October 1, 2020 Planning Board Minutes
Approved November 5, 2020
Thursday, October 1, 2020
The regular meeting of the Town of Porter Planning Board was called to order at 7:02 p.m. with the Pledge to the Flag.
Present: Chairperson J. Anthony Collard, Vice Chairperson Jeffrey Schulze, Member Robert Tower, Member Ryan Ross, Member Mark Fox, Code Enforcer Peter Jeffery, Planning Board Secretary Amy Freiermuth
Excused: Attorney Michael Dowd
Approval of the minutes from September 3, 2020 Planning Board meeting
A motion was made to approve the minutes as presented by Vice Chairperson Schulze and seconded by Member Tower. All in favor, motion carried.
Public hearing on Site Plan for Jill Coleman, 3745 Ransomville Road, Ransomville (former Stevenson Elementary School facility); Tax Map 62.18-1-8 for a NYS Licensed Child Care
Center
Ms. Coleman was present.
Chairperson Collard read the public hearing notice as published:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT, Zoning Chapter 200-106 (Site Plan Review) of the Town of Porter Planning Board, 3265 Creek Road, Youngstown, New York (716-745-3730) on Thursday, October 1, 2020 for the purpose of considering and hearing all interested persons concerning the following:
7:05 p.m.: APPLICATION OF JILL COLEMAN, 3745 RANSOMVILLE ROAD, RANSOMVILLE
(former Stevenson Elementary School facility); Tax Map 62.18-1-8 for a NYS Licensed Child Care
Center
Full application and site plan proposal for the above application is available for viewing at the Town Hall Building Inspector’s office during normal business hours.
Time(s) are approximate. Applicant(s) must be present.
A motion to open the public hearing was made by Member Tower and seconded by Member Fox. All in favor, motion carried.
Ms. Coleman stated that nothing had changed since the previous month’s presentation. She stated that she and the school district have agreed on a sale price, however it needs to be approved at a school board meeting. She continued that everything with the bank is going as expected.
Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that the State Health Department may need Ms. Coleman to make minor modifications to her plan regarding direct outdoor access for the infant and toddler rooms. Ms. Coleman stated she anticipated adding 8 exterior doors as presented last month.
Chairperson Collard asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak or ask questions. With no comments, a motion to close the public hearing was made by Member Fox and seconded by Vice Chairperson Schulze. All in favor, motion carried.
Code Enforcer Jeffery asked Ms. Coleman if she anticipated having signage for the building. She stated that she thought that the posts were still installed from the previous signage and would probably use those. Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that signs are permitted and that they can work out the details when she applies for her building permit. Ms. Coleman agreed.
Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that the approval of the Site Plan should be contingent on the sales transaction with Wilson Central School District. The Members agreed.
With no further discussion, a motion to approve the Site Plan as presented, contingent on the final sale from Wilson Central School District, was made by Vice Chairperson Schulze and seconded by Member Tower.
With no further discussion, roll was called:
Chairperson Collard: Yes
Vice Chairperson Schulze: Yes
Member Fox: Yes
Member Tower: Yes
Member Ross: Yes
Motion carried.
Chairperson Collard introduced former Planning Board Chairperson William McLaughlin (who was in the audience) to those in attendance.
Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for Elizabeth Rockette, 2505 Lake Road, Ransomville; Tax Map 21.18-1-29 for a Special Use Permit for a detached storage building (originally a cottage – 1950’s vintage) to a home office/guest cottage; Additionally a retroactive Area Variance for a roof projection (post & beam structure) for firewood storage, which is 1-foot from the property line
Code Enforcer Jeffery explained that Ms. Rockette had two items on the agenda — a Special Use Permit to use a detached storage building as a home office/guest cottage and a retroactive Area Variance for a roof projection that is 1’ 3” from the property line.
Ms. Rockette displayed images on her phone of the building and the roof projection. She explained that years ago, she went to the Town to determine if she needed a building permit to redo the roof of the building and was told she did not. She would like to use the building for her writing business as well as an occasional guest house for out-of-town friends and family. She stated the space would not become an overnight rental.
Ms. Rockette explained that there are no homes near her home office – only the neighbors shed. Member Ross verified that the building was already built and didn’t follow code. Ms. Rockette confirmed. Chairperson Collard asked Code Enforcer Jeffery what happens if the Board is not in favor of the Area Variance because the roofline has already been created. Vice Chairperson Schulze stated that 1-foot to the property line is close and limits access for future maintenance of the building. Ms. Rockette explained that she can walk under the roof area for her stored items and doesn’t need to go outside of that 1-foot of space.
Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that the 50-foot wide lot of non-conforming record should have between a 5 to 7½-foot setback (dependent on the height of the building). Chairperson Collard stated that Ms. Rockette is therefore requesting an approximate 6½-foot variance. The Members agreed that it was an issue that the roof projection is already built.
Ms. Rockette stated again that she was told she didn’t need a permit. Code Enforcer Jeffery stated he felt that she was told she didn’t need one to replace the roof, but would have needed one for the projection and the property line setback issue would have been addressed at that point. Ms. Rockette stated that the roof was 4’3” off the property line prior to the addition.
Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that Ms. Rockette had two items on the agenda: Special Use Permit for Home Office/Guest Cottage and Area Variance for the roof projection 1-foot from the property line.
Member Fox stated that 1-foot is too close and Vice Chairperson Schulze stated that this is an extreme request and does not allow room for maintaining the exterior without going onto the neighbors property. He further stated he does not want to set a precedent for the future with a recommendation for such a large Variance.
Member Tower reminded the Members that the Zoning Board has the ultimate decision and that the Planning Board only makes a recommendation. However, he stated that if this was an application, he would not approve it as presented.
Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that when the Zoning Board considers a Variance application, there are multiple factors they take into consideration including if there is an alternative and how significant is the request. Chairperson Collard stated that the code has a set distance and therefore the precedent is set. Member Tower stated he had concerns with the drainage from the roof because it is so close to the neighbor’s yard. Code Enforcer Jeffery stated this would have been addressed during the building permit process for the roof projection.
A motion was made to recommend that the Zoning Board of Appeals deny the Variance as presented by Member Tower and seconded by Vice Chairperson Schulze.
With no further discussion, roll was called:
Chairperson Collard: Yes
Vice Chairperson Schulze: Yes
Member Fox: Yes
Member Tower: Yes
Member Ross: Yes
Motion carried.
Code Enforcer Jeffery stated that the Members also needed to make a recommendation on the Special Use Permit for the Home Office/Guest Cottage. He stated that this was a reasonable request and the building renovations were an improvement over the past. He continued that he felt this was a good use of the facility.
Member Fox stated that it was a cottage previously and didn’t have an issue with it being used as a guest house as long as it didn’t become a rental property.
A motion to recommend that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the Special Use Permit for a Home Office/Guest Cottage was made by Member Fox and seconded by Vice Chairperson Schulze.
With no further discussion, roll was called:
Chairperson Collard: Yes
Vice Chairperson Schulze: Yes
Member Fox: Yes
Member Tower: Yes
Member Ross: Yes
Motion carried.
Attorney Dowd’s report
Attorney Dowd was absent.
Code Enforcer Jeffery’s report
Code Enforcer Jeffery’s stated he did not have a completed report for September, but would email it to the Members when it was done.
Correspondence / New / Old / Miscellaneous Business
None.
With no further discussion, a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:04 p.m. was made by Member Tower and seconded by Member Fox. All in favor, motion carried.