Home Calendar Departments Directory Gallery Documents History
ZBA home About Notices Applications Decisions APA Letters Resources
Zoning Board Member Frank Malagisi opened the public session of the meeting at 7:00pm. Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals in attendance by roll call were:
Chairman – Pete Welker - absent
Vice Chairman – Ken Coirin – absent
Frank Malagisi – present
Doug Purcell – present
Robert Kane – present
Alternate Member Christina Perkins - present
Others in attendance: Mike Heberer, Jim Selsmer, Ralph Palcovic, Ken Cronin, Brenda Cross, Matthew Arrnow, Zac Arrnow, Emmett Inserra, Carol Deyoe, Dawn Montavon, Chris and Tina Quenelle, Terri Wrobel, Aaron and Mary Mickley and Paul Phoenix.
Zoning Board member Frank Malagisi explained that with absence of Chairman Pete Welker and Vice Chairman Ken Coirin he will be chairing the hearing this evening and Christina Perkins will be sitting in as the Alternate Zoning Board member.
Frank Malagisi asked if there are any additions or corrections of the previous hearing minutes. The present board members replied there were none. Mr. Malagisi asked for a motion to be made to waive reading and to accept the minutes as written. Doug Purcell made the motion and Bob Kane 2nd the motion. All Zoning Board members agreed.
Zoning Board Member Mr. Malagisi advised that the Town of Caroga Board of Appeals was meeting to hear a variance application. The hearings are two part hearings. The first part is a public session to hear the applicants and the public about the application. The second part is an open session when the board discusses the application.
Mr. Malagisi advised the Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals will hear Application Number Z2011-01 by Kenneth P Cronin Sr of PO Box 233 Caroga Lake, NY 12032 of the property located at 109 North Branch Rd Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as Parcel # 67.-1-11 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.040 Paragraph (c) of said code.
Applicant wants to relocate a snowmobile repair shop in a Hamlet District. This Commercial Use is neither a permitted use nor a use by Site Plan Review.
Mr. Malagisi asked the applicant to explain what he wanted to do. Ken Cronin explained that he wants to move his seasonal repair shop to his home due the increase cost of renting at his present location. He explained that it is a seasonal business that he runs during the winter months and was too costly to keep the present location running year round as the present owner of the building is currently seeking. Mr. Cronin states that he has been at his present location for a number of years and has always kept the area uncluttered with respect to his location. He is requesting a seasonal variance for the winter months only for consideration by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Town of Caroga Code Enforcement Officer Mike Heberer presented information on his conversation with the Town’s Attorney. If the garage on this property were attached, it would be considered under town definition as a Home Occupation and no application would be needed. It was further noted that the Town of Caroga code omits the phrase including other structures not attached which is common in New York State code for the definition as a Home Dwelling. Finally, it was also noted that the property location is in a Hamlet district and the zoning regulations as guided by the APA, which was the original basis for the Town of Caroga of Caroga code, permits this use within a Hamlet district.
Mr. Malagisi asked if there was anyone present who wanted to speak in regards to this application.
Dawn Montavon spoke to say she has reservations for the variance to be granted for commercial use.
Chris Quenelle spoke to say he questions the impact the business would have on the area which is presently residential. He questions what impact the possible increase of traffic would have on the roads, as well as the increase in snowmobile traffic. He questions what will happen to any waste gas and oil generated by the repair shop. He states he is against the variance being granted for a business in a residential area.
Brenda Cross states that the roads in the area of North Branch Rd are already designated for snowmobile use and expects there should be little impact.
Emmett Inserra states that he has concerns for the safety of the road with increase in traffic because of its narrowness especially during the winter months. It is a quiet area and he wants it to remain that way. He questions the restrictions on ATV’s so why not snowmobiles. He states that with increase snowmobiles there will be an increase in people which increases the concern for safety in the area. An example he is uses is the recent rash of burglaries in the area. He states he would have to consider the expense of installing an alarm or camera system should the variance be granted .
Carol Deyoe states that her residence is at the entrance to North Branch Rd and with the increase in traffic possibility existing would be disturbing and should anyone be unable to stop they would be in her front yard. She has concerns with the Rd being narrow and unsafe, spillage concern and the environmental impact any spillage would have on the lake. She states that allowing the variance for a business will affect property values of the nearby residential homes.
Paul Phoenix states he is not concerned with the increase in traffic and is in favor if the variance being granted for the business.
George Bugele states he is concerned with the commercial use and safety issue.
