(3) Zoning Board of Appeals

Town of Red Hook Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes May 8, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:05 PM by Chairman Nick Annas. ROLL CALL Members Present: Nick Annas, Chris Carney, John Douglas, Tim Ross, Trilby Sieverding Absent: Ken Anderson, Jim Hegstetter PRELIMINARY BUSINESS Minutes of April 10, 2013: Chairman Annas asked if everyone had read the April 10, 2013 Minutes and invited comments or questions. Hearing none, Tim Ross made a motion to approve the Minutes as written. The motion was seconded by Chairman Annas and all were in favor. Planning Board Minutes and Letters: Chairman Annas asked the Board if they had any comments. There were no comments from the Board. Building Inspector/ZEO Permits and Memos: The Permits were reviewed by the Board. There were no Memos to be reviewed. REVIEW OF APPEAL 7:10 Appeal 13-02, Trevor and Joanna Baker application to erect a 6 ft. lattice fence on a small portion (48 ft.) of road front (house side yard) to provide added privacy to back yard, while maintaining the character of the neighborhood. Section 143-28A of the Town of Red Hook Zoning Law limits the height of fences to 4 ft. in a required front yard. The applicant’s property is located at 107 Old Post Road North in the hamlet zoning district, Tax Grid #6373-01-254977. Trevor and Joanna Baker presented their request to the Board. Chairman Annas asked the Board if the Bakers have to have the same setback on both streets? Tim answered yes. You define one as a back and one as a side. The setbacks have to be 60 ft. from both roads. They are treated as two front yards Chairman Annas asked if the Bakers would like to present their arguments. Trevor said as was expressed there, it’s just going to be a lattice fence. It’s not going to be a privacy fence. Chairman Annas asked if they had a picture of the fencing. Joanna showed them the picture of the 2” square lattice that they would like to put up. Trilby asked if the fencing would be on the ground or on posts. Joanna said it depends on the grading. Joanna said they have a privacy fence between the properties which, because it slopes, some of it has a little bit more space on the ground than others. Trilby asked if they were going to keep the same look as the privacy fence. Joanna said yes. Chairman Annas asked what the treatment was going to be on the fence. Trevor said solid stain in a brown color to match the existing fence. John asked how far off from the edge of the road are they going to go with the fence. Joanna said they currently have a bed of shrubs which are approximately 6 ft. away. The fence is going to go behind the bed of shrubs. John said he thought there was a culvert right there? Joanna said there was. Tim said it’s just on the west side. Tim said the culvert crosses there and then it goes up to the Saulpaugh property then under 9G behind the one on the corner that has the LeGrand sign on it. Joanna said the fence will be in the yard. It’s not going to be close to the road. Chairman Annas asked if a survey was done. Chairman Annas asked if they were sure that the fence would be on their property. Trevor said we had a survey done and, it will be on our property. Trilby asked if they planned on growing something on the fence. Joanna said the lattice is going to be used so the fence doesn’t look too “walled” and to let a little more light through. Joanna would also have some flowers there. It would give us a little bit of privacy but, it will also look nice. 2 Tim made a couple of comments: The 6 ft. portion shouldn’t have any impact on visibility. Tim wanted to know how far back the 4 ft. high fence would be, from the edge of the pavement, how far did they think? Joanna said there’s a Stop sign and there is a bed that’s behind that stop sign. They are going to put the fence behind that bed. Chairman Annas asked if the Board could walk the property and could they please stake out exactly where the fence will be. Chairman Annas asked if there were any further comments. There were none. ADJOURNMENT Tim Ross made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Chris Carney and all were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted Jackie Fenaroli ZBA Secretary 3