Nicole Dobson

The Board of Zoning Appeals meeting, conducted electronically via Facebook Live due to COVID-19 precautions, addressed several applications requiring area variances. Old Business included continuing the public hearing for Bernard J. Vito regarding an accessory structure setback variance, and continuing the hearing for KBM Associates, Inc. concerning a second-story addition setback variance. The application for Paul Kondolf, requesting an area variance for an attached garage exceeding the maximum accessory structure square footage, was approved with conditions, including obtaining necessary building permits and an agreement not to request further accessory structures. New Business involved continuing the public hearings for Harry E. Morris, III, concerning fence height/location and an accessory structure location variance, and for Michael Green regarding setback and total square footage variances for a proposed attached garage. The meeting concluded with an adjournment time of 7:48 P.M.

The Board of Zoning Appeals agenda for the meeting includes several public hearings under Old Business, primarily focusing on area variance requests for constructing a 6-foot-high closed-construction vinyl fence in various locations on a corner lot, concerning sight-triangle and yard setback regulations. New Business includes a previously requested Special Use Permit for a major home occupation which has since been withdrawn by the applicant. The remaining New Business item involves an area variance request for an existing accessory structure that is too close to the property line in the rear yard of a corner lot. The agenda also lists a discussion topic on Neighborhood Notification Modification and concludes with adjournment.

The meeting involved discussions and actions related to several agenda items. A special planning topic included a public comment and review of the Town of Greece's MS-4 Annual Permit, with further public comment to be posted online. Under site plans, the application for Air Water Gas Solutions, Inc. at Eastman Business Park was continued to the next meeting pending further review concerning safety, noise impact, compliance with regulations (including SEQR review where the Planning Board acts as lead agency due to proximity to a National Historic District), environmental concerns regarding soil remediation, and clarification on point-of-contact procedures for the business park. Another action involved granting two 90-day extensions for the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Section 1 of the Edge at 3500 subdivision.

The agenda for the meeting covered Old Business items, including requests for area variances related to the construction of a detached garage exceeding maximum floor area limits and setback requirements for a proposed principal structure. New Business featured several requests for area variances concerning fence height and construction type in front yards, location of proposed decks in waterfront yards, and setbacks for those decks. Additionally, requests included an area variance for an additional freestanding sign at a business park, and a waiver request for a special use permit to operate a motor vehicle service station.

The Board of Zoning Appeals addressed several old business items requiring area variances. Approval, with conditions, was granted for an application to keep four dogs at a residence instead of the permitted three, following verification of spaying status for one dog and adherence to future spaying commitment for another. An application for area variances related to the placement of a temporary aboveground pool, due to lot size constraints, was also approved with specific conditions, including compliance with town codes and seasonal removal. An application for variances concerning the height and setbacks of two freestanding identification signs for an apartment complex was addressed by modifying the neighborhood notification requirements based on staff recommendations. Two new business applications, one concerning fence height and construction on a corner lot, and another regarding accessory structure floor area ratios, were both continued to subsequent meetings for further review by the applicant.