Zoning Board Meeting

publication for all items with that um open up for a call of attendance Mrs Volo here Mr how here Mr short here Mr CA here Mr lagner here Mr Taylor here Mr artusa here I can get everybody stand for the pledge of allegiance aliance to the flag of the United States America and to the Republic for it stands Nation God [Music] indivisible uh with that um start with the first item did you want me to read it in again please all right six 71 Willow Lane accessory structure located at 671 Willow Lane applicant Brian bishoping is requesting area variances to allow side setback less than what is required and to allow the placement of an accessory structure to be near to the front of

property line than the rear line of the main residence associated with the construction of a 500 ft detached wood frame structure on a46 acre parcel having SP number 065 1 3-2-1 located in an R3 single family residential district under sections 350-12 and 35-36 of the code of the town of Webster hey Brian hello how are you tonight good um want to present the changes that you have made uh to the board um actually just uh going back to last meeting the last thing we were talking about is a rendering of what things were going to look like so the uh packet that I submitted we could jump right to page 33 I believe and uh that I think is what Y is there any way to get that up on these screens what it is on the screen I what happened the yeah on the that's not showing up on these screens is that oh wait a second possible right maybe it's not it's not

on was it on earlier no no I yeah it's on that TV screen can't see that TV screen you got you got a mirror I'll there you go we'll rotate the building okay I I mean I I see the the image that we're looking at at least so for the board cuz uh my pages don't have page numbers it is it is in the middle of the yeah it's uh this image here all right yeah so if you're thumbing through it there is the June I think it's June 11th presentation if you go through all of those images then it goes to the rendering once again I'm Adam Cummings uh helping out my friend Brian on this application while you're looking I did look at the old minute so I apologize in the past when I didn't introduce myself so find it yep I mean I'm I'm good as everybody have a copy of it I was going to try and find some time to find it to find the button should screens aren working I don't know there it

is so the one on the bottom is it shows the um porch Edition um that was discussed at the last meeting as well as the uh accessory structure uh we don't have quite the skill set to Overlay them with Photoshop or illustrator or whatever is used to get it on there so it's just a cutout but tried to show it in both of them um and and that's the softening up of it with the the siding matching the two um the color uh right now now is a light gray cuz he can't or doesn't want to match the 1962 green color so there is a plan if there is a budget sometime in the future to eventually change it but this is a neutral enough color and it's not too contrasting to the neighborhood uh to put that one in there so they kind of blend together but once again the rendering down below does not show all the windows didn't get into that level of detail but that's why both in were given to show that so on the bottom he's not looking to propose to take any windows out oh now you lost all of it so if you're looking at the paper

copies just to clarify that bottom one he other than the porch Edition he's not looking to make any changes to the main structure of the house at this juncture that's just a rendering that didn't take the level of detail to do that needs a licensed AR te to do that type of detail so out of curiosity um and I was not at the October meeting uh I did have the opportunity to listen through um the meeting itself um but I was at the meeting prior I believe it was the September meeting when we talked about it and we talked about softening this up we had talked about trying to get this to fit within a residential neighborhood uh and I'm looking at uh elevations that that were received back in July and I'm looking at the the rendering and I can't see a difference between what was submitted in July and the rendering so the main change was the sighting originally was the vertical that you'd see in more of a commercial building it's still metal siding but this one's horizontal to match it it's still the instead of a 4in siding like you'd see on a residential so uh his has got the 9 in so yeah these

were materials that weren't allowed to be added at the meeting because we were going to bring them at the same day um but we are looking to do the wider horizontal um orientation of the metal siding um light fixtures just didn't make it on the rendering because but there would be light fixtures above the doors um but they didn't make it on to that one you still maintaining the 20 foot yes interior height well it's the roof height so he he's maximized his footprint with height and the square footage of what the town code allows y now is the 20 foot the to the outside to the top of the peak taller point of the so the roof line the way the toel and code reads is to the midpoint of that gabled roof it's not the peak how tall physically is the actual tallest point of the building it's 21 4 in yes 21 fo4 so an original rendering had it at 238 but it it was recalculated it's

going to be 21t 4 in but once again that's due to the meeting the town code height of 20 ft measured to the midpoint of that sloping Ridge and this one is the rendering is drawn to scale with the perspective view of what it would look like to each other to uh the two Builders there's no perspective in our packet well this perspective of what you're looking at here oh okay no I don't have a perspective view from an airplane coming at it this is that's an aerial I'm just talking about a perspective yeah no so the perspective is from the road we don't have an aerial or an ortho image perspective understand okay other questions from the board I just got a couple comments seems to me we've been going over this now for four five months whatever it is and the board's been requesting ing different things every time uh

renderings samples uh suggested height difference exterior appearance things like that and we haven't always gotten what we've been asking for or suggested is there some reason for kind of sidestepping some of our requests or yeah I don't know that there's any sidest stepping but I am following town code kind of the what I presented for the uh I think it's 43 pages is I'm following the way the town wants me to do things um I didn't have to get elevation drawings yet but I did go out and do that on my own just to get ready and then I did hand them over and it's it's not stuff that's required at this point for something that's less than $20,000 to construct uh but to to your point if it was a code you wouldn't be here you'd be you'd have your building permitted be up so you haven't provided everything that we've asked because you're the one asking for Relief so we're trying to do our best job in

weighing whether that request merits that relief so it's not like you've done everything that the code ask you to you're asking for relief from some of the code requirements so that's why we've asked for extra information from location yeah it's actually two variances I I would like to fine-tune that one back in I I appreciate and recognize that the town is trying to impose architectural standards that don't exist opinions of what you'd like it to look like but I would like to point out that this is the zoning board of appeals trying to find the minimum variance required not necessarily a denial or an acceptance or an approval what you hear about it's proximity to the back line of the house and the side lock line I understand you're trying to look at it in terms of the secret evaluation and the area variance part of community character but once again it's on the variance and the town code allows it so I disagree that it's been sidest stepping for an application that at the first meeting was pointed out he's trying to see if he can get the variance approval to actually do the project without investing too much time and effort Adam I I appreciate that um you

know and I don't think this board I don't think it's lost on this board that the variance is um for the location um but this board does have the opportunity to take into consideration uh the impact on the neighbor on the neighborhood itself um which is why we the board has been asking for um softening of the structure uh to help it fit into a residential neighborhood over the course of uh the multiple meetings that we've had um and so with that um if there's any other comments from the board at this point if not I'm going to open it up to uh public if there's any public comments all right uh with that I um open it up to the public for public comments please note that uh there is a five minute limit on um individual comments um with that come on up please uh state your name and uh address my name is Jan armantrout I live

directly across the street at 670 Willow Lane and have attended every one of these meetings but one um I am dismayed that this information that's being shown right now was not available on the website as late as today so there was no chance for me to make comment I am the person as I said who will be most affected I have um discussed with Mr artuso and several other people that there are certainly things that could as the person walking out of her front door every day um make this a possibility of a project certainly the height and the fact that it looks you know in the matter you call a spade a spade and that looks like an extra garage to me and there's already in commercial equipment around the property on a very routine basis um I had specifically suggested that the building be rotated so that the garage door entrance would open to the driveway um I see even that sort of a moderate change that could make a project workable there's no room for any sort of compromise in this I if we drive the

