Meeting Minutes : ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

TOWN OF PITTSFORD
 ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
September 11, 2017

 

Zoning Board of Adjustment Members Present – Stanley Markowski – Chairman, Rick Conway – Vice Chairman, Ed Keith, Jr., Clarence Greeno, Nicholas Michael and Jack Orvis.  ABSENT:  Dan Adams.

Others Present – Terry Wilbur, Julie Keith, Robb Spensley, William Gallus, 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 stated that the meeting was warned in the Rutland Herald on August 29, 2017.R.

S. Markowski swore in Jeff Biasuzzi (Zoning Administrator – Town of Pittsford); Mr. Terry Wilbur (1272 Adams Road, Pittsford, VT).

Application 17-26 – Terry and Jane Wilbur to operate a Boat Sales and Storage Facility on a portion of Parcel 1130, southeast corner of Route 7 ad Pinewoods road – a non-conforming 1 +/- acre portion of the Carmela Carter   J. Biasuzzi introduced the property as being north of the motorcycle shop on Route 7 north, the property is vacant and part of the Carter Farm.  J. Biasuzzi indicated that the waterline runs through the property.

The Zoning Board of Adjustment was presented with a letter from an abutting land owner – Ed Butler.

S. Markowski inquired if Mr. Wilbur owned the property, which he indicated that he did not, however, was in the process of purchasing if the permits were approved.  Mr. Wilbur stated that the property would be mainly used for storage of boas and the sales occur on line.  C. Greeno inquired if there were any salesmen that would be located on the property.  Mr. Wilbur stated that there would be no salesmen on the property.  S. Markowski inquired how many boats would be on the property.  Mr. Wilbur stated there would be 30 – 40 boats, beginning with 10 – 15.  R. Conway stated that there were 2 proposed driveways.  Mr. Wilbur explained that there was a ditch on the property.  R. Conway inquired the entrances.  Mr. Wilbur stated that the entrances would be on the Pinewoods Road.  R. Conway inquired if the Right of Way Permit has been received from the Select Board.  J. Biasuzi stated that the 2 cuts had been applied to the Highway Department and the Select Board.

R. Conway inquired the size of the building that was included on the drawing.  Mr. Wilbur stated that this would be “a medium shed”.  R. Conway inquired the dimensions of the shed.  Mr. Wilbur stated a 10’ X 20’ shed as there was no need for an office.  R. Conway inquired if there was a Site Plan.  J. Biasuzzi stated that the application mentions a building in the future and that the sketch is too close to the waterline and the building is shown at the pine trees.

S. Markowski inquired if the ditch and wetlands have been reviewed.  J. Biasuzi indicated that there were no known wetlands on the property, however, there are ponds in the vicinity and possibly hydraulically connected.

S. Markowski inquired if there would be an aggregate surface on the field.  Mr. Wilbur indicated that there would be 2 driveways, however, if the property is not dry enough to hold the vehicles, rock would be added to the driveways and not the surface area.  S. Markowski inquired if there was a concern during the spring thaws and wet times.  Mr. Wilbur stated that if this became a mess, crushed stone would be added.

S. Markowski stated that dimensions were needed for the building.  Mr. Wilbur stated that the building would just be a shed.  S. Markowski explained that the Zoning Board of Adjustment could not just issue a generic permit for a shed as Zoning protects he neighbors.  N. Michael explained that sheds and buildings have different requirements.  Mr. Wilbur stated that the shed would be a 10’ X 15’ shed.

R. Conway inquired if Mr. Wilbur had reviewed the Pittsford Zoning Regulations as the lot size was missing and the lot size does not meet requirements.  Mr. Wilbur stated that he was working with J. Biasuzzi on the permit.

R. Conway recommended that the Zoning Board of Adjustment recess this discussion for review.  S. Markowski stated that he did not believe that the information was sound enough for the Zoning Board of Adjustment to form a decision.

Mr. Wilbur inquired if 30 boats was too many for this lot.  S. Markowski stated that there was no way to determine this.

J. Orvis inquired if the boats would be new or used.  Mr. Wilbur indicated that the boats would be used and on trailers.  N. Michael inquired if the boats would be shrink wrapped.  Mr. Wilbur indicated that they would be wrapped in the winter.

S.  Markowski explained that the Zoning Regulations were done by the Planning Commission.

Mr. Wilbur exited at 7:37 PM.

Motion by R Conway and seconded by N. Michael to recess the hearing until 8:30 PM.  Motion passed unanimously 6 – 0.

Application 17 – 30 – Ed Keith Jr. requests a variance to install an open deck that would encroach into prescribed setbacks.  The deck is to improve safety and access ot the main entrance to their residence at 162 Elm Street.

Ed Keith recused himself from this hearing.  S. Markowski swore in Ed Keith, Jr., Julie Keith, and Jeff Biasuzzi.

Mr. Keith explained that this project was to remove the front 2 steps and deck to the front door and remove the 2 railings to allow for safer entry into the residence.  The walkway and 2 steps would be removed and replaced with wooden steps.

R. Conway inquired why the request for variance.  J. Biasuzzi stated that wood constitutes a structure and requires a permit whereas landscaping does not require a permit and the change in the walkway causes a “grey area”.  C. Greeno inquired if there was 40’ to the edge of the road.  Mr. Keith stated yes.  R. Conway inquired if this was located in the village or the town.  Mr. Keith indicated that this was the village.  R. Conway indicated that this property was built by Allied Power under the Village Zoning.  J. Biasuzzi indicated that the walkway was constructed “pre zoning”.

