May 12, 2022
A regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals/Planning Board of the Village of Lakewood, NY, was held May 12, 2022 at 6:30 PM, in the Board Room of the Anthony C. Caprino Municipal Building, 20 W. Summit Street, with Chairman Gary M. Segrue, presiding. Board members present were William F. Chandler, Louis S. Drago, Jr. and John Jablonski. Also present was Building Inspector Jeff Swanson and Village Clerk Mary B. Currie.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by William Chandler, seconded by John Jablonski, to approve the minutes of the last meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on April 19, 2022.
Adopted: 4 ayes, no nays (Chandler, Drago, Jablonski, Segrue)
REAR YARD SET-BACK &
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES
227 LOCUST STREET
Tom & Julie Brown, 227 Locust St., have submitted an application for rear yard set-back and maximum building height variances regarding their proposal to build a garage (accessory structure) in the rear of their property at the address above. In accordance with the proposed site plan and related information they are requesting a rear yard set-back variance of 21.9 ft., rather than the required 25 ft., and maximum building height variance of 1.6 ft. rather than the required 12 ft., as prescribed in Section #25-10 (E) [Single-Family Residential (R-1) District] of the Village of Lakewood Zoning Law.
Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman, Gary M. Segrue asked Mr. & Mrs. Brown if they would explain the reasons for their request.
Mr. Brown said they purchased the vacant lot behind their property which had a drainage ditch along the property and when there would be significant amounts of rain their property would flood with the water run off Grandview Ave. and Winding Way. He said with the help of the village he installed a 20 ft. sluice pipe and buried the pipe with compacted processed gravel. He place medium rip rap around the mouth of the pipe with the hope of eliminating secondary water and erosion coming from above.
Mr. Brown said since the pipe was installed in May 2021, he has noticed it takes quite a bit of water from the drop inlet off Grandview Ave. and indicated he has not had any water flooding in his yard since.
Mr. Brown said what he would like to do is build a 24 ft. x 28 ft. garage in the back corner of the lot for additional storage and a place to park his vehicles. He indicated he has already put a gravel driveway in up to the point of where he would like the garage. He said the garage will sit a little askew on the property and the set-backs will be 8-10 ft. from one corner and approximately 3 ft. from the rear wooded area. He said he has talked to the two abutting property owners and the woman who lives behind the property looked at what he is proposing and indicated she has no problem with it, he said he has both their signatures.
Mr. Segrue asked Mr. Brown what the height of the garage will be.
Mr. Brown’s contractor said it will be 13.6 ft. to the peak.
Mr. Jablonski asked how far away from the pipe will the garage be.
Mr. Drago asked how possible it would be to bring the garage in approximately 3-4 ft. from the rear property line, allowing for more of a set-ba
Mr. Brown said that would put it on the sluice pipe and there would have to be a substantial amount of fill brought in, that would cause any water run off that does not go in the sluice pipe to run towards the house. That would also change the grade of the driveway, making it steeper.
Mr. William Chandler inquired about a shed which is currently on the property.
Building Inspector Swanson said per code, you are allowed one shed as well as one detached garage on a single piece of property.
Mr. Swanson said Mr. Brown has worked with the village attempting to fix a water and erosion problem the village has had in that area and at his own cost.
Mr. Swanson reminded Mr. Brown that per NYS building code, there can be no openings within 5 ft. of any boundary lines and make sure to go with a 1 hour fire rating for ceilings and walls up to 9 ft.
With no additional comments or questions, Chairman Segrue and members of the Zoning Board of Appeals proceeded to review and answer the questions posed on the area variance findings and decision form.
Motion by Louis S. Drago, Jr., seconded by John Jablonski, to approve Mr. & Mrs. Brown to construct a multiple vehicle garage with the following variances. A rear yard set-back variance of 22 ft. where the required is 25 ft., a maximum building height variance of 2 ft., rather than the required 12 ft., the building is not to be higher than 14 ft. The construction is to be completed, per NYS building and fire code within 12 months of approval.
Adopted: 4 ayes, no nays (Chandler, Drago, Jablonski, Segrue)
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH VARIANCE
FRONT YARD SET-BACK VARIANCE
220 WEST SUMMIT STREET
Mr. Byron Bilicki, 220 West Summit St. has submitted an application for minimum lot width and front yard set-back variances regarding his desire to construct Phase II of additions to his residence at the address above. The proposed site plan indicates a minimum lot width of 60 ft. rather than the required 75 ft., requesting a 15 ft. variance and front yard set-back of 20 ft. rather than the required 25 ft., requesting a 5 ft. variance, as prescribed in Section #25-10, (E), [Single-Family (R-1) Residential District], of the Village of Lakewood Zoning Law.
Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman, Gary M. Segrue asked Mr. Bilicki if they would explain the reasons for his request.
Mr. Bilicki said his intent is to make this home his primary residence and said he has made some changes to his original plans he had submitted in October 2021. Mr. Bilicki said he is no longer proposing an addition to the east of his structure due to an existing drainage easement. He said he would now like to connect the existing house to the existing garage and said the roof line between the two structures would remain the same as it is right now.
Mr. Bilicki said in order to do this he will need a 5 ft. variance in the front yard and 15 ft. variance for his lot width.
Building Inspector Jeff Swanson said there are many houses along West Summit St. that have garages closer to the street as well as homes closer to the lake than Mr. Bilicki is proposing.
Mr. Bilicki said he would also like to make some extra living space above the garage which would consist of a kitchenette, an additional bathroom, a bedroom and a common area. He indicated that space would only be used for family or friends who would be visiting and said he has no intention of it ever being rented.
Mr. Jablonski asked if there is a crawl space or a basement in the house and if he plans to increase the height of the structure.
Mr. Bilicki said the house has a crawl space and the height of the structure will not be any higher than it is right now, he is just connecting the two roofs into one.
Mr. Jablonski said since there will be extra rainwater run-off from the additional section of roof that is being added, would Mr. Bilicki be agreeable to having a Professional Engineer design a stormwater swale that would catch the rainwater run-off, sending it through a rain garden and filtering it before going to the lake.
Mr. Bilicki said he would not be opposed to doing that but first would need to do a little research to see what that would involve.
There was much discussion on extra living spaces within a single family home and whether it matters if it is family staying there or not, would the structure then become a duplex and should there be separate entrances/exits.
Chairman Segrue said Mr. Bilicki has come before the Zoning Board of Appeals in request of a couple variances which have nothing to do with what is inside. If he decides to have extra living space added to the structure, then at that time he will need to go before the proper board for approval.
With no additional comments or questions, Chairman Segrue and members of the Zoning Board of Appeals proceeded to review and answer the questions posed on the area variance findings and decision form.
Motion by Louis S. Drago, Jr., seconded by William Chandler, to approve the requested variances for 220 W. Summit Street. Minimum lot width required by village code is 75 ft., the actual will be 60 ft., approve a variance of 15 ft., minimum front yard set-back required is 25 ft., the actual is 20 ft., approve a variance of 5 ft. The construction is to be completed, per New York State Building and Fire Code, within 18 months of approval.
NOTE: Should the addition of separate living quarters be added to the project, the request for that approval will have to go before the proper board before the renovations can be completed.
Adopted: 4 ayes, no nays (Chandler, Drago, Jablonski, Segrue)
SITE PLAN REVIEW
COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING
341-343 EAST FAIRMOUNT AVE.
Ms. Lori Thierfeldt, Jamestown, N.Y., has submitted an application for a Site Plan Review regarding her proposal to make revisions to her original site plans on the construction of her 5,700 sq. ft. Commercial Office building at 341-343 East Fairmount Ave. The revisions are for the parking lot and drainage only, in accordance with Section #25-89, B-1 [Site Plan Review] of the Village of Lakewood Zoning Law.
Chairman Gary Segrue said Ms. Thierfeldt is here this evening to revise plans for her parking lot that had previously been approved by the Planning Board and the Board of Trustees.
Ms. Thierfeldt said the parking lot and drainage never needed to be on the original plans to begin with. She said because of the lot size those are not requirements.
Building Inspector Jeff Swanson said whether they are required or not, that is what was on the original plans that were submitted and approved by the Planning Board and the Municipal Board. If any changes are made from what was approved those changes need to have board approval.
Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals member John Jablonski asked why her contractor didn’t build what was approved in the plans.
Ms. Thierfeldt said her architect put the dry wells into the plans against her wishes. She said she had a conversation with Mr. Andrew Johnson, EcoStrategies, about what was required for her lot size and it was determined that since it is such a small foot print from the existing structure, none of the drainage was required. She said she thinks her architect felt the need to put them in there just to run her bill up, he then told her he didn’t feel that there was enough time to change anything and told her they would worry about the drainage later.
Ms. Thierfeldt also said the New York State Department of Transportation (DOT) held her project up for six months. The DOT wouldn’t let her put in her permitted electricity so she had temporary electricity, which made it difficult to get her project done. She also said she needed a bigger utility pole and the DOT held her back for that as well.
Ms. Thierfeldt said the DOT didn’t approve her drawings for her suggested parking spaces, they told her that land was not deeded to her. The DOT claimed they have had a right of way across the entire front of her property since 1980, when Fairmount Ave. was moved back approximately 30 ft., making more of a curve. She said when they changed the road she gained frontage that she doesn’t necessarily own, but the previous owner used that land for 30 years. She said then the DOT did go to the county and asked that they re-convey part of the property to her but it was only going to be for the right half of her parking lot. The County Attorney’s office did some research and found that in 1919 her property lost approximately 30 ft. due to the DOT not wanting property owners to own up to the edge of the road. She said the state eventually determined that she in fact does own that land so she had a surveyor and an abstractor confirm that she did indeed own the property, she then filed for a new deed and was able to get the area back. She said she still doesn’t have permission from the DOT to use the parking out front.
