Zoning Board of Appeals August 23, 2018 Minutes

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

Chairman Kenneth Coirin — here
Douglas Purcell — absent
Mike Frasier — absent
Frank Malagisi — here
D Peter Welker — here
Kathleen Ellerby — here

Also present for the Town of Caroga: John Duesler (Code Enforcement Officer), Tor Shekerjian (Assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer).

Members of the public in attendance: Jarrod Maddocks (applicant), Tracy Maddocks (applicant), Carole Arthur VanCoughnett, Amy Clark, Nicholas Simon, Joseph Insogna.

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

Application Number Z2018-09

Owner: Tracy Maddocks. 444 Sprout Brook Road Garrison NY 10527, of the Property located at: 224 South Shore Rd. West Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as parcel #82.12-1-2 for an after the fact variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Side Yard Setbacks, and the percentage of ground cover allowed in this zoning district.

Owner also desires to be permitted to keep a previously approved carport which he enclosed, and is looking to get a variance for the other unpermitted structures placed in the shoreline setback.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: These hearings are two-part. The first part is for the public and the applicant to explain what he wants to do and for the public to address any questions, concerns, or support. After that, we'll close the public portion of the meeting open it up to just the board. I understand there is no correspondence.

The secretary said there is no correspondence.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: We are here to consider application Z2018-09 by Tracy Maddocks, for the property located at 224 South Shore Road, West Caroga Lake. This is an after-the-fact variance. So, if you could give us a quick overview of what you are asking for, what you are looking for.

Jarrod Maddocks: Last year at this time we were permitted to build a 24 [foot] by 24 [foot] car port structure. After framing the structure, I closed the sides in rather than having an open side car port. I didn't think that I needed a variance approval for that because the footprint was the big deal of why we were here: the footprint that we were taking up. So, I didn’t think adding sides to it — I thought I could go to John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer] for a permit and I would have been OK. Unbeknownst to me, John said that we had to come back here and ask for permission for the sides. I didn’t realize that it was the type of structure that we were building. I thought it was the size of the structure, which is why I was downsizing from a 36 [foot] to a 24 [foot]. Which I did build the 24 [foot] by 24 [foot]. So, the after the fact variance that I’m asking for is to the sides I added to the car port.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Is there anybody here who would like to speak about this? OK, then we’ll close the public portion and go on to the board’s portion.

Close the public portion at 7:03 pm.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I guess I’m wondering why did you enclose it?

Jarrod Maddocks: Um, well, originally, the plan was, down the road, was to enclose one side because my a wife is a — my wife works every day, daily, be it here or downstate. Um, back two years ago, she broke her neck snowmobiling in front of Lanzi’s and a she broke her C1 and C2 vertebrae. And if she does not stay active, she can’t move. So for her, it became for a routine — a daily routine — no matter what — if we’re on vacation — if we’re here — if we’re somewhere else — every day, she works out. So, it was always, it was always to — to close in one side to give her a fitness area that she can work out in. But, if we were going to build a 36 [foot] by 24 [foot] at the time, economically, we couldn’t do it. Because we downsized it and at the time that we started building, we were able to do it. So, that’s, that’s why it got closed in.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. I guess a couple of other questions are: why did you build a gazebo and the hot tub deck, without permits?

Jarrod Maddocks: OK, so the, the hot tub deck was — has been at the house since you — you guys came out and did the first inspection. Look, I didn’t really consider it a deck. I thought it was a platform. Then, when John came out and gave me the stop work order on the a car port, he said about the, about the a, about the hot tub deck. And, I didn’t realize I needed a permit for it because I thought it was just a platform. I thought you could put — you can’t walk around it. You saw it. You were there today.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

Jarrod Maddocks: So...

Tracy Maddocks: [inaudible]

Jarrod Maddocks: It, it has been there for two years.

Tracy Maddocks: Its been there.

Jarrod Maddocks: I didn’t build it since you guys went. And I do have pictures showing that. And John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer] knows that. I showed him pictures stating — I didn’t build it since you guys were there the first time. That was there. And the pictures that I have that were dated actually don’t, don’t even have the posts on the, on the deck — on the back. It just has that [inaudible] along the side. As far as the gazebo go — oh, let me go and finish. If necessary, I, I will remove that. I did not know that I needed a permit for it. I thought that because it wasn’t anything that I could put furniture on, or sit in, or, or so on and so forth, I, I thought it was a platform. OK? As I understand, I could put the hot tub on the ground: It’s not considered a structure, correct?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Isn’t it: anything that touches the ground considered a structure?

