ZONING BOARD MINUTES
March 19, 2007
Approved 04/16/2007
Posted 04/27/2007
Please take notice that the Town of Pittsford Zoning Board of Appeals held the following public hearings on Monday, March 19, 2007 in the Town Hall lower level meeting room, 11 South Main Street, beginning at 7:00 P.M. local time.
MEMBERS PRESENT
David Rogachefsky, Michael Rose, George Dounce, Rufus Falk, Barbara Servé and R. Shaddock
MEMBERS ABSENT
Peter Webster
ALSO PRESENT
D. Rowe, Building Inspector and S. Zutes, Town Board Liaison; R. Williams, Attorney
Chairman, David Rogachefsky, called the regularly scheduled meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals to order at approximately 7:00 p.m.
Richard Williams read the Legal Notice as published in the March 7, 2007, Wednesday edition of the Brighton Pittsford Post.
PUBLIC HEARING:
14 Creekside Lane
Tax 138.13-2-8
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-15 C (1) & (3)
Requiring a 70' front and a 20' side setback.
Jack Sigrist of Architectural Innovations presented the application for the owners of 14 Creekside Lane. The home was built in the 1950s and it predates the present zoning. The house is outdated for today's family needs. The present garage does not allow the owners to park two cars in it. The garage has no storage for toys or lawn equipment. The variance for the garage is 6' from the property line the additional 3 ½' allows them to store their two cars. The first covered front porch will have a 48' front setback and the second covered porch will have a 53' front setback because the house already is within the 70' front setback. The variance on the right hand side of the house in the rear has been withdrawn because the applicants will be moving the rear addition over and therefore will be out of the right side setback. The plans changed late this afternoon and the applicants have added a second floor master suite that will be over the garage and 12' from the side lot line.
Comments from the neighbors:
- James & Susan Searls, 18 Creekside Lane are concerned that the requested 6' side setback for the garage addition will be too close to their living room and they spend a lot of time in this room they cherish the openness of the area. They do not want to see a garage wall that close to them. They also feel that with this garage so close it will block their sunlight.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- How close to the lot line are you planning on putting in screening?
- Without the requested 3 ½' this garage is just one large one-car garage if they pushed it back it would cost more money?
- It is our understanding that you stated that the variance is no longer needed for the rear addition on the right hand side of the house.
Mark Williamson stated that they would be planting trees between the two properties to screen this garage addition from their neighbor's living room.
Mr. Searls stated that he does not want trees planted between the two properties. He would rather see the space between the two houses remain open to in order to get the sunlight into their house. The addition is not a problem but the garage wall is just too close to their personal space and they being hearing impaired and are very visual people.
D. Rogachefsky commented that they should keep the hearing open so that all of the parties here tonight can discuss this application and come to an understanding for the proposed garage location.
D. Rogachefsky stated that he is not in favor of this garage addition. As a rule the board does not like to grant any smaller of a side setback than 10' and you are requesting a 6' side setback.
Mr. Searls asked if this would push the neighbors back a month for them to start construction?
B. Serve asked if they could approve the rest of the application so they can get started with their other additions?
D. Rogachefsky stated that they could approve only the covered front porches and rear addition so that the applicant can at least get started with their construction.
The applicant, architect and the owners of 18 Creekside Lane discussed the closeness of the proposed garage addition and they determined that if they remove the closet in the garage they could be scale it down to only 2' 6" for the garage addition therefore allowing a 7 ½' side setback for the garage addition.
Mr. & Mrs. Seals agree with this change to the garage and they have no problem with the master suite over the garage.
There were no additional comments from the board members or the public.
This is a local matter therefore there are no comments from Monroe County Planning & Development Department. This is a Type II Action therefore is not subject to a SEQRA review.
Rufus Falk moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded: George Dounce
The Public Hearing is closed.
45 Carriage Court
Tax 192.08-1-79
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-23 C (3)
Requiring a 15' side setback.
Robert & Irene Steele owners of 45 Carriage Court stated that this corner of the yard is the only place that the pool can go. There are mature trees in the yard that they do not want to take down. With the trees in the backyard they have only one spot that gets good sunlight and that is the location indicated on the surrey map submitted with this application. They are requesting to allow 6' from both side lot lines to get the pool out into the sunny part of the yard.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- Have any of the neighbors shown any objections?
- Could you move it further into the yard?
Irene Steele responded that everyone signed but the one across the street they go to Florida for the winter. If the board feels that 6' is too close they could move it.
Andy Sacco, 47 Carriage Court, would like to see the pool moved over, further from the lot line that is closest to his property. He does not want the pool filter, ladder or a deck to be on the side of the pool facing his backyard.
Irene Steele stated that they have no intention of putting on a deck and the pool filter and ladder will be to the front of the pool therefore will not be in the allowed setback that the board sets.
