Zoning Board of Appeals March 29, 2018 Minutes

Town of Caroga
Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting
Minutes
March 29, 2018

Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals in attendance by roll call were:

Chairman Kenneth Coirin — present
Douglas Purcell — present
Frank Malagisi — present
Mike Frasier — absent
Kathleen Ellerby — present

Others in attendance: Roger Eaton, Christopher Eaton, and John Costello.

The meeting is to hear Application Z2018-01 by Christopher Eaton of 304 East Main Street, Johnstown NY 12095 and Mary Beth Kresse of 178 Old Stump Road, Brookhaven NY 11719 of a property located at 179 North Shore Road, West Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as Parcel #67.20-1-87, 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: Build a deck entirely within the shoreline setback.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin opened the public hearing at 7:00pm.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I will entertain a motion to [speaker was interrupted].

Motion: Douglas Purcell moved to waive the reading of the minutes from the last meeting and accept them as they were modified. Frank Malagisi seconded the motion. The vote in favor was unanimous.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: This is a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Caroga. The format for the meeting — it is a two-part meeting. The first will be open to the public for any correspondence or any statements that people would wish to make concerning this application. Then, we’ll close the public portion of the meeting and go into the board’s portion of the meeting. We have Mr. Christopher Eaton. If you would just give us a fast overview on what you would like to do.

Christopher Eaton: What we’re looking to do on our property at 179 North Shore Road West Caroga Lake is: to add an exit off the south facing side toward the lake. The property at this point has one exit, facing the north side and we would like to put a small 8×10 deck-type porch structure off the south facing side in proximity to the bedrooms. That’s why we did the first step which was: we were told to apply through the APA. We did that. Then, met with the gentleman, the code enforcer [Town of Caroga Code Enforcement Officer, John Duesler]. He reviewed it and due to the proximity of the property to the water, he said [speaker was interrupted]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Correct.

Christopher Eaton: to take this step and that’s why we’re here to apply for this variance.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Roger Eaton: I’m Roger. I’m the father. My two children have the camp. We’ve got grandchildren from two years old to eight years old and with one entrance and exit in the back. It’s hard, you know, in case of fire. And, I’m very concerned about that. So, that’s the reason we’re really doing this.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

There is no correspondence regarding this at all. Would you [John Costello] like to speak?

John Costello: I’m the neighbor. I know the property fairly well and I can tell you an 8×10 addition to that, I think it must have been there at one time anyway, I can’t believe they didn’t have a porch [speaker was interrupted]

Roger Eaton: I can’t believe it they wouldn’t [speaker was interrupted]

John Costello: But, I can’t see it interfering with anybody's view or any emergency vehicles getting around or anything like that, so I just came up be able to see if I could support them on that.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So you are in support it?

John Costello: Yes, I am. I think even with that measurement it might even be still set back farther than some of the other locations out there, like John’s house is pretty close and is too, to tell you the truth. I think mine is in front of yours even with the porch, but I moved in that way.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: If there’s nothing further on the public portion then we’ll close that. We’ll go into the board’s portion.

Public portion closed at 7:04pm.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Rather than coming out the way you are towards the lake, would it be feasible to go out to one side or the other?

Roger Eaton: What they are, the other ones are just bedrooms. Where, this one here is a bigger, open room. This photo right here, you can see it.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

Roger Eaton: This here is a cellar entrance. That goes into, like, the cellar.

Frank Malagisi: Is there access to the upstairs from that way?

Christopher Eaton: No. It’s purely just a basement and there is no access from the basement to the top.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Just from the outside?

Christopher Eaton: Yes, just from the outside. It just serves as the plumbing and [speaker was interrupted]

Roger Eaton: No, this is the only feasible place. You saw us right there take this window out.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So, it’s not really practical to go on either side?

Roger Eaton: No, it isn’t.

Douglas Purcell: Which window are you [referring to]?

Roger Eaton: See this big picture window? There’s a little one right next to it. [To the east side of the picture window.] We were going to put the door in.

Douglas Purcell: OK.

Roger Eaton: And put the porch out there and then 36 inch steps, just going down.

Douglas Purcell: Where are the steps going to be relative to that door going to the basement?

Roger Eaton: They would be over here [east side].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So, they’ll be coming down off that way [east side].

Roger Eaton: Yes.

Douglas Purcell: OK, because that's not the way it is on the diagram.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. The diagram shows it coming this way.

Douglas Purcell: Right. That’s why I was asking. Because, it looked to me like it was [speaker was interrupted]

Frank Malagisi: The steps aren’t going to go [speaker was interrupted]

Roger Eaton: You can’t go this way because of the door.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

Douglas Purcell: Right.