Code Enforcement Officer John Duesler: If it is level with the ground, it isn’t. And then, putting a hot tub on it, I’m not really sure. I don’t think it’s a structure at that point. In my opinion.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Jarrod Maddocks: And then as then far as the gazebo goes, that was a house-warming present from my parents, that they sent to us. Um, and when they were sending it, they did tell us it was coming and I looked in the code and in the code it says you are allowed one structure under 100 square feet without a permit. And I have a permit for everything else that was done. So, I thought that this as — I thought this was my right because it is in the, in the town code. I do have it printed and highlighted, if you’d like to see it. I’m sure you know that stuff. So it says — and that gazebo is 60, 60 square feet.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK, anybody else: questions, concerns?

Frank Malagisi: I’d like to get an overview from the Code Enforcement. Would you give us an overview of the project?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: From the start? Or, what type of overview were you looking for?

Frank Malagisi: This here page was provided to us.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: Can you just refer from that?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Sure. Back when Jarrod and I were talking and I put the stop work order on him, I told him that I couldn’t give him a C of O [certificate of occupancy] because I thought that the [area] coverage was exceeded and he was exceeding even more with the steps going into the shoreline setback. So, I told him probably what the best thing to do would be have me start right from — like if he was to come to me right off the bat. What would I have had him do. And, that’s where I started figuring up all the square footage issues and I got some old files out of the SBL [Section, Block, Lot] folder from the Assessor. Looked at the old house, square footage-wise. It was 576 [square feet]. The new was 1,120 [square feet] combined, but that did not include the unpermitted hot tub deck and gazebo. I believe that included the front porch, the 28 [foot] by 10 [foot] front porch, and the 25 [foot] by 9 [foot] rear porch. All the setbacks: the front was OK; the sides were OK, prior to the hot tub. The rear would have required a 30 foot variance. The property owner stated that he moved the structure farther away from the shoreline than the old cottage. And, without — at the time, without many documents, I went there and I measured 45 feet from the shoreline to the rear porch structure, not including the steps. And, that would have required a 30 foot variance, without the steps. The square footage also would have needed a variance, in my calculations, for going over the allowed square footage in the LF-2.5 zoning district. He went over by 347 square feet. And again, it did not include the unpermitted hot tub deck or gazebo or the 24 [foot] by 24 [foot] ZBA approved car port.

Code Enforcement Officer John Duesler then presented survey maps to the board.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: In this one survey map, it showed the cottage without any measurements, compared to the new structure, with measurements. And, as you can see, it is quite a bit larger. I believe it’s 544 square feet over. Just the house itself.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Just the house.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Just the house.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: There were changes — he expanded the porch, right? If I read these right.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I would have to look at the blue prints to find out. Initially, when he came in, I didn’t even have the blue prints available to me.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: And, I just thought that the previous building inspector did her due diligence and looked at all the setbacks, the square footage issues, and everything was OK. So, when he came in for the rear deck, I had told him: As long as he didn’t go farther out than the…

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Cantilevered.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Cantilevered one, OK, because I thought that the previous code enforcement officer…

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Coverage is coverage.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Would have figured all the square footage in, and setbacks. The front really wasn't an issue. Then, I had come up with that blue print right there. And, it isn't exactly what the blue prints say. But, Jarrod [Maddocks] said he had a newer, updated plan that I looked at, at your [Jarrod Maddocks] house.

Jarrod Maddocks: You [Code Enforcement Officer John Duesler] gave me drawings. You gave us [partially unintelligible because Tracy Maddocks was speaking at the same time as Jarrod Maddocks] town permits. No, we gave you extra drawings of the decks that we were building, which we built.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: But, I had nothing to compare them to. I didn’t have the blue prints [speaker was interrupted by Jarrod Maddocks]

Jarrod Maddocks: When we came into the office — Danny Costello did — and gave you drawings of the decks, and we built what we said we were gonna do, which you gave us a permit for.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Right.

Jarrod Maddocks: That’s what I did.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: The front one.

Jarrod Maddocks: And the rear.

Tracy Maddocks: And the rear.

Jarrod Maddocks: And the rear — and the reason why the rear is six inches over is because you asked me to put the, the, the a supports on. You asked me to put the 8 [inch] by 8 [inch] on.

Tracy Maddocks: From the top.

Jarrod Maddocks: If you measure the deck, the deck’s 8 feet. The 6 by 6 is — the deck is 8 feet 6 inches because it wraps the six with an 8 by 8 and the top one is 8 feet. You have 9 feet. It is 8 feet 6 inches. You can go back or not — it’s existing —anybody can go measure it. But, in other words, my point is, I came in and I got permits for a foundation and I built that size. I got permits for a two-story structure. I built that size. I got permits for a deck. I built that size. I got a Zoning Board approval for a 24 [foot] by 24 [foot] structure. Yes, I enclosed it, but I did a 24 [foot] by 24 [foot] structure. So, I’m here asking for a variance for that. I understand you guys are looking for a variance for the house. If you would like to give me one, I will accept it. But, that’s not what I’m asking for because I went to the Town of Caroga’s building department and asked and built to everything that I said. And you’re going off from a freakin’ sketch that I put over the cottage. Now, if you take the, the actual one inch, one inch, a one quarter of an inch, whatever it says on my survey, which I gave you, it, it, the cottage is — that, that was existing.