neighborhood and I believe all of you have maybe multiple times appreciate the amount of work that you have put into this um that's a commercial looking building in a very residential neighborhood these houses are now like $300,000 houses they're like the smaller family room bath and a half two and a half bath bedrooms um lovely neighborhood um mostly built in the 60s and very early 70s and we want to preserve it um my fears amongst other things with this sort of thing is that if a person operating a business out of the home in one instance gets an approval for this building every other Tradesman in the neighborhood's going to have a request at before you and before you know it the neighborhood looks like older parts of the the village of Webster um I have made my um concerns repeatedly to you guys I don't see softening there like I said I don't see the building rotated I see a garage a big garage a tall garage and um I would ask that some other consideration be given if it's such an ideal building for the

neighborhood put out on the other side of the house plenty of room there and then I'm not looking at the commercial Equipment Plus the garage that has routinely stored on that side of the property and again I thank you for the amount of work and time that you folks have given all this thank you is there any anybody else to speak for or against the project any comments from the public all right with that bring it back to the board a uh final comments or questions that the board may have and I'm going to recommend that um we've move forward with a uh a decision uh at today's meeting we've uh gone through this process multiple times um multiple iterations um I'm recommending that we move forward with a with a decision unless anybody here disagrees no I agree with that okay I I guess I still have a concern with the height because the building is not located where the code indicates that the building should be located I

drove that entire neighborhood from halt road to 250 throughout the past weeks and did not see another other than a barn on 250 did not see another two it's in essence a two-story Building without a middle floor um a two-story accessory structure and any of that building development and and to me that's the harshest part of it is because it's much closer to the road than it typically would be based on on what the accessory structure code States is there any way to soften the look of it by reducing the height by 5T or 7 ft or it it just I know you want to put shelves in I know but but it's still much more storage than what you have right now and it would make it just less big gray wall so can I pose well first I want to one you come up to the microphone please so we can Capt yeah sorry about that thank you um one thing that keeps being brought up and and I'll um add to to Brian's part known Brian

for uh 24 years now uh since we went to college together and he has been a licensed electrician that whole time he does not wholly run his business out of there but ever since we were teenagers he does as an electrician business act as an electrician there he does not operate his business out of it there are times he doesn't even have a truck that has the business name on it there are a lot of other ones that go in so I just want to point that out that he's not going to operate a commercial business business out of this uh the other part in terms of um what um board member Volo just asked about is to point out with the way the code is it's not drawn on here but if it was placed in the backyard where it could be to be code compliant it just shifts it back the 10 or 12 feet back and 7 feet over so the height of it by the code that's allowed would only diminish it by about a foot and a half in terms of the view that you're seeing there because he does have room in the back well it's not a back corner because he's a corner lot so he's got two sidey yards so he does have room back there but it's because the electric service is why he's electing to put it here so in terms of the height while I do appreciate the points you're making on that the code does allow it to

be in that converging of the two side lots and in terms of a height impact while no other buildings have it it is possible to put it in there and still receive a building permit but to the point of Ryan answering the question of your request to minimize it which once again is not a variance request of the height because he is meeting the code I'll ask him if he'd entertain it I mean I I am looking to I am looking to maximize my storage so things started off one way and then when I found out that the way I wanted to do it was an accessory structure I looked at the those um that tell code for an accessory structure and that's this is what I've come up with um location is uh makes sense on the property and I think with the metal sighing flipped horizontal and the existing metal sighting that's on the primary structure is 8 in and the new metal sighting is going to be in so I think with the I believe it's about 30 32 ft from

the existing garage to the side nearest side of the accessory structure uh you're never going to notice that difference in one inch for the the metal siding um so I think it's it's going to blend right in with the existing structure and you know the exist the South Wall of the existing structure that f faces mil Creek Run is it has two windows other than that it's 22 1/2 ft of metal siding okay um um so I'd like to just note um that this is a a type two uh no further review is necessary under uh Seeker um pursu uh section 617.980.9025 um with that um guess uh looking for a a motion I guess or um motion on the looking for a second yeah thank you thank you

Don okay Mr short I Mr how Mrs Volo hi Mr CA hi Mr so uh now a motion for the variance um let me ask one the neighbor across the street uh asked that the garage door be located towards the existing garage would you be willing to do that um with the the the reason the structure is 20 x 25 is so that my boat will fit in okay if the garage door is on the other side I don't have enough room to swing I just need notation on there that's it no no no public session is done over at this point um so need a um guess we want to go through the the findings um and need to a motion for the variance um as I I know if you want to read it in or or for 671 will Lane accessory structure

located uh at 671 um this is for an area erance to allow a side setback less than what is required and to allow the placement of the accessory structure to be nearer to the front property line that in the rear line of the main residence associated with construction of a 500t detached woodf framed uh structure on a 0.46 acre parcel having SPL number d211 located in an R3 C family residential district under sections 350-12 35-36 of the code of the town of Webster did we determine what those setbacks were uh I believe we have and I have to go back through uh there was 44 um no I found the motion it was approved at 5T from the north lot line and 43.4 ft from the front or east lot line no m

so anybody want to do the uh the findings did we have a second huh did we have a second or did you not make a motion we haven't done the I haven't uh haven't made a motion we haven't done the findings yet I'm sorry to to do that no all right um so uh you know findings that that we have to go through um kind of standard uh is this request out of character in the neighborhood um based on all the conversations that I have heard uh from this board over multiple meetings this request is out of character uh for this neighborhood um there uh there will not be a detriment created uh to nearby properties um you know again and from from uh hearing from this board um you know there's potential visual impacts uh to nearby NE uh to nearby neighbor uh properties um benefit is not achievable by any other method um it is not um the

applicant is attempting to uh get all his materials uh and Equipment stored inside um to meet uh requirements of the town code uh one way doing that one of the only ways of doing that is to provide a uh a structure to be able to put his uh equipment and materials inside uh and build a structure um this request is not substantial um this request does meet uh the town um code uh from a size standpoint um but not from a location standpoint uh there is no adverse physical or environmental impacts to the site uh or the neighborhood um I would agree with that other than uh the the first two items uh previously identified uh at a character of the neighborhood and detriment created to nearby properties um the difficulty was not self-created um and it's not right I mean at the end of the day uh the applicant wants uh has has equipment he's uh been able to uh acquire uh over time it needs be able to store that uh not a self-created uh

element uh and this uh it's not a uh is this is not a uh desirable change um Mr chair if I may I believe you you do mean that this is a self created difficulty thank you yes uh further um if you could I I think it' be helpful to include some of the facts of the particular project that you find that uh result in undesirable change the board has noted the the height of the structure the materials that are used having an industrial look uh I would suggest that you would incorporate some of those specific facts into the findings okay thank you um going back to the uh the character in the neighborhood neighborhood uh is a a typical residential neighborhood um typical uh sighting uh throughout the neighborhood Dormers um maximum height of uh structure stres are typically a two-story structures um the structure that was uh presented before this board is a uh metal sided uh pole barn structure low roof uh low slope roof um no Dormers very flat front uh face uh very industrial uh looking um