Ralph Palcovic states that the land where the business will be located is not visible to the surrounding neighbors which are mostly summer seasonal residents. He states that the snowmobiles generate tourism which helps the economics of the area. He also read from the minutes of the Planning Board meeting held on Jan 5th stating the need to promote tourism to generate revenue for the town. He states that without tourism in the town it will be a dead area. He states that the business is not a threat and he is in support of the variance being granted.
Carol Deyoe spoke again to state that she is not against snowmobilers she is just against where the business will be located.
Matt Arrnow states that as a neighboring property owner he is in favor of the business and the variance being granted.
Terri Wrobel questioned why some people received letters being notified of the variance and some did not. Mike Heberer states that residential home owners within 250ft of where the variance is requested are sent letters.
Emmett Inserra spoke up to say he likes the quiet and serenity of the area where he lives and is concerned by the increase in traffic. He states that the road is not safe and not built to handle a possible increase in traffic. He also questions the environmental impact that additional oil and gas that snowmobiles will generate.
Jim Selsmer states he encourages the business and the services it provides. He states that the commercial district was zoned may years ago and is out of date with the needs of today’s economic needs. Zoning changes are needed for the flexibility for commercial use in the town. He states that Ken Cronin has operated the seasonal business for many years and a variance will help him continue. He states that he is favor of the Code Enforcement Office Mike Heberer monitoring the business.
Ralph Ottuso states that he is a business owner with his home right
next to him. He states that the town needs more business to promote more
revenue for the town. He states that the town benefits from businesses
and things need to change to promote more business.
Terri Wrobel states that business can upset the environment of the area.
Aaron Mickley states that he has been to the snowmobile repair shop and has always thought it to be clean. He is in favor of the variance.
Tina Quenelle states she has concerns of a business in a residential
area. She asked why in the past when there was a sawmill business in that
area was shut down. She made a formal request that an environmental
impact study be conducted for the concerns already raised and to include
noise. She also questioned the hardship. She asked if the applicant
looked into other locations. Ken Cronin replied that he had but
with limited availability of commercial rental property it was more
economical to relocate the business to his property.
Mike Heberer states that the zoning ordinances for the Town of Caroga have not kept up with the APA zoning in a Hamlet District which allows commercial use with such as home occupations. Again he states that if the garage owned by Mr. Cronin was attached to his home this would be considered a home occupation.
Mike Heberer states that the zoning ordinances for the Town of Caroga kept with the APA zoning in a Hamlet District allowing commercial changes such as home occupations. Again he states that if the garage owned by Mr. Cronin was attached to his home this would be considered a home occupation.
Mr. Malagisi asked those present if they had any other questions or comments. Those present indicated they had no additional comments or questions.
Mr. Malagisi asked if there was any correspondence for this application and the secretary replied that yes there was approx. 14 letters. The Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary explained to the public that each letter of correspondence will be read in detail. The minutes of the meeting will detail the name of the person sending the correspondence, their address if listed, whether they approve or disapprove and a brief description for their reasons. The secretary explained that each letter of correspondence will be filed along with the minutes for this application.
Correspondence is as follows;
Rita Tompsen of 199 North Shore Rd states she is in favor of the variance being granted as knowing Ken Cronin as a neighbor and good business owner.
Trent Atkinson of 107 North Branch Rd, Matt Arrnow of 122 North Branch Rd and Dana Aunkst of 127 North Branch Rd all state as friends and neighbors of the applicant they are in favor of the variance. They also stated that with Mr. Cronin owning 9 acres where the business will be located will result in little impact on the neighboring residents.
Nicole Wright of 175 North Shore Rd states she is in support of a business that would provide more benefits for that town than harm.
Christopher and Kristina Quenelle of 109 North Branch Rd states they are opposed to the variance being granted for the business to be moved. They are concerned with the impact on traffic safety, the peace and tranquility of the area and environmental issues.
Carol Deyoe of 119 North Shore Rd states as she is a year round resident she is opposed to the variance being granted for the business because she is concerned with the increase in traffic and safety on the road.
Mr. and Mrs. Edward Potocar of South Shore Rd state they are opposed to a variance being granted for a business being in a residential area. They state that home values will be lowered.
Polley and Frank Foley of 107 Chapel Rd state they would speak unfavorably for the variance being granted for a business in a residential area.
Paul and Janet Morien of 141 North Shore Rd are opposed to the business and the granting of the variance for unwelcome noise and safety.
Dawn Montavon opposes the variance for a commercial business from an environmental and questioning where the gas and oil will go and what impact will it have on the water table and lake.
John Plummer of 124 North Shore Rd stating his concerns in allowing a variance for the business. He is concerned that if one business is allowed that what stops more from coming. He is concerned about old and unregistered snowmobiles accumulating and who will be monitoring the situation. He is also concerned about the road.