Ms. Thierfeldt said then the DOT claimed that portion of the road was owned by the village and called them saying they could turn it over to her.
Mr. Jablonski asked if the state has easements along there.
Ms. Thierfeldt said they do have easements on one of the lots, it is the DOT who landlocked the lot when they put the rail up. There is only one way in and out of her parking lot.
Mr. Jablonski said the pipes that are sticking about 4 ft. out over the stream along with what she is proposing he feels is very unstable and is not acceptable to him. He said he has a problem with amending any plan.
Ms. Thierfeldt said those pipes were for the sump pump and they have since been moved.
Ms. Thierfeldt said it is not unstable and indicated she has not made any changes to that bank. She said the whole reason this has not been completed by now is because her engineers and contractors are overwhelmed with work. She said according to the state none of this had to be done to begin with.
Mr. Jablonski said he doesn’t see where this is a state issue and asked Mr. Swanson what will be done about the parking.
Mr. Swanson said that should be referred to the Planning Board to see if road millings are going to be a suitable parking lot and also being referred back to the Board of Trustees because it does not meet what the original plan was.
Mr. Drago asked how many parking spaces are required for a building that size.
Mr. Swanson said he’d have to look at the NYS building code to see what is actually required. She is required to have one handicap spot per twenty five.
Mr. Jablonski asked where the waste water from the roof is now draining.
Ms. Thierfeldt said it is now draining to the sides of the building.
Mr. Jablonski said if the water goes into the ground, it will come out into the stream and cause problems.
Ms. Thierfeldt said she hasn’t had any issues or problems all winter. She said last July there was a significant flooding event and the water went up to the bank and under the culvert. There is no signs of erosion, it is just as it was before the flooding. I haven’t had any significant floods in the parking lot because there is a slow drain and my sidewalks are heated so there isn’t much water from there, it melts as it falls and said the foot print of the building has not moved any closer to the bank.
Ms. Thierfeldt said she only needed a new site plan because the DOT is not allowing her anymore parking spaces.
Mr. Segrue asked Ms. Thierfeldt what it is she wants in the new site plan for parking.
Ms. Thierfeldt said she now has to take out the parking she had that is in the DOT right-of-way and remove the dry walls. She said she has an existing drain that was in the original plan, she doesn’t know why he didn’t put more in the plan and said the existing one does need to be raised up.
Mr. Jablonski said who would the authority be that could tell me that these items are not required?
Ms. Thierfeldt said she has been working with Mr. Andy Johnson from EcoStrategies, Jamestown.
Mr. Swanson said her plans she has are stamped from Mr. Peter Radka, who is a Professional Architect and he doesn’t know if he has been working on this with Mr. Johnson. He said you could ask for a letter from Mr. Johnson saying this is acceptable and ask him to put his license on the plan as well.
Mr. Drago said before he moves forward, he would like to see it in writing from Mr. Johnson or at least hear from him.
Mr. Drago said the Planning Board and the Board of Trustees looked at these plans at one point and approved multiple dry wells and a change in the drainage in order to protect the stream. The plans were not constructed the way they were approved.
Ms. Thierfeldt apologized and said that was all her engineer, she indicated that is the reason she has since parted ways with that architect and hired Mr. Radka.
Mr. Swanson said the Board of Trustees approved a temporary certificate of occupancy so she would be able to get new plans together, which is due to expire on May 31, 2022. He said she has had all spring to comply. She is now going to have to meet with the Village Board once again to ask for an extension on that temporary certificate of occupancy.
Mr. Swanson said if Mr. Johnson has a stamp then he needs to stamp the plans and we can move on.
Ms. Thierfeldt said she has been talking with Mr. Johnson, he just hasn’t stamped the plans because he was too overwhelmed with work. She said she will be happy to ask Mr. Johnson for a letter if that will help with their decision.
Mr. Jablonski said he’d have a hard time believing Mr. Johnson is ok with this the way it is. There is only gravel, nothing has been planted, there is no top soil or grass and the slope is too steep.
Ms. Thierfeldt said the gravel was added to prevent mud.
Mr. Drago said in order to move forward I would like to see what Mr. Johnson has to say how many drains and trees are required and I would like to see both Mr. Radka’s and Mr. Johnson’s stamps on the plans.
Motion by Louis Drago, seconded by William Chandler, that it is the recommendation of the Planning Board that the Village Board of Trustees grant/approve Ms. Thierfeldt request for an extension on her Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for an additional sixty (60) days, expiring July 31, 2022, where she will have extra time to receive a written statement from Mr. Andy Johnson on her updated site plan for 341-343 E. Fairmount Ave.
Adopted: 4 ayes, no nays (Chandler, Drago, Jablonski, Segrue)
Motion by Louis S. Drago, Jr. seconded by William Chandler to adjourn the regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals at 8:48 PM.
________________________________
Mary B. Currie, Secretary