C. Greeno inquired if the walkway went into the drive.  Mr. Keith indicated that the drive goes right to the steps.  Mrs. Keith indicated that the railing goes to the house and that the steps would be no closer than the steps are now.  C. Greeno stated that there is 27’ to the traveled portion of the road.

J. Biasuzzi stated that there is no change in structure or use.  Mr. Keith stated that there would be the wooden replacement on crushed stone that would be placed on part of the walkway that would be dug out.

Motion by C. Greeno and seconded by R. Conway that the variance application was not necessary as the 10’ X 13’ wooden walkway was replacing the current walkway.  Motion passed 5 – 0 – 1 (Keith).

Mrs. Keith exited at 8:00 PM.

Application 17 – 31 – Robb Spensley and Evan Chadwick request a variance for an entry porch within the prescribed setback, to improve access to the front entry at 3232 US Route 7.  S. Markowski swore in Robb Spensley (201 Furnace Road, Pittsford, VT  attorney) and Jeff Biasuzzi.

S. Markowski explained that this was a non-conforming porch and asked Mr. Spensley to explain the project.  Mr. Spensley explained that this was the main entry at the porch, which was originally a “slab” of granite and not safe in wet conditions.  Mr. Spensley explained that the granite was originally in the basement and was used for the steps, however, when the roof was removed, the rain went into the house, now the roof allows for safe entrance to the structure by protecting the steps and the residence.

Mr. Spensley stated that there is currently a violation of the setback as the ramp goes further than the proposed porch.   R. Conway inquired if the step was in the Right of Way.  Mr. Spensley stated that the new porch was 4’ into the Right of Way making a 21’ setback and not the 25’ setback, as required by current zoning.

R. Conway inquired the age of the structure.  Mr. Spensley stated that the structure is pre 1850.

S. Markowski stated that the Zoning Board of Adjustment needed to review the criteria for the variance.  Mr. Spensley stated that the step outside was a unique circumstance as the step was unsafe if not protected; (B) – needed a safe entrance; (C) – did not create a situation; (D) – did not alter hopes for improvement; (E) – was a minimal deviation.

Motion by R. Conway and seconded by N. Michael to approve the variance without conditions.  Motion passed unanimously – 6 – 0.

Mr. Gallus was present to request the Select Board to “put on hold” the Kennedy Zoning Permit for failure to produce a letter from stormwater specialist.

S. Markowski explained that the Zoning Board of Adjustment makes the decision and if the allegation/appeal are not properly done on the permit, the situation is referred to the Zoning Administrator.

Mr. Gallus stated that Mr. Kennedy stated at the appeal that 1 – 2% of stormwater was to hit the Gallus property.

R. Conway explained that the Zoning Board of Adjustment is a quase judicial board and feels that the Zoning Board of Adjustment should not go further until a future date/time to consult legal counsel and contact the other involved party.

S. Markowski stated that this was an enforcement issue and violation of permit, which is in the Zoning Administrator’s jurisdiction.

Mr. Gallus stated that J. Biasuzzi indicated to him that the Kennedy’s were notified of the meeting at the same time as Mr. Gallus.  Mr. Gallus stated that he spoke with Mr. Biasuzzi in October and December and sent e-mails, and in February, he was informed by Mr. Biasuzzi that he could not make a person comply with giving the letter from the engineer.  Mr. Gallus stated that he has no faith in Mr. Biasuzzi.  Mr. Gallus explained that he had arrived for the June Zoning Board of Adjustment meeting with a letter for review, and the meeting was cancelled.  Mr. Gallus stated that he submitted the letter to the Select Board and only wants compliance of the agreement with the Zoning Board of the Adjustment.

J. Biasuzzi stated that the board has minutes, Finding of Fact, the letter to the Select Board and the appeal meeting request letter.  S. Markowski asked J. Biasuzzi to move the matter along for the condition enforcement.  J. Biasuzzi stated that the letter was not a condition.  R. Conway expressed that J. Biasuzzi is the Enforcement Officer in this matter.

Mr. Gallus stated that the Board and Mr. Kennedy had an agreement to provide the engineering letter.  S. Markowski inquired what it would take to get the correspondence.  J. Biasuzzi indicated that a violation of the permit could be issued and appealed to the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

R. Conway explained that the Zoning Board of Adjustment can not advise legally, however recommended that Mr. Gallus contact someone to assist.

Mr. Gallus stated that he just wants the letter with calculations for the stormwater for impact on his property and wants to protect his property and be fair.

Mr. Gallus exited at 8:43 PM.

Motion by R. Conway and seconded by C. Greeno to enter into Deliberative Session to discuss the Wilbur application.  Motion passed unanimously 6 – 0.

The Zoning Board of Adjustment exited Deliberative Session at 8:57 PM.

Motion by R. Conway and seconded by C. Greeno to consult with an attorney with regard to the application.

The Zoning Board of Adjustment recessed the hearings until Monday, September 25, 2017 at 7:00 PM.

Meeting recessed at 9:02 PM.

 

Respectfully submitted

Kelly Giard, Recording Secretary

 

Following the seven day comment & review period by ZBA Members, the Chairman is duly authorized to approve these Minutes on behalf of the Zoning Board of Adjustment;

 

Approved this __________ day of September 2017, by:

 

___________________________

Stanley Markowski, Chair