Patricia Hopper of 156 South Shore Rd writes she opposes the variance for a business in a camp area. She is also concerned that if one business is allowed that more will follow.
Ellen Wright requests that the variance be denied.
Susan Bradt is against the variance stating that it is not a commercial area and should remain that way.
Barbara Shearer writes to say she opposed the variance being granted. She is concerned with the parking of vehicles and the road.
Mike Heberer provided further clarification to the question of why some residents received notices of the variance from the Town of Caroga and some did. Notices were sent out via email by the West Caroga Lake Association to other residents which resulted in the number of correspondences read this evening.
With no other questions, Mr. Malagisi closed the public part of the meeting at 7:56PM and went into open session.
Roll call was taken with the same results as previously recorded.
Mr. Malagisi asked the board members if they had and comments.
Doug Purcell states that the financial distress the Ken Cronin states is his reason for requesting a variance does not have complete info provided nor was it clarified if he looks at other places to relocate. Mr. Cronin replied that he considered his property the best location for pratical reasons. Doug Purcell questioned the specifics of seasonal request. Mr. Cronin replied that he would be open from approx. Nov 1 to March 1 each season but that also depends on the snow. Frank Malagisi asked what he planned on doing with any waste gas and oil. Ken Cronin replied he plan on taking it to a regulated waste disposal site. He questioned whether the garage has a cement floor to which Mr. Cronin replied it did. Mr. Malagisi asked Ken Cronin about the blue flagging on the property and Ken Cronin replied that the flags mark his property line.
Mr. Malagisi asked if the board members had any other comments or questions. The board members replied that had no other comments and understood what the applicant wanted to do.
Mr. Malagisi advised that the Zoning Board Appeals, in granting use variance, shall grant the minimum variance that it shall deem necessary and adequate and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
Mr. Malagisi then stated to the board members that they will review the four criteria for application Z2011-01 for a use variance that are from the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance
1. Whether the applicant cannot realize a reasonable return provided that lack of return is substantial as demonstrated by competent financial evidence.
Alternate Christina Perkins and Doug Purcell both state that cannot and all board members agreed and replied no.
2. That the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood.
Mr. Malagisi it is not unique and the property is on a dead end road and Hamlet zoned. Doug Purcell stated that the property is in a Hamlet District bordered by a residential area. All board members agreed and replied no.
3. That the alleged hardship has not been self- created.
Doug Purcell replied that it is not self-created and all board members agreed no.
4. Whether the relief asked for, the requested variance, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
Frank Malagisi states the property size is large and invisible from area residents. The variance request is for seasonal during the winter months when there are the fewest residents. All board members agreed and replied no.
Tina Quenelle asked if she can add another comment. Mr. Malagisi stated she can but advised that the public part of the hearing was closed. Tina Quenelle stated that Ken Cronin did not disclose and was misleading that there was another location available to move his business. Ken Cronin replied that he was not aware of any other location and the only property he owned was at 109 North Branch Rd. Tina Quenelle asked about the property in Bleeker. Brenda Cross replied that the property mentioned in Bleeker is owned solely by her, not Ken Cronin.
Mr. Malagisi requested that stipulations be agreed to before a variance can be granted or denied. Ken Cronin replied he will agree to stipulations to get the variance approved. The board members agreed. The following stipulations are as follows;
That the hours of operation be Mon thru Fri from 9am to 5pm and from 9am to 12pm on Sat and Sun.
That the seasonal variance be for the 2011 to 2012 season beginning Nov 1st to April 1st.
That the variance be reviewed 1 year from the date of this hearing.
That Ken Cronin agreed to at least 2 random property inspections by the Town of Caroga Code Enforcement Officer.
Mr. Malagisi asked for a motion to vote. Ms. Perkins made the motion to approve the variance with the stipulations as written and Mr. Kane 2nd the motion.
Mr. Malagisi stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals would now vote. A yes vote would grant the variance and a no vote would deny the variance.
The voting results are as follows;
Frank Malagisi – yes
Doug Purcell – yes
Bob Kane – yes
Alternate Christina Perkins - yes
Mr. Malagisi advised Ken Cronin that his application Z2011-01 for a variance was granted by the Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals with the stipulations as noted. It goes to the APA for their review and final decision. The APA has thirty (30) days upon receipt of the application paperwork to respond with their decision for approval or denial. The applicants will be advised to contact the Code Enforcement Officer for the APA’s decision.
Mr. Malagisi asked for a motion to close the Hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals at 8:25PM. Ms. Perkins made the motion and Mr. Kane 2nd the motion.
Respectfully Submitted
Mary Johnson
Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary
Copyright © James McMartin Long 2017–2024