Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230161 8 Taylor Shed Public Comment Buydos 3James Buydos @ 6 Taylor St. We sƟll oppose the requested variance. All the reasons we have stated in the published public comments. I will again summarize with a few key bullet points which I will read at this evening’s meeƟng: 1. First there were addiƟonal falsehoods stated again by Mrs. Critelli at the last meeƟng. Mrs. Critelli stated that if the shed were to be moved to fit within the required setbacks, that I myself would see “more” of the shed. This statement is again false. I have a complete full view of the shed anywhere its moved to live within the required mandated setbacks. At the first meeƟng you may recall the Critellis brought several neighbors and suggested they would be the “muscle” to help move the shed into compliance. We also pointed out that geƫng access to move with equipment through 4 Richard Ave. driveway as was done when it was installed, is an opƟon. The Critellis simply do not want to move the shed because its an inconvenience. 2. Any of the other “example sheds” do not reside in the WiƩ Southside development. It’s a higher price point development and for a reason, because it’s well-built construcƟon in a planned development. Also, no FOIL request was made for the examples of “other sheds” that do not meet the setback requirements provided by the Critellis. So in reality, the map they provided is useless because we have no way of verifying if the examples provided meet the setbacks – or not. 3. The Critellis have structured their small backyard to take advantage of every square inch, but in doing so have violated exisƟng well established zoning laws. This (combined with other issues not included in the variance request) really has created a privacy issue for myself as the immediate next-door neighbor. The 25’ rear setback for a paƟo really means the Critellis can’t really even have a paƟo in the back yard. Their paƟo starts mere feet from by screened back porch, creaƟng a nuisance when they are using it for entertaining. 4. This issue has allowed me to present mulƟple opƟons to the Critellis via my aƩorney – one including lot line adjustments that would give both parƟes more privacy AND take a net neutral approach with the same size square footage as the exisƟng lot lines. Please see that example below. 5. In closing, we sƟll oppose the requested area variance at 8 Taylor Street. This is also now part of a pending legal maƩer that includes other issues not included int variance applicaƟon – and will be liƟgated in the NYS Supreme Court. 6. Example soluƟon # 1 (of several proposed):