Home Calendar Departments Directory Gallery Documents History
ZBA home About Notices Applications Decisions APA Letters Resources
Zoning Board Chairman Ken Coirin opened the public session of the hearing at 7:00pm. Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals in attendance by roll call were:
Chairman Ken Coirin - present
Vice Chairman Doug Purcell – present
Pete Welker – present
Frank Malagisi – present
Others in attendance: Jin and Linda Nicosia, Kathy and Dave VanVolkenburg, Brian Gulick, Ciel Vickerson, Carol Mark, John Garger, Bob Gulick, Frank Garger, Dan Lair and MaryEllen Charles.
Chairman Ken Coirin asked if there are any additions or corrections of the previous hearing minutes. The present board members replied there were none. Mr. Coirin asked for a motion to be made to waive reading and to accept the minutes as written. Doug Purcell made the motion and Pete Welker 2nd the motion. All board members agreed.
Chairman Ken Coirin advised that the Town of Caroga Board of Appeals was meeting to hear variance applications. The hearing is two part hearings. The first part is a public session to hear the applicants and the public about the applications. The second part is an open session when the board discusses the applications.
Chairman Ken Coirin advised that the Zoning Board of appeals was in public session to hear Application Z2012-13 by James and Linda Nicosia of 31 Henrietta Blvd Amsterdam NY 12010 of the property located at 720 South Shore Rd East Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as Parcel # 83.13-5-30.2 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.050 of said code.
Owner desires to: Construct an Attached Garage to an Existing Structure. Front and side yard setbacks are at issue.
Mr. Coirin stated that at the previous hearing held December 20, 2012, Mr. Nicosia was asked to have a detailed survey map done clearing showing the side yard lot line and measurements. The application was tabled until this could be done. The survey was completed and submitted to the Zoning Board members this evening.
The survey shows that the lot line is 22’ from the existing structure. The proposed garage addition will leave a side yard setback of approx ten (10) feet.
Ken Coirin closed the public part of the hearing at 7:08 pm and went into open session.
Doug Purcell asked Mr. Nicosia if the existing steps to the structure will be moved. Mr. Nicosia will be moved and the proposed addition will start where the steps were located. He asked if there will be a back entrance to the proposed garage addition. Mr. Nicosia yes there will be. Frank Malagisi stated that he would like to see a minimum of 10’ from the proposed garage addition to the lot line.
With no other comments Mr. Coirin stated to the board members that they will review the five criteria for application Z2012-13 for an area variance that are from the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance
Mr. Coirin advised that the Zoning Board Appeals, in granting area 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.
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this variance.
All board members agreed and replied no
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other methods feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
Doug Purcell stated the requested variance is within the criteria and all board members agreed and replied no.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
All board members agreed and replied no.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board of appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
Mr. Coirin asked for a motion to vote. Frank Malagisi made the motion to approve the application with a minimum 10’ side-yard setback and Pete Welker 2nd the motion.
Mr. Coirin 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;
Ken Coirin – yes
Frank Malagisi – yes
Doug Purcell - yes
Pete Welker – yes
Mr. Coirin stated that the applicants will be notified that application Z2012-13 for a variance was approved by the Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals. It goes to the APA for their review and final decision. The APA has up to one hundred and eighty (180) days upon receipt of the application paperwork to respond with their decision for approval or denial.
Chairman Ken Coirin advised that the Zoning Board of Appeals was back in public session at 7:15pm to hear Application Z2012-14 by Dave & Kathy VanVolkenburg of 212 n Shore Rd West Stoner Lake Caroga Lake NY 12032 of the property located at 212 n Shore Rd West Stoner Lake Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as Parcel # 12.17-1-5 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.050 of said code.
Chairman Ken Coirin stated that this application is being reheard because of being given wrong zoning district information at the previous hearings. The board based the criteria decision on a zoning in a LF1 which allows 25% coverage. The Vanvolkenburgs property in located a zoning district R10 which is allowed a 10% coverage.