these were the materials that were presented to this board over the course of the last 6 months um with very little uh modifications uh made um to accommodate any any adjustments um think that I think that about covers it one more thing Mr chair I if I understood the board correctly um the the request is substantial in so much as it's the combination of the the size and the uh materials used coupled with the um reducing the setback from the front Road would that be accurate that would be accurate yes so I guess with that um make a motion um I make a motion uh for a variance uh for area variances uh at 67 uh 671 Willow Lane accessory structure um with a was it a side setback of 5 feet and a front setback of was it 43 feet grin is that right 43.4 43.4

feet do I have a second is your motion to approve or deny the application for the area Mr chair deny to deny second Mr SCH um I agree Mr Santa um I agree to deny it yeah the motion is to deny so the response from the board be I thank you I I Mrs w i Mr how hi Mr light hi Ryan um unfortunately uh you have the response from the board um your application for uh area variance has been denied for uh the structure um I believe it's a six-month uh period before you can come back before the board is that correct Josh one year one year unless there's substantial uh changes is that correct correct i' I'd like to correct that I believe he can't come back ever unless there is a substantial change to the application to

the zoning board of appeals the reference in our code is one one year one year it's one year in our code unless there's some meaningful change that would right indicate the fresh application okay well thank you the board for all your consideration on this obviously disappointed with the decision but thank you for all the time and effort appreciate it thank you one more piece of evidence was was provided to us saying plan oh okay yes can that be included please with the findings yes sir was October I missed that one okay all right um our next application uh water viiew Apartments phase three all right Waterview Apartments phase three located in the northwest corner of

Willow Point Way and nautical mile drive applicant Legacy Development Company Incorporated is requesting area variances to allow front setbacks less than what is required and a district buffer area less than what is required associated with the construction of six buildings plus a community center total of 56 units each two stories in height on a proposed 13.15 acre parcel having SP number 093.0 6-3 6411 located in an mhr medium high residential district under section 35-14 of the code of the town of Webster how's it going good evening I'm Chris Nadler general counsel from markv Enterprises with us here tonight we have David Cox from pasero our design engineer and Chris Maro the president of markv Enterprises and owner of Legacy development the owner of the property at issue here as you know we've gone through several design iterations on this project over the years in the 1980s this

parcel was approved for a seven story 158 unit apartment building along with the approval of phase one which consists of 35 tow houses and phase two which consists of 62 two tow houses earlier this year we proposed to the town two three story apartment buildings containing 90 total units we participated in sketch plan review with the planning board and we came before the zoning board and heard feedback from both boards as well as feedback from our neighbors and uh other members of the public we took that feedback to Har as you can see and redesign the project uh completely as you can see it's significant reductions uh in size scope and number of units but more importantly we are presenting townhouse style Apartments so it's more in keeping with the character of the neighborhood what we're proposing now is 56 townhouse style Apartments each with their own garage

separate entrances driveway a clubhouse a dog park and Sport Court for use of the of the community this is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood what's already there uh one thing we are proposing as well does this one show it um and I wanted uh this is a new a recent change to the plans there will be one single entrance onto mchan instead of six separate driveways the build building will remain in the same location but the driveways will converge into one single entrance there will be an extensive landscape buffer between the driveways and mchan road to Shield our neighbors and the road uh additionally we'll be adding four parking spots in front of the clubhouse um some of the challenges we faced in in putting together this this plan was is that there are three Road front frontages surrounding the property and there's utility easements uh along the Eastern portion of the property coming from mchan over uh to the existing tow houses um we did manage what I think is

a really great plan that's in keeping with the neighborhood that those revisions eliminated two of our variance requests um and now we're left with front setback variances that we're seeking uh the largest front setb variance would be 18.7 ft where a 75t front setback is required that's on Maritime Drive this building here along Maritime Drive it's important to remember that from the building to the property line is 18.7 Ft that's an 18.7 ft foot setback from the property line but but from the property line to the road there's another 17.5 ft so the total distance from the building to the road is 36.2 ft most of the buildings in Phase 1 and Phase 2 have between 30 and 40 foot driveways setbacks from the building to the road um some of the town houses in phases 1 and two have as little as 27 ft from the townhouse to the road so what we're proposing is definitely in keeping

with the character of the neighborhood um if we didn't have these if we if the board didn't Grant the variance uh we'd have 100 foot long driveways 70 ft back from the property line and then another 25 ft to the road that would be substantially more pavement and substantially less Green Space Josh can you put the um overhead the aerial with the uh arrows on it that that one as you can see from this map we're also requesting District buffer setback from an mhr multif family residential zoning District to a residential zoning District it's a 38.5 ft setback where a 100t district setback buffer is required similarly to the driveway setbacks we have an additional 22 ft between the border between the two zoning districts which is the property boundary and mchu and drive which is 22 ft away so our buildings to mchan is 58.5 ft the single family homes on mchan

are across the street facing the front of the townhouse building the distance from the build from our building to the mchan houses is at least 152 ft away there 152 ft between the proposed building and the existing homes on uh mchan again there will be a landscape buffer uh between the homes and the proposed building the distance between the existing town houses in Phase One and phase two and houses along mchan is is as little as 66 ft between buildings we're proposing 152 ft between buildings and what's already there in the neighborhood is 66 ft so it's definitely in keeping with the neighborhood we met with the planning board for another sketch plan review to to go over the proposed plan uh last week and they they received it favorably I understand at least uh some of them have have indicated that to you in correspondence um and we're looking forward to coming back with them next month for site plan approval um our you know we went back

and designed something that's in keeping with the neighborhood and I think that uh the variance requests are absolutely reasonable David and I are here to answer any questions the board might have well uh I want to say thank you for um heaing our comments and making adjustments uh accordingly um I'm struggling seeing um that that graphic and that graphic is uh we don't have that graphic uh and our screens are not working so if you have copies I would greatly appreciate that um as part of your on a five board well there's only five of us thank you app thank you thanks you indicated uh significant um plantings of vegetation uh along thean Drive yes sir um if I'm reading this plan correctly those plantings are happening outside of your property line is am I reading this correctly yes that's correct we'll work with the town to allow that in the right way what kind of uh vegetation um would you be

anticipating yeah mostly uh Street trees mostly Street trees is the answer so you believe that 10 Street trees is an adequate landscape buffer I think given the distances here given the fact that these are townhouse style apartment buildings that have individual garages individual entrances that's how streets are created is you know two residential structures facing each other here we actually have a lot more distance between the houses mchan and the one building that faces mchan so but your idea substantial landscape buffer is 10 trees then right and there's Foundation plannings as well well that's not a that's not in the buffer I'm just trying to make sure that I understand what you're presenting I am not familiar with what a a street tree is so if you can explain that to me I apologize yeah give me one second find the uh landscape table so um sweet sunset maple trees uh honey locust Black Gum and then

we have uh Robin Hill Serviceberry raising Sun Redwood Fringe Tree real star so all all trees that are going to lose their leaves in the winter time uh it sounds like if I'm not and actually they're all deciduous material and uh the vast majority of them actually large shrubs not really they can be they legally be called trees but they're more shrub likee in size and appearance okay um what is the overall general height the max height that they these this vegetation grows yeah so the um obviously the maple uh 35 to 40 ft tall the honey locust 30 to 50 ft the Black Gum is is 30 to 50 ft and then the service bury is 20 to 25 uh the red buot is 8 to 12 The Fringe Tree is 18 to 20 and the star magnolia is 10 to 15 and the Egg recort lilac is 8 to 10 gotcha thank you I appreciate that other comments from the board questions so with just to make sure I