Jarrod Maddocks: The cottage that was existing, per scale, on the, on the survey which you have, is 20 [foot] by 38 [foot]. Whether or not they had the rear porch on it or or not, I don’t know, but in my pictures, you guys will see there’s a big rear porch sticking out the back of the cottage. Since the structure is 20 [foot] by 38 [foot], which leaves you 760 square feet. The property size, which you have as 60 [foot] by 218 [foot] is incorrect, going with the survey — I think you were going off the tax map, possibly — is 233 feet by 60 feet which brings you to 13, 980 square feet. Are you with me? It, should I keep going, or?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Well, the old cottage was 20 [foot] by 38 [foot]. Without a calculator, I don’t know what that is. 760 [square feet]. And, 28 [foot] by 40 [foot] is what? 1120 [square foot], yes.

Jarrod Maddocks: You have that there.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: So, that's a difference of 360 square feet. I'm not doubting that you built anything without a permit.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Not at all.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No, not on the house. No.

Jarrod Maddocks: No, I’m just saying that like the, the — and even like on the lot across the street, you, you have down that it’s 60 [foot] by 150 [foot]. It’s actually 60 [foot] by 200 [foot]. Again, I have a copy of the survey. I think you do to. Am I right?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I may have.

Jarrod Maddocks: And would you have copies drawn of the plot plan? That’s a copy of the survey.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes. That’s 60 [foot] by 200 [foot]. Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: That’s 12,000 square feet.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: Do you have a recommendation for a solution to the problem, in your opinion?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I was kind of hoping that the Zoning Board would hash this out with the property owner, myself. If you are asking me, I will tell you what I think. I will tell you what my opinion is, but I think that would be premature.

Frank Malagisi: OK.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. So, combining the two lots, I come up with a ten percent permissible of 2,598 [square feet]. What are we at, right now?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: With what he’s got?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes. That 12 [foot] by 20 [foot] shed that’s on the other piece of property, right?

Jarrod Maddocks: Well, that’s to be removed, but I need a permit for removal.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: That’s what?

Jarrod Maddocks: That’s to be removed.

Tracy Maddocks: We were told we needed a permit.

Jarrod Maddocks: I do need a permit.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, you need to demolish that.

Jarrod Maddocks: Right, yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. So, we won’t worry about that.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I have 1,625 square feet for the new house, not including the unpermitted hot tub and deck.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Tracy Maddocks: It’s actually 1,612 [square feet], if you do the other measurements. Without the deck.

Jarrod Maddocks: Well, without the deck, yes, it’s 1,612 square feet.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: OK, with the decks?

Tracy Maddocks: With the difference in the 9 foot deck. It’s an 8 [foot] 6 [inch] deck, not 9 feet.

Jarrod Maddocks: Correct. The deck is 8 [foot] 6 [inches], so with the deck it’s 1,612 square feet, with, with the decks, the front porch, the rear deck, and, you know, everything.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 1,612 [square feet].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 1,612 [square feet]. And, what is your hot tub deck?

Jarrod Maddocks: 8 [foot] by 8 [foot].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: And, your gazebo is?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 60 [square feet]. I think he said 60 [square feet].

Tracy Maddocks: 60 [square feet].

Jarrod Maddocks: It’s less than a square. I don’t know how to do the math on that.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I get 1,736 [square feet] for the house, the hot tub deck, and the gazebo. Plus, the car port.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, give me the car port now.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: What was the car port?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 24 [foot] by 24 [foot].

Jarrod Maddocks: 576 [square feet].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I come up with 2,302 [square foot] on that particular parcel.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: On that parcel.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Ground coverage.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. What’s allowable on that?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 60 by — Jerrod [Maddocks] do you know the size?

Jarrod Maddocks: 1,400 [square foot].

Tracy Maddocks: 14,000 [square foot].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: For 10 percent, 1,400 [square foot] allowed. So it is 912 square feet over, on that particular lot.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Lot. Are you thinking of combining them into one parcel?

Jarrod Maddocks: I would consider it. I did ask about possibly talking to the Assessor to see what my taxes would be, because then it would create double the lakefront — not lakefront, but double the lake property, I guess, property that touches the water. So, I don’t know if would my taxes would triple? I don’t know. Does anybody have an answer?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I did talk to the Assessor and she said they would probably go down.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: That’s what she said. It would not go up.

Tracy Maddocks: How would they go down? It’s a vacant piece of property.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: You are paying on a vacant piece of property and you are also paying on a piece of property with improvements.

Tracy Maddocks: But, that means we can’t put a garage on the other side.

Jarrod Maddocks: I don’t know [inaudible]

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: That’s what she said.