Ken Coirin stated there were 3 letters of correspondence and a letter of response from the APA. The planning board secretary was asked to read them for the board and public to hear.
The first letter was from Frank Garger is asking why 1. several statements were not included in the minutes of the hearing held 1/24 which includes a comment by Frank Malagisi saying that “we have different standards for seasonal people then we have for town residents” and 2. why when Dave Vanvolkenburg stood up and pointed a finger at member of the public and said “I will get you for this” was not included. The answer given by Chairman Ken Coirin and the Planning Board secretary was that the minutes are generally not typed word for word and are a synopsis of each hearing and personal conflicts and comments exchanged amongst the public, not directed to the Zoning Board, are not included.
The 2nd letter was from John Garger and Carol Mark. 1. Lakefront question and answer – Ken Coirin did not notice is lakefront. He also stated that the issue of lot coverage is the reason why the application is before the board again. The board based its previous decision based what was given to them for LF1 zoning which allows 25% coverage. He advised again that the board was given incorrect zoning information and was advised the property was located in R10 which allows 10% coverage. 2. In response to consulting the Town Attorney. Ken Coirin stated he went to see the Code Enforcement Officer and at that time was given a copy of the application for a building permit at issue that he did not have at the December hearing. With that application in hand it was decided that it was not necessary to contact the Town Attorney for the hearing in January. The application was not part of the hearing even though He apologized for not explaining that clearly at the January hearing. MaryEllen Charles stated that the permit was not part of the application. Ken Coirin stated that is was not given originally but now has the copy. 3. In response to the question that a different criteria is used for seasonal and year residents he stated that the criteria used is the same for all. 4. In response to legal obligations he stated that they are asking for a legal opinion and he is not able to give that. 5. In response to issues of minutes. Again, the minutes written are general synopsis of the hearing and are not typed word for word. Personal exchanges within the public are not included. The minutes are typed from notes written during the hearing. It was unknown at that time that the recorder was defective. A new tape recorder has been purchased to resolve and recording problems.
MaryEllen Charles questioned the 4 permits issued for the Vanvolkenburg property and the total square footage of coverage for all the buildings. Ken Coirin stated that the hearing this evening is only to deal and address application Z2012-14 for the wood shed. Again the reason for this hearing is the misinformation of the zoning districts. This changes the allowable coverage from 25% to 10%. The board will only address the present application, not any decisions made by previous permits or zoning boards. The coverage is based on the total square footage of building coverage. Pete Welker stated that the board is talking about a wood shed, not pre-existing structures or non -conforming. Ken Coirin stated that he will not address prior permits.
The 3rd letter was from the John and Agnes Gulick. 1. They questioned why they were told in 2002 that the properties were overdeveloped and expansion possibilities were exhausted. They purchased a 25’ x 25’ after being denied a 125’ x 25’ lot from Tom Stuart, a former owner of the Vanvolkenburg property, to allow for their storage shed. Ken Coirin response was that he cannot answer to previous decisions by the zoning board. He stated that they were here now to discuss the woodshed and the present coverage issue only. He again clarified that the board was misinformed as to the zoning district and that is the reason for being here again to discuss the coverage issue for the woodshed only. 2. Well and water line issues. Ken Coirin stated that the board understands that and that is why the decision was previously made and agreed to by the Vanvolkenburgs to move the woodshed to the 10” sideyard setback even though the exact location of the water line is not known. The waterline at this time is fully functional so is not an issue for the board to discuss at this time. 3. The Gulicks state that the value of their property is decreased because they consider the wood shed to be an eyesore and a fire hazard. The zoning board members do not agree with this as decided on in January. 4. Side yard setback 20’ issue and a permit issued was claimed to be undated and not non-notarized in August 2012. Ken Coirin stated that it was realized and that is why the board was meeting for the setback issue. Ken Coirin again showed the copy of the application that was issued and its shows a date of August 20, 2012 and a notary is not needed. 5. Ken Coirin responded and seasonal and year round residents equally treated the same for variance decisions.