understand with the revised driveway of the building that is closest to muan um or the one that faes mchan that 38 Point distance Remains the Same there is no change other than I'm just consolidating the driveways that's correct okay is there any other comments from the board at this point the required buffer is 100 ft correct that's correct and the proposed subbs to the buildings to MCU eight uh is it 38 ft is that am I reading that correctly yeah 38 41.8 I believe 41.8 is what you're seeing no there's a uh 38 point I'm mchu there's a 38.5 and then a 41 the building facing mchan will be 41 is 41 the one to the left on the screen is 38.5 I gotta so the side of the building to the left is going to be at 38 ft 38.5 ft yes I got

you that building by the way faces the pump house can't see it on this map but that's directly across from the pump house understood okay all right just so I understand a buffer between districts does that have to be green space yes without anything in it or am I treating it like a setback CU I had assumed buffer was Green Space okay that's correct so really we don't have so that that it does not include Ingress and egress though buffer does not include Ingress and egress it allows it allows Ingress and ESS okay all right but the road cannot run parallel with the buffer it can run through it perpendicular but not parallel so the unit that is facing mchan you have a road that is running parallel to the buffer that's correct right so the buffer would start at the edge of the drive the drive the drive once it starts to run parallel so with the pre previous plan where the driveways ran individually to muan that was permitted but having a

single Ingress egress on mchan now changes the dimension technically to the buffer that's correct it's a balancing here okay I just want Don just for clarification why would that um change that because it's still Ingress egress and Ingress it does but occupies more space of the buffer so eliminates any type of screening that uh potential screening that may be uh needed well I just want to make the board aware that this particular change of consolidating the driveways was made at the planning board's request as well as the highway superintendent who wants to limit the number of curb cuts to the public road yes thank you let me say it's a b yep no actually I think it works it works much better than the August submission than the two big block buildings this is far and above a much easier and more palatable design I think and I think it'll work Mally doesn't work better I think it when you're going down the street it'll look nicer and More in character with the surrounding

neighborhood with that I'm going to open up to the public comment unless anybody else has any other questions at this point I'll bring it back to the board after all right uh I open up to public comment for for this anybody want to speak um so a total of uh five minutes per per per uh individual so I'm David Guyer I live at 400 mchan Drive uh my property the southeast corner of my property is right at that curve where the uh road comes in by the pumping station um I did see am I correct that you've redesigned the road so it doesn't go across my property which I appreciate um is there supposed to be a buffer between my property and a private road I don't know the town code for that I I don't know that the answer to that we can look that up so if the snow plow was plowing it would plow onto my property not that I use that as my driveway but it is literally going onto my property so I don't know if that's a again can be considered um further redesigned to push that road further away from the southeast corner of our

property you're on the north side of mchan is that correct I am I unfortunately I cannot see that screen so yeah so where the road Curves in I am right along that property line there is there somewhere I can point so yes this is my property line is here and here so this is okay that's your spot there okay thank you yep so I'm not sure if there's a way to redesign that also I'm not excited about the hook of the road coming into MN concerned about cars just whipping around that corner and uh not slowing down or stopping and that does go against the uh Department transportation recommendations for roads coming in perpendicular to another road so not excited about that that corner and that curve um I'm also uh a little concerned about the um the fact that we're only using 32% of this property and 4.2 acres and we're cramming 56 units onto that or 13.4 units per acre uh I understand why they're doing that but I think that's uh that's trying skirting the way we're

trying to get around medium high res uh property so that we are putting a lot of units in a very small place on that property um it does uh and I don't see a community need or a hardship by the developer need to do that other than they want more units on that property there are ways in my opinion they could redesign this property it may be a few fewer units not opposed to the development I'm opposed to doing things that are against the code we really in my opinion should be following the code as much as possible thank you thank you anybody else uh my name is Charlie I was here previously I'm at 440 M um first off this is this new design is better uh I will admit that uh we're still concerned with the the same questions you have in terms of the offer right if it's if it's not going to be as big as it should be or as long as it should be uh it should be more significant um there's no other mhr in the town of Webster that will

have this small of a buffer between an R3 in our case or an mhr District um almost all of them have significant whether it's vegetation trees shrubs things that are a lot bigger than what they actually propose right now so if we're at asking for a variance or if they're asking for a variance in that buffer I'm asking the town to consider making that buffer a lot more significant than what they're currently proposing um I also kind of went down to Black Hole in terms of cluster development I kind of understand the need to develop these properties in the most suitable part of the of the property uh what I don't understand and I don't know if you can answer this um is is very similar similar to what uh Dave was saying earlier um and how the calculation in terms of the area relative to the number of dwellings that's allowed in a cluster development I was trying to do the math myself um I was couldn't quite figure it out um I don't know if that's something you can answer right here today but it's definitely something I want you all to consider I do appreciate the question uh the calculation is based off the total size of the lot so the the their two lots being combined um which totals I

believe uh Mr nler was at 12 13 acres 12 and 13 12 and a half 13 acres so when calculating it you look at the the total size of the lot okay but your questions uh would be great for the the planning board they could certainly speak to to any concerns you might have about that okay thank you thank you just note this is not a cluster development it's mhr right right thank you other uh anybody else um other comments comments from the public no okay I'll turn it back over to the board any other uh questions from the board at this point I I'm sure it's more the perview of the planning board but because it is a district buffer I think there should be more plan material to buffer not that the proposed buildings are not going to be really really attractive I I believe that I uh but there it is as a district buffer I think especially since you're doing it in the right way and not um not on the property itself and you basically have a parallel road going there I I I think it uh it would make a much better plan if there was some more plant material in

there not just necessarily trees but a mixture of uh of both size and um types deciduous and Evergreen along with shrubs and trees as as well with once again I don't know if that's more of a planning board thing but I believe it goes to the character which then brings it back to us um for saying that but that's just my opinion I I agree with you I um taking a step further um the buffers Were Meant to protect any residences outside of the project limit project limit unfortunately is the property line which is the RightWay to McKuen there I I personally think there should be more uh Green Space uh uh from that project limit uh to the project itself uh this way it protects the single family homes on M and also protects the town houses within the comp I I agree I just but since it is show that green space is shortened especially with the parallel Road I'd like to see that small little area RightWay really over almost overplanted to make up for that um lack of distance yeah well you know as it's stands right now at that driveway I said a zero buffer right

right so if I may Chris Maro just came came up to me during the uh public hearing portion and said we're Absol absolutely going to put pine trees or you know ever green trees in there we can absolutely beef that buffer up including in the lawn between the driveways if that's what the planning board uh or this board would like um usually the way we we select is through the planning board process with input from our neighbors they're the ones who are going to wind up looking at it they um but we can absolutely beef that up I think we probably were going to anyway with with the new design um the unit that is on mchan is there what was the purpose for its distance off of the property line versus moving it further south I think so I think elimination of of unnecessary pavement is a is a large part of that um I we can we can have 100 foot long driveways I'm I'm not I'm not talking about a 100 but to to everybody's comments here right I mean the RO the the drive Road I'm going to call it the heart the one that is parallel to the uh to the property line

