Text · page 7 of 11
ZBA Board Member Kevin Ingraham – No ZBA Board Member James Cornell – absent Proof: The Applicant will simply not be able to use the new, unpermitted sheds. Modifications of the existing shed could be an option. This property still has value for other approved uses and could be sold. The property can be used reasonably as is. Any financial issues are self made. 2.) The alleged hardship relating to the property is unique. (The hardship may not apply to a substantial portion of the zoning district or neighborhood): ZBA Chairman Edward Wilkowlaski – No ZBA Board Member Mark Geitler – No ZBA Board Member Russell Clother, Jr. – No ZBA Board Member Kevin Ingraham – No ZBA Board Member James Cornell – absent Proof: The Applicants were given previous acknowledgement that a permit was required for building on property. This property is under the same regulations as the other properties in the same zone. No main building, being used as living quarters. 3.) The requested use variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood: ZBA Chairman Edward Wilkowlaski – Yes ZBA Board Member Mark Geitler – Yes ZBA Board Member Russell Clother, Jr. – Yes ZBA Board Member Kevin Ingraham – No ZBA Board Member James Cornell – absent Proof: No immediate neighbors have opposed to the building of the sheds. This variance would all for habitable structure to exist, in a manner not like the rest of the neighborhood. Area has multiple recreational type residents (Vermont Hill Club) also has existing buildings. 4.) The alleged hardship has been self-created: ZBA Chairman Edward Wilkowlaski – Yes ZBA Board Member Mark Geitler – Yes ZBA Board Member Russell Clother, Jr. – Yes ZBA Board Member Kevin Ingraham – Yes ZBA Board Member James Cornell – absent Proof: The applicant was made aware of issue well in advance of even purchasing the property. This land is not suitable for the use as stated in the code. All variances are self created. Determination of ZBA based on the above factors: The ZBA, after reviewing the above four proofs, find that the applicant has failed to prove unnecessary hardship through the application of the four tests required by the state statutes. The Vote on the Motion: Chairman Edward Wilkolaski – Nay ZBA Board Member Russel Clothier, Jr. - Nay ZBA Board Member Mark Geitler - Nay ZBA Board Member Kevin Ingraham – Nay ZBA Board Member James Cornell – absent. The motion to grant the Use Variance is denied for Case#2-2026. Comments The Applicant stated that from his understanding that the Vermont Hill Club is seasonal, you can’t live there all year round. Board Member Clothier stated that it has evolved through the years and people do. The Applicant asked if it was legally evolved or just evolved. I believe before there were zoning codes and building inspections. The Applicant stressed that he just wants to camp there. Board Member Clothier stated we have to look at it as if you may want to sell it next and those buildings are there now and then the next person decides to live there. The Applicant stated they couldn’t legally, it’s not permanent, it’s a class 260 you can’t live there. Even if you lived in a tent there, I don’t think it’s legal, last time I checked. You can’t live in a hunting shed, that’s homelessness. We couldn’t sell the land in the next five years, we put way more in. We bought it at a higher price then what it’s probably worth number one, number two, we put about Eighty grand into it. If we 7