Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2018 Minutes

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

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

Members of the public in attendance: Christopher Maddalone, Lucia Maddalone, I Ting, Matthew Paton, Darin Battisti (representing Schuyler).

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

After brief discussion, the board decided to address the previous minutes in next week’s meeting.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: This is a meeting of the Zoning Board of appeals. The meeting is in a two-part format. The first part is for the public — any concerns that they would like to express. Then, we’ll close that and go into the board’s session.

Application Number #Z2018-11

Owner: Christopher & Lucia Maddalone 525 Union Street Schenectady NY 12305 of the property located at: 108 Montayne Lane Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as parcel # 83.9-2-25 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Sections 4.050 and 4.101 of said code.

Owner Desires to: demolish existing structure and build a single family dwelling. The lakefront setback and lot coverage are at issue.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I understand that we’re going to rehear zoning application Z2018-11. We tabled this because there was a discrepancy between the two surveyors as to exactly where the line went. I understand that’s been resolved.

Christopher Maddalone: Well, I have an email from Chris Foss, my surveyor that says he’s talked to his surveyor and they never produced a survey. On email it basically said — Chris [Foss] said — have them produce a survey. If they don’t, I don’t know what to tell you. Which they have not produced a survey, as far as we know.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Well we may as well go ahead and hear this.

Frank Malagisi: I don’t feel comfortable without the survey. I mean, we could have he-said, she-said stuff and then turn into a legal battle.

Christopher Maddalone: May I interject?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Christopher Maddalone: With all due respect, if this is a civil matter — it has nothing to do with what my application is with regards to lot lines and so on, because he’s not arguing a lot line — he never did. His argument was the fact that there was a right of way that went down — if you remember — he said it went down in the middle of his living room. And, my rebuttal to that was: and that’s for the lot of the house that we took down. And, I said, well it doesn’t matter anymore because there’s no house there anymore. And, we want to put our septic on that lot, so they’ll never be a house on that lot. So, there never will be a right-of-way going through his living room any longer. I said, I actually doing you a favor by buying the lot, nobody can purchase it any longer to put a house on, and then there be a concern about the right of way.

[Easements and rights-of-way persist and are not automatically terminated.]

Chris: And, this has been going on — they tried — the previous owner [of SBL#83.9-2-32, 105 Montayne Lane], the Fichthorns, tried to sell this house for almost two years and he argued tooth and nail with anyone that came to look at the house because of the survey. And, they kept saying, get a survey, get a survey, get a survey. He never wanted to spend the money to get a survey, which he never did. And, that’s what Chris Foss said.

Frank Malagisi: Chris Foss is your surveyor?

Christopher Maddalone: Correct.

Frank Malagisi: Did he file it with the county?

Christopher Maddalone: Oh, absolutely. I have two surveys — I have — for both lots.

Frank Malagisi: Do you have them present here tonight?

Chris: I have blown-up copies. Actually, you have copies that are there. Those are blown — those are blown-up copies. This is the survey that Chris [Foss, surveyor] did. And, it is this lot right here — this is the lake here — this is my — let me give you — just to make it a little easier — so, this is the lake. This is the lot [SBL#83.9-2-25, 108 Montayne Lane] that we are talking about — that we’re requesting the zoning, right. This is Eugene’s lot [Eugene Mierzwa, 106 Montayne Lane] — the gentleman that was here. This is the other lot that I also have a survey for, which you have in your possession, that Mr. Foss did as well. My wife and I also own this lot, but that’s not in question here. So, this lot has the right-of-way and the right-of-way supposedly went from here to there to the lake. Well, the right-of-way is no longer, because the house is no longer.

[Rights-of-way persist even if a building is removed.]

Christopher Maddalone: And, that’s where we’re proposing to put our septic. That house is gone. We took it down already.

Frank Malagisi: Have you made an attempt to combine the two parcels?

Christopher Maddalone: I said I’m willing to do that, if necessary.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: He will do that.

