Applicant’s Lot‑of‑Record request put on hold after ZBA cites abandonment rule

The Town of Pembroke Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed a May 20 application from Eric Von Kramer seeking a Lot of Record determination for Tax Map #17.-1-91, a parcel in the Medium Density Residential district, and left the public hearing open until the board’s June meeting.

Chairman Terrance Daniel opened the hearing and outlined that notice had been published in the Batavia Daily and mailed to neighbors; no written comments for or against the application had been received. Board members reviewed photos submitted with the application showing a garage and mobile home in 2008, demolition of the mobile home by 2013, and only a garage remaining in 2025.

Board members focused on Town Zoning Law Section 304 B, which states that a nonconforming use is deemed abandoned if it ceases and is not reinstated within one year. Daniel said that under state and local practice it would be “very unusual” to grant the relief requested where an existing nonconforming dwelling was removed and not replaced within the one‑year period, and that abandonment generally removes grandfathered protections. Jim Wolbert, the zoning enforcement officer, told the board the garage and mobile home might have been present since the 1950s, before zoning rules existed; the board agreed that accessory structures now standing without a principal residence must be reviewed by the ZBA before improvements.

Eric Von Kramer arrived during deliberations and said he believed the meeting began later than scheduled and summarized the parcel’s history: a prior house and an approved septic system, water at the street, and a previously permitted garage. He told the board that earlier owners had obtained Planning Board approval and county support for a proposed surveyor’s office, subject to an area variance from the ZBA. “I thought the meeting began at 7:30 p.m.,” Von Kramer said when explaining his late arrival.

Members discussed two pathways forward: (1) seek a Lot of Record determination, which would allow the use of alternate zoning setbacks if the lot could be treated as grandfathered; or (2) apply for area variances under the current Zoning Law. Several board members noted that acquiring adjacent land would reduce the amount of variance required and make a variance application more straightforward. At one point a board member suggested granting a 15‑foot variance for frontage and a 50‑foot variance for depth as hypothetical examples for discussion, but no variance was moved or adopted at the meeting.

Mr. Von Kramer asked the board to postpone a decision while he explored options. The board closed the hearing, then voted to re‑open it and leave it open until the ZBA’s June meeting so the applicant could pursue alternatives (motion by Michael Wolf; seconded by Cherie Uebelhoer; voice vote 5–0). No final determination on Lot of Record status or any variance was made.

The board also handled routine business: it approved minutes from the March 18 meeting at the start of the session and adjourned at 7:40 p.m. The public hearing will resume at the June ZBA meeting; the applicant was advised to consider acquiring adjacent property or to prepare a variance application under current setbacks.