Jarrod Maddocks: I am still — so, even if you — so, if you would say: OK, combine the two lots and, um, at this point I still have 200 or 300 square feet that I’m allowed to build on the other side. I mean, is this going to take away the garage that was permitted to build on the other side? That’s my main question. If I’m still allowed to build that garage, I would be fine combining the two lots.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, that would leave you 296 square feet.

Jarrod Maddocks: Right. Which, what I’m looking to build on the other side is 1,200 square feet. So, I would be 700 square feet over. But, this is where I was when I came to you the first time. And, and, so, nothing has changed since I came here the first time. You guys permitted both sides. The only thing that’s changed is: Yes, I put sides on the carport, but I did build the structure the same size. Everything else is, is what was there.

Tracy Maddocks: I mean, even with the water setback, we went to the APA — the Adirondack Park, and sent all of our drawings — the house, and the measurements — and they okayed everything. They said we didn’t need a variance for anything. They came out. We had to do that before we came to you guys the first time. I have that.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: You have that documentation?

Tracy Maddocks: You guys have a copy of it too. You read it at our last meeting. April 28, 2017, and they approved it.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Now, you’re talking the variance?

Jarrod Maddocks: Correct.

Tracy Maddocks: Yes.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: For the [speaker was interrupted]

Tracy Maddocks: Like, you’re saying, our setbacks, and everything. They said we were fine.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I’m not sure they’re saying that everything is fine.

Tracy Maddocks: They said we had to come to the town variance to ask what their opinion was. But, with them, it was what we did was, you know, they didn’t tell us we had to get special permission from them.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Well, my calculations, if you combine the lots, you would be 298 square feet over.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 298 [square feet] over.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Wait a minute.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I came up with 296 [square feet], but OK.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: You’re 902 [square feet] over, and if you added the other — you’re right — that would give you 298 square feet.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, still not making the 10 percent.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: No, that would be. The other lot is 12,000 [square feet]. So, 10 percent of that is 1,200 [square feet].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Correct.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: So, you are gaining that 1,200 [square feet] and you are taking away the 902 [square feet] that he’s over. So, you would be to the good 298 [square feet].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. I came up with 296 [square feet], but it’s fine. We’re close.

Frank Malagisi: He would be to the good for 298 [square feet] with everything that he’s asking for?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, that’s including the gazebo. It’s including the hot tub.

Frank Malagisi: OK, so our solution is to combine [speaker was interrupted]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The lots.

Frank Malagisi: The two lots.

Jarrod Maddocks: Again, if you will permit me to build the garage on the other side as I was, which is gonna to put me over, but you did give me a variance for it the first time, I would be — I will combine the two lots.

Frank Malagisi: I know, but if we have a wrong, we should try to correct the wrong. We are not here — it is not us against you — you against us. This is about being a steward to the lakes.

Jarrod Maddocks: What, what — I understand that.

Frank Malagisi: I get it. I get it.

Jarrod Maddocks: I didn’t change anything.

Frank Malagisi: I know you didn’t. But, I’m trying to correct [speaker was interrupted]

Jarrod Maddocks: Why am I paying the price for permits that were granted to me from your office?

Frank Malagisi: We are trying to correct a wrong. That’s all I am saying.

Jarrod Maddocks: I agree with you.

Frank Malagisi: So, there has to be a give and take on both sides.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK.

Frank Malagisi: And, I get it. If we have everything that we have and we’re under [speaker was interrupted]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The 10 percent.

Frank Malagisi: The 10 percent. But, the structure across the street hasn’t been built yet. So, if that’s the wrong, let’s correct it.

Jarrod Maddocks: I, I don’t agree with you that it’s the wrong, but I understand what you are saying. I think the wrong here is the fact that I was granted permits, possibly that shouldn’t have been granted.

Frank Malagisi: Well, I see sins on both sides of the aisle.

Jarrod Maddocks: You do? Where did I [speaker was interrupted]

Tracy Maddocks: The sin we did is put sides on a building. We didn’t, we didn’t go over square footage or anything.

Frank Malagisi: I’m not saying they were, you know, cardinal sins.

Tracy Maddocks: No, we came. We got permits. We’ve been [Jarrod Maddocks was speaking at the same time]. We’ve been paying for them every year.

Jarrod Maddocks: Here’s the way I see it. Yeah, exactly. I mean — all the permits — all the permits that were granted were renewed. We payed thousands of dollars from — thousands, because I can’t get a C of O [certificate of occupancy] because nobody knows what they are doing. And, I don’t think that’s right.

Tracy Maddocks: And, we keep going back. We, this year, another $550, because we can’t get a C of O.

Jarrod Maddocks: Right. So, and, and, but, but, all my permits that now are to be wrongdoing on my part, I guess, um, that I paid for. My taxes are as if the house has a C of O, which we pay.

Frank Malagisi: OK, but, the structure across the street hasn’t been built. You’re not paying taxes on that.

Jarrod Maddocks: No, I understand that. But, what I’m saying to you is: I was here a year ago and we met.

