ZBA FINAL MEETING MINUTES, June 27, 2013
Having determined that a quorum was present, Chairman Gilly
called to order the June 27th , 2013 meeting of the Zoning Board of
Appeals. There being no objection,
the action was adopted. Chairman
Gilly introduced the members present: Michael Castiglione, Annemarie Gilly,
Maria Mendoza, Richard Smykowski. Dustin Wilber.
1. ADMINISTRATIVE
MATTERS
- Changes/Additions
to the Meeting Agenda. No
changes.
- Approve Draft Meeting Minutes of June 13th
. Minutes were accepted as corrected. Motion by Ms. Gilly.
Seconded by Mr. Smykowski.
Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
2. PUBLIC HEARINGS SCHEDULED FOR June 27, 2013
7:05 pm. ZBA
Case #13-08. Application of Pelle
and Patricia Bollin
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE
APPLICATION OF PELLE AND PATRICIA BOLIN
#13-08. June 27, 2013
ZBA Members Present: Michael Castiglione, Annemarie Gilly,
Maria Mendoza, Richard Smykowski, and Dustin Wilber
Having determined that a quorum was present and the Members having been
introduced, Ms. Gilly read the published legal notice for this case.
ZBA Case #13-08.
Application of PELLE and PATRICIA BOLIN, for property located at 176
TINKER STREET, WOODSTOCK, NY, a .50 acre parcel located within an R3 Zoning
District, for variances from Area & Bulk Regulations, Article IV,
Modification of Required Yards, Section 260-26B2b for a 20' infringement into a
minimum required 25' side yard setback in order to construct a one story 504
sq. ft. 2-car detached garage.
NYSEQR DETERMINATION
In accordance with the guidelines set forth in 6NYCRR, Part 617, the Zoning
Board of Appeals has determined that the instant application is classified as a
Type II Action which, by definition, does not have a significant effect on the
environment and is exempt from environmental review.
Mr. Bolin introduced himself. Ms. Gilly said there were two exhibits, A and B.
Mr. Bolin said he is planning a two-car garage, as he has no
storage space. He is a car
afficionado, has antique cars.
Tenant of the house who is there now has 7 motorcycles. Mr. Bolin plans to live there when he
can no longer live on Grog Kill Road.
He has the time and money to build the garage now.
Mr. Smykowski asked if this
is not his property now. No, it is
his property, Mr. Bolin said. It
is a
retirement property.
He is planning on moving there when he gets older. It is closer to town.
Mr. Bolin said he has a lot of cars.
Ms. Gilly said she had stopped by the property and had taken
photo. She guesses this is spot
for garage. Yes, said Mr. Bolin, a
shed is being moved two feet back, because he spoke to his neighbor, Greg, who
had been afraid of blocking the view.
He is cool with this now.
It will be 5 feet from house, as required.
Is there 5 feet between house and shed? Ms. Gilly
asked. 6 feet, Mr. Bolin
replied. Will it be completely
detached from house? Yes. He has no intention to turn it into a
living space later.
Mr. Wilber asked if it will have electricity. Yes, and no water. Will it look similar to house? Yes, same siding. Strictly a garage, no other use. Correct.
Ms. Gilly said the first floor of house is 1,116 sq.
ft. Yes, that’s correct. T his is Exhibit C, Ms. Gilly
said. We are looking at number of
buildings on property. There is
only one, Mr. Bolin said. We are
not counting second floor as we are only doing footprint, Ms. Gilly said.
Mr. Smykowski asked about footage of shed. Ms. Gilly asked Mr. Bolin if he is
tearing down shed. No.
Ms. Gilly said Richard is right to take shed size into
consideration. It is 8 x 10. There are requirements for
lot size, Mr. Smykowski noted. If
it is a problem, I can move it to Grog Kill, Mr. Bolin said.
Mr. Smykowski asded what the square footage of the shed was
to which Ms. Gilly said “that’s 80’.”
504 for garage, 80 for shed, so he is up to 1700 sq. ft. first floor is 1116, garage is 504, and
shed is 80. Total is 1700.
Mr. Castiglione asked applicant where this tree is in
relation to the garage Mr. Bolin
said property line is on this side.
He is still keeping the tree.
The garage is going to be through here. The tree will stay? Mr. Castiglione asked. Yes. It has nothing to do with it. The garage will basically be where the shed is, two feet
back, because neighbor wants to keep view.
There were no other questions. Ms. Mendoza said this is pretty clear and straightforward.
Ms. Gilly read the 5 criteria questions. She explained that these are questions
for the Board to consider when making decision. She said there are no contiguous neighbors present, but she
has to read them. Brian Lapiner,
at 9 Schoonmaker Lane. Tara
Martinez, at 11 Schoonmaker Lane.
Gregor LaRocque, at 178 Tinker St.
Alan Hutchins at 7 Schoonmaker Lane. Michael Lang, at 1081 Wittenberg Road in Mt. Tremper. Town of Woodstock, 45 Comeau Drive.
Ms. Gilly made a motion to recess the pubic hearing of this
case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
Mr. Bolin thanked the Board.
3.
DECISION & ORDERS AND INTERPRETATIONS OUTSTANDING
#13-01. Chris Maxwell. This case was recessed until further
notice.
#13-05. Shelly Bance. This
case was withdrawn.
#13-02A. Alan Hutchins.
Chairman Gilly moved to reopen the recessed public hearing of this
case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
Chairman
Gilly moved to close the public hearing of this case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
RESOLUTION: Based upon the Standards
for Consideration of Area Variances set forth in Section 260-103B(1), of the
Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, and conditional upon compliance with
stated representations, an area variance from the Zoning Law of the Town of
Woodstock, Article IV, Area and Bulk Regulations, Section 260-16, Minimum Yard
Requirements, Col. F, with respect to a side yard, located in an R3 district,
as modified by Section 260-26B2(b), Modification of Required Yards, for a 23'
infringement into a minimum required 25' side yard setback, in order to
construct a 20' x 24' x 12' maximum height detached garage, in the location on
the subject property shown in the submitted plans; Article
IV, Area and Bulk Regulations, Section 260-16, Minimum Yard Requirements, Col.
G, with respect to a rear yard located in an R3 district, as modified by
Section 260-262C, Modification of Required Yards, for a 10' infringement into a
minimum required 50' rear yard setback, in order to construct a 20' x 24' x 12'
maximum height detached garage, in the location on the subject property shown
in the submitted plans; and 3) Article IV, Area
and Bulk Regulations, Section 260-16, Maximum Structure Coverage, Col. B, in an
R3 district, with respect to the maximum structure coverage for all structures
on the subject property, in order
to construct a 20' x 24' x 12' maximum height detached garage, in the location
on the subject property shown in the submitted plans, and which will exceed the
maximum structure coverage limitation of 2482 sq. ft. for the subject property
by up to 356 sq. ft., are hereby granted, subject at all times to the condition
that the new structure must be set back no less than 4 feet in the side yard
from the subject property line.
All of the foregoing being subject to all requirements of the Zoning Law
of the Town of Woodstock, the NYS Real Property Law, and all other applicable
Laws, Codes, and Regulations.
The
vote was announced as follows: Ms. Gilly, Aye, Mr. Castiglione, Aye, Ms.
Mendoza, Aye, Mr. Smykowski, Aye, Mr. Wilber, Aye.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED by a vote of
five in favor, none opposed, none absent, and none abstaining.
#11-34. 201 Cooper Lake Road (Friedrike Merck).
Chairman
Gilly moved to reopen the recessed public hearing of this case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
Chairman
Gilly moved to close the public hearing of this case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
RESOLUTION: Based upon the Standards
for Consideration of Area Variances as set forth in Section 260-103B(1), of the
Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, and conditional upon compliance with
stated representations, the Decision and Order of this Board dated December 8,
2011, and filed on December 14, 2011, with respect to an area variance from the
Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, Article IV, Supplementary Regulations,
Section 260-32A, Fences, Walls, and Gates, to allow a 7-ft. high, black metal,
4-inch square mesh deer fence, measured from the ground level to the top of the
fence, is hereby modified to allow a 7-ft high, black metal, 4-inch square mesh
deer fence, measured from finished grade level to the top of the fence to be
installed in the location depicted in yellow/green colored ink as depicted on
Exhibit A, and which Exhibit A was submitted by the applicant with the original
application in this case, and re-submitted at the May 9, 2013 public hearing, a
copy of such Exhibit A being attached hereto and made a part hereof, and
pursuant to applicant’s request at the May 9, 2013 public re-hearing, to modify
the original application to the extent shown on Exhibit C, which Exhibit C applicant
submitted at the May 9, 2013 public hearing, and a copy of which modified
herein for purposes of clarity is attached hereto and made a part hereof to
extend the subject’s 7-ft. high, black metal, 4-inch square mesh deer fence,
measured from the finished grade level to the top of the fence, from a location
on the subject property depicted on Exhibit E as Point A, running thence in a
generally easterly direction to Point B, on said Exhibit C, and then provide
for an opening in such fence extension in order to install a cattle guard or
deer guard in the path of such fence extension, and then such fence extension
recommencing from Point C and continuing to and ending at Point D on said