if we were to take that building and move it back 15 feet from right I mean you're adding 15 feet of a perpendicular driveway that that's what you're adding right we're not talking about adding significant to all the other properties or or whatnot you are getting closer to the bio retention Pond you are making the fields um in the backside smaller right yeah in that a little bit smaller again I don't know what the distances are um but if it was to move back 15 ft that gives the ability to provide more buffer uh staggered buffer versus raming you have a a row of trees that are you know next to each other you end up a single row of trees doesn't really provide a a great deal of buffer but if you're able to provide a stagger staggered row of uh trees it provides a much better level of of buffering well plus moving it would moving that what you want to call the access road or the roadway um gets it out of the easement correct around there too which once again if it gets plowed up they can tear it up and say hey have fun putting your driveway back in right yeah mean is that something that you guys would would consider well so I think it eats up

usable Green Space to add not unnecessary but irrelevant Green Space there's not going to be a you're not going to be able to perceive a difference um it's important to remember uh Josh could you put up the overhead the aerial with the arrows on it it's important to remember that our buffer our where we're measuring from is our property line and then what's after that is some space between our property line and mchan drive and then there's mchan drive and then there's a bunch of uh front yards and then 160 ft away are uh single family residential houses generally the residential district buffer requirement is when you're putting an apartment building in the backyard of um of single family residential the backyard is where the activity of a home is focused not the front yard so putting an apartment complex even right on the border impacts that home um we've got 160 ft to what's people's garages and then a little bit

more to where their foyers and living rooms and dining rooms usually are in a single family home um but so we're not you know I I don't think there's a ton of space to add uh to move that building back Mr nther uh the planning board asked you to incorporate that Community Center in those courts was that request from from that board yeah and that's that's fundamental to the plan um we have an existing complex here I think it'll it'll really make this a great project uh the building that enters the drive uh as far as access what if you flip that and utilize the access point to the clubhous for that building so you know and we obviously we looked at that that was my initial uh idea but I'm a lawyer not an engineer it does not work that way uh the the project won't isn't feasible that way why there's about 9 ft of elevation the gring that's thatt higher than than the clubhouse area yeah okay and then you have you know people

on mchan looking at our backyards not the front of a house like a residential street is you know the design should be actually town house really doesn't have a backyard if you know what I mean really utilized uh like a single family's backyard okay okay any other comments I'm going to go back to my other qu my question before because it I I didn't hear an answer to it um would you would you consider or is there an ability to slide uh the building facing mchu and back um a number of you know I'm looking at I see we're about 15 ft from the retaining wall the retaining wall is about 8 ft from the uh the corner of the pickle ball pickle ball court um you know so I don't know we're 25 feet plus or minus from the corner of the pickle B fencing is what I'm reading there I don't think that's feasible I mean we could do a foot or

two with I mean there is a backyard to these town houses yep um and you know you don't want to destroy that you don't want to impede on uh the sport court or The Clubhouse um and I don't think it'll we can go back a foot or two um but I don't think it'll be perceptible I could also probably shift the um that that parallel driveway I can shift that a few feet too um so we could probably get to a 5 foot uh you know moving the build a couple feet Shifting the driveway a few feet get at least five more feet there that just my thoughts that would be helpful um CU understanding that that parallel driveway was a request by the town um but that does put you at technically zero foot as a buffer which I understand that there's Green Space on on the other property that that can be vegetated to to block it a little a little bit but I think if you could make it a little bit deeper it it's still going to be a significant change from what's there now but it will be a little less harsh with with more

plantings and more depth of plantings yeah okay well I think either way they're they be planting in the right away even if they that because you're not going to you're not going to take that extra couple feet if they move their they need to do both right right they would need to do both we can absolutely do that well and maybe that helps get no never mind that helps get you out of the easement a little bit as well well for the driveway absolutely but driveway I think for the plant material you wouldn't want to it's been my experience that I generally won't plan specify anything in a easement because tree roots tend to do what they what they do do yeah and on the it could be detrimental to any type of utility y okay any other comments from the board does anyone have any concerns with the front set back at 18 ft it's it's within the complex I really don't care no well and it it's be honest with you it's a private road it and it's there's more town homes Beyond this parcel that it's very

similar to that yes and it's like I say it's a private road the buffer concerns me um I don't want to establish a predent people say you don't establish a precedent each application stands on their own Merit but uh it concerns me it could establish precedent um I mean initially this third phase came in I think I believe was like 3 acres or 2.5 acres so they combined lots to around the uh density uh issue God bless you what's to prevent them from splitting their land off again um that concerns me also well the planning board the planning board can impose a condition to prevent any future I would think that the zoning board could also I I would at least think the zoning board would make that recommendation do you have I'm I'm assuming that this will be the the end of the development for this property and even though there's acreage that's un undeveloped at this point in time as part of this 12 acre parcel you're not planning any additional development on the acreage that's absolutely correct we're not this is the end of the development this is the end of the plan from the 1980s and this is the end of the owner's plan on development and the

plan is to then not subdivide the property and then sell off the property for another another developer to come in it's this is the this is the parcel absolutely that is not our intent the open space sloping down to the Bay is integral to not only this project but our current 62 tow houses that we rent um it would be a a devastating blow to lose that um we also um couldn't subdivide it below 5 Acres because we would then be out of compliance with town code and would need a variance so I get we could but we'd need the planning board and the zoning board to approve it again and that's uh not not in the plan all right any other comments questions Mr nler you said that uh in regards to the buffer the the distance from the road to those other single family residences what's that distance there the distance from our building to the close CL mchan house is 153 ft okay and again there's houses in phases

one and two that are 60 ft away between buildings all right there's no other uh questions or comments from the board um post the vote on uh Seeker um I'd like to make a motion for a type two action under Seeker pursuant to nycr section 6175 of the environmental code second okay Mr short hi Mr L hi Mr hi Mr s hi Mrs hi all right um with that um walk through the uh the findings uh of the of the uh project if anybody else if anybody wants to do it no all right uh this request is um not out of character in the neighborhood uh the applicant has really uh made an

effort from the initial submission to the current submission to um ensure that the project um is within the character of the neighborhood itself um both um within the current property as well as uh adjacent properties there um there will not be uh a detriment uh created to the nearby properties um at the end of the day uh the applicant has uh agreed to uh provide additional uh additional 5ot setback uh more than what was uh previously proposed as well as um buffer plantings uh to uh minimize and eliminate uh any um any visual impact to any of the nearby properties um the benefit uh is not achiev achievable um through any other methods due to the uh the slope of the property um uh all the way down to the Bay as well as uh the immediate area um the benefit is not achievable by any other methods um this is a large project it is a substantial uh project uh for the area

um and there are uh no adverse physical or environmental impacts uh to the site uh or the neighborhood uh that it's within especially with the uh the buffers uh uh being put in place and the 51.8 for the document that I have uh adding uh 5 ft to that 15 56.8 ft um from nearby uh structures themselves um difficulty was not self-created uh this is the property uh that is the natural slopes that are there um this is um this is a desirable change uh to the area from um from the the fields that that are there um with that uh I'd like to make a motion um to provide a variance to uh the water viiew departments phase three located uh at northwest corner of Willow Point Way and artical Mile Drive applicant uh Legacy development is requesting area variant um to allow a front setback of uh um it 18 18.7 ft where uh