Roger Eaton: No, I understand what you are saying.

Frank Malagisi: The steps aren’t going any closer to the water? That’s my question.

Douglas Purcell: With them going on that side, they are going further away from the water than they would be as shown on the diagram.

Frank Malagisi: Going sideways.

Douglas Purcell: Yes, the steps are off the side of the deck, not off to the front.

Christopher Eaton: They would be off to the east side, yes.

Douglas Purcell: Right.

Christopher Eaton: The west: That’s where our existing exit is, to the west side of the structure. And, actually going out that way, the bathroom is on the west side of the structure and there isn't very much room, the way the bathroom is and the shower is framed in to where — that’s where the exit is. It comes out this way, from the front end on the camp.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

John Costello: Where's your septic? It’s not on my side?

Christopher Eaton: The tank would be on the west side. So, coming out there you would be actually where you would be where you would drive the pilings in would be right over top in the septic area — the tank — the actual leach field is outside of the camp area.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Roger Eaton: You have photos of the camps on both sides, right?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, you gave us those.

Frank Malagisi: Those setups are preexisting. So, each case is different.

Roger Eaton: But, we did it just to show the setbacks, you know. You can see the lake.

Frank Malagisi: I had a hard time looking at the ground because of the snow coverage.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, there’s quite a bit.

Frank Malagisi: I mean; it was kind of deceiving.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Anybody else have any further questions? There are five (5) different criteria that require the minimum variance. And the Zoning Board of Appeals, in the granting of an 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 health, safety, and welfare of the community. The first is 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 said no.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Secondly, 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.

Frank Malagisi: Without seeing the ground, because of the snow, would they consider patio pavers?

Douglas Purcell: Well, you’ve got to think about what it is they are trying to accomplish: they are trying to accomplish another exit. They are really not trying to accomplish creating a deck for pleasure really.

Christopher Eaton: No.

Roger Eaton: No.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 8×10 is not going to [speaker was interrupted]

Douglas Purcell: That was one of the reasons why I was interested in knowing what the purpose for this variance was. As soon as I hear that the explanation is: “I’m looking to have a secondary exit for safety reasons,” because that was my thought. You know, patio pavers, you can do anything in order to accomplish having an outside area for enjoyment of the view. But, that’s not what they are saying they are trying to accomplish.

Frank Malagisi: OK.

Douglas Purcell: I agree with your thoughts, but after hearing what they said [speaker was interrupted]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, with the discussions we’ve had, it’s not feasible for you to go out either end either.

Roger Eaton: No, it’s not.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So, OK.

Douglas Purcell: I’m going to say no.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I’m going to say no.

Frank Malagisi: I’ll say no.

Kathleen Ellerby: I’ll say no.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

All board members said no.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Thirdly, whether the requested area variance is substantial.

Douglas Purcell: It definitely is substantial.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: It is.

Douglas Purcell: I will say that by keeping it to an 8×10 — because if it was for enjoyment of the lake or something like that, they could have run it across the whole length of the back and they’re not.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No.

Douglas Purcell: They’ve at least minimized it from that standpoint, but it is definitely substantial.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: It is substantial.

Douglas Purcell: Because all eight feet are within the 75 foot setback.

All board members agreed it was substantial.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Fourthly, 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 replied and agreed no.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Fifthly, 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 replied and agreed no.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I’ll entertain a motion on this.

Motion: Douglas Purcell moved to grant the variance application Z2018-01 as discussed. Frank Malagisi seconded.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: We have a motion and a second. A yes vote grants the application. A no vote denies it.

Secretary called a roll call vote.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: yes
Douglas Purcell: yes
Frank Malagisi: yes
Kathleen Ellerby: yes

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The application has been approved. It is going to have to go to the APA for their final approval. You are moving closer to the lake. I don’t know what they are going to say, one way or the other, but seeing as how we are putting in that it is a safety issue and there is no other place for you to go to create this, we’ll see how it goes. We need to appoint a vice chairman for the coming year. Are you, Doug, willing to?

Douglas Purcell: Sure.

Motion: Kenneth Coirin moved to appoint Douglas Purcell to the position of vice chairman for the coming year. Kathleen Ellerby seconded the motion. All board members said aye.

Motion: Douglas Purcell moved adjourn. Frank Malagisi seconded the motion. All board members said aye. The meeting adjourned at 7:12pm.

Respectfully submitted
James McMartin Long
Town of Caroga Deputy Supervisor,
acting as Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary

Copyright © James McMartin Long 2017–2024