Christopher Maddalone: You weren’t — unfortunately, you weren’t here last time, so the real quick of what I’m looking to do is: this house is 20 [foot] by 40 [foot] currently. I’m requesting a variance to make it 24 [foot] by 40 [foot] and put a front porch on the front of 6 foot by 24 [foot], which is a total — between the two variances — I’m looking for 304 [square] feet additional from what I had. This lot is almost 3,000 square feet. So, by taking this house down — if you grant the variance for this lot — I’m decreasing the overall percentage by almost 7 percent. And, I am willing to combine the two lots. I have no problem with doing that. Linda [Gilbert, Town Clerk] told me how I can do it. I have do it through the Assessor’s office. It is not a problem, because again, we’re putting a septic here. I need that whole lot to put the septic. So, again, his argument was the fact that there was this right-of-way and it actually — it showed up only in her deed — this deed here. It never showed up in my deed and it wasn’t in his deed. So, they actually had a buyer for this lot, maybe eighteen months ago and it fell through because nobody could — this person was the only one that had the right-of-way. It wasn’t in anyone else’s lot. So then the deal fell through. So then I called them. I said, you know, why don’t I just buy it and then there’s no issues ever again. And, he — you know — he came last time and he was — you know — he said — if you remember — you could bring the minutes up — well: I had a friend look at it and he disagrees. And, I said: well I had two certified surveys from Chris Foss, who everyone knows — he lives right on the lake — and — you know — produce a survey. And, Chris [Foss, surveyor] says the same thing. Well, they never produced a survey. So — I mean — you know.

Frank Malagisi: Is there any letter of communication to that?

Christopher Maddalone: All I have is an email from Chris [Foss, surveyor]. I emailed Chris [Foss, surveyor] after this meeting and Chris [Foss, surveyor] responded to me saying: They need to produce a survey and if they do, I’m happy to look at it, but they haven’t produced one.

Frank Malagisi: Did you send a letter to that property owner [Eugene Mierzwa] requesting a survey?

Christopher Maddalone: Well, he [Eugene Mierzwa] was here.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: He [Eugene Mierzwa] was here. We requested that the two surveyors get together and determine where the line actually is.

Frank Malagisi: OK.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, as far as I know, that has not happened.

Christopher Maddalone: There’s stakes all through here, there, there, there, there, there. These are all stakes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. Now his contention was, when they dug down, they found another stake that was probably two and a half to three feet [Chairman Kenneth Coirin was interrupted by Christopher Maddalone]

Christopher Maddalone: He said he found one right by — that’s a telephone pole — he said he found one there. But, that’s not — that’s exactly where his house is. His house runs right there. So, I don’t even know why — if there’s a stake there — maybe that’s his — maybe that was the division of the right-of-way, because why would the stake be there in the middle of his lot? We don’t know, but it has nothing — you know — there’s a stake here for this lot and then — you know — down at the lake. So.

Kathleen Ellerby: [inaudible, speaking to Chairman Kenneth Coirin] because this is his?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

Kathleen Ellerby: The other guys, they [inaudible] Is that what he’s looking at, maybe?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes. That was our request. We wanted to know where that line was.

Christopher Maddalone: In my retention — it is basically saying — you know — I’m asking for this variance that doesn’t — really doesn’t have anything to do with fact that — you know — I’m looking for three feet here — it’s not — or four feet — it’s not going to affect his building in any way. It’s not going to affect his lot line — you know — his lot line is — we have thirteen feet here, in between the two.

Frank Malagisi: How much closer are you going to the water?

Christopher Maddalone: Six feet, but just for a front porch.

Frank Malagisi: And, how far away are you from the water now?

Christopher Maddalone: Currently, I'm 51 feet. I only have 49 [feet]. It’s — the current zoning, I believe, is 100 [feet], but because I’m only 50 — I’m 50 [feet] back. So, I would be — I have it all written. So, currently, the house — the footprint is — that’s the house we took down — it was 18 [foot] by 52 [foot]. We covered 32% of the deed. It was 936 square feet. The lot was 2,900 [square feet]. So, right now, there’s nothing on that lot. The current house is 20 [foot] by 40 [foot] — 800 square feet — 14 percent of the lot and the lot is 5,700 square feet. Right now, we’re 51 feet setback from the water — two and a half [foot] from the left front corner, 11 [foot] from the west corner. So, what the building inspector requested — that I actually move the house to make it more conforming with the LR2 [sic] — the LF2 requirements. And make it more conforming [speaker was interrupted].

Frank Malagisi: So, it aligns the lot?