code requires uh 75 ft and a district buffer area uh of um we vote on each one of those separately yeah I would prer that okay yeah um so deal with the do I have to make motion separately then on each one of these set so second I'll second the front setb okay and that's the front set back to Maritime Drive correct is there a building number on that uh no it would just be the one facing Maritime or facing this one here you talking about um yeah uh so we're doing a front set set back variance 18 was was it 18.6 18.7 18.7 18.7 18.7 who second it

cor so Mr short hi Mrs Volo hi Mr CA hi Mr how I Mr lag hi okay you have your um 18 foot front uh setback um thank you for the second one uh make a motion for uh a district buffer area less than uh what is required uh District uh area buffer would be uh 30 40 43t um where code uh requires uh 100 ft is that inclusive of the additional five that is inclusive of the additional 5T uh so one correction the um the one facing me c is moving down but the one that's kind of perpendicular on the left side of the screen is not changing that one's not changing that one's 38 that one's 30 cor correct okay so can we do a dual buffer so to the oh you guys made this real complicated for us West westmost 10un building have a buffer of the 38.5 ft and the building

facing muan have a 5- foot buffer to that drive connected Drive C can I re can I recommend that you grant the the variance of 38 a 38 foot buffer setback with conditions that the building move I think that would comply with Public Notices with a condition that we move the building back but uh gu it since right now that access driveways at the zero buffer so we moving the ex driveway because I'm assuming the drive that everything with that in that building will shift South 5 ft so the building and the access road no the building was shifting uh 2 feet and the the driveway was shifting 3 feet so the driveway sh five but the building's only shifting two so back to what I think what Karen was saying earlier and I I think I I got you is that the Western most building have a buffer of 38 ft right the building fa in mckuin would be 43 ft the no to would be

5T to the drive Road yes is is what it ends up being can you push that yeah I thought we were going to do three on the driveway no but when you move the building to it makes the driveway go right yeah right yeah um and I I can do a condition of moving I think you said moving the building 2 feet moving the driveway 3 feet well the driveway would move five because of correct yeah yeah yeah sorry yes but it be two 3T closer to the build building is still going to be further from mchan than the westward 10 unit building so can we also add condition of additional landscaping or landscape materials of both sizes okay Sor I'm just got it I just I don't want to miss it okay I'm GNA try this again so um I make a motion for the westernmost 10 unit town home to have a uh uh a single family District buffer variance of 38 ft from the property line um and the 10 unit uh

building facing mchan to have a 5ot buffer to the drive and to maintain uh a 43.8 ft um buffer or distance to the property line yes yes second nailed it yeah um with the conditions of um buffer Landscaping to be provided both um in the in the buff Zone on on uh your property as well as uh work with the town to provide buffering uh in the right in the um the town property as well now take a second Mr schw hi Mr Santa hi Mrs Vol I Mr how Nick Mr Wagner hi all that being said you now have um

two variances one for the front setback and one for the buffer uh setback um with the conditions of uh additional um buffer vegetation as well as moving the building Back 2 feet and moving the the horizontal or the um the Drive road back 5 ft um you have uh one year um for for the project um you need all other permits and approvals uh from the planning board Etc I'd like to thank you all very much for your thoughtful consideration we appreciate it we appreciate the feedback we got over the summer from you thank you very much have a good evening thank you Josh thank you st all right you ready for the next one no I am a complete mess right now have to consolidate

Pap a bigger desk okay you're an engineer engineer lately I'm a retired engineer engineer what's an engineer all right now I'm ready Sharon court all right um located at 1093 Sharon Court applicant Dale Weiss is requesting an area Varian to allow for the construction of a readymade garage to be plac placed closer to the front property line than the rear line of the main building on a .55 acre parcel having number 18-140 located in an R3 single family residential district under sections 350-12 and 35-36 of the code of the town of Webster hi hi state your name and uh 1093 Sharon Court okay Le the wa 109 three Sharon court all right uh feel free to present your project oh s okay he wants you to

present the project we did it last time we were just here for the second variance the um but we can go over it again they did do that address yep the the applicant was here at the October meeting for aide setback but it wasn't noted noticed for the building being in front in front of the rear line of the house that's correct so we just needed to read advertise it so that that variance could be correct I'm going to ask a question um the property lot size um based on the information I have is 21,780 square ft um based on the deck pool house uh car current um shed and then the new structure we are going to I believe we're going to exceed 20% of lot coverage as well I haven't verified that but that would mean we'd have to read advertise I know and I'm sorry to sorry to do that I as I was calculating the numbers at 4:00

today I it's what I noticed it can you explain that please so town code requires um within I think this is an R3 District uh it's a 20% I believe uh is what I recall um maximum lot coverage so um if you have you know you're I think you're a Halfacre plot of land that's uh 21,780 Square ft uh 20% of that is 4,000 and change um that's calculated based on structures on the property which includes the deck um the deck wraparound porch uh the pool the house the um the shed and then the new structure as well um would be the ones that would come up and when I did my math and I don't know what your spec the actual property size is if it's truly a straight half acre or if it's 6 of an acre or if it's 04 of an acre I think something like that so I I didn't have all the figures I just I was over by about 700 Square fet

when I was doing my quick calculations and if the it would be another variance that you would also need on top of the side variance the front variance and then lot size variance as well If lost the other shed would that make a difference if we it would I I couldn't again I did I bring my calculations with me um I think the shed was about 110 square ft plus or minus um I wasn't out on your property with a tape measure so it's um I was doing the best I could with the information I had um the house pull and deck I have uh at about 4,7 uh 4,700 Square ft um and then the new structure itself um you had the C you had the size on here it was like 14 by 20 or something like that um yeah you know that was another several hundred square feet um allowable based on what I was calculating was 4356 and the house and pool without the shed was already at 4700 okay so again without me

actual numbers I I I apologize what's that the lot is 055 lot is 0.55 that that in of itself helps so 23 sorry I'm trying to do some quick calculations so that puts you about 4,800 Square ft which would be the house the pool and the shed um you lose the shed yeah you'd be able to put another 100 squ ft shed back

up but you'd still be at the max again I my calculations were based off of Google Earth uh measurements they were not me physically out there measuring it so okay so what do we need to do come back next month again back do we have to fill another variance form or no we'll take care of that we'll take care of we'll calculate the actual um dimensions and then we'll advertise this along with what you were here tonight for okay okay so you're saying that the structure we want to put on is adds too much to the total for the lot size is that because I'm having trouble hearing you I'm sorry but sorry um yeah so the total based on the um the zoning code there's a maximum of 20% of coverage on uh a lot and that is of structure so anything that you build on your lot cannot exceed 20% of

the the total lot size your lot is .55 Acres or uh 23,958 square fet is what your lot is So 20% of that would be 4,791 square feet of built structures that that's not including the driveway or or any of that but that is the house the deck the pool the shed and then any new structures that are built okay does that make sense I understand essentially what you have your current lot coverage is just about at the maximum you're allowed okay so I I'm not trying to speak for the chairman but uh like you said you could get rid of the existing shed and you know tell us you get rid of the existing shed or just come back unfortunately next month and uh it is unfortunate that um you have to do that way but it has to be advertised even though uh I'm sure everyone that's here tonight to speak against it will be back next month but um um you know unfortunately that's the way it goes okay and what's the date in