Frank Malagisi: I know. I know.

Jarrod Maddocks: I was granted, I was granted a variance to build a garage on the a vacant lot. I was granted a variance to build a 24 [foot] by 24 [foot] structure on the house side. I’ve done nothing but built a 24 [foot] by 24 [foot] structure. Whether or not I closed in the sides or not, I understand — that’s what I’m asking for a variance for. Like I said, I know — I was — if I need to pay a fine for that, I’ll pay a fine for that, but for you to take away the building on the other side because mistakes were made from the building department, from the beginning, I don’t understand how that becomes: your taking away from me. You've already me granted the, the variance to build across the street. Can I downsize if I want? Would you guys feel comfortable with that? I'm asking for a 40 [foot] by 30 [foot] structure. If I build a 30 [foot] by 30 [foot] structure, would that be, would that be — I’ve already joined the two lots.

Tracy Maddocks: And, moved down the hot tub deck. We’ll get rid of the hot tub deck. I mean, I don’t care.

Jarrod Maddocks: In my eyes, joining the two lots hurts me. I could sell that old lot down the road. Joining the two lots — I, I, and I — you guys asked me that in the last meeting — and, I said I would rather not. So, I feel like I’m — I feel like that I [speaker was interrupted]

Frank Malagisi: The septic. The septic is already over there, correct?

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes, but that wouldn’t stop me from doing something.

Frank Malagisi: How would you?

Jarrod Maddocks: I don’t know, but I was told that that — that it could get an easement for the septic for the house, just like you would a well, and you could build there and sell it. I’m, I’m just saying that I originally was against joining the two lots. At this point, I feel like I’m giving as well as I think that you guys are giving. And, I’m willing to take a whole bay of the garage on the other side. I think that that’s definitely give and take. So, that, at that point, you’re, you’re giving me, you’re granting me 500 square feet over the 10 percent. Which, you’ve granted me last time, 1500 [square feet].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Jarrod Maddocks: Because I am no longer using the variance for the car port.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: We’re trying to get this as close to the 10 percent as we possibly can.

Jarrod Maddocks: Sure, I agree. Yes.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Ken [Chairman Kenneth Coirin], one other issue that I think that is important to recognize is that whatever goes on here tonight, or if a decision is made, that decision still goes to the APA.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Correct.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Which they still have to review and respond. They have 30 days. They could overturn whatever decision the Zoning Board makes tonight. And, one thing to think about was the steps that you had going even further into the shoreline setback.

Jarrod Maddocks: I explained to you that I’d be happy to take down the hot tub deck and put the steps in their place. Which is much less square footage. Which is a 3 foot by 2 foot, 6 square feet.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: The thing is: That it’s so many square feet in the shoreline setback. The APA allows a hundred [square feet].

Jarrod Maddocks: You guys are giving me — you guys are saying...

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I’m just saying...

Jarrod Maddocks: I’m saying, I’ll remove — I’m going to less square footage.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: But, in the shoreline setback you have way over what you are supposed to have.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: And, I’m just telling you that I believe the APA will look at that and…

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: They may kick it back.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I mean, a lot of your house is in the shoreline setback. Once you go outside of your footprint, it’s like: all bets are off.

Tracy Maddocks: But, then the other house was in the shoreline footprint. Because, we moved the house closer to the road. The other house had to have been close to the water.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: If you had stayed in that same exact footprint, you would have been fine. You went outside of that footprint and you did go away from the shoreline setback — which is admirable.

Jarrod Maddocks: Which all this should have been taken into note and brought to my attention from the building inspector that was here.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Absolutely.

Tracy Maddocks: She exactly told us what we could do and we did exactly that.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The previous building that was there is considered to be a preexisting nonconforming structure.

Jarrod Maddocks: I agree with you.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. So, moving it back another 10 feet, or whatever you did: excellent, good move. And, we appreciate that. But, when we first look at this, we see that the decks were expanded beyond what the initial plans were. There was a gazebo built without a permit. There was a hot tub built without a permit. And, the two-car carport, is now a garage and an exercise room. That’s a lot to happen without our Code Enforcement Officer even knowing that any of this is going on.

Tracy Maddocks: Well, the hot tub deck was there when everybody walked around the house. That, that should not even be brought in because at that point it was there and so were the steps.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: This is where I — I’m just trying to explain.

Jarrod Maddocks: That hot tub deck was there, right, so.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Which doesn’t make it right, by the way.

Tracy Maddocks: No, it doesn’t.

