Full Text
TOWN OF STERLING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 31, 2017 A meeting of the Town of Sterling Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Wednesday, May 31, 2017 at the Sterling Town Hall at 7:01 pm with the following members present: Laurence Lemon ~ Chairman Darrell Uetz ~Member Richard Palmieri ~ Acting Chairman Excused: Members Charles Itzin and Brad Dates Also Present : William & Kathy Snook. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Chairman Laurence Lemon. PUBLIC HEARINGS William Snook Chairman Lemon stated that the Hearing would continue on tonight and had remained open since the meeting on April 27, 2017 and through the meeting on May 11, 2017. Notification to the neighbors as well as publication in the newspaper had been completed a second time because of the length of time between meetings and because a meeting date had not been established at the last meeting. Chairman Lemon began the discussion by stating that he had researched the theory proposed at the previous meeting that the front of the house is in the Fair Haven section of the property, therefore the permit authority would be Village of Fair Haven ( which wouldn’t require a variance to build the garage if attached). He stated that the mailbox location determines the municipality with permitting authority which is Sterling. William Snook presented an updated site plan that located the garage 9’ from the house with a pergola to provide an attachment between the two structures. The Board members were satisfied with the new site plan which had more measurements to work with as well as the plan being drawn to scale. A discussion ensued regarding the proposed pergola and whether it would classify as an attachment of structures. The LUR is remiss in containing a definition for ‘attached’ but Member Palmieri offered that a definition for a detached building exists and is as such –a building having an open space on all four sides. The pergola will attach to the house with 2 posts and attach to the garage with 2 posts, and will be approximately 4’ wide. The members questioned what a pergola was; Mr. Snook replied that it is basically landscaping apparatus that will enhance the design of what already exists on the property. Chairman Lemon suggested making the pergola more substantial by adding a platform walkway or some other framing for future use with a roof to keep snow off the surface. He further suggested closing it in to make a breezeway which would be an acceptable method of attachment. Through this discussion it was realized that the pergola is located on the back wall of the garage and connects to a wall of the house which would not be suitable for a walkway or breezeway construction. Mr. Snook explained that the proposed location keeps the house open to utilize the sidewalk and access the side yard as well as keep a bedroom window from being blocked. The door on the garage would be around the corner from the proposed location of the pergola and to extend a roof line from that area to the porch roof of the entry would be extensive construction and expensive as well as not in harmony with the existing architectural details used in the home construction. Several scenarios were discussed with roof extensions and matching the front facing aesthetic gables to no avail; the distance needed traversed lends to any structure appearing as a pavilion and will hide the house that has many architectural details that the owners do not want hidden from view. Discussion then turned to moving the proposed garage to the north side of the property where there’s potential to attach it to the house through a breezeway or similar construction which would still require a front setback but possibly not a side setback variance. Member Uetz agreed with the applicant that the expense to fill the north side to a buildable elevation would be excessive and the drainage issues to overcome would be difficult to achieve on the small lot without impacting neighboring properties. Discussion retreated back to the applicant’s proposed garage location, which is at 9’ from the house making it 21.5’ from the property line and 31.5’ to the edge of pavement. Member Palmieri offered that the Village of Fair Haven has 30’ front setback and 10’ side setback requirements which the Board has previously tried to match on properties that are on tax rolls of both municipalities. The site plan illustrates an 11’ offset for the side yard dimension, an improvement from the original request at 6’ and agreeable to the Board members. The site plan also illustrates that the garage will ---PAGE BREAK--- now face the roadway which will involve moving the driveway to be perpendicular instead of parallel as the original design intended. The Board discussed the maneuverability of a 31.5’ driveway when an average car length is 20’ and determined that it would be sufficient space. Member Palmieri questioned the applicant as to why he settled on 9’ separation of house and garage. Mr. Snook replied that at 9’ he wouldn’t disturb the landscaping and that at 9’ the sidewalk slopes toward the house. The members questioned what the neighboring properties had for setbacks because they wanted to blend with what already exists in the community. The applicant stated that two properties to the north have garages 12’ from the road and many other properties have sheds even closer to the road. Chairman Lemon sated that if the definition for detached is open on all four sides then the proposed garage is attached because the fourth side contains the pergola which attaches to both structures. Member Palmieri commented that he had hoped that the attachment would be something more substantial. Member Uetz added that the garage will need to be built with a firewall since the structures are so close. The applicant stated in response that when he had approached his builder after the last meeting to alter the design because the structures had to be attached, he replied that he had built pergolas in the past (Finger Lakes area) to satisfy the same requirement. Without any further public or Board comments, the Hearing was closed at 8:13 PM by Chairman Lemon. A motion was moved by Member Palmieri to grant the requested front setback relief of 30’ and 10’ relief of side setback to construct 24’x24’ garage. The motion was seconded by Chairman Lemon, all were in favor and the motion carried. Resolution 2017-04 BE IT RESOLVED, by the Zoning Board of Appeals for the Town of Sterling, upon the facts presented and the determination made, that the application for the requested variance of 30’ relief for front setback requirement and 10’ relief for side setback requirement for proposed 24’x24’ garage on property located at 14918 West Bay Road, Sterling, NY 13156; Tax Map # 5.19-1-10 is hereby GRANTED, under the assumption that the proposed method of attachment constitutes as an attachment of garage to house. Roll call vote was taken: Lawrence Lemon, Chairman Aye Richard Palmieri, Member Aye Darrell Uetz, Member Aye Charles Itzin, Member Absent Brad Dates, Member Absent 3 AYES 0 NAYES 0 ABSTENTIONS – REQUEST APPROVED MINUTES A motion to approve meeting minutes for April 17, 2017; April 27, 2017 and May 11, 2017 was moved by Member Uetz and seconded by Member Palmieri, all were in favor and the motion carried. ADJOURN On a motion by Member Uetz and seconded by Chairman Lemon the meeting was adjourned at 8:29 PM. Approved Minutes, Respectfully submitted, Lisa Somers ZBA Clerk