a car and would have to back the car onto the road.
Mr. Mallery stated that he does not want to make the driveway area dangerous for the applicant.
Mr. Fornal then mentioned 30 feet.
The Board discussed the septic location and ways to place the house.
Mr. Fornal and Chairman Mallery both stated that the applicant will need to print out pictures he has on his phone, bring in the DEC paperwork about the tanks, amend the zoning permit to be 30-35 feet from the road/front of the yard, and at least 20 feet from the sides, amend the area variance application, new site plan for the next meeting. This would require 2 variances but not as demanding as the stream variance.
Chairman Mallery asked if the applicant could change the orientation of the home.
Mr. Wright stated that he could not.
Ms. Enouen asked if the home was already designed.
Mr. Wright stated that it was. He noted that when the Department of Environmental Conservation told him that 50 feet from the stream was okay he did not know he was going to have any problems.
Mr. Fornal asked if the applicant could write a narrative about the impacts of hurricane Irene for the record. He also asked the applicant if he owned any contiguous property.
Mr. Wright stated that he did not own any contiguous property.
Mr. Fornal asked if there was a survey or any stakes on the property.
Mr. Wright stated that there was fencing on the property line.
Mr. Fornal asked if the applicant could get a letter from his neighbor explaining where the line was.
Mr. Wright stated that in 2004 his neighbor was the building inspector.
Mr. Fornal motioned to classify the application as a type II under SEQR. Mr. Fischer seconded.
Roll Call:
Chairman Mallery – Yes Ms. Enouen – Yes
Mr. Fornal – Yes Mr. Psaras – Yes
Mr. Fischer – Yes
5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstain, 0 absent
Mr. Fornal motioned to set the application for public hearing for the May 17th 2018 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Mr. Fischer seconded the motion.
5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstain, 0 absent
There was no further discussion.
Continued Application – Public Hearing
Sue Lapp/Kyle Pugliese
2018-02 – Area Variance
76 Tow Path Road, Tax Map #77.1-3-32, AR-3 Zoning District. 4.6 Acres.
Proposes a 6 foot high fence in front yard. Section 140-13H(2) if code states “fence height shall not exceed a height of 4 feet when located in any front yard setback.”
Kyle and Chenai Pugliese were present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Pugliese stated that they lived at 76 Tow Path Road and that their house was 12 feet off of Town Road. He added that the ditch runs about 12 feet. He stated that he would like to construct a 6 foot fence on the higher elevation to keep the kids safe.
Mr. Fornal asked how far from the center of the road the fence would be and if there would be gates.
Mr. Pugliese stated that the fence would be 4 and a half feet high from the road and that there would be no gates.
Chairman Mallery asked what kind of driveway the applicant had.
Mr. Pugliese stated that he had a “U” shaped driveway.
Chairman Mallery explained what a variance was and why the Board granted them.
Mr. Pugliese stated that he wanted the fence for privacy, block out road noise. He stated that the guy on Granite Road just put a fence in that was closer to the road than his would be. He added that the fence would help with the lights shining into the children’s bedrooms.
Mr. Fornal asked the applicant to bring pictures of the property and how a fence would look in perspective to his home.
Chairman Mallery asked if it was possible to build a berm.
Mr. Pugliese stated that he might as well build a 6 foot berm, buy blocks and stack on the ground and then wouldn’t need a permit.
Chairman Mallery stated that fences and walls were considered the same in the code.
The Board discussed different heights and ways the fence could be placed. They also discussed them individually going to look at where the fence would be.
Mr. Fornal motioned to classify the application as an unlisted action under SEQR. Mr. Psaras seconded the motion.
Motion Carried. All in favor.
5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstain, 0 absent
Mr. Fornal motioned to set the application for public hearing for the May 17th Meeting. Ms. Enuoen seconded the motion.
Motion Carried. All in favor.
5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstain, 0 absent
Other Matters:
Cypress Creek Renewables:
Mr. Fornal motioned to have the Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary re-convey public hearing correspondence for Cypress Creek Renewables; Rondout Creek Solar for the May 17th meeting and re-notify bounding owners and to tell Cypress Creek Renewables that the Zoning Board of Appeals is reopening their application and if they have any additional information to present to have it to the Secretary by the cutoff date. Mr. Psaras seconded the motion.
Motion Carried. All in favor.
5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstain, 0 absent
Guidelines and Procedures:
The Board continued discussion of the procedures and guidelines of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Fornal motioned to adjourn the meeting at 8:28pm. Mr. Fischer seconded the motion.
Motion Carried. All in favor.
5 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstain, 0 absent
Respectfully submitted,
Shaye Davis, Secretary