December 13th Christmas I think it'll be a good Christmas present right yeah I think it's the it would be the 10th is it the 10th Tuesday the 10th Tuesday the 10th okay and we on our end we don't have to do anything this is all going to be calculated and put in the paper and then we'll come back again and see if we can get the Varian that's correct correct okay three variances sounds like correct we've already received one though so two more to go okay sounds good I mean do we want it hold off on tonight's until next month or it's up to you guys I'm fine you want to do it all together as one yeah we can do unless you want to go home with with something tonight let's just hold off until this way it's at one location no no I agree but one until 1210 to make I make a motion to table um 1093 Sharon Court Webster New York uh to to the 1210 uh meeting second I all those in favor I I thank you sorry thank you no it's okay third

times a charm yes have a good night thanks you too all right moving on to our scheduled matters for this evening waiting Road single family residence located at 430 waiting Road applicant Austin Goodwin is requesting an area variance to allow a front setback of 30 ft where a minimum required is 75 ft associated with the construction of a 2,261 ft² single family residence on a 3 Acre parcel having SPL number 049.0 3-1-3 4.2 located in an LL large lot single family residential district under section 35-13 of the code of the town of Webster state your name ad uh address and feel free to give us uh rundown on your project good evening everybody my name is Austin Goodwin like you said I

am the owner at 430 Whiting Road along the with my fiance Caroline um the reason we're here tonight is for as you already stated to request a front setback variance uh smaller than the one applicable to town code uh looking up on the screen you can see that this is a 3 Acre flag lot along Whiting Road and town code specifies that your front setback for a flag lot is not typical of a normal property where it comes off of the right away it comes off of the rear lot line of the property in front of you so off of the property in front of me being 446 waiting which is uh Mr Schneider who is also here with me tonight the front setback starts from his rear property line so just to make it clear that when I'm talking about a 30 foot front setback I'm not talking about a 30 foot front setback from waiting Road I'm talking about about a 700 plus foot setback from whaiting Road um the reason that I'm asking for this is because of the natural Topography of the property itself um things that I stated in the statement of difficulty number one being that this is not a self-created hardship the natural topography Josh if you don't mind um

keep going right there so the natural Topography of this parcel is a Central Valley running right through the middle and then just to the right side of that another steep hill with a peak once you go down the back side of that Hill the far edge of this property is Webster Park so this property is not a flat lot that is easy to build upon in a sense the only real logical place that I can place a single family residence is where you see on here where what it will be is the front of the house will be at the top of the valley where it's flat and the house will be a single story residence um with a walk out basement that goes down the hill and that would allow me to based on where it is um be a few feet up from the low point of the valley where when we get freeze Tha and all the snow starts melting you don't want your house in that um and it also the reason it has to be pushed a little bit farther forward like that is the leech field that you see on the right side of the house so Whiting Road doesn't have all the utilities that a typical Road does there's about a 1,250 ft gap on both sides of the road where there is no water service and there is

no sanitary sewer so the house is actually 410 just to the north side of this is the last house that has water service off Whiting road which means I can either pay the monor County Water Authority tens upon tens of thousands of dollars to extend the main or I can go on a well like most people in this area have in order to do that there is certain health code requirements that separate the Well from the leech field so on the left side of the house I know you probably can't see it but there's a little circle right there that's where I'm proposing to put the well at the top side of the Hill Upstream from the leech field that's a health code requirement I can't change that nor would I want to I don't want my well Downstream with my leech field uh the leech field itself also can't be built in the valley because of during the spring when that becomes inundated from snowmelt now it's inundated and I'm going to back up my plumbing and that's going to cause a whole another mess of problems so the leash field has to be built as a tiered system on the side of the Hill that leech field has separation requirements from property lines and that's why there's an arrow right there on the North Tippy corner of the leech field essentially that leech field is as far to the right and as close to that little Valley that I can possibly put it it is also as close to the house as I

can put it because health code requires me to have the septic tank and the leech Fields a certain distance from the house in order to build this house that means that the house has to move closer to the back back rear lot line of Mr Schneider's property um and that's why I'm asking for the 30 foot versus the 75 now in terms of all the other questions for statement of difficulty essential character would this affect the character of the area no it's a very sparse single family residential street uh where all the lots are at least 3 acres all covered in vast mature vegetation I do not plan to change that in any way um in fact actually by having the house closer up I'm farther I'm as far as I can possibly go to stay away from Webster Park so instead of having the house way in the back corner by the trail I'm trying to stay away from it I want people to enjoy that and I also want to have my privacy from the park um in terms of no other remedy without mass grading this very this 3 Acre Site and effectively filling in that Valley and clear cutting all the trees on the property to get that net cut fill there's no other

way for me to do it without putting the house where it is where the front of the house at the top of the hill build it to be a single story Ranch and have it be a walk out basement versus a twostory house like many others on the in the area um couple reasons why I want that I'd like to grow old in this house I don't want to have stairs in 40 years and another sense is because of the property being on a hill the only way essentially to do it is to be a walk out basement St St house um in terms of significance to neighbors the only neighbor that would be affected by granting this variance is Mr Schneider and that's why I brought him here today uh because this is a one-dimensional movement the house is not getting any closer to the properties to the north than is already allowed it's not getting any closer to the property to the South or the East which is Webster Park the only person who is affected by this would be Mr Schneider's property and the closest distance between this house and his is over 500 ft uh the nearest neighbor in terms of even just distance to this house whether this was granted or not is over 300 ft to the north with vast mature vegetation between this house and all of the neighbors so during the middle of summer no one can see each

other anyway regardless if this house is here or back no one is going to see it um otherwise this is probably the smallest uh presentation of ever done for a project since it's single family house so I'm here for any questions you have thank you uh that was that was helpful um my one question to you is I got why you situated it in its current location MH I did I took a quick sketch I rotated it 30 Dees and I was able to pick up an additional 25 ft um keeping the building the house and the same location is that something that you are willing to consider is rotating the design you have to move the garage ultimately what it does is it pulls the garage back further away from the property line so just to make sure that everybody understands what you're saying is take that house as is uh is there a TV everyone can see or rotated counterclockwise by about I is it 25 so you would be essentially asking that what happens instead is that the house would get turned counterclockwise like this correct so the reason I did not do that

is because of the steep grade change that drops off into that Valley if you were to turn the house yes the main portion of the house is still on the flat side of the hill but what you've now done is that the back side of the basement the walk out portion is now on the portion of the hill where it's coming down it's not an open level ground in the back you have essentially one corner of the house at the bottom but the entire house is a skew from the hill so that you don't have anything out back I can't put a patio out back for for people to sit on I can't put anything other than just having the land dive down to one corner of the house and then I have nothing usable you would have the whole again with the whole flat side uh adjacent to the garage that whole face would be facing downhill similar to yes it would um the second reason that I didn't want to do that is because the more and more you turn this that is more and more fill that has to be placed just to put the garage in and with this house being a walk out basement the only soil I'm going to get without mass grading more of the site cutting down trees and getting that soil from somewhere is by leaving it like this the H the soil that gets dug out for the basement has to go where the