D. Rowe stated that if the applicants want to put a deck on this pool they would have to apply for variance to do so. The ladder and pool filter is a part of the pool and cannot be any closer to the side lot lines that the Zoning Board allows.
There were no additional comments from the board members or the public.
This is a local matter therefore there are no comments from Monroe County Planning & Development Department. This is a Type II Action therefore is not subject to a SEQRA review.
George Dounce moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded: Rufus Falk
The Public Hearing is closed.
17 Mitchell Road
Tax 164.11-2-63
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-8 B.
Requiring a maximum storage of not more than four vehicles.
Ron Williams, consultant and contractor for the owners of 17 Mitchell Road presented the application for a 3-car garage addition. The owners have three cars for their college children, two cars of their own, two collector cars and a lawn tractor, and they do not want to have all of these parked in their driveway. The new garage addition will allow for the storage of the two collector cars, lawn tractor, their own two everyday cars and for a couple of cars for when the college kids come home. The garage addition will match the house and the existing side load garage.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- How much land do they have?
- Have any of the neighbors objected?
- What is behind this garage addition?
R. Williams stated that the new garage addition will back up to Town owned lands, to the right of the house is a wooded area between them and Route 31. On the left hand side of the existing house is a vacant building lot. None of the neighbors have responded to this application. This lot is 1.36 acres.
There were no additional comments from the board members or the public.
This is a local matter therefore there are no comments from Monroe County Planning & Development Department. This is a Type II Action therefore is not subject to a SEQRA review.
Robert Shaddock moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded: Michael Rose
The Public Hearing is closed.
91 Maywood Avenue
Tax 138.18-1-29
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-15 C (3)
Requiring a 20' side setback.
Jack Sigrist, architect for the owners of 91 Maywood Avenue presented the application for the 10' x 18' 6" rear addition. The current side setback is 20' and they are requesting an 18' side setback from the lot line. The existing house is already 11' off the lot line.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- Could the addition be moved over more and that way you would not need the 2' variance?
- The plans show you needing 19'2" side setback.
Jack Sigrist stated that if they moved the addition out of the side setback the office space that the applicant needs would not fit. The reason for the 2' variance request is because just to be safe that the construction goes over in size, because that is known to happen. It is just a precaution.
There were no additional comments from the board members or the public.
This is a local matter therefore there are no comments from Monroe County Planning & Development Department. This is a Type II Action therefore is not subject to a SEQRA review.
Robert Shaddock moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded: Michael Rose
The Public Hearing is closed.
4245 East Avenue
Nazareth College
Tax 151.09-1-1.111
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-39
Requiring a maximum height of any structure of 30'
Paul Sylvestri, attorney for St. John Fisher College, presented the application and the need for the additional 149 beds. Also, there will be classrooms and a computer lab on the first floor. The main part of the structure will be 43' high and the stair tower will be 50' in height. Right now some of the students are tripled in their rooms and they should not be tripled. There is a need on campus for these additional beds.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- How many students are tripled at this time?
- The variance that was approved in 1997 was never built why?
- Why can't a 3-story building with a larger footprint work for the college?
- Will the parking lot increase substantially?
- Will there be tunnels connecting this building with others on the campus?
- Will there be additional buffering between this building and the surrounding neighbors?
Robert Healy stated that there are several other buildings on campus that are over the proposed 50' height for this 4-story building. There is a green space where they want to put this building and if they make the building only 3-stories high that means they would be taking up more of the property and the walls would be longer to look at for the residents and the additional cost would be into the six figures. Right now the first floor footprint of the proposed building is 12,000-sq. ft. and the other three floors are 10,000-sq. ft. each for about 42,000-sq. ft. If the building was changed to a 3-story it would add about 13,300-sq. ft. to the first floor footprint now and you have a first floor footprint of 23,300-sq. ft. Just the stair-tower is 50' high the 4-story building is only 43' high. If they were to consider a 2-story building then the footprint would double to 46,600-sq. ft. and that would be even more wall space for the neighbors to see and it would crowd the campus too much. Putting this building in another place on campus would not be functional for the use of the college.
The parking lot would increase to accommodate the additional cars. There will be no connecting tunnels for this building. This building will be about 127' from the property line.
Brendan Bystrak stated that there was additional buffering and landscaping installed for the building that was never built in 1997. The college does intend to add more trees; they cannot put any landscaping in the Monroe County Water Authority easement, which is on Nazareth's property.
The owners from 40, 45 & 67 Winding Road and 4383 East Avenue, addressed their concerns as follows:
Owner of 40 Winding Road asked do the neighbors have an option or will this application automatically be approved?