Christopher Maddalone: Correct. Exactly. So, I — I said, no problem. That’s not — you know — that’s not an issue. So, I can do that.

Frank Malagisi: How did it interfere with the setbacks?

Christopher Maddalone: It actually makes the setbacks better because it’s actually — because of the lot — it — you had to be — I think it’s ten feet and I’ll be 13 feet on one — I’ll be 13 feet on both sides now. Where currently, I’m only two and a half feet. You can see on this one right here — I’m only two and a half feet right there. So, now I’ll be 13 feet over. And, this would — that’s 11 [feet]. That would be 13 feet. This is 15 [feet]. That would be 13 [feet]. And, so on. It’s basically — I’m moving the house.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: You're just squaring it up.

Christopher Maddalone: Exactly. And, Frank [Malagisi], just to give you an idea of where — where the house — what it even looks like. We did an aerial for you. So, currently, that’s the house we’re talking about. As you can see, all the houses go this way, and that one goes that way, so we would be switching it. So, this house is no longer here. This is kind of the right-of-way. You see that dark path there. That’s what they were using as a right-of-way. So, his contention was these people were using this right-of-way, but the deed says that the right-of-way was in the middle of the property.

Frank Malagisi: So, do they still have access?

Christopher Maddalone: This lot? Is no longer — that’s the one I’m putting the septic. So, I took that house down. So, I’ll combine these two lots.

Frank Malagisi: OK. So, how are you going to get the septic to that lot?

Christopher Maddalone: Through the — I own this lot too. So, we’ll come right through there. And John King [P. E.] — you guys know John King. He’s an engineer — local engineer — who designed it.

Frank Malagisi: OK.

Christopher Maddalone: Because, we own all this land here. So, we’re going to put a tank here and it goes right to this lot.

Frank Malagisi: Does that third lot [107 Montayne Lane] have a structure on it?

Christopher Maddalone: This one?

Frank Malagisi: Yes.

Christopher Maddalone: Yes, that’s — this picture was taken in July [2018].

Frank Malagisi: Would you be sharing that septic with that lot?

Christopher Maddalone: Yes. It’s a $45,000 septic. It’s got two tanks and so on.

Frank Malagisi: It’s going to be able to accommodate both?

Christopher Maddalone: Oh, yes. Absolutely. I just met John Horning. Do you guys know John? He’s a local septic guy that — but, yes — it does — I mean, it’s an engineered system that would be — meet approval.

Frank Malagisi: Did you give the board a copy of your prepared septic plans?

Christopher Maddalone: No, not yet. Tor [Shekerjian, assistant to the Code Enforcement Officer], who was helping — who said I didn’t need to to it yet. The zoning was more important. But, I mean, obviously, if the County has to approve the septic — if the County doesn’t approve the septic, I can’t build the house. So, and I can’t build the house if I can’t get the zoning — which — you know — is kind of a domino thing. So, the zoning is the first step. And, then the County approves the septic, and then the building department approves the building. So, overall — like we said — we were requesting an additional 304 square feet on the home on the lake, but we took down 936 square feet in the back. And again, I’m more than happy to combine the lots. I don’t care. And again — you know — the previous contention was just the fact that, he [Eugene Mierzwa] was worried about the right-of-way and he didn’t produce a survey — he doesn’t want to.

Frank Malagisi: You want an opinion? I’ll give you one.

Douglas Purcell: Go ahead.

Frank Malagisi: I’ve got a little bit of the concerns of the “what-ifs”. I think that the property should be combined first before we make a judgment.

Christopher Maddalone: Could you make the approval contingent upon combining the lots?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: It’s a possibility.

Douglas Purcell: We’ve put contingencies on approvals in the past.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Douglas Purcell: What other concerns do you have?

Douglas Purcell: Well, first of all, before we enter discussion, do you want to close the open session and then let’s go into?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes. Is there anything?

Christopher Maddalone: Any further questions on this?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No.

Christopher Maddalone: No? OK.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. We're going to close the public session.

The public session closed at 7:14 pm.

Frank Malagisi: Was there any other correspondence, Doug?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No.

There was no other correspondence.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: We tabled it because of the question of the boundary line between the two lots.

Frank Malagisi: But, has that been resolved? No.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: That’s our problem. Now, when was the…

Frank Malagisi: I just feel a little bit uncomfortable making a judgment today without a permanent survey mark.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK.