Jarrod Maddocks: But, but, but, but, meaning, meaning that — just like you thought when you went and looked — and you got angry, ‘cause you did — that I did this without trying to tell you. I did it before you were there. In other words, I did build that hot tub deck without a permit. I agree. And, and, and, I thought I was building a support for the hot tub. I was building a support for the hot tub. That’s what I was building. I wasn’t building a deck where you could sit around it, or get in it. You actually have to get in it from the deck that it attaches to. You saw that. So, I didn’t do anything maliciously. I didn’t do anything to try to hide from anybody. Like I said, I came in here. I got permits for everything that I did. As far as the gazebo goes, it states right in there — it states right there: anywhere on the property you want, less than a hundred square feet. So then, John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer] walks around: you’ve got a hot tub deck, you’ve got a gazebo. And, that does sound like a lot. But, the way I just explained it to you.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I understand.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK, that’s what I’m saying.

Tracy Maddocks: We just don’t want you to think we did all these things and just thought: OK, cool, we can do it. That wasn’t our intention at all.

Jarrod Maddocks: John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer] and I get along well. It was actually John’s first thing, it was like: you can’t just like come up here and do what you want. I’m the building inspector and you need to tell me what’s going on. And, I did explain to you that just what I just said. So, I do understand when you state it like that, it sounds like I’m just — I don’t care. I do care. In fact, I guarantee you, my wife and I are the only two loosing sleep over this over the last two weeks. I guarantee you: nobody else lost sleep. We’ve invested a great deal of energy — a great deal of money. And, this is — we’re trying — we’re not trying to come up and ruin Caroga Lake. In fact, we — we’re members of the community. We know most of our neighbors. We go to many different social gatherings. Not just bars. You know what I’m saying. I mean, we give to the a, a — clothes and, and food and this and that. We’re here to build something that we want to retire in. It’s not just a place for us to come play, through shit to the, stuff to the side, and leave. My wife plans on living here full time in the next two, three years. I’ll be up in five years. The idea of me building a structure across the street is — everybody, you went to my house — everybody’s been there. There’s a lot of stuff I need to put inside that. I’m trying to keep the place neat. And, that is my intent. And, for me to be happy, and for me to love where I live, I do need a place where I can do what I love. What I love is tinkering with old cars. And, and that’s, that’s what I’m looking for. So, if you can understand that, and you can, you can see that — you know, listen, I’m willing to combine the two lots. I’m willing to take a bay off the side just like we did on this side. We can come to that agreement. I think that, as John said, we can present that to the APA. If they say OK, then we could — this whole thing could be done.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK, anything else?

Frank Malagisi: What would be the square footage over, at a?

Jarrod Maddocks: 30 [foot] by 30 [foot]. 900 [square foot], so over 300 [square foot].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 30 [foot] by 30 [foot] is 900 [square foot] and you’re 298 [square foot] so you'd be 600 [square foot] over.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Approximately, on almost 2,600 [square feet] allowable. He’d be about 600 [square feet] over.

Frank Malagisi: 600 [square feet] over?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes. On 2,600 [square feet].

Frank Malagisi: What’s the percentage of that 600 [square feet]?

Tracy Maddocks: About 23 percent.

Jarrod Maddocks: I could bring that to 524 [square foot] by removing the hot tub deck. 8 [foot] by 8 [foot] is 64 [square foot]. I could bring that to 536 [square foot overage].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No, with them combined.

Frank Malagisi: The gazebo is only 8 [foot] by 8 [foot], right? I’m trying to get it under 20 percent.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: With them combined, it can be 23 percent. It’s — combined you have approximately 300 square feet to play with.

Jarrod Maddocks: It’s 2500 [square feet] so there’s, there’s 500 square feet at 20 percent. Agreed? 2.5 times 2.5 is 500 square feet, ‘cause it’s 2500 square feet and change.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So, I think we’re looking at 12 - 12.5 percent.

Frank Malagisi: Can we make sure of that? I mean, is there a way?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Who can do the math?

Frank Malagisi: At this point, I’d like to be correct, instead of making more of a wrong. So, what I’m looking for is let Mr. Maddocks and Mr. Duesler to get together.

Jarrod Maddocks: He, he’s done that.

Frank Malagisi: I know, but come up with a solution.

Jarrod Maddocks: You want me to — he’s already done all the math.

Tracy Maddocks: These aren’t right, though.

Jarrod Maddocks: No, mine are.

Frank Malagisi: I’d still like to table it, so these guys can get together.

Jarrod Maddocks: Alright. If you feel better if John [Duesler] and I get together, we measure everything, and we come up with the right numbers then.

Frank Malagisi: Well, I want them to be the right numbers, not just any numbers.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, with a 30 [foot] by 30 [foot].

Tracy Maddocks: With a 30 [foot] by — correct. Going downsize and taking off the hot tub. [Jarrod Maddocks was speaking at the same time]

Frank Malagisi: I get it.

Jarrod Maddocks: So, you want John and I to measure it together, that’s what you’re saying?

Frank Malagisi: Yes.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK. I’m OK with that.

Tracy Maddocks: But, what you saying is: do the measurements with a 30 [foot] by 30 [foot] and add it, and take off the hot tub deck. So, it’s all...

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Then, I want to know what that percentage coverage is.