A letter was received from the APA and answered in reference to application Z2012-14. It states that the variance was conditional being moved to a ten (10) foot setback from the side-yard and based on the information provided with the application, no further action is required and does not involve provisions under the APA.
Copies of these letters will be on file with the application.
Frank Garger questions why they were told their properties were determined to be overdeveloped in 2002 by previous owners and present owners and why a decision was made by the board to allow the variance for the Vanvolkenburgs for additional coverage. Frank Garger stated that even under the 25% coverage previously though allowed they were over. Ken Coirin stated they were within the 25% then. Ken Coirin said that the board made their decision based on the 25% allowable coverage which they now realize was incorrect and should be only 10%. That is why the zoning board was hearing the application again this evening. Pete Welker stated that the board based their decision based on the information of 25% presented to the zoning board previously.
MaryEllen Charles stated that she wants it in the records that the Gulick property is seasonal property that is stigmatizing property under the US Fair Housing Act. The Gulick’s house is a year round house and Ken Coirin stated that he agreed it is a year round house and did not feel he meant it any other way.
Dave Vanvolkenburg stated that he made numerous calls to code enforcement officer Mike Heberer in attempt to figure out all the problems and did not receive any return calls. He was later informed that he was out on disability following surgery. John Garger stated that he had made calls to the code enforcement officer and had no problems getting answers or return calls. It was determined that this was a few years ago and he was not out on disability as he was when Dave Vanvolkenburg was trying to reach him.
Maryellen Charles states that the Vanvolkenburgs should be using the propane as their major heat source and the wood only as a secondary which may reduce the amount of wood to be stored and the woodshed necessary for the storage of the wood. Ken Coirin stated that he also used propane and wood as a heat source has no issues with using wood heat for his primary heat source to save on heating costs. Carol Mark stated that she got the impression based on a statement from a board member that different standards were used for year round and seasonal residents. Ken Coirin stated that there is not difference of standards used.
Dave Vanvolkenburg commented that at the prior hearing that yes, he was upset and left the room. He did state that he did not make any further comments to any of the public after leaving the hearing room.
MaryEllen Charles commented about the propane tank on the property that can be used as a heat source. Ken Coirin stated that heat is a double source, using both wood and propane gas or fuel oil, in these economic times. The increase in square footage for the wood shed in minimal. The property is kept neat as is the woodshed.
Ken Coirin closed the public part of the hearing at 7:48 pm and went into open session for the board members.
Frank Malagisi stated that he went to the Vanvolkenburg property and measured the existing structures and came up with a total of 2629 (+/-) square feet of coverage including the woodshed. The 10% coverage in a R10 is 2187 square feet. The wood shed is 173 square feet. Today’s times heating wood and propane is realistic. The woodshed as it is on the property has issues on its own. The materials are a tin roof or a plastic tarps can stay and cover the wood on the ground can stay there. The issue began when four (4) concrete footers were added then start some form of a structure and the matter was brought before the Zoning Board. The property is maintained neatly. The request for a variance in coverage in square footage for the wood shed is not substantial and believes that they should be allowed to heat with wood.
With no other comments Mr. Coirin stated to the board members that they will review the five criteria for application Z2012-14 for an area variance that are from the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance
Mr. Coirin advised that the Zoning Board Appeals, in granting area 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.
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this variance.
All board members agreed and replied no
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other methods feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
Ken Coirin stated that with the previously approved variance to move the shed to a 10’ side yard setback, it is not substantial and all board members agreed and replied no.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
Frank Malagisi stated that the woodshed is not an eyesore and all board members agreed and replied no.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board of appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
Mr. Coirin asked for a motion to vote. Frank Malagisi made the motion to approve the application with the 10’ side-yard setback and under the R10 zoning coverage and Doug Purcell 2nd the motion.