Frank Malagisi: Is there some confusion on the line, obviously?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes. I think what we should do here. This is just a suggestion, but that the [speaker was interrupted]

Frank Malagisi: And, I don’t mean to [speaker was interrupted]

Christopher Maddalone: No, with — I, I understand — I really do understand, but my, my concern is two — it’s twofold. One, with all due respect, I don’t think lot lines have anything to do with this — this zoning application. Two, he’s not — he hasn’t produced a survey and how long do I need to wait for him to produce a survey? What if he never does? It just holds me up. And again, his — his arguing my New York State certified surveyor, Chris Foss — who’s probably surveyed probably every lot in this town.

Frank Malagisi: Not every, but [speaker was interrupted]

Christopher Maddalone: Not every, but a lot, right? So, why — I mean, what’s the argument with someone not agreeing with a New York State certified surveyor when he just come up and says, I don’t agree with it. If you don’t agree with it, you have 30 days — you actually have a year and a half since the last time we argued about this — to produce a survey — and he hasn’t.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. So, what I was going to say was, I think we need to send a letter to Mr. Eugene Mierzwa — I think that’s the way they’re pronouncing it.

Frank Malagisi: I mean, our cautiousness only helps you out in the long run.

Christopher Maddalone: I understand, but I’m confident that my certified survey is legit.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I think if we send out a letter to him.

Kathleen Ellerby: [inaudible] had the other map?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes. I think if we send them a letter and say we need a survey by such-and-such a date. And then if he doesn’t produce, then we go ahead.

[several persons speaking simultaneously]

Christopher Maddalone: [interrupting the chair] Is there a legality of how long he has — I mean — under the Zoning Board approval — the Zoning Board — your board — is there a precedent or a ruling that allows him to just argue my survey? Because — I’m not an attorney, but — I’m a — I’m a developer down in Albany and I do this stuff a lot and I’m not saying that I’m smarter than anybody else, but I’ve never run into this before. When someone has a problem with a survey, produce a survey. If you don’t have one, then keep your mouth shut.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: This is what we're discussing right now. The letter was telling Mr. Mierzwa that he has until such-and-such a date to produce a survey. Does that sound reasonable? Does that sound right to you?

Frank Malagisi: Do you want to make that in the form of a motion?

Christopher Maddalone: Can I have one last question before you make a motion?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Christopher Maddalone: What is — I understand his concern about the survey. Someone, someone says, I don’t believe the survey. I understand that. What, what is your concern with his lot line and the fact that I’m asking to increase my building by three feet? When the survey right there — and every — and you go on your tax map, it proves that I’ve setbacks that are more than three feet. What is — what is the main concern — if he says that his lot — do you think that his surveyor’s going to come in and say, no wait a minute, I think my lot line is beyond that three feet I’m asking — I think my lot line is zero setbacks. Is that — I mean, what is the main concern with him just arguing the fact that...

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Then, if that happens, then your sideline setback is not thirteen feet anymore: It’s less.

Christopher Maddalone: Right.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. Then, that’s something that we would have to take into consideration at that point, which is why we’re asking for: Let’s get this thing settled, one way or the other.

Frank Malagisi: I'll make the motion to send a letter.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Either produce the survey or by what date?

Frank Malagisi: I’d say a minimum of, what, 30 days.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. Alright?

Kathleen Ellerby: I’ll second it.

Douglas Purcell: You’ve got a motion. You’ve got a second.

Roll call vote:

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Frank Malagisi: Yes

Kathleen Ellerby: Yes

Douglas Purcell: No.

Douglas Purcell: But, it passed.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: But, it passed.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. So, we need to get to Linda [Gilbert, Town Clerk] and have her get a letter out to Mr. Mierzwa.

The above application was thus tabled at 7:22 pm and the next application’s public session was opened.

Application Number: Z2018-12

Owner: William Schuyler 505 Wolfe Street Alexandria VA 22314 of the property located at: 235 Pine Lake Road Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as parcel #38.11-1-22 for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.050 of said code.

Owner Desires to: add a deck to a non-conforming structure. Road and lakefront variances are being requested.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I understand that Mr. Darin Battisti is representing Mr. Schuyler. So, if you’d just give us a fast overview of what you want to do and why.