Jarrod Maddocks: No problem.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Jarrod Maddocks: No, well, he wants us to go to the site. He wants you — Frank [Malagisi] wants you and I to go to the site, measure together, add the 30 [foot] by 30 [foot] structure on the other side and come up with what percentage is over what’s existing or with what is left.

Tracy Maddocks: If we combined.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: OK, is that keeping the hot tub deck and everything?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: That’s everything.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Everything?

Tracy Maddocks: No, taking down the hot tub deck.

Frank Malagisi: Take the hot tub deck.

Tracy Maddocks: We’ll take that down.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK, take it down.

Tracy Maddocks: I don’t want to have a problem with the shore set lines, and we’ll take that stuff right down.

Jarrod Maddocks: Yeah, no, we’ll take it down.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: You are going to take the hot tub deck down.

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: The gazebo, because it’s so close to the waterside, I’m just trying to put my mindset in for the APA.

Jarrod Maddocks: That’s OK, I’d rather them look at it and tell me.

Tracy Maddocks: Because they came out and it was there.

Jarrod Maddocks: Because, because in the town code it says you can put it anywhere you want.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Jarrod Maddocks: And, if you go up and down in a boat, I’ve got pictures of thirty of them on the water, east and west.

Frank Malagisi: We got pictures of boathouses that can’t be built anymore, neither.

Tracy Maddocks: There’s a brand new one built on the lake.

Jarrod Maddocks: It’s aluminum.

Frank Malagisi: No, I get it, but they had to have had a boathouse preexisting.

Jarrod Maddocks: No, no, no, we’re talking about a gazebo, right on the water, five houses down.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. Are you agreeable to that, John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer]?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: I’ll do whatever you guys want me to do.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. What we’re asking you to do is to go with Jarrod [Maddocks], measure it all out, so we have exact numbers, and then add in a 30 [foot] by 30 [foot] structure.

Frank Malagisi: With combined lots.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: With what?

Frank Malagisi: With combined lots.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, with combined lots. And then give us a percentage of coverage at that point.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: OK, I mean roughly we’re 600 square feet over right now. So, you want us to combine the two lots.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: And then figure the ground coverage.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Exactly.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: And give you a percentage that’s over. OK.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Or, just give us the total percentage of coverage. That would work. Alright.

Jarrod Maddocks: Now, do we need to meet again, or are you guys going to decide this, just by the measurements?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No, we would need to meet again.

Frank Malagisi: It has to be a public hearing.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Jarrod Maddocks: So, there’s no way we could go do it right now, right? I don’t mean — I’m not trying to be pushy. It’s just like I just said, the only two that are loosing sleep here are me and my wife. It’s been quite a rough road, and I feel that — you know — I feel like, I just — I would rather — you know, whatever — if it has to be.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Well, can't we figure out the square footage of both lots?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I’ve got that.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: What is that number?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 25,980 [square foot].

Jarrod Maddocks: Am I allowed to come up here?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Excuse me?

Jarrod Maddocks: Am I allowed to come up here?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 25,980 [square foot] both lots combined.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: So, you’re allowed to cover 10 percent of that.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. Which is 2,598 [square foot].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes.

Jarrod Maddocks: Here’s a stamped survey.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, right now, with everything that's there [Jarrod Maddocks has approached the board and is speaking simultaneously], we’re at 2,302 [square foot].

Frank Malagisi: [to Jarrod Maddocks, who has approached the board and is talking over the board discussion] Let me just listen here.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: And then, he’s proposing another 900 foot, square foot structure?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: So, 604 square feet over, exactly.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: We have to figure that percentage.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

Tor Shekerjian, Assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer: What’s the total? 2,598 [square feet] is the total?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Tor Shekerjian, Assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer: 602 [square foot] over? 23.17 [percent] over. 23 [percent] and change, over. 23 [percent] over.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 23 percent over.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Over.

Jarrod Maddocks: OK, so if you were to remove the hot tub deck, and come out with 8 [foot] times 8 [foot].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 64 [square foot] less.

Jarrod Maddocks: Right.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Than, 604 [square foot]. But, you’re going to be adding some steps to get off…

Jarrod Maddocks: Six square feet: 3 [foot] times 2 [foot].

Frank Malagisi: Can you build the steps into the deck? Is that possible?

Jarrod Maddocks: I can not. John [Duesler] and I went over that.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 546 [square foot], Tor [Shekerjian], 2,598 [square foot].

Tor Shekerjian, Assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer: 21 percent [over].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 21 percent [over].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So that’s where we are.

Frank Malagisi: I would still like to see something under 20 percent. Can we take it away from the size of the garage?

Jarrod Maddocks: I’ll do the size of the garage across the street at 30 [foot] by 28 [foot].

Frank Malagisi: 30 [foot] by 28 [foot]?

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: That’s 60 less square feet.

