A Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, September 23, 2010 at the Mendon Town Hall, 16 West Main Street, Honeoye Falls, NY, 14472 at 7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: 	Kevin Wright - Chair 
			Don Irvine 
			Don Thorp  
			Bruce Peckham
			Liz Sciortino

ATTORNEY:	Doug Jones 
	
OTHERS: 	Edward Walsh (PB)

Minutes were taken by Lea Walsh.

Mr. Wright called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m.

Approve Minutes of September 9, 2010 meeting.
MOTION
Mr. Irvine moved, seconded by Mr. Wright, to approve the September 9, 2010 minutes as amended.
ADOPTED
Mr. Wright-aye, Mr. Irvine-aye, Mr. Thorp-aye, Mr. Peckham-aye, Ms. Sciortino-aye.
Discussion
The Board discussed and amended the Cook Area Variance Determination drafted by Mr. Peckham.
COOK AREA VARIANCE DETERMINATION

Mr. Peckham moved, seconded by Ms. Sciortino, that the application by Todd and Laura Cook, 142 Chamberlain Road, Honeoye Falls, NY, for an area variance at said property consisting of 32.978 acres, bearing Tax Account No. 215.01-12.1, located in a RA-1 zone, to construct an 85’ x 175’ accessory structure which, when added to the existing accessory structures, will result in a total of approximately 20,669 square feet of accessory structures, which exceeds the 1% lot coverage allowed by Town Code by approximately 6,304 square feet, be approved based on the following findings of fact and conclusions of law with conditions:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1.	Rob Meehan, Meehan Architecture, and Laura Cook appeared before the Board for Todd and Laura Cook, 142 Chamberlain Road, Honeoye Falls, NY at a public hearing on September 9, 2010. 

2.	The accessory structure Mr. and Mrs. Cook wish to construct is an 85’ by 175’ private recreational indoor horseback riding ring. The Cooks own hunter/jumper horses. The proposed ring will be built to the minimum size for the riding activities of the applicant.

3.	Mr. Meehan presented an architectural drawing of the proposed building to the Board. At Mr. Meehan’s request, Mike Tanzini of Ted Collins Tree and Landscape presented to the Board on behalf of the applicants a landscape plan drawing demonstrating the landscape plan. The Cooks’ construction and landscaping designs are intended to provide synergy with the architectural configuration of the existing property.

4.	The structure itself is a pole barn with posts and trusses but the exterior cladding will prevent a pole barn appearance. It will be designed to look like a wooden Dutch gable building that will have windows with shutters and an architectural shingled roof.  It will have cultured stone on the bottom. The peak of the building would be 29.5’, and the roof pitch would be 3.5/12. The east side the structure’s interior will be built to include a laundry room, storage room, bathroom, and a viewing room. In order to create a uniform appearance, the landscape plan includes at the entry to the new location a repeat of the gate style of the existing main entryway to the property. Mr. Tanzini stated that the area near the new structure would consist of open lawns populated by over seventy various types of trees to create a park-like effect over time.

5.	Mrs. Cook stated that they previously owned just less than 7 acres and that they bought an adjacent three acre lot last summer. They then purchased 24 acres from their south side neighbor.  The accessory structure and riding complex will be constructed within the newly purchased acreage. In order to mitigate the 1% lot coverage allowed by Town Code 15 additional acres would be needed, but the neighbor would not sell additional land.  

6.	During the discussion of environmental issues, the applicants indicated that six to eight downspouts would provide for runoff from the roof of the structure. Manure from the complex is picked up weekly by a local farmer to fertilize his land. It will not be spread on the Cooks’ property. The need for additional septic service is yet to be determined. Limited exterior lighting is planned for the gate posts at the road and in the soffits above the front door of the riding ring.

7.	Mrs. Cook stated that this structure will not be operated as a business.

8.	Two members of the public spoke at the public hearing and were complimentary regarding the work the applicants have done with water drainage in connection with their previous expansion activities on the property.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1.	The benefit Mr. and Mrs. Cook are attempting to achieve cannot be achieved by any other means.

2.	The granting of this area variance will not create an undesirable change to the neighborhood or to nearby properties.

3.	The request is substantial.

4.	The granting of this request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects.

5.	The difficulty is self-created.

6.	This is a Type II action under SEQR.

CONDITIONS:

The applicants will provide the following:

1.	A copy of the Meehan architect’s drawing(s) of the proposed accessory structure project in the same format presented at the public hearing September 9, 2010.

2.	A copy of the Ted Collins Tree and Landscape drawing(s) of the property landscape plan in the same format presented at the public hearing September 9, 2010.

3.	A topographic map to show the elevation from Chamberlain Road to the proposed accessory structure and adjacent paddock area.

4.	In as much as the applicant stated that the structure would not be used for business/commercial activities, such activities are not permitted.

MOTION
Mr. Peckham moved, seconded by Ms. Sciortino, to approve the amended Cook Area Variance Determination.
ADOPTED
Mr. Wright-aye, Mr. Irvine-aye, Mr. Thorp-aye, Mr. Peckham-aye, Ms. Sciortino-aye.

MOTION
Mr. Wright moved, seconded by Ms. Sciortino, to adjourn at 7:58 p.m.
ADOPTED
Mr. Wright-aye, Mr. Irvine-aye, Mr. Thorp-aye, Mr. Peckham-aye, Ms. Sciortino-aye.