Darin Battisti: Well, it’s in the letter we wrote. The camp has a small set of stairs going up to the front door to a landing. Well, it doesn’t have it yet.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No. It’s framed.

Darin Battisti: Right. And, then there’s a deck in the back and he just wants to connect the two with a walkway going down the side of the camp.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. And this is to facilitate?

Darin Battisti: It’s mostly for his mother. She’s older. She’s having trouble getting around. And, if you go into the front entrance of the camp, you go in, you step up, you turn, you step up, and you turn again. And, where you go down the back, you go around the back and right in, straight in the camp.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. Has there been any correspondence on this?

There was no correspondence.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Anybody else want to speak on this? Then, we'll close the public portion and open the board’s portion.

Public portion closed at 7:24 pm.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: What are your feelings?

Douglas Purcell: How familiar with the plans that he submitted are you [Mr. Battisti]?

Darin Battisti: As far as?

Douglas Purcell: What he wants to do. Because what I'm hearing described and what I’m seeing when I go there and what I’m seeing on the drawing are somewhat different. Because, the deck in the front that I saw framed, doesn’t look like it protrudes out past the current front of the house. However, on the plans, he’s got it coming out another four feet and then having the steps come up from the front door.

Darin Battisti: I think the whole deck that’s framed in — I don’t think that’s done yet.

Douglas Purcell: OK.

Darin Battisti: Because it used to — the one that was originally on there — came out past the camp.

Douglas Purcell: So, that’s how that one has been approved by Code Enforcement Officer, because it’s preexisting.

Darin Battisti: Right.

Douglas Purcell: OK.

Kathleen Ellerby: And that's the 10 [foot] by 6 [foot] deck?

Douglas Purcell: Yes.

Darin Battisti: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Douglas Purcell: All we are here is to discuss is the four foot that connects the front one to the back one. OK. That was my main concern: What I was seeing didn’t seem to add up to what I was reading.

Frank Malagisi: The steps are already preexisting?

Douglas Purcell: Well, they were.

Darin Battisti: They were.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: They were.

Kathleen Ellerby: I’m gathering, it’s just where this six foot, it’s just this four foot going all the way back to the back of the deck. Am I correct?

Darin Battisti: Yes.

Douglas Purcell: This is unfortunate. It is already written in his denial notice that he already approved to replace the two existing porches. Which is what’s already planned.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

Douglas Purcell: Alright. With what I saw when I went there today, that little portion there — I don’t have any major objections.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I don’t either.

Kathleen Ellerby: I wondered why: He’s just connecting the two. It’s not going [multiple simultaneous speakers].

Douglas Purcell: My major concerns were the ones that were already approved, because they were approved based on the existing non-conformance and — OK.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. Anybody else have anything?

Frank Malagisi: No.

Douglas Purcell: OK. Do you want to go through the criteria?

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: I think four foot is the minimum that he’s going to need.

Douglas Purcell: Well, and he's really not adding anything closer to the water or to the…

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Sideline.

Douglas Purcell: It’s going to as close as it is already, with the other two porches.

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: I’ll entertain on this.

Douglas Purcell: I’ll make the motion that we grant the variance application Z2018-12 .

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I will second it. A “yes” vote approves the application. A “no” vote denies it.

Roll call vote:

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

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Approved. It goes to the APA. And it needs Planning Board approval and they meet on the 5^th [of December, 2018].

Application closed at 7:31 pm and then public session for the next application opened.

Application Number: Z2018-13

Owners: Matthew & Lynne Paton of 121 Schmidt St. Tribes Hill NY 12177 of the property located at: 449 State Highway 10 Caroga Lake NY 12032 and identified as parcel #12.19-2-6 for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Section 4.050 of said code.

Owner Desires to: build a larger replacement deck that attaches to a preexisting non-conforming structure.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Would you give us a fast overview on what is requested?

Matthew Paton: A variance for a larger deck which actually is already there because my contractors — when I went up there when they already had it on. Then, my code guy said you have to get a variance so I came to the Planning Board first, and they — I just got the letter — they approved it. It’s just adding about four feet to the side. It’s still on the corner of the camp where the existing steps and the landing used to be, going down to the decks that are there now. They just built out. It’s about 8 [foot] by 10 [foot] just in the corner of the camp and the deck doesn’t go out past the camp itself on the side or no closer to the water. But, its for my elderly parents who have trouble getting around. They’ve got walkers and canes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, you’re not going any closer to the lake?