garage currently is in order to build a pad to put the garage in so if you turn that farther and farther then the garage is farther and farther down the hill and now that's significantly more and more material that I have to bring in or import or cut down trees in another part of the property to steal that soil in order to fill that pad area in order for me to put a 6 to 8 in concrete pad in so it's a much larger I don't want to say significance it's a much larger construction project in order to turn that and put more of the garage over an area that it would have to have multiple and multiple feet of additional fill placed underneath it which If This Were a large development project they're masquerading the entire site anyway it that's not a big deal for a single family residence the only soil I'm getting is what gets dug out for that basement and there's not much that would allow me to build the pad under the garage as is which already has a 4ft to 5ft grade change from front to back if I turn it I now have to fill in front of it and underneath it and I'm not going to have enough soil to do that thank you any other questions from the

board I don't I walked the property again today just to reaffirm for myself I remember there being a ravine back there but I was not I did not remember how significant the Ravine was on that lot so from aiel or from contour lines doesn't look as bad as it is when you're standing there they're going oh yeah I forgot about that cuz that um so the the flat the flat area where you have the house is really the only logical location to put it on that parcel with the least amount of damage and with respect to uh Mr Short's comments which might make it a little better from a design standpoint I think from a practical standpoint based on the existing conditions out there I think that works it's it's not a question of it not working it's a question of a personal preference of I think it might be better if you rotated it but I don't think the necessary actions to rotate it is significant enough to request them to do that all right uh I'll open up to public comment anybody speak for or against

hi I'm Eric Schneider I reside at 446 Whiting Road uh with my wife Karen and I'll note that uh kathern klch is still coughing but um yeah we are the only affected neighbor in fact we're the only neighbor and uh we won't even be able to see this development unless we're standing behind our barn it's just uh even even um in the summer you just won't see it at all so it's not a problem there um I can tell you from having lived here for 30 years that that Valley will become a quagmire in the spring it uh simply can't be built on at that location and the leech field does have to be up on the hillside itself in order to support that um and it does drop off quite quickly there's a good uh 13t difference as it drops from the flat section down to the uh well what my wife and I call the meadow um so there's not a whole lot

of space there you pretty much have to have the house running parallel to the hill itself in order to um have any sort of patio walk out basement thing like that and it's almost going to be at the level of the meadow floor by the time you get there so there are a lot of constraints there um you would have to push it all the way across the meadow floor and within uh well closer to Webster Park by 50 foot you'd basically be staring at the people on the west loop as they walk through in the summer so um not the best idea so this is really the only feasible location of um a house given the constraints that you've got and um trying to keep it within a reasonable budget so uh my wife Karen and I have discussed this and I believe that um Karen and M Volo walked the property together along with the dog thanks for exercising him while I was at work and um basically we're we're fully in agreement with the

position of the house and the variance requested thank you thank you bring it back to the board any other comments from the board questions you done a perk test to ensure that the septic system is good where you have it yes um that perk test was done and that is why you see the amount of leech fields that are there just making sure thank you okay right that I'd like to make a motion for a type two action under Seeker pursuant to the nycrr section 61 7.5 of the environmental code second all those in favor I I can I'll do okay you go uh the uh project doesn't result in the uh undeserved change in the essential character of the neighborhood uh and there'll be no detriment to any adjacent properties if the uh variance is granted um the uh relief sought by the variants is not achievable by other feasible

method due to the existing Contours uh both the valley and the the flat area of the existing property uh the variance is not substantial uh based on the amount of property and the uh proximity to adjacent neighbors uh the variance will not have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood and uh it's not self-created because the flag lot has already been subdivided and the topography and wood wooded areas were existing probably long before the flag lot was uh created okay like to make a motion for the Whiting Road uh single family residence located at 4:30 Whiting Road uh requesting an area variance to allow a front setback of 30 ft the minimum required is 75 ft associated with the construction of a 2261 ft² single family residence on a 3 Acre parcel having SP 049.0 3-1-3 4.2 located in an LL large

lot single family residential district under section 35-13 of the code of the town of Webster second Mr SCH hi Mrs Volo hi Mr Canta hi Mr haard hi Mr L hi you have your variance for the front setback uh you have one year uh for the project you must obtain all building codes um Department of Health codes for the uh for the septic Etc uh before you can start the project thank you all for your time thank you last scheduled matter I'll read it uh meal Ridge House Edition located at 867 uh meal Ridge Lane applicant Chad uh willardson is requesting an area variance to allow a rear setback of 38 ft where the minimum required is 50 ft associated with the construction of an addition on a 0.41 acre parcel having d130 located in a R3 single family

residential district under section 350-12 of the code of the town of Webster how we doing good Chon project manager for Marshall exteriors I'm representing the homeowners Kathy and Steve Buckner okay um we're looking to change the setback from 50 to 38 we had a permit for a coverage structure already and uh uh the homeowner asked to enclose it uh we're not changing the footprint whatsoever we're just looking to have uh the set pack changed are you enclosing just the addition portion or so not the existing deck that will remain do stay in the same okay I don't have any questions I don't either no based don't under based on last size and that there's no other option no and there's a car dealership behind it yeah they're not going to ever

see it right no issues all right uh I'll open up to the public if there is any more public here which there is not not um so I'll bring it back to the board one last time nobody had any comments before I'm assuming nobody has any more comments um I'd like to make a motion for a type two um action under Seeker puru to nycrr section 617.980.9025 person too I uh record that that uh the board uh Grant area variances for a metal Ridge House Edition located 867 M Lane uh to allow a rear setback of 38 ft where the minimum required is 50 ft associated with the construction of an addition on a 0.41 acre parcel having SPL number 0791 n-1 D30 located in R3 single family residential district under section 350-12 of the code of the town of Webster second do we want to do findings

before we vote Yes want me to do it I can I'll do it anyway fine uh there are know um hang need the she to do it in order I apologize that's okay um I want to make sure I do it correctly uh granted variance will not uh change the essential character of the neighborhood and it will provide no detriment to nearby properties uh the benefit uh sought by the applicant is minimal and there are no other remedies based on the size and the configuration of the lot uh the requested area variance is not substantial uh the proposed variance will not have an adverse effect on the physical and environmental conditions of the general area and the uh the the request is not self-created and that the lot size with the uh current uh house and deck are there and that's the really only spot to to put an addition

second do we have a second Mr hi Mrs r i Mr how hi Mr lagner hi Mr short I you have your variance you have to make sure you have all other permits uh required uh to be able to complete the project you have one year to complete the project right thank you have a great night you too we have uh two administrative matters we do please hold please here somewhere she's getting all right um I if everyone is in agreement and has reviewed them I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from the September 10th zoning board of appeals meeting second all those in favor and yes I have enough to vote okay and then lastly if I can get there I will make a motion to approve the minutes from the October 88th zoning board of appeals meeting second second all those in favor I I I eyes

abstain perfect thank you all right we are caught up with our administrative matters make a motion to close today's zoning board meeting all right thank you everybody