This dormitory is 50 yards from the property line of 45 Winding Rd. and he feels that the size of the building will tower over his home. He does not want to have a fence installed in his backyard. He likes the openness of his yard, adding 15' trees does not hide a 43' tall building.
The owner of 67 Winding Road owns a 2-story house that backs up to the property where this dormitory will be. From her bedroom she will see nothing but wall and windows. Right now she has a nice view of the campus. With the leaves gone for the winter the view would be worse. The taller buildings that the representatives have spoken about are further into the campus. There is no reason to put this dormitory in the proposed location they could move it to another part of the campus nearer to the other dormitories. This building will impact the value of the surrounding properties and it will change the character of the neighbor.
The owner of 4383 East Avenue stated that they are opposed to this expansion and they could lower the building by putting at least two floors below ground. This campus continues to get bigger and bigger. The applicant knows the restrictions before they even propose a new building and they know that it does not meet code, but they continue to submit applications for approval. The property values go down when there is a college near by. The properties on French Road values have gone down. The lights are on a lot along French Road and the berm that was installed is not high enough and the plants that were planted there have not grown very well. They don't think installing a berm is a good idea, nor a good look for the Town of Pittsford to have berms all over town.
David Rowe, Building Inspector, stated that the college can not put two floors of this building underground because it would be against New York State Building Code. There is not means of escape for the students in the event something happened. The State would not allow this dormitory to be built that way.
D. Rogachefsky stated that no variance is automatically approved. This application will not be decided tonight the application still has to be approved by the Planning Board before this board can grant a decision. The board members have been instructed to do a site visit to the area and review the neighbors concerns for the size and location of the proposed 43' building. Several of the residents in attendance have given permission to visit their properties to get a feel of the situation from their perspective.
D. Rogachefsky stated that this Public Hearing for this application remains open and will be addressed at the April meeting.
3690 East Avenue
St. John Fisher College
Tax 138.19-1.1.1
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-39
Requiring a maximum height of any structure of 30'
Robert Burgdorf, Nixon Peabody, presented maps indicating the lack of coverage for wireless phone users. There are three areas in the Town that is not covered and the two locations 3006 Clover Street and 3690 East Avenue at St. John Fisher College will fill in some of the gabs in coverage. The equipment building will be on top of the existing structure. This building is in the middle of the campus surrounded by other buildings and the expressway is on one side. This will have no visual impact on the neighborhood for this is completely screened from the neighbors.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- Will this equipment shelter be higher than the exiting building?
Robert Burgdorf stated that the code requires that no building shall be over the 30' in height this building is 68' therefore it is 38' above code. This equipment building will be 1' above the height of the building wall and cannot be seen by the neighbors.
There were no additional comments from the board members or the public.
This is a local matter therefore there are no comments from Monroe County Planning & Development Department. This is an Unlisted Action and Planning Board will issue a Negative Declaration and this coordinated review under SEQRA.
George Dounce moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded: Michael Rose
Planning Board has not finished their review and has not granted final approval for this application. Therefore, this board can't render a decision until the April meeting.
3006 Clover Street
Tax 163.16-3-39
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-15 C (1), D & 185-120
Requiring a 70' front setback and a maximum height of 30' for any structure.
Robert Burgdorf presented the application for an additional cupola and equipment shelter to be installed on 3006 Clover Street barn and property. This cupola/cell tower will cover another gap in the service area for cell phone users. There will be an additional cupola/cell tower installed as well to balance off the aesthetics of the barn. This additional cupola will provide room for another provider. The center cupola will be the largest of the three and the additional cupola to be installed will match the existing cupola that is already there. The cupola is 1' over the required height of 30'.
Comments and questions from the board members are as follows:
- You are looking to get a height and a front setback variance? Is that right?
- The equipment building will also be within the front setback?
- Will the Architectural Review Board see this?
Robert Burgdorf said that the footprint of the barn will not change the equipment shelter will be 12' x 20' it will house a standby generator and will be to the rear of the barn and not be visible from the road. The generator will run only during emergencies and is not very nosey. The cupola and equipment shelter do need a front setback variance and a height variance for the cupola. They spoke with the owner of the barn and asked if they could raise the height of the silo and the owner did not want to do this. With the addition of the cupola it will help with a short-term problem for phone coverage but at the present time it is the best the company has to offer. The cupola will need to go to the ARB board in April.
There were no additional comments from the board members or the public.
This is a local matter therefore there are no comments from Monroe County Planning & Development Department. This is a Unlisted Action therefore a SEQRA review was granted by this board.
Rufus Falk moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded: George Dounce
The Public Hearing is closed.
RESOLUTIONS:
14 Creekside Lane
Tax 138.13-2-8
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-15 C (1) & (3)
Requiring a 70' front and a 20' side setback.
Discussion:
A nice job done on the plans and also with working with the neighbors regarding their concerns and coming to a reasonable conclusion. A lot of the older homes in this area are very close together.
