Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes 10-21-09

TOWN OF RHINEBECK

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21, 2009

 

 

PRESENT: David Baldauf                 Michael West      Scott Bergin             

                     Pierce Smith                    Jeff Irish

 

I.       CALL TO ORDER

          The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m.

 

II.      APPROVAL OF MINUTES

          Meeting minutes of October 7, 2009, were reviewed and approved. 

 

III.     NEW BUSINESS

          There was no new business scheduled.    

 

IV.     PUBLIC HEARINGS

Kaplan, Steve - Case #784 - area variance application requesting front setback reduction from 75' to 65'; rear setback reduction from 20' to 15' and accessory structure increase from 3 to 4, for property located at 55 Delano Drive, Rhinebeck, New York.  The Public Hearing opened at 7:40 p.m.  Mrs. Jill Kaplan was present and reviewed the application with the Board.  Jeff noted there are 2 additional variances:  front setback from 20 feet to 5 feet and rear setback from 75 feet to 20 feet.  Mrs. Kaplan stated their property is very rocky and due to lack of space the  proposed location for the pool and shed is their only option.  Piece noted the house is visible from the road yet is far enough away.  Pierce asked when they would begin building.  Mrs. Kaplan stated they would like to begin this fall.  There were no neighboring property owners present.  The Public Hearing was closed at 7:45 p.m.

 

 

V.      OLD BUSINESS

 

RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AREA VARIANCE

John & Susan Sammut, Case #782

 

WHEREAS, an application for an area variance, Case #782, was filed on August 21, 2009 by John & Susan Sammut in compliance with Town Law;

 

WHEREAS, a public hearing on this application was advertised and held by the Town of Rhinebeck Zoning Board of Appeals on September 16, 2009 at the Town Hall;

 

WHEREAS, the record of the hearing has been reviewed and the members of the Board have familiarized themselves with the premises;

 

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Appeals that for the following reasons the Board GRANTS approval for an area variance to allow an increase in the number of allowable accessory structures from 3 to 5: subject to conditions stated in item 6 below;

 

1.  The applicants' parcel is in the R3A zone located at 221 Cedar Heights Rd. and is known as tax parcel # 6271-00-745157;

 

2.  The lot is 1.006 acres (+-) and pre-dates zoning. Currently there are accessory structures on the property that are not in compliance due to having been constructed without proper building permits;

 

3.  The applicants intend to construct an additional accessory structure, a 30' x 36' single story garage near the rear of their property to store collector cars, motorcycles and a tractor. The structure would be electrified;

 

4.  The proposed garage would be the fifth accessory structure on the property, the other existing structures being as follows:

1.  An attached two car garage;

2.  A swimming pool;

3.  A wood shed;

4.  A tool shed;

 

5.  The neighboring property owner, Renate Frank, owns property that surrounds the applicants' parcel. Ms. Frank expressed concern about the additional structure at the public hearing citing what she referred to as "overdevelopment";

 

6.  The ZBA has determined that the proposed garage will have no negative impact on the neighborhood so long as the following conditions are met:

1.  The applicants must work with the ZEO to bring the non-compliant structures

      into compliance by acquiring the necessary building permits;

2.  The proposed garage must be constructed in a fashion that is consistent with

     the existing architecture currently on the property;

 

7.  The ZBA, after due deliberation GRANTS a variance from Section IV(G)(1)(f) of the Zoning Law citing it's authority under Section XI.(B)(3);

 

8.  Construction of the proposed garage must be commenced with one year of the granting of this variance or said variance will become null and void;

 

9.  The granting of this variance in no way obviates the need for the Applicant to obtain any additional approvals and permits required under the law including, but not limited to those of the Planning Board and other involved agencies.

 

 

 

Motioned by:  Michael West                                                  VOTE

 

Seconded by:  Pierce Smith                                                    David Baldauf - yes

                                                                                                Scott Bergin - yes

Date Approved: October 21, 2009                                         Jeff Irish - yes                                                                                                                                     Pierce Smith - yes

Filed with Town Clerk:  October 22, 2009                             Michael West - yes

 

Zoning Clerk: Jadeen Murray

 

*   *   *   *   *   *   *

 

RESOLUTIONS FOR AREA VARIACNES - Susan Sie - Cases #768 & 768A

 

WHEREAS, an application for various area variances, Case #'s 768 and 768-A, was filed on February 26, 2009 and revised on August 28, 2009 by Susan Sie

("Applicant") in compliance with the Town Law;

 

WHEREAS, a public hearing on this application for variances was advertised and held by the Town of Rhinebeck Zoning Board of Appeals beginning on March 18, 2009, and closing on September 17, 2009 at the Town Hall;

 

WHEREAS, the record of the hearing has been reviewed and the members of the Board have familiarized themselves with the premises;

 

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Appeals that for the following reasons the Board GRANTS approval for area variances from either Section IV (Schedule of Bulk Regulations) or Section V (D) of the Town law as follows, all subject to the conditions noted below in finding number five:

 

     1. A building front setback reduction on Tewkesbury Street from 50 feet to 9.5 feet,        

2. A building front setback reduction on Grinnell Street from 50 feet to 19.5 feet,

3. A building side setback reduction from 20 feet to 19.5 feet,

4. A building rear setback reduction from 25 feet to 7.5 feet,

5. A maximum building coverage ratio increase from 10 % to 17.3%.

6. A retaining wall height increase from four feet to 7.5 feet

 

These variances are based on the following findings and are subject to the conditions in item 5 below:

 

FINDINGS:

 

1.      The property is located in the R1A district in the Town of Rhinebeck and is known as tax parcel # 6069-06-355910 -0000.

2.      The Applicant has received approval from the Town Planning Board to demolish her existing home on this property and wishes to replace it with a new house.  In addition, her plan includes the construction of a new shed and a single storey two car garage on the eastern edge of the property along Tewkesbury Street. All of these plans were presented at the public hearing in a PowerPoint slide presentation a copy of which is in the ZBA file for this case in CD-R format.  Selective diagrams and renderings from the plan are also included in hard copy format.

3.      At the public hearing the neighbors to the east of applicant's property - Mike Amsden and Greg Sokaris ("Sokaris/Amsden") - objected to the size and placement of the proposed garage and shed on the grounds that it would partially obstruct the view from their home. Other public comments both against and in favor of Applicant's plan are noted in the minutes of the various meetings.  The ZBA also notes that there were comments to the Planning Board on the project from interested agencies and parties including the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation and the Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) of the Town of Rhinebeck.

4.      The ZBA believes that Applicant's proposal, as conditioned in Finding 5 below, will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor will it be a detriment to nearby properties.  Given the very limited size of the property which is typical of Rhinecliff, the area variances are necessary to permit Applicant to pursue a reasonable development plan. The ZBA does not believe that the variances will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood.   

5.      The granting of these variances by the ZBA is based on the following  conditions:

 

A.    Applicant's plan will be amended so as to eliminate the proposed shed along Tewkesbury Street on the eastern boundary of the property. The only structures permitted in this location will be a gazebo and a one story two car garage (less than 9 feet in height) with access onto Tewkesbury. In order to effect this change in Applicant's plan, the ZBA has reduced the approved lot coverage variance from the requested 18.67% to 17.3%.

 

B. The ZBA notes that Applicant has proposed to install at her expense vegetation along the western edge of the Sokaris/Amsden property on the east side of Tewkesbury.  The ZBA also notes that Sokaris/Amsden are in agreement with this proposal.  It is a condition of the variances approved above that Applicant in consultation with the Town CAC proposes to Sokaris/Amsden within 30 days of this approval a "vegetation plan" to mitigate the visual impact of the proposed garage. If the parties are unable to agree on a "vegetation plan" within 45 days of this ZBA approval, the CAC will arbitrate and will determine within 15 days thereafter a plan ( the CAC Plan) which it in its sole discretion it deems to be fair to the interests of both Applicant and Sokaris/Amsden. In the event Applicant does not accept in writing the CAC Plan within 15 days, the ZBA reserves the right to reduce the permitted lot coverage so as to allow only a structure on the rear of the property along Tewkesbury which is approximately the size of the shed now existing in the southeast corner of the lot. In the event Sokaris/Amsted do not accept in writing the CAC Plan within 15 days, the Applicant shall have no further obligation to install vegetation on the Sokaris/Amsted property. The agreement by the parties on a "vegetation plan" shall be evidenced by a letter to the ZBA signed by them no later than 90 days from the date of this approval.  A copy of the plan shall be attached.

 

C. It is a condition of these variances that Applicant execute her development of the property substantially in the form shown to the ZBA and the public at the pubic hearing on September 17, 2009. As noted above, this plan is contained in the ZBA files for this case in CD form and partially in hard copy. 

 

6.      Dutchess County states this is a matter of local concern

7.      The ZBA, after due deliberation, approves the above variances from Section IV and Section V (D)  under their authority cited in Section XI of the law, subject to the conditions in finding number 5 above.  

8.   Unless implementation is commenced within one year from the date of issuance

      of these variances, the variances shall become null and void without further action

      of the ZBA.

9.  The granting of these variances in no way obviates the requirement for Applicant

     to obtain any additional approvals and permits required under the law including,

     but not limited to, those of the Planning Board and other involved agencies.

 

Dated:  October 21, 2009                                      VOTED:

                                                                   David Baldauf - yes        

Motioned by: Pierce Smith                           Jeff Irish - yes

Seconded by:  Scott Bergin                           Scott Bergin - yes

Pierce Smith - yes

Michael West - yes

Jadeen Murray, Zoning Secretary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VI.     ADJOURNMENT

          The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session at 8:10 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Jadeen Murray, Zoning Secretary