TOWN OF MACEDON

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

April 16, 2014

The Town of Macedon Zoning Board of Appeals meeting was held on Wednesday, April 16, 2014, 7:30 p.m., at the Town Complex, 32 Main Street, Macedon, NY. Present were Chairman Warren Jeffries and members Carl Eligh, Brian Frey, John Gravino and Ronald Santovito. Also present was Board Clerk Susan Bush. Absent were Councilwoman Sandy Pagano and Town Engineer/CEO Scott Allen.

Chairman Jeffries called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. He then explained the purpose for which the Board serves and read the Legal Notice as it appeared in the Times.

PUBLIC HEARING:

Z-02-14 – Zaretsky – 1035 Mayflower Drive – Area Variance – Section 135 Schedule I – Side & front setbacks and Section 135-162-B – Expansion of non-conforming building – Applicants Bruce Zaretsky and Sharon Coates were present to address the Board. Mr. Zaretsky explained they have a 1,600 sq. ft. home with a one-car garage. They would like to build a mudroom and add a second bay to their garage. At present, the entry into their home is directly into their dining room. As landscapers, they often arrive home with muddy boots/clothing and would like to have a mudroom where they can remove and store those items.

They have taken into account comments from the two previous variance requests in preparing this plan. The proposed garage addition would be 10’6” minimum off the side property line at the front and 12’6” off the side property line at the rear. They have also moved the garage 5 ft. farther back to 58 ft. from the road and 68 ft. from the lot line. Mr. Zaretsky cited examples of homes in the neighborhood that are closer to the road, as well as other variances that had been granted for side and front setbacks. Due to the location of their septic system and with their living room behind the garage, they cannot build anywhere else.

Mr. Zaretsky noted that previously there had been concerns about noise, fumes and lights. He felt being able to park his second vehicle in the garage would reduce any noise, other than the garage door going up, and there would be no fumes. There will be no large windows on the side of the garage, and there would be very little light on the side of the property.

The differences in the applications where reviewed: The first application requested a 6 ft. side setback which included a mudroom, garage and expansion of the dining room. The second application requested an 8 ft. side setback and moved the garage forward. The present request has a 10’6” side setback, the front setback has been reduced by 5 ft., and the dining room expansion has been eliminated. Again, Mr. Zaretsky stated they could not build onto the back because their living room is behind the garage.

In response to questions regarding drainage, Mr. Zaretsky explained they capture rainwater in a barrel to be used/kept on site. There is also a pipe that discharges water from the french drain around the garage foundation. This water goes into the swale between the properties. He stated the neighbor’s downspouts also discharge into the same swale. If the variance is approved, Mr. Zaretsky stated he would like to install a french drain to direct the swale water into the front culvert.

The neighbor from 1043 Mayflower Drive was present to speak in support of this application. She owns the property north and behind 1035 Mayflower. She stated Mr. Zaretsky and Ms. Coates have improved the property during their ownership and felt confident they would do a good job with an addition.

A neighbor from 581 Lexington Drive also spoke in support of the Zaretsky/Coates application.

Ms. Coates then came forward with letters of support from neighbors at 1003 Mayflower Drive, 1051 Mayflower Drive, 581 Lexington Drive, 583 Lowell Drive, 1043 Mayflower Drive, 599 Lexington Drive and 1016 Mayflower Drive.

The resident at 1025 was present and represented by two family members who then spoke in opposition to the granting of these variances. They felt the same reasons for denying the previous two applications also applied to this one. The proposed addition would be too close to their parents’ bedroom and would impact the value of their parents’ home. They also noted that others in the neighborhood who supported this application would not be impacted to the same degree as their parents. They also cited a variance that was granted many years ago to build an addition at 1035 Mayflower Drive. They had agreed with the previous variance, but felt they should not have to have a second variance granted.

· Town Board – Member absent

· Planning Board – The Board once again recognized a modified request and the homeowner’s

need for additional storage space. However, they felt there was insufficient side setback,

and this action could set a precedent.

· SEQR – Not required at Appeals level

· Wayne County Planning Board – Referral not required

There was no one else to speak for or against the granting of these variances.

MINUTES:

A motion to approve the 02-19-14 minutes was made by Carl Eligh, seconded by John Gravino. All in favor; none opposed; minutes approved.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

Z-02-14 – Zaretsky – 1035 Mayflower Drive – Area Variance – Section 135 Schedule I – Side & front setbacks and Section 135-162-B – Expansion of non-conforming building – A motion was made by John Gravino, seconded by Ron Santovito, to approve these variances per the application. The Board members then discussed past instances where similar requests had been approved or denied. Mr. Eligh had concerns regarding the drainage. However, Chairman Jeffries felt that issue was not within the scope of the ZBA. The Chairman also noted that the applicant has modified his plans three times and has increased the side setback to 10’6”.

The five factors were then reviewed: There would not be an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties as the side setback had been modified to more than 10 ft.; benefit sought could not be achieved through another feasible method; requested variance is substantial; would not create an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood; difficulty was self-created.

Roll Vote: Eligh – yes; Frey – yes; Gravino – yes; Santovito – yes; Jeffries – yes. Therefore, these variances are granted.

ADJOURNMENT:

A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Carl Eligh, seconded by Ron Santovito. All in favor; none opposed; meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan Bush

Clerk to the Board