Barbara Servé moved to grant to the owners of 14 Creekside Lane the requested area variance to allow the construction of two covered front porches, a garage addition and a second floor master suite over the garage within the front and side setbacks at the above-mentioned property.
Seconded: George Dounce
Roll Call: All Ayes
A resolution was passed granting the requested area variance to allow the construction following within the 70' front and the 20' side setback allowing a front setback of 48' front for the first covered front porch and a 53' front setback for second covered front porch. Also granted was a 7 ½' side setback for the garage expansion and a 12' side setback for the second story master suite addition over the garage at the above-mentioned property. The minutes and resolution are on file in the Town Clerk's Office, property file and in the Zoning Board of Appeals file.
45 Carriage Court
Tax 192.08-1-79
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-23 C (3)
Requiring a 15' side setback.
Discussion:
There were no additional comments from the board.
Michael Rose moved to grant to the owners of 45 Carriage Court the requested area variances to allow the construction an above ground pool within the 15' side setbacks at the above-mentioned property.
Seconded: David Rogachefsky
Roll Call: All Ayes
A resolution was passed granting the requested area variances to allow the construction of an above ground pool allowing side setbacks of 10' from the south lot line and 6' from the west lot line at the above-mentioned property. The minutes and resolution are on file in the Town Clerk's Office, property file and in the Zoning Board of Appeals file.
17 Mitchell Road
Tax 164.11-2-63
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-8 B.
Requiring a maximum storage of not more than four vehicles.
Discussion:
There were no additional comments from the board.
Rufus Falk moved to grant to the owners of 17 Mitchell Road the requested area variance to allow the construction an additional 3-car storage space at the above-mentioned property.
Seconded: Robert Shaddock
Roll Call: All Ayes
A resolution was passed granting the requested area variance to allow the construction of an additional 3-car storage space allowing an over all storage space for 6 cars at the above-mentioned property. The minutes and resolution are on file in the Town Clerk's Office, property file and in the Zoning Board of Appeals file.
91 Maywood Avenue
Tax 138.18-1-29
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-15 C (3)
Requiring a 20' side setback.
Discussion:
This is a necessary addition and will improve the utility of the home and the addition is to the back of the house and does not impact the neighborhood.
David Rogachefsky moved to grant to the owners of 91 Maywood Avenue the requested area variance to allow the construction a new rear addition within the 20' side setback at the above-mentioned property.
Seconded: Robert Shaddock
Roll Call: All Ayes
A resolution was passed granting the requested area variance to allow the construction of a new addition within the side 20' side setback allowing a side setback of 18' at the above-mentioned property. The minutes and resolution are on file in the Town Clerk's Office, property file and in the Zoning Board of Appeals file.
3006 Clover Street
Tax 163.16-3-39
Requesting relief from Code Section 185-15 C (1), D & 185-120
Requiring a 70' front setback and a maximum height of 30' for any structure.
Discussion:
There were no additional comments from the board.
George Dounce moved to grant a SEQRA resolution for 3006 Clover Street.
Roll Call: All Ayes
Richard Williams moved a draft resolution to grant to the owners of 3006 Clover Street the requested area variances to allow the installation of a copula/cell tower on the top of an existing barn higher than the required 30' maximum height by allowed code and an equipment storage building within the front setback at the above-mentioned property.
David Rogachefsky moved to adopt the resolution as written by Richard Williams.
Seconded: Michael Rose
Roll Call: All Ayes
A resolution was passed granting the requested area variances to allow the installation of a copula/cell tower and equipment storage building within the 70' front setback and to be over the required height of 30' at the above-mentioned property. The minutes and resolution are on file in the Town Clerk's Office, property file and in the Zoning Board of Appeals file.
OTHER MATTERS:
- REVIEW/APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 19, 2007 MINUTES
The February 19, 2007 minutes were approved by unanimous vote.
- POINT PERSONS FOR THE APRIL 16, 2007 MEETING
Continued Public Hearings:
- 4245 East Avenue, Nazareth College: Robert Shaddock
- 3690 East Avenue, St. John Fisher College: George Dounce
Area Variances:
- 14 Silco Hill: George Dounce
- 9 Arrowhead Road: Michael Rose
- 500 East Street: Rufus Falk
- 51 Oak Manor Lane: David Rogachefsky
- 3700 East Avenue, St. John Fisher College: Robert Shaddock
The Zoning Board of Appeals granted Lead Agency status to the Planning Board for the application submitted for 3690 East Avenue, St. John Fisher College.
Motion for adjournment at 10:00 p.m.
Roll Call: All Ayes
Respectfully submitted,
Sandie Freitag
Zoning Secretary
OFFICIAL BOARD MINUTES ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK