TOWN OF PITTSFORD
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
September 10, 2015
Zoning Board of Adjustment Members Present – Stanley Markowski – Chairman, Rick Conway – Vice Chairman, Clarence Greeno, Ed Keith, Jr., John Mitchell, Jack Orvis, and Sherry Reed.
Others Present – Atty. Gary Kupferer, Bill Herrington, Susan Herrington, Ramon Davis (7:45 PM), Kim Webster (7:45 PM), Jeff Biasuzzi – Zoning Administrator, and Kelly Giard – Recording Secretary.
S. Markowski, Chairman, called the Zoning Board of Adjustment to order at 7:04 PM. S. Markowski introduced the members of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
S. Markowski introduced the members of the Zoning Board of Adjustment and stated that the meeting was properly warned in 3 public places on August 26, 2015; on the Town website on August 27; and mailed to the abutting landowners via certified mail on August 26, 2015.
S. Markowski swore in Jeff Biasuzzi (Zoning Administrator – Town of Pittsford); Susan Herrington (retired – 28 Hudson Terrace); Bill Herrington (retired – 28 Hudson Terrace).
J. Biasuzzi stated that the neighbors have submitted written letters to the Zoning Board of Adjustment in support of Mr. & Mrs. Herrington.
S. Markowski explained that this meeting was called to review an appeal of a Notice of Zoning Violation that was issued by the Zoning Administrator for constructing outbuildings without a town permit and encroaching prescribed setbacks at property located at 28 Hudson Terrace, as submitted by Mr. & Mrs. Herrington.
J. Biasuzzi stated that the issue of the Herrington’s outbuildings was brought to his attention due to a title search as the Herrington’s are in the process of selling their property. J. Biasuzzi stated that the first building was constructed in 2010. This building was described as a freestanding woodshed on the western boundary line less than 25’ from the western boundary line. The second structure was described as an attachment to the garage.
Mr. Herrington stated that the garage was built in 1940 and the house was built in 1987.
R. Conway inquired which structure in question was built at what time. Mr. Herrington stated that the freestanding structure was built in 2010 and the garage attachment was built in 1012.
Mr. Herrington stated that when the construction on both projects occurred, there was no intention of violation. Mr. Herrington stated that he was not aware of set-backs and there was an existing structure that he wanted to replace to “look nicer”. Mr. Herrington stated that he thought of his neighbors and contacted the Mansfield’s, who reside on the western side. Mr. Herrington stated that the Mansfield’s stated no objection to the construction. Mr. Herrington stated that he was concerned with keeping the structure away from the property line and stated again that not obtaining permits was not done intentionally. Mr. Herrington stated that there were hemlocks on the western boundary line and the structures were closed in by the hemlocks.
Mr. Herrington stated that there was no other position on the property for the freestanding structure as the property is narrow and just under 1 acre. The measurements of the property is 175’ at the front; 149’ at the rear; 393’ at the north property line; and 321’ at the western property line.
Mr. Herrington stated that the structure was stained aesthetically and the neighbors had no objection to the colors.
Mr. Herrington stated that there is a chicken coop on the northern side of the garage. Mr. Herrington stated that they are hoping to close on the sale of the property on September 21, 2015 and the prospective buyers have expressed strong interest in retaining the structures.
S. Markowski inquired the location of the house in relation to the Parker Road. Mr. Herrington explained the location of the residence on a map that was presented.
R. Conway inquired the house being built in 1987 and if the necessary permits were obtained. Mr. Herrington stated that the house was built by Kit Hudson and was not aware if a permit was in place for the structure. J. Biasuzzi stated that there was no a permit in the active file, however, the title search did not turn-up the house.
R. Conway inquired if there was a different location for the structures to bring both structures into compliance with Zoning Ordinances. Mr. Herrington stated “possibly” at the center of the lot or in the front of the house, however, he felt it was better to “tuck it in” in the back.
J. Mitchell inquired if Mr. Herrington constructed the structure himself. Mr. Herrington stated that he did do the construction.
Atty. Kupferer inquired the zoning district of the property. J. Biasuzzi stated that this was the Rural district and the buildings conform with the setbacks.
R. Conway stated that the Zoning Board has had other similar situations in the area and he appreciates the contact that Mr. and Mrs. Herrington have had with their neighbors. R. Conway explained the denial of a request of a garage in the same neighborhood in 2008.
