TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 17, 2008
Members Present
|
Peter Barber, Chairman Charles Cahill, Alternate Sharon Cupoli Susan Macri Allen Maikels Mike Marcantonio Tom Remmert James Sumner Robert Feller, Counsel
|
_____________________________________________________________________
Chairman Barber opened the meeting and pointed out the emergency exits in the event they were needed.
NEW CASES:
MATTER OF DANIEL SANTABARBARA – 100 PROUT LANE
Sharon Cupoli read the legal notice:
"Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Guilderland, New York, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Articles IV & V of the Zoning Law on the following proposition:
Variance Request No. 4113
Request of Daniel Santabarbara for a Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the construction of a 32' x 32' accessory structure in a side yard.
Per Articles IV & V Sections 280-34 & 280-51 respectively
For property owned by Daniel Santabarbara
Situated as follows: 100 Prout Lane Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map # 15.00-2-24.1 Zoned: R40
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 17th of September, 2008 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: September 8, 2008"
The file consists of the mailing list to 11 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for an area variance, the Town Planners comments, a narrative, a plot plan showing the proposed location of the garage and some photos of the property.
The Town Planner had the following comments: "The applicant is requesting an area variance to construct a detached garage in the side yard. No planning objections."
Dan Santabarbara, applicant, presented the case. Mr. Santabarbara stated that he would like to build a 32' x 32' garage with a carport out the side of it. Mr. Santabarbara stated that he was 700' off of Curry Road and only basically has one neighbor.
Chairman Barber stated that the area is very wooded with a lot of hills.
Mr. Santabarbara stated that the contour of the land does not allow him to build this garage behind the house.
Chairman Barber stated that he did not think you would even be able to see the garage from the road.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents. There were none. Chairman Barber made a motion to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 – 0.
Chairman Barber made a motion for approval of:
Variance Request No. 4113
Request of Daniel Santabarbara for a Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the construction of a 32' x 32' accessory structure in a side yard.
Per Articles IV & V Sections 280-34 & 280-51 respectively
For property owned by Daniel Santabarbara
Situated as follows: 100 Prout Lane Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map # 15.00-2-24.1 Zoned: R40
In rendering this decision, the Board makes the following findings of fact:
A public hearing was duly noticed and there were no oral or written comments received regarding the application.
This is a Type II Action under SEQRA, not requiring SEQRA review.
The Town Planner had no objections to the request.
The Board further finds that upon review of the application that the house and the garage are well off Curry Road by approximately 700'.
The topographical layout of the land renders the view of the garage virtually impossible; it is hidden mostly by woods and hills on the property.
Therefore the Board finds that the granting of this request will not have an adverse negative impact upon the neighborhood.
In granting this decision, the Board imposes the following conditions:
Adherence to the plans as submitted in terms of the placement that the Board is relying upon in granting this variance.
The Zoning Administrative Office is hereby authorized to issue the permits necessary to implement this decision.
If this variance is not exercised within one year of date of issuance, it is hereby declared to be null and void and revoked in its entirety.
Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 – 0.
Chairman Barber stated that the case of Lily Ji of 6185 Johnston Road had been postponed to 10/1/08.
MATTER OF JAMES SINKINS – 7060 SUZANNE LANE
Tom Remmert read the legal notice:
"Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Guilderland, New York, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Articles IV & V of the Zoning Law on the following proposition:
Variance Request No. 4112
Request of James Sinkins for a Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the placement of a television dish antenna in a required front yard.
Per Articles IV & V Sections 280-34 & 280-51 respectively
For property owned by James Sinkins
Situated as follows: 7060 Suzanne Lane Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map # 40.05-1-17.1 Zoned: TH
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 17th of September, 2008 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: September 8, 2008"
The file consists of the mailing list to 72 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for an area variance, the Town Planners comments, photos of the satellite dish and a depiction of the dish location on the property.
The Town Planner had the following comments: "The applicant is requesting an area variance for the placement of a satellite dish in a required front yard. The applicant should produce some documentation as to why the structure could not be placed in a rear yard or attached to the residence, which would be preferable. Otherwise, perhaps some kind of screening would help mitigate the visual impact."
