Town of
Trenton
Oneida County, NY
 Minutes 

December 17, 2007: Public Hearing and Regular Meeting

Body:

TOWN OF TRENTON

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

P. O. Box 206

Barneveld, NY 13304

 

Minutes of Meeting

December 17, 2007

 

 

1.                  ROLL CALL

Present:   Charles LaMendola, John Stetson, Jeff Dittl, Richard Joyal

Absent:   Anna Giacobbe

Also present:  David LaManque, Steve Hunter, Zoning Enforcement Officer, Kenneth Cutler, Code Enforcement Officer

 

2.                  PURPOSE:  This was a Public Hearing and a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals

 

3.                  PROCEEDINGS:

 

The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:10 p.m.  The following case was heard:

APPEAL #7097, PARCEL #229.000-1-2.3, ZONING R-R, DAVID LAMANQUE, AREA VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A POLE BARN STYLE GARAGE PLACED 12’ FROM HOUSE AND WITH A 2’ SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE.  The appeal application was reviewed by the Board.  Mr. LaManque stated that he had received a Building Permit based on erroneous set back information and began to build a 32’ wide x 24’ deep garage.  He had not had the property surveyed, and misjudged the placement of the property line which was closer to his home than he assumed.  Under the R-R Code the structure must be 20’ from the house and have a 15’ side yard setback from neighbor’s property line.  The original placement of the garage would have been 5’ off the side yard line at the front – east corner and 9” at the rear - east corner.   Mr. LaManque asked for a variance of 12’ from the house and a 2’ side yard setback, however the actual side-yard setback appeared to be 9 inches.  Mr. LaManque said other locations were not feasible because: Moving the garage closer to the house would block access to the backyard, a hardship because twelve feet is the minimum necessary to trailer his boat to backyard storage; Moving the structure forward would create difficulty in accessing the house entrance from the driveway requiring a new sidewalk be built, Moving the garage back, even a few feet, encroaches the existing septic system; and Placing garage on the left - West side of house would require a new driveway, trees removed and substantial amount of fill.  Mr. LaManque stated he had spoken to his neighbor, Mr. Geer, who owns the adjacent lot to the east of his.  According to the appellant, the neighbor said to Mr. LaManque that he did not object to the 2’ side yard setback as long as the structure did not overhang his property.  Mr. LaManque had also asked the neighbor if he could purchase some or all of land in the easterly adjacent parcel in order to meet the required R-R Zone side-yard setback.  According to the appellant, those offers were declined.  Mr. Geer, was not present for the public hearing and had not provided written concerns or recommendations about the appeal.  John Stetson advised Mr. LaManque that the Planning Board had recommended that the appeal be denied since the application cites a self-imposed hardship.  Mr. LaManque along with the Board members, Mr. Cutler and Mr. Hunter discussed various alternatives to potentially meet the R-R Zone side-yard setback for auxiliary buildings, including: attaching garage to house, downsizing the dimensions, reconfiguring the scale length and width, and possibly changing the site placement of the structure in order to conform to the 15’ side yard setback requirement.  There was also discussion about the Code-required 20’ minimum distance between a house and an auxiliary building, which in included in the appeal.  Mr. LaManque exhibited a survey which showed his entire lot, placement of the house and the specific location of the proposed garage-pole barn referenced in the appeal.  Upon discussing different choices that might enable the appellant to meet Code requirements for side-yard setback, or at least mitigate the proportional encroachment, Mr. LaManque stated he remained uncertain about the final location and dimensions of the proposed structure and because none of the alternatives discussed helped mitigate the required 20’ distance between the buildings, the Board tabled the appeal and asked Mr. LaManque to carefully consider all the options available, decide whether to submit a revised building permit, and to attend the January Board meeting to let the Board know if he wished to continue with his appeal unchanged, submit a plan which would  meet the 15’ side yard set back requirement and only require a variance for the garage being sited less than 20’ from the house, or whether a new building permit is being submitted for a proportionally improved (but still less than 15’) side-yard setback.  There were no objections to the appeal either at the meeting or in writing.  Mr. LaManque left the meeting at 8:20 p.m.

 

The regular meeting was called to order.  Upon motion by Stetson, second by Dittl, the minutes of the November 13, 2007 meeting were approved and all members present voting “aye”.

 

Old Business:  The Board reviewed the letter dated December 4, 2007 from Thomas Hughes to the Trenton Fish and Game Club citing the Town Board’s denial of a Building Permit.   The Board agreed that, if it had not already done so, the Town Board should consider sending copies of the ZBA Decision and Tom Hughes’ letter to Kevin Storsberg.

 

New Business:  LaMendola advised that Scott McCartney had spoken with him about applying for a variance to mine gravel which was not a permitted use in his Zone.  However, to date an application has not been received.

 

An appeal application has been received from Tom Bronson, Plank Road, Remsen to build a garage/storage structure on the footprint of an existing foundation which does not meet the current front yard setback of 75’ for the R 1.5 Zone.  Since Mr. Bronson must also meet with the Planning Board for a Site Plan Review for the project, Steve Hunter suggested a joint Public Hearing.   LaMendola will ask John Panzone to consider whether or not the Planning Board wishes to conduct a joint ZBA-Planning Board meeting date to review the Bronson appeal and Site-Plan.

 

The date of the next ZBA meeting was tentatively scheduled Monday, January 14th 2008 at 7:00 P.M, subject to the determination of whether or not a joint ZBA-Planning Board meeting would be scheduled.

 

The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Jeanette Conte

Secretary