R, Conway inquired if it would be possible to contact the neighbors to possibly obtain a boundary adjustment. Mr. Herrington felt that this would cause a violation by one of the neighbors.
Mr. Herrington stated that the building would be difficult to move as it is set in concrete. S. Markowski inquired if the structure was on a concrete slab. Mr. Herrington stated that the structure was on sonnet tubes with a dirt floor.
S. Markowski stated that there could be a possibility of a neighbors dispute in the future as the properties could change ownership.
C. Greeno inquired if the setbacks were the same at the time of construction as they are now. S. Markowski stated that the setbacks have not changed.
Atty. Kupferer stated that the only issue at the moment is the violation and not a need for a variance. Atty. Kupferer stated that there would need to be an application filed, which would require a hearing, with no guarantee of approval for a variance.
Atty. Kupferer inquired if there was a lesser setback required for an accessory structure. J. Biasuzzi stated that there is no difference in the Pittsford Zoning Ordinances.
J. Mitchell inquired if there was a different place that the structure could be located. Mr. Herrington stated that the only other location would be in the driveway. S. Markowski stated that the access would be blocked.
S. Markowski inquired how many sonnet tubes were involved. Mr. Herrington stated that there are 7 and the structure has a dirt floor.
S. Markowski inquired if Mr. Herrington has researched the cost of moving the structure. Mr. Herrington stated that the potential buyers are interested in retaining the structure, however, Mr. Herrington stated that it would probably be best to remove the structure.
Mr. Herrington stated that there is a powerline 22’ behind the garage.
Motion by R. Conway and seconded by J. Mitchell to enter into Executive Session at 7:53 PM. Motion passed unanimously 7 – 0.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment exited Executive Session at 8:06 PM.
S. Markowski stated that there were no conclusions, however, the advise of the Attorney was that there would be no fines imposed currently, the neighbors will be “watching” this situation as they were denied previously, it would be possibly difficult to obtain a variance and there are 2 violations. The possible options include possibly moving the boundary lines, chance of a variance approval, or moving the structure closer to the garage.
Atty. Kupferer stated that the board was in a “tough position” and a variance takes time to obtain.
Motion by R. Conway and seconded by J. Orvis for the Zoning Board of Adjustment to give the Herrington’s 90 days to resolve the violation with no fines and after 90 days the fines would be considered. Motion passed unanimously 7 – 0.
The Herrington’s exited at 8:20 PM
The second hearing before the Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order at 8:20 PM.
S. Markowski swore in Kim Webster and Ramon Davis.
J. Biasuzzi stated that the Webster’s property currently has a Right of Way to the Whipple Hollow Road and they are proposing the construction of am 18’ X 20’ structure to replace a temporary structure in the northeast corner of the property. A permit was issued to construct this metal building, with the condition that the building was out of the 100 year flood plain.
Mr. Davis stated that he consumed the land by deed as a life lease.
R. Conway inquired if there was a submitted map of the property. J. Biasuzzi stated that the map was a FEMA map and Mr. Davis and Ms. Webster both agreed that this map was accurate of the property.
S. Markowski inquired if the Webster’s Right of Way was through the Davis property as this was not indicated on the map. The deed, page 1 was read by J. Biasuzzi.
Atty. Kupferer inquired about the infringement. Mr. Davis stated that Mr. Webster moves the fence, which is believed to be the boundary line. Mr. Davis stated that the shed was being built in front of the gate.
J. Biasuzzi inquired if the shed was going to be constructed within the 1 acre lot that is fenced for the Webster’s use. Ms. Webster stated that the shed would be constructed in that area and that Mr. Davis had no right of way to that 1 acre and uses the remaining 6 plus acres to pasture his animals.
Atty. Kupferer stated that this is not a zoning concern, however, a deed enforcement concern.
Motion by C. Greeno and seconded by R. Conway to refund Mr. Davis $50 as there is no action that can be taken by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Motion passed unanimously 7 – 0.
Motion by R. Conway and seconded by C. Greeno that this matter is not a zoning matter for action. Motion passed unanimously 7 – 0.
Motion by R. Conway and seconded by J. Orvis to adjourn at 8:53 PM. Motion passed unanimously 7 – 0.
Kelly Giard, Recording Secretary
Stanley Markowski, Chair
Richard Conway, Vice Chair
Ed Keith, Jr.