James Sinkins, applicant, presented the case.
Chairman Barber asked Mr. Sinkins if he had considered other locations on the property for the satellite dish.
Mr. Sinkins replied that he had; the Direct TV gentlemen went all over the property to get a place where he could locate the dish and there was no other location. Mr. Sinkins stated that he was told that it was impossible to put the dish on the roof. Mr. Sinkins stated that there is a huge tree right behind the house.
Chairman Barber asked if the satellite dish was pointing towards the house.
Mr. Sinkins replied that it was.
Chairman Barber asked why wouldn't an antenna on the house serve the same purpose.
Mr. Sinkins stated that it would not pick up a satellite on the roof of the house.
Chairman Barber stated that he could possibly put landscaping around the front of the dish.
Mr. Sinkins stated that he had spoke with the president of the Homeowners Association and he thought that landscaping would be a good idea.
Chairman Barber asked how long the satellite dish had been there.
Mr. Sinkins stated approximately three weeks.
Chairman Barber stated that the reason he needed a variance is because the satellite dish falls within the definition of a structure and there are no structures allowed in front yards.
Chairman Barber stated that the federal statute does state that you cannot prohibit the installation but it does give some leeway in terms of where it is located.
Mr. Sinkins stated that he had asked Direct TV to provide him with a letter stating why the dish had to be installed where it is but he was still waiting for that.
Mr. Sinkins stated that he had gotten an estimate from a tree removal service and the estimate was $2500 for removal of the large tree in the back yard. Mr. Sinkins stated that the trees are not even on his lot, they are on the common lot.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents.
David Michela of 7066 Suzanne Lane stated that he was opposed to the granting of the variance; he thought that it would set a precedent and would like to see the satellite dish relocated somewhere else on the property.
Chairman Barber asked Mr. Michela if he would be opposed to landscaping to shield the dish.
Mr. Michela stated that there is virtually no way to screen the dish completely; his property sits back further and he would still see the dish.
Judy McGinn-Michela of 7066 Suzanne Lane submitted a set of pictures to the Board showing the satellite dish on the property and stated that she was also opposed to the granting of the variance.
Barbara Avgerinos of 7062 Suzanne Lane stated that she was opposed to the granting of the variance and the unsightliness of the dish.
Chairman Barber stated that the Board needs to be very careful regarding this application and would like to give some additional time to look at some of the issues, particularly the Federal Communications Commissions rulings and documentation from the applicant regarding the installation.
Chairman Barber stated that he would also like counsel to look at any legal issues that may or may not be present with respect to the federal statute.
There was discussion regarding the possibility of hiring a TDE if needed.
Chairman Barber made a motion to continue this application to October 15, 2008. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 – 0.
MATTER OF JASON CELEBUCKI – 3423 CARMAN ROAD
Sue Macri read the legal notice:
"Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Guilderland, New York, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Article V of the Zoning Law on the following proposition:
Interpretation Request No. 4111
Request of Jason Celebucki of Four C's Landscaping for an Interpretation under the Zoning Law to: determine whether or not a landscaping and lawn service business is a use permitted within a BNRP zone with a Special Use Permit.
Per Article V Section 280-56B
For property owned by John Celebucki
Situated as follows: 3423 Carman Road Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map # 15.18-3-34 Zoned: BNRP
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 17th of September, 2008 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: September 8, 2008"
The file consists of the interpretation request by Jason Celebucki, a mailing list to 37 neighboring property owners and a letter dated June 9, 2008 addressed to Mr. Celebucki at 7116 Fuller Station Road regarding his views on the proposed application.
Jason Celebucki, applicant, presented the case. Mr. Celebucki stated that in mid 1991 his brother had started a small lawn care business and in 1996 the business legally became his. Mr. Celebucki stated that he stores commercial lawn care equipment in the garage that was built back in 1997. Mr. Celebucki stated that he has two trailers and three trucks that he cannot fit in the garage but they are all hidden.