Matthew Paton: No. Just the steps are the same that they were — join the deck down below — how they were. It’s just the upper part — it’s just out to the end of the camp, just the side of the camp — no farther than the camp.

Douglas Purcell: This is the one that had correspondence.

Correspondence from John J. Garger together with Carol Mark, 457 State Highway 10, residing at 19 Tompkins Avenue, White Plains NY 10603. They have no objections.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Again, that has no objections. Alright. We’ll close the public portion of this and go into the board’s.

Closed the public portion at 7:31 pm.

Douglas Purcell: My only concern was that I could tell it was already done.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

Matthew Paton: I didn’t do that intentionally.

Douglas Purcell: I’m glad to hear that.

Matthew Paton: That should not have happened.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Other than that, any other concerns?

Douglas Purcell: No. It’s like you said. I didn’t end up going any closer to the lake. It just put more coverage inside the setback [inaudible].

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. I’ll entertain a motion on this.

Douglas Purcell: I move that we approve application number Z20178-13.

Frank Malagisi: I’ll second it.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: A “yes” vote will approve the application. A “no” vote will deny it.

Roll call vote:

Douglas Purcell: Yes.
Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes
Frank Malagisi: Yes
Kathleen Ellerby: Yes

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Again, APA.

The session ended at 7:33 pm and immediately opened the public session for the next application.

Application Number: Z2018-14

Owner: I Ting of 31 First Avenue Gloversville NY 12078 of the property located at: 203 Lane Road in the Town of Caroga and identified as parcel # 115.-1-65 for a variance to the Town of Caroga Zoning Ordinance which is in violation of Article 4 Sections 4.031 and 4.010 of said code.

Owner desires to: Place 2 - 12 x 10 Sheds on the property. R-3 zoning does not permit an accessory structure without a principal building.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Would you please give us a fast overview of what you’d like to do.

I Ting: I would like to construct a couple metal shed. The only location that I discussed with the code officer — well, it was two.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: It was two sheds.

I Ting: Yes. Because, originally I thought a larger one, but it was too difficult — the ready-made. So I decided to have two smaller ones. That’s the one I purchased from Sears. It is 10 [foot] by 12 [foot]. And, he [Code Enforcement Officer John Duesler] said usually we could not have any shed unless we have a principal building. That’s why he denied it. My concern is: it is very hard for me on weekend land that is on a seasonal road. And also, I have also a house in town.

[background discussion continued]

I Ting: Then, I needed approval for a shed because of security concerns. You know, I park the car. I walk inside [...]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, you’re planning on building a…

I Ting: I plan to build — after I find out. […] I plan to build a ready-made [principal building] from Mohawk. A small — a mini-house — a small building. And, then insulate it, and so on and so forth, with a foundation. […] The house would be under 500 [square] feet. […] But, practically, I would need a house eventually.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: You need some place to stay.

I Ting: Right. But, the thing is, it is very hard for me to even know, because price-wise, I couldn’t say I pick up the phone — I mean, at my age, I don’t need a house. I have a house already, so I just to understand a little bit. And, for me, it is conservation. You know, I am with Cornell [University] Forestry. And even to meet them, it is difficult, because you have black fly and you have […] I have a couple logging roads. [...] I measured 100 yards down. I didn’t have to cut any lumber. [...]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: You don’t have to bring any trees down or anything.

I Ting: No. The shed is very tiny. You know, if I need to cut the grass — all the little things I would need to be able to do any kind of construction. Because, I am a D-I-Y [do-it-yourself] type. So, the security and I feel at home if — you know hard it is to be. So, that’s exactly why I put through the request.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: When we arrived this evening, there was a picture of the shed you want to put up [from Code Enforcement Officer John Duesler].

I Ting: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. There was a note along side of it from the Code Enforcement Officer. He says you must meet 50 pounds per square foot of snow load. You have to show documentation for that or it won’t be allowed. OK?

I Ting: Right.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: So, if you can get some specifications on the shed and bring those to John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer]. And, as long as it meets the 50 pounds per square foot, then — if we approve this — then, that would be allowed. It has to be able to hold 50 pounds per square foot.