Exhibit C; and a variance from Section 260-117, with respect to that portion of
the fence that may infringe into a 30-ft. dormant right-of-way indicated on
Exhibit A, is hereby granted, all of the foregoing being subject at all times
to the following requirements and conditions: 1) that the fence extension
depicted on Exhibit C and described herein shall be set back at least 5 feet
from the southerly border of the existing 20-ft. r-o-w as shown on said Exhibit
C, and which r-o-w runs over the land acquired by applicant in a deed dated
September 20, 2011, and recorded on November 10, 2011 in the office of the Ulster
County Clerk, at Liber 5209, Page 116, and which lands were subsequently merged
into a single tax lot now known on the County of Ulster, Town of Woodstock tax
map as Section 26.2, Lot 2, Lot 20.211, and which lot for purposes of this
application this Decision and Order and the Resolution of this Board is now
deemed to apply to 2) that length of the fence adjoining the land now or
formerly of Gayle Burbank, be installed or remain, as the case may be, a
minimum of 10 ft. from the property line so as to allow sufficient room to
plant and maintain deer-proof shrubs or trees between fence and the Burbank
property; 3) that similar types of plantings be installed or remain, as the
case may be, along the length of fencing that is parallel to the driveway of
the land now or formerly of Carol Wandry; and 4) that the fence be maintained
in the original black color, all of the foregoing being subject at all times to
all requirements of the Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, the NYS Real
Property Law, and all other applicable Laws, Codes, and Regulations.
The
vote was announced as follows: Ms. Gilly, Aye, Mr. Castiglione, Aye, Ms.
Mendoza, Aye, Mr. Smykowski, Aye, Mr. Wilber, Aye.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED by a vote of
five in favor, none opposed, none absent, and none abstaining.
#11-35. 201 Cooper Lake Road ( Friedrike Merck).
Chairman
Gilly moved to reopen the recessed public hearing of this case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
Chairman
Gilly moved to close the public hearing of this case. Seconded by Mr. Smykowski. Motion passed 5-0-0-0.
RESOLUTION: Based upon the Standards
for Consideration of Area Variances set forth in Section 260-103B(1), of the
Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, and conditional upon compliance with
stated representations, the Decision and Order of this Board dated December 8,
2011, and filed on December 14, 2011, with respect to an area variance from the
Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, Article V, Supplementary Regulations,
Section 260-32A, Fences, Walls, and Gates, to allow a 7-ft. high, black metal,
4-inch square mesh deer fence, measured from the ground level to the top of the
fence, is hereby modified to allow a 7-ft high, black metal, 4-inch square mesh
deer fence, measured from the finished grade level to the top of the fence, to
be installed in the location depicted in yellow/green colored ink as depicted
on Exhibit A, and which Exhibit A was submitted by the applicant with the
original application in this case, and re-submitted at the May 9, 2013 public
re-hearing, a copy of such Exhibit A being attached hereto and made a part
hereof, and pursuant to applicant’s request at the May 9, 2013 public
re-hearing to modify the original application to the extent shown on Exhibit C,
which Exhibit C applicant submitted at the May 9, 2013 public re-hearing, and a
copy of which modified herein for purposes of clarity is attached hereto and
made a part hereof, to extend the subject’s 7-ft. high, black metal, 4-inch
square mesh deer fence, measured from the finished grade level to the top of
the fence, from the location on the subject property depicted on Exhibit C as
Point E, running thence in a general easterly direction to Point F, on said
Exhibit C, and then provide for an opening in such fence extension in order to
install a cattle guard in the path of such fence extension, and then such fence
extension recommencing from Point G and continuing to and ending at Point H on
said Exhibit C, is hereby granted, all of the foregoing being subject at all
times to the following requirements and conditions: 1) that the fence extension
depicted on Exhibit C and described herein shall be set back at least 5 feet
from the southerly border of the subject property; and 2) that the fence be
maintained in its original black color, all of the foregoing being subject at
all times to all requirements of the Zoning Law of the Town of Woodstock, the
NYS Real Property Law, and all other applicable Laws, Codes, and Regulations.
The
vote was announced as follows: Ms. Gilly, Aye, Mr. Castiglione, Aye, Ms.
Mendoza, Aye, Mr. Smykowski, Aye, Mr. Wilber, Aye.
THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED by a vote of
five in favor, none opposed, none absent, and none abstaining.
4. REVIEW CASES RECEIVED/SCHEDULED FOR July
11, 2013 MEETING
None
at this time.
5. OTHER
Ms.
Gilly noted that Mr. Wilber will be writing the Bolin decision. He and other members will make a site
visits prior to hearing each case.