Chairman Barber stated that this is a BNRP zone and the Town Code lists uses in that zone. Chairman Barber asked Mr. Celebucki which use listed he felt that he fell under.
Mr. Celebucki replied that the closest would be architect or landscape design.
Chairman Barber stated that lists a licensed professional, but Mr. Celebucki was not licensed.
Mr. Celebucki stated that was correct.
Chairman Barber stated that legal uses, which Mr. Celebucki's is, has to find a home somewhere in the Town and the question is where. Chairman Barber reviewed the Code and stated that there are a couple of provisions, such as in the agricultural zone, the rural agricultural zone, both acres three and five.
Chairman Barber stated that in 280-13 agricultural zone, special uses, one of the uses is landscape contracting facility. Chairman Barber stated that if the use is not listed as a special use in a BNRP zone, which he isn't, then you can take two different routes. Chairman Barber told Mr. Celebucki he could apply for a use variance or apply to the Town Board for a rezone.
Mr. Celebucki stated that he has tried numerous times to hand in paperwork and has been denied every time.
Chairman Barber stated that when you are applying for an interpretation the first question is: Is Mr. Cropseys interpretation that your business does not meet one of the special uses in a BNRP zone, is that right or wrong? Chairman Barber stated that it appears that it is right. The second question is: What does that mean?
Chairman Barber asked Mr. Celebucki if he had ever tried to submit a use variance application.
Mr. Celebucki stated that he had tried numerous times.
Chairman Barber stated that the Board would send him an application for a use variance.
Chairman Barber asked Mr. Celebucki if he would like to withdraw his interpretation request and apply for a use variance.
Mr. Celebucki stated whatever he needed to keep storing his vehicles on that site.
Chairman Barber stated that he does not qualify for a special use in a BNRP zone so the interpretation by Don Cropsey was correct.
Don Cropsey stated that he thought that it was important that the Zoning Board make the interpretation because over the course of time there has been a misunderstanding about his interpretation and what the law says.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents. There were none. Chairman Barber made a motion to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 – 0.
Chairman Barber made a motion on the request for the interpretation:
"This is a request by Jason Celebucki of 4 C's Landscaping to determine whether or not a landscaping or lawn service business is a use permitted within a BNRP zone by means of a special use permit for property located at 3423 Carman Road.
The Board first notes that the Board has limited jurisdiction or responsibilities to interpret the code and they have no jurisdiction to rewrite the code. The applicant has described his business as being a landscaping business and lawn service. 280-19 of the code sets forth the uses allowed in a BNRP zone and none of the listed uses would appear to qualify. The one use that someone might think is similar is a licensed professional but as the applicant indicated, he is not a licensed professional.
The Board further notes that a landscaping business is allowed by special use permit but only in agricultural zones, rural 3 district zones and rural 5 district zones.
Therefore, the Board upholds the Zoning Administrator's determination that the landscaping and lawn service use is not a use permitted in a BNRP district. The Board however notes that the applicant has the right to apply for a use variance with this Board of to seek a rezone with the Town Board in an attempt to satisfy his needs as stated in his application."
Motion seconded by Tom Remmert. Vote 7 – 0.
There was discussion regarding the types of zoning around this property.
SIGNS:
The Board approved a 6sf building mounted sign at 1525 Western Avenue. Vote 7 – 0.
The Board approved two signs for a total of 24sf for MNB Communications at 3770 Carman Road. Vote 7 – 0.
The Board approved a 24sf building mounted identification for Little Caesars at 1800 Western Avenue. Vote 7 – 0.
The Board approved two building mounted signs for Creo' for a total of 50sf at 1475 Western Avenue. Vote 7 – 0.
The Board approved a 24sf freestanding sign at Executive Park and Fuller Road for Kaplan. Vote 7 – 0.
The case of Mark Grimm of 7 Remmington Road was postponed until October 1, 2008.
The meeting adjourned at 8:25pm.
| 