I Ting: Right. Because, the reason I do the assembling thing is because — you know, I could always — how do you say — make a wood frame — you know, like make a double up, because this kind of storage…

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Modify it and put in additional support.

I Ting: Yes, because this kind of storage, because of — I don’t want to get — I have four-wheel drive — I don’t want to get stuck. And so, I will make a building that is not going to collapse.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. That’s what he’s [Code Enforcement Officer] is looking for.

I Ting: The location that I chose and also — I mean it has no purpose for me to have like a paper box. And so, whatever he said that: gravel. But, I believe the shed was used to being in the north as well. Whatever. But I can get all the specifications.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: If you can get the specifications and bring those to John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer]. Show him. OK? Was there any correspondence on this?

There was just the one note from Code Enforcement Officer John Duesler.

I Ting: Just the roof, right?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Yes.

I Ting: Just the snow load?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The snow load. That’s what he’s [John Duesler] concerned with.

I Ting: I think I can — there should be — how much is it 50, or 35?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 50 [pounds per square foot snow load].

I Ting: Wind, wind and?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: 50 pounds per square foot.

I Ting: Is this the weather when you type in the weather — this is the zone which — the regular — the regular for this zone, right? Because, originally, I think about buying a metal building that they will bring and assemble here.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right.

I Ting: But, the thing is that location-wise, so this is for the south — whatever. So, I will definitely — I have other shed, actually. I’m going to open — I have the book. I already brought them with my trailer. So, I will just get the book out. And, tomorrow...

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: And, bring it into him [John Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer].

I Ting: Yes.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. If that’s it, then we will close the public portion of this and go into the boards’.

Public portion closed at 7:43 pm.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Questions? Concerns?

Frank Malagisi: I kind of like the idea of storage sheds, because it takes away from — I mean, when I first came up here and I was remodeling the place that I had, I wish I had a garage or storage shed to put equipment in, prior to building whatever I built. One, it prevents blight. Two, it prevents theft — or, it makes it harder for theft — for items that you have on the property. And me, personally, I don’t have a problem with a storage shed.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I don’t either.

Douglas Purcell: As a board, we have a precedent for setting — approving — these type of applications, particularly when they say that they’re doing it so that they have a place to store things, with the ultimate goal of building on that property. So, I don’t have any problems with it.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. Anybody want to make a motion?

Douglas Purcell: Keep in mind that we have to go through the criteria and it is a use variance.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: I should have known that one.

Douglas Purcell: And, you don’t have it?

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: No, of course not.

[Applicant asks the board about local snow climate in Caroga versus Gloversville. Multiple simultaneous conversations occur.]

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: OK. We have to go through these criteria now. No use variance will be granted without a showing by the applicant that applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship. The following tests must be met for each and every use allowed by zoning on the property, including uses allowed by special use permit. The first is that: The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return, as shown by competent financial evidence. The lack of return must be substantial.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Well, she can’t store anything.

Douglas Purcell: Right.

Frank Malagisi: If there was equipment [inaudible] that — because it was damaged by the elements without the shed.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Right. Exactly.

Board said, “yes”.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The alleged hardship relating to the property is unique. The hardship may not apply to a substantial portion of the zoning district or neighborhood.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Almost everything else there already has a dwelling or something on it. And, in this case, she doesn’t. So, I would say, “yes”.

The board said, “yes”.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The requested use variance, if granted, will

not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.

The board said, “no”.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: The alleged difficulty has been

self-created.

The Board said, “no”.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Now, I will entertain a motion on this.

Frank Malagisi: I’ll make the motion to accept the granting of application Z2018-14.

Kathleen Ellerby: I’ll second it.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. We have a motion and a second. A “yes” vote approves the application. A “no” vote denies it. Secretary, please call the roll.

Roll call vote:

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

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: Alright. You're all set. So, bring that in to John [Duesler, Code Enforcement Officer] and make sure that this roof won’t go in.

[The applicant discussed her hopes for the project and she thanked the Board.]

Frank Malagisi: I make the motion to adjourn.

Douglas Purcell: Second.

Chairman Kenneth Coirin: All those in favor?

The meeting adjourned at 7:50 pm.

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

Copyright © James McMartin Long 2017–2024