Mr. Coirin 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;
Ken Coirin – yes
Frank Malagisi – yes
Doug Purcell - yes
Pete Welker – yes
Mr. Coirin advised the applicants that application Z2012-14 for a variance was approved by the Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals. It goes to the APA for their review and final decision. The APA has up to one hundred and eighty (180) days upon receipt of the application paperwork to respond with their decision for approval or denial.
Chairman Ken Coirin advised that the Zoning Board of Appeals was back in public session to hear Application Z2013-01 by Jeffery Kollar of 308 West State St Johnstown NY 12095 of the property located at 148 First Ave Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as Parcel # 83.158-31 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.050 of said code.
Owner desires to: Construct a Shed. Side yard and rear yard setbacks are at issue.
Doug Purcell stated that the details for this application was submitted and discussed with Mr. Kollar on February 7th but since there was no quorum that evening it was tabled and rescheduled for tonight. Mr. Kollar had explained he wanted to add a shed for storage. He stated that his yard was 50’ and the shed would be 5’ yards for the side yard lot line. Mr. Purcell states that he had a note that a phone call was received from a Homitz and stated that they had no objection to the shed being constructed and a variance being granted.
Ken Coirin closed the public part of the hearing went into open session.
With no other comments from the board members Mr. Coirin stated to the board members that they will review the five criteria for application Z2013-01 for an area variance that are from the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance
Mr. Coirin advised that the Zoning Board Appeals, in granting area 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.
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this variance.
All board members agreed and replied no
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other methods feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
All board members agreed and replied no.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
All board members agreed and replied no.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board of appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
Mr. Coirin asked for a motion to vote. Doug Purcell made the motion to approve the application and Pete Welker 2nd the motion.
Mr. Coirin 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;
Ken Coirin – yes
Frank Malagisi – yes
Doug Purcell - yes
Pete Welker – yes
Mr. Coirin advised that the applicant will be notified that his application Z2013-01 for a variance was approved by the Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals. It goes to the APA for their review and final decision. The APA has up to one hundred and eighty (180) days upon receipt of the application paperwork to respond with their decision for approval or denial.
Chairman Ken Coirin advised that the Zoning Board of Appeals was back in public session to hear Application Z2013-02 by Anthony and Elizabeth Manley of 55 Beth Dr Kingston NY 12401 of the property located at 202 South Shore West Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as Parcel # 82.12-1-11.12 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.050 of said code.
Owner desires to: Construct a mud room addition in a LF 2.5 district. Shoreline setback is at issue.
There was no one present to speak for the application.
Ken Coirin closed the public part of the hearing at 7:55 pm and went into open session.
Doug Purcell stated that the proposed mud room addition is close to the side yard. Frank Malagisi stated that he measured where the addition will be and it was close to ten (10) feet. Ken Coirin stated he the proposed mud room addition would be further back from the shoreline than the present structure.
With no other comments Mr. Coirin stated to the board members that they will review the five criteria for application Z2013-02 for an area variance that are from the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance
Mr. Coirin advised that the Zoning Board Appeals, in granting area 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.
1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this variance.
All board members agreed and replied no
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other methods feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
All board members agreed and replied no.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
Frank Malagisi stated that the addition will be at the rear of the structure away from the shoreline and all board members agreed and replied no.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board of appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.
All board members agreed and replied no.
Mr. Coirin asked for a motion to vote. Doug Purcell made the motion to approve the application and Pete Welker 2nd the motion.
Mr. Coirin 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;
Ken Coirin – yes
Frank Malagisi – yes
Doug Purcell - yes
Pete Welker – yes
Mr. Coirin advised that the applicant will be notified that his application Z2013-02 for a variance was approved by the Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals. It goes to the APA for their review and final decision. The APA has up to one hundred and eighty (180) days upon receipt of the application paperwork to respond with their decision for approval or denial.
Mike Frasier was introduced as a new member of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Chairman Ken Coirin asked for a motion to close the hearing at 8:05pm. Doug Purcell made the motion and Pete Welker 2nd the motion.
Respectfully Submitted
Mary Johnson
Town of Caroga Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary
Copyright © James McMartin Long 2017–2024