Tor Shekerjian, Assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer: That's 840 [square foot].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: So, that's 60 square foot less. 486 [square foot].

Tor Shekerjian, Assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer: 18.7 percent.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Frank Malagisi: So, can we just do an overview of what we’re?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: We need a motion — or, no, no, we can do the criteria, but.

Frank Malagisi: I know we can do the criteria, but we’ve been talking about a whole — I just don't want to have any misinterpretations of what they can and cannot do. That’s where I’m at.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. Alright.

Frank Malagisi: So, what are we allowing? Combine the two lots.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Combine the two lots.

Frank Malagisi: We’re going to get rid of the hot tub, is that what we decided?

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Combine the two lots.

Frank Malagisi: Structure across the street is going to be 28 [foot] by 30 [foot]?

Jarrod Maddocks: Correct.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Remove the hot tub.

Frank Malagisi: Now, did you have any plumbing in the garage whatsoever?

Jarrod Maddocks: Across the street?

Frank Malagisi: The car port.

Jarrod Maddocks: Water to wash the car, but no.

Tracy Maddocks: There’s no bathroom.

Frank Malagisi: There’s no kitchen?

Tracy Maddocks: Absolutely not. There’s not even a closet.

Jarrod Maddocks: There’s water line that runs under in the front to a hose spigot to wash your car, that’s it.

Frank Malagisi: Sure. That’s fine.

Tracy Maddocks: You’re welcome come to look. There’s a glass door. You can see right in. It’s a gym and a concrete floor on the other side.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright, so we’re looking at combining both lots, removing the hot tub, and the garage to be built across the street to be 28 [foot] by 30 [foot].

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: And then we’ll bring this in under 20 percent [overage on area coverage].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And that will bring them under the 20 percent [overage on area coverage] — 18.7 percent.

Kathleen Ellerby: I put 18.7 [percent overage on area coverage].

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: 18.7 [percent overage on area coverage].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. Alright.

Frank made the motion combine the two lots, remove the hot tub, and garage to be built across the street to be 28 [foot] by 30 [foot]. Chairman Kenneth Coirin seconded the motion.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 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. There are five criteria. 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.

Board members said, “No.”

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Secondly, whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.

Board members said, “No.”

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

All board members said, “No.”

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 said, “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 said, “No.”

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. We have a motion.

Frank Malagisi: I’ve got one more other thought, so we probably have to make an amendment to it. I need a time frame here. Because, the garage across the street: that’s going to be taken down?

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: What’s reasonable for a time allowance for you to do all this? I’m not saying building the structure. What I’m saying is: combining the lots, getting rid of that garage across the street, and do that in a timely manner, so that — because, obviously, it was 2017 when you went for the — you still have that structure 12 [foot] by 18 [foot].

Tracy Maddocks: Well, there’s a stop work order.

Frank Malagisi: I get it.

Jarrod Maddocks: So, here’s what I would say. I would be able to do that within two months after the APA approves.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Jarrod Maddocks: Because I do need to wait for that.

Frank Malagisi: I agree. We’re saying 60 days after the final approval.

Jarrod Maddocks: Can we do 90 [days].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Frank Malagisi: Is that agreed: 90 days.

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: I’ll give you 90 days.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 90 days, yes.

Frank Malagisi: Is that good, John [Duesler]?

Jarrod Maddocks: 90 days after John gives me the permit.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, demolition permit.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: Wait a minute, you’re going to demolish that little garage across the road?

Jarrod Maddocks: Yes.

John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer: All this is going to start after the APA reviews and responds.

Jarrod Maddocks: Actually, once you give me a permit. You have to give me a permit to demolish. But, I don’t necessarily have to demolish, I mean, I could give this away to someone else, right? They could come get it.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: As long as it’s gone.

Jarrod Maddocks: Yeah, yeah, right.

Tracy Maddocks: So, with the real property, we call them now, or we wait for?

Jarrod Maddocks: Say, the APA denies it [reverses]. I’m not going to combine lots. That’s why I was saying 90 days.

Frank Malagisi: I mean, if the APA approves it, obviously you’re going to have to combine the properties before you any of the construction.

Jarrod Maddocks: No, absolutely. Well, we’ll get in line with them and we’ll set up and just ask them questions and make sure we have everything ready. Last time we went to the APA, they got back to us within two weeks.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes, their 30 days is their max.

Frank Malagisi: OK, so we have a motion on the floor. We’re agreeing for the timeline. Go ahead Ken [Chairman Kenneth Coirin].

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. A “yes” vote approves the application, a “no” vote denies it. Secretary, please call the roll.

Roll call vote:

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.
Frank Malagisi: Yes
Kathleen Ellerby: Yes
Peter Welker: Yes

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: We have an agreement.

Peter Welker made the motion to adjourn. Chairman Kenneth Coirin seconded the motion. All were in favor.

The meeting adjourned at 7:55pm.

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

Copyright © James McMartin Long 2017–2024