Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board denies request for oversized accessory shed after members cite perpetuity and neighborhood character
Summary
The Henrietta Zoning Board of Appeals denied an applicant’s request for a large detached shed after board members said the proposed aggregate square footage and height would be excessive and would remain with the property in perpetuity.
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Henrietta Zoning Board of Appeals on July 1 denied an application from Christian Cruz Santana to build a 14-by-32-foot, 12-foot-high detached shed after several board members said the proposal was substantially larger than the town’s accessory-structure norms and would alter the neighborhood’s character.
Cruz Santana told the board he had rented two 10-by-20 storage units for years and wanted enough space at home for cars, motorcycles and seasonal equipment. "I've been renting 2 storage units," he said, describing the financial burden and saying his family needs would make the larger shed practical. He also said he would keep an existing smaller shed and paint it to match the new structure.
Board members pushed him to consider smaller alternatives, consolidation or removing the existing shed. Members repeatedly emphasized that variances run with the land: "A variance stays with the property indefinitely," the chair (speaker 6) said during deliberations, a point several members cited when urging a smaller footprint.
Multiple board members described the requested 593-square-foot increase (combined with the existing structure) as "substantial" and said it would harm the subordinate scale of accessory buildings in the area. After public discussion and questions about height, layout and perpetuity, the board moved and seconded a resolution to deny the variance and approved the motion by voice vote.
The denial means Cruz Santana may withdraw and submit a revised request with a smaller combined footprint or remove the existing shed and reapply; the board noted applicants can also pursue a tabling option to develop a reduced plan for the next meeting.
What’s next: The applicant was offered guidance on alternative solutions (combining structures or consulting the building inspector for layout options) but left the meeting without a granted variance.

