Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves three area variances for backyard storage buildings
Summary
The Zoning Board of Appeals approved area-variance requests for storage buildings at three properties after reviewing the five statutory criteria; applicants were instructed to obtain building permits and the board signaled broader code updates on barn sizes and setbacks may be considered.
The Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant area variances for three applicants seeking to add non-agricultural storage buildings to properties in town.
At the first hearing, the board granted a variance for applicant Andrew Walt to build a 50-by-70 storage structure at 1735 Rich (the board noted the parcel is roughly 10 acres). "I'll open the public hearing," the chair said before the board reviewed the five statutory area-variance factors. After hearing that the lot size would prevent adverse neighborhood impacts, the board voted to approve the variance and directed the applicant to "see the code enforcement officer for the building permit," the chair said.
The board then approved a 32-by-56 storage barn for applicant Victor Burrows at 1067 McCallen / Hamlin Farm on Townline Road. The board recorded that the applicant's property had a tractor and other outdoor equipment and that relief was needed only from the side lot line (the applicant said he was 16 feet from the south property line). Board discussion again applied the five criteria and concluded the requested relief would not create an undesirable change to nearby properties; the motion to grant the variance carried and staff was instructed to advise the applicant on permit steps.
Later, the board approved a 24-by-32 personal storage barn for applicant Gavin Waugh at 1180 Walker Lake Ontario Road. The applicant said he planned to keep two existing smaller sheds and that moving the new building closer to an existing frame shed might have avoided a variance; the board noted the requested setback would be about 7 feet where 15 feet is required, accepted the applicant's rationale, and granted the variance. The chair reminded him to obtain necessary permits from Cheryl in the building office.
All three approvals followed the same process: the chair opened public hearings, the board reviewed the five-factor test for area variances, members asked questions about site conditions and alternatives, and motions were made and seconded. The board recorded each motion and confirmed applicants should apply for building permits and follow-up inspections.
Board members flagged that repeated variance requests for accessory barns and storage units have prompted a separate code review to consider consistent setbacks and possible size limits on small lots. That policy discussion, they said, will be part of upcoming code changes under consideration.
The board did not record complete roll-call tallies in the transcript; minutes should be consulted for the official vote record and permit requirements. The board ended the segment by advising applicants to contact the building department for permit processing and inspections.
