Preview
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
it is also relevant to note thatthe issitesheinghise)hage nothing!o4±withfhe anthetics ofthe
skucture orwhether it contproniiseseanyone's viegmá7ing¾eletters of stÆpert and photos
"corrected"
provided in Mr. Socha application itrelevant to theaissuesat hund. We agree, it is a
lovely structure and does enhance the visuals from the like.
The concerns we bring forward have to do with the PROCESS and LEGALITIES associated
with Mr. Socha's variance application by both Mr. Socha AND the Town of Starkey.
Mn Sodha's$pparent intent to be deceitful to prevent the correciproperty owners ofbeing
notified of hisinitial applicatioti forwariance.
" ML Sochrs apparent intent to be decéitful in his application to the Town of Starkey with
regards to the accuracy of information, and the description, use, and purpose of the
structure.
" The Town of Starkey's lack of due diligence in identifying the inconsistencies in tax map
numbers and fraudulent information in Mr. Socha's initial application.
" The Town of Starkey a building permit for other than where the
issuing property
application for variance was being requested.
4 The Town NOT a STOP ORDER and allowing Mr. Sochaeto "correct
orStarkey issuing
errors"
his despite submitting a fraudulent initial application.
" The Town of Starkey Mr. Socha to illegally build and continue to build, a
allowing
structure on property for which he does not have a valid buildmg penmt.
" The disregard for the covenants and restrictions in the deeds for these parcels of property
"livable"
on the lake resulting in Mr. Socha building a structure.
" The perceived preferential treatment that Mr. Socha seems to be receiving from the Towrr
of Starkey Zoning Board in comparison to restrictions imposed oñ other property owners.
iflt is the boarcPs decision is to approve this application for variance, theirwe as neighboring
property owners, along with all other propertpowners of these lakefront parcels, wilhassume that
we can all build similar structures, making the propedy deed covenants and restrictions
thereby
null and void.
We agree, if there were numerous similar structures on these parcels of land, thenáhe view from
the lake would be greatly enhanceddn fact, we personally could build a bigger structure given
that we own 60 feet of property in comparison to Mr. Socha's 30 feet and couldplan to use it as
a guestbouse,
Edward Worth and Shannon L. Scott
60 Red Cedar Ln, Dundee, NT, 14837
Edward.worth2@gmail.com
Scott.shannoni962@gmail,com
57
1 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
* . . ® .
.
58
2 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
lbr$ Gmail
lvdh htiver Pr0posed ShedVertánce fòr Aan Socha
Christirie Wagner achrissyatthelake@gmail,com> eti¿0en 022.at?:43 M
To: starkeyceo@gmail.com
Dec.2,2022 John and Chris Wagner at 47 Red Cedar Lane Dundee, NY oppose the structure duedoinulilple bode
violations for lake front property.
Sent from my iPhone
3 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF
09 DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
¬up> ¬
’sp 7 g
³¬¬
79P 77 7
p p p n
7 T V
4 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Ray and hinny Brewer
880°Qurran Road
Farmington NY 14425
585-73922040
Lakeview Road Tax No 115;2144
ecember 4 2022
Brian Shiver, and the Starkey Zoning Board of Appeals,
We are writing this letter to. øutline the nurherous reasons for our strong opposition of Sean
Socha's re-application, and to the original application, for a várience ortallowing asshed"Ato bp
built on a small parcetof waterfront.
In October 2021 Sean and Christa Socha requested an application to the Zorfing Board of
Appeals (ZBA) for an Area Variance. The application had inaccuradies, false statements, and
altered documents frorn the Survey Company. These actions caused1the ZBA to proceed with
the process in a totally wrong direction ãnd ndfify the wrong people wit7 surrounding
properties of the 90 Starkey Point Roäd address, not the Lakeview Road waterfront, denying.
all Os of due process. Allegedly, Mr. Socha planned this so the original hearing was beld at a
time of the year when it is w.éll
many known waterfront
that of the Lakeview
property ownérs
would be out of town, most
being seasònal residents. Thus, knowled!e of this application and
subsequent hearings
were not known to those impacted As it was, rhany of the oUiginally
Sshed"
hotified surrounding property owners wërePunder the irnpression the would be builtit
90 Starkey Point Road and did not see än issue. Hence, the ZBA were guided to the false
#shed"
impression th varianoe for the proposäFwas unwopposed;
The entire fiasco was not noticed by those øf us who wogid be impacted until late-surnmer of
20.22 when a lárge load of building materials were delivered lakpside. It took some time to
figure out what had occurred what wastgoing to be built, and evendoore time to gear up and
start inquiries and discussions with th¼$tarkey sóde Entbrcement Officer (CEO). Myinitial visit
to his office was on September 16th. He was defensive and not interested in looKing into my
concerns at that time when I explained
clearly what had happened. Once the waterfront
owners collectively started digging into the details with the help of A FOIL reqsest it becarne
abuUidantly clear what had unfairly happened. It wasn't until a letter outlining all of the.
egregious errors made that any mayément was started by the Town of Starkey on the issue An
order"
immediate request for a "stop work until this mess was cleared up was ignor d and the
"investigative process", if there wás one, dragged on, once again unth the seasorial Lakeyiew
Road residents impacted had left their residences and now can't be in attendance for the
*shed"
December 15th hearing. The construction has continued.. See áttachëd photos
5 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
"shed"
Ourscomplaints and issues With the arthe phakkefrontlocation are
spotinh¼ Sulldinerearsts/Pârt
" It is a permanent pole bam type building. Permanent structures are not allowed for the entire
length of waterfront that constitutes the Lakeview Road properties. All of us who own
waterfront were not allowed anything more than prebuilt sheds that sit on either blocks or
crushed stone bases, and in one case a concrete pad. Large and two story sheds are not
allowed. We were held to strict rules for square footage of the sheds, height restrictions, and
for set backs by the ZBA. It was an arduous process that we all went through, but it appears
Mr. Socha, allegedly with John Socha's influence, was granted whatever he wanted. Height
"shed"
and size restrictions seemingly were ignored. The is not in the character with the
waterfront neighborhood and meets none of the restrictions. See attached photos 1 and 2.
" The "shed"
was constructed with no correct permit for the tax map address where it now
stands. The permit was issued for work to be done at 90 Starkey Point Road which is totally
incorrect. It is alleged the incorrect address was not a mistake but meant to deceive. The
permit was never posted at the construction site, but, the contractor had it in his truck who
reluctantly allowed us to view it once. It appears deceptive it was hidden from anyone who
has the right to view it at anytime.
" Once the details of the application were released to us, it is very clear what is being
finally
"allowed"
built does not come close to what was by the ZBA. The construction plans were
not included in the application, at least none were released to us in the FOlL request. Just a
simple vague pencil sketch. The actual construction plans were tightly held by the contractor
on site and
we were not allowed to see them. The "platform on pylons", which a shed was to
be placed on, allowing water to flow under during storms was never constructed. Instead the
"shed"
first floor of the permanent building is ground level, to allow a full second floor to be
constructed. The water management consists of a berm with large timbers with a buried
drainage system that will attempt to move the rain water to the sides of the building. Further,
the height and construction of the berm will force excess run-off and debris from the road
during storms to the adjoining neighbors properties. Hardly what the application by Mr.
Socha was proposing. See attached photo 5.
" Allthe residents oftakeview Road waterfront were eadh of our ittdividual2BA
admonishedat
hearings in the past years that our sheds would have no accommodations intended for living,
sleeping or bathroom facilities. This is made plear in the original maps drawn up for the Town
of Starkey approvals in the early 1S60% See attached photo 8 Allegedly Mr. Socha tg| s
"shed"
individuals he intends to use the for a remote office and plans fo live in it weekends
during the Summer while be:has a new house built at his property at 90 Starapy Roint Road
after which friends can stay there occasionally. Thusy the need for apertnanent structure and
the second floor. The property already has electriditMo can be done easily; With
living there
the installatiortof thermoepene windows and doors WWshouldn't
be surpriseMhe "shed? will
allegedly be wired, insulated and an HVAC system installed the wiriter while being
oveW
hidden behind the tarps cutteritly blocking the wibdowsand dóoredgaik ZBAtold gathis le
not what is allowed along the waterfronts Will Mr. Socha now be required tbTpply and be
Occupancy"
Fanted a "Gertificate of ptior to occúpancy of thershed"THow will this be
done or even enforced by the CEO? If a blind eye is turned by Dode Enforcement and 00
"shed"
certificate is granted reasoning it is only a and something serious happens bile the
building is occupied for living, will the Town of Starkey be willing to be held legally liable for
allowing this?
62
6 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Section 5, Construction and Inspection, Part A, Per the Code, nothing should be hidden
during the construction process, but with the latest delivery of material, all of the windows
"shed"
and doors of the have been covered with blue tarps inside, blocking the view of any
work being done, most likely the addition of the second floor and other work that should not
be allowed. Another code violation. See attached photo 6.
"shed"
We have also been forwarded from the Town Clerk two letters in favor of the that have
been sent so far. We should point out that while nearby property owners have the right to
comment, both of them are not relevant to this proceeding. Neither of the two letter writers
have property in our section of Lakeview Road and have no idea of the restrictions and codes.
One is located on the end of Starkey Point and the other is outside of our area in the north
cove of Starkey Point. The letters with their gushing, flowery comments
beautification, of
upgrades, and non-obstruction
of views are somewhat de-meaning and are only being sent at
the request of Sean and John Socha, both letters containing the same wording and phrases in
each, to deflect from the real issues all of us are presenting to you. So it should be reasonably
expected they will not influence decisions regarding this matter.
"shed"
In closing, we strongly oppose the approval of
applicationthis by Mr. Socha. The
egregious false statements in
application, the non-compliance even to what was wrongly
approved the first time around by the ZBA, and numerous attempts to bypass the process to
get what the Socha's want warrants scrutiny, and possible legal recourse. We again ask for an
immediate "stop work order", no approval moving forward, and complete removal of the
"shed", to be replaced by what should be to code by the ZBA. It is up to you to correct this
mess.
If we carl't depend ortthe ESA to fairlyditigate fules d codes in ary unblased manner tõ all the
takpaying residerits whoaresowed due process in theTown of Starkeyewhat is the purpose of
having a ZBA?
If you have any questions please contact us.
Ray and Ginny Brewer
63
7 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
and as can be seen not
Photo 1. The "shed", tota y out of character
with the other sheds in the neighborhood.
conforming
64
8 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Photo 2. Lakeside view of the "shed". Note the compar son to a previously
approved ZBA correct shed to the right. Also, one of the drain pipes from
the berm can be seen on the left of the building. The first floor is ground
level, seen at the entryway. Obviously this is to allow internal height for a
second floor. This is a permanent building, not a "shed". It is a cottage!
65
9 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Photo 3. A typical shed at the Lakeview waterfront. Note the kayak
storage that is common in the area, which contrasts with Mr. Socha's
alleged intentions to store his inside, vertically.
66
10 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Photo 4. More of the typical sheds on the Lakeview waterfront.
67
11 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Photo 5. The berm with associated drainage pipes (buried and not seen).
pylons"
This reveals the "platform on was never constructed and allegedly
never intended to be. The previous owner had an approved wooden shed
and the yellow seen on the ground (parallel to red line) are 6 inch tall
concrete parking stop blocks used to prevent vehicles from hitting her
shed. As can be seen, the entire berm has been raised at least 6 inches,
burying the blocks in the ground, and designed to force run-off to both
neighboring properties. Also note in the background another shed with
the common means of storing kayaks.
68
12 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Photo 6. This recent, 12/22, image shows all windows and doors being
blocked with blue tarps, a violation of Starkey Town Code Section 5,
Construction and Inspection, Part A
69
13 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Photo 7. A view north along the Lakeview waterfront showing more sheds,
all approved in past years by ZBA with tight restrictions. This is in stark
"shed"
contrast to the oversized permanent or cottage that is being
allowed to be built.
70
14 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
71
15 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
c
-
44
NECA @°A
outerspaw A
LAKE
37A
ar.swage
34A
he,¾e,
XTA
of
am
394
km
ang
no 24
tack 3
A
A")ot
is pam*aw
showms
36A
ble
PLA 29A
Svecines N
4tes
4 of
20'aidatten 28A
Scale.•
well
LOT 27A___.-..___....
enn0t+ S
on Ed"K 24A
any
or
15A
A'lot. eac.h
7.4A
tot
cW54ashpreA,*FÆ"a)t
23A
.
e, 2? sa"ww
"
z
aga½g 204
6 .r-
0. o O -C
oMC O 9- O C o z o
¦ m 2É- B ¦ 2 .E C a ¦ m
C -o 3 •Q C c¦ c ø
e E ±-All -o _C C o ene --
OO > O .
16 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
Erica Davis
37 Red Cedar Lane . .
Dundee, NY 14837
To whom it may concern,
I am writing on behalf of my neighbors, Sean and Christa Socha. t have had the pleasure of
observing their process of makingimprovements to their lakefront parcel this summer and I can
attest that the investments are making are much needed and ultimately will benefit the
they
Lakeview Road community collectively. I own a parcel on 1.akeview as wel; approximately five
units to the south of Mr. and Mrs. Socha,
They have removed a dilapidated old shed and a dangerous and unsightly and an old tree from
the property. In an area where a little TLC is much needed, Mr. and Mrs. Socha have gone above
and beyond to raise the standard of what lake living on Seneca Lake should resemble. As a next
generating property owner in the area, I, like the Socha's believe that it is our duty to maintain
these properties in a manner that they may be enjoyed safely by our families for generations to
come. Mr. ond Mrs. Socho ore doing exactly thatt
The have erected a beautiful flew structure that adds a distinctive (and much needed) element
of class to the Lakeview Road community. Their design is insync with current design trends.The
structure does not in ony way compmmise thè view ofany other rèsidents occupying their own
personal properties. Similar structures to theirs can be seen abundantly throughout the finger
lakes as the next round of property owners are choosing to invest in the revamping of lakefront
property in the region. As a neighboring resident, I appreciate their thoughtfulness throughout
the process and attention to detail with the design itself. The high quality of their work will help
set the Lakeview Road region apart in the most desirable way possiblel
In closing, the Socha's have done a superior]ob on their renovation, which in turn helps us alli It
would be my pleasure to speak more on this matter with you at your convenience.
Most Sincerely,
Erica Davis
efiavis@williamsoncentral.org
585.880.6032
17 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
. c
74
18 of 56
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023
M Gmail
Agninst Sacha vanance approval
Tom Schomer Tue ec*63 2Ó22 at 2:30
To: Brian Shriver starkeystipervisor@gmail,com
I forgot to sign the previous letter, so in case that makes a difference, I baye signed this one.
These are the reasons I believe the Socha Variance application should be denied arid the structure removed:
1. The delivery of a large load of lumber alerted Lake Neighbors that a construction project appeared imminent on
Mr. Socha's lakefront lot. After conferring with each other it became evident that none of us had received notice of
any proposed structure. Several of us immediately went to visit the Starkey CEO (Code Enforcement Officer) and
expressed our concerns. Mr. Shriver adamantly refused to accept the possibility that we had not received
sa
Preview
FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 it is also relevant to note thatthe issitesheinghise)hage nothing!o4±withfhe anthetics ofthe skucture orwhether it contproniiseseanyone's viegmá7ing¾eletters of stÆpert and photos "corrected" provided in Mr. Socha application itrelevant to theaissuesat hund. We agree, it is a lovely structure and does enhance the visuals from the like. The concerns we bring forward have to do with the PROCESS and LEGALITIES associated with Mr. Socha's variance application by both Mr. Socha AND the Town of Starkey. Mn Sodha's$pparent intent to be deceitful to prevent the correciproperty owners ofbeing notified of hisinitial applicatioti forwariance. " ML Sochrs apparent intent to be decéitful in his application to the Town of Starkey with regards to the accuracy of information, and the description, use, and purpose of the structure. " The Town of Starkey's lack of due diligence in identifying the inconsistencies in tax map numbers and fraudulent information in Mr. Socha's initial application. " The Town of Starkey a building permit for other than where the issuing property application for variance was being requested. 4 The Town NOT a STOP ORDER and allowing Mr. Sochaeto "correct orStarkey issuing errors" his despite submitting a fraudulent initial application. " The Town of Starkey Mr. Socha to illegally build and continue to build, a allowing structure on property for which he does not have a valid buildmg penmt. " The disregard for the covenants and restrictions in the deeds for these parcels of property "livable" on the lake resulting in Mr. Socha building a structure. " The perceived preferential treatment that Mr. Socha seems to be receiving from the Towrr of Starkey Zoning Board in comparison to restrictions imposed oñ other property owners. iflt is the boarcPs decision is to approve this application for variance, theirwe as neighboring property owners, along with all other propertpowners of these lakefront parcels, wilhassume that we can all build similar structures, making the propedy deed covenants and restrictions thereby null and void. We agree, if there were numerous similar structures on these parcels of land, thenáhe view from the lake would be greatly enhanceddn fact, we personally could build a bigger structure given that we own 60 feet of property in comparison to Mr. Socha's 30 feet and couldplan to use it as a guestbouse, Edward Worth and Shannon L. Scott 60 Red Cedar Ln, Dundee, NT, 14837 Edward.worth2@gmail.com Scott.shannoni962@gmail,com 57 1 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 * . . ® . . 58 2 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 lbr$ Gmail lvdh htiver Pr0posed ShedVertánce fòr Aan Socha Christirie Wagner achrissyatthelake@gmail,com> eti¿0en 022.at?:43 M To: starkeyceo@gmail.com Dec.2,2022 John and Chris Wagner at 47 Red Cedar Lane Dundee, NY oppose the structure duedoinulilple bode violations for lake front property. Sent from my iPhone 3 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF 09 DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 ¬up> ¬ ’sp 7 g ³¬¬ 79P 77 7 p p p n 7 T V 4 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Ray and hinny Brewer 880°Qurran Road Farmington NY 14425 585-73922040 Lakeview Road Tax No 115;2144 ecember 4 2022 Brian Shiver, and the Starkey Zoning Board of Appeals, We are writing this letter to. øutline the nurherous reasons for our strong opposition of Sean Socha's re-application, and to the original application, for a várience ortallowing asshed"Ato bp built on a small parcetof waterfront. In October 2021 Sean and Christa Socha requested an application to the Zorfing Board of Appeals (ZBA) for an Area Variance. The application had inaccuradies, false statements, and altered documents frorn the Survey Company. These actions caused1the ZBA to proceed with the process in a totally wrong direction ãnd ndfify the wrong people wit7 surrounding properties of the 90 Starkey Point Roäd address, not the Lakeview Road waterfront, denying. all Os of due process. Allegedly, Mr. Socha planned this so the original hearing was beld at a time of the year when it is w.éll many known waterfront that of the Lakeview property ownérs would be out of town, most being seasònal residents. Thus, knowled!e of this application and subsequent hearings were not known to those impacted As it was, rhany of the oUiginally Sshed" hotified surrounding property owners wërePunder the irnpression the would be builtit 90 Starkey Point Road and did not see än issue. Hence, the ZBA were guided to the false #shed" impression th varianoe for the proposäFwas unwopposed; The entire fiasco was not noticed by those øf us who wogid be impacted until late-surnmer of 20.22 when a lárge load of building materials were delivered lakpside. It took some time to figure out what had occurred what wastgoing to be built, and evendoore time to gear up and start inquiries and discussions with th¼$tarkey sóde Entbrcement Officer (CEO). Myinitial visit to his office was on September 16th. He was defensive and not interested in looKing into my concerns at that time when I explained clearly what had happened. Once the waterfront owners collectively started digging into the details with the help of A FOIL reqsest it becarne abuUidantly clear what had unfairly happened. It wasn't until a letter outlining all of the. egregious errors made that any mayément was started by the Town of Starkey on the issue An order" immediate request for a "stop work until this mess was cleared up was ignor d and the "investigative process", if there wás one, dragged on, once again unth the seasorial Lakeyiew Road residents impacted had left their residences and now can't be in attendance for the *shed" December 15th hearing. The construction has continued.. See áttachëd photos 5 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 "shed" Ourscomplaints and issues With the arthe phakkefrontlocation are spotinh¼ Sulldinerearsts/Pârt " It is a permanent pole bam type building. Permanent structures are not allowed for the entire length of waterfront that constitutes the Lakeview Road properties. All of us who own waterfront were not allowed anything more than prebuilt sheds that sit on either blocks or crushed stone bases, and in one case a concrete pad. Large and two story sheds are not allowed. We were held to strict rules for square footage of the sheds, height restrictions, and for set backs by the ZBA. It was an arduous process that we all went through, but it appears Mr. Socha, allegedly with John Socha's influence, was granted whatever he wanted. Height "shed" and size restrictions seemingly were ignored. The is not in the character with the waterfront neighborhood and meets none of the restrictions. See attached photos 1 and 2. " The "shed" was constructed with no correct permit for the tax map address where it now stands. The permit was issued for work to be done at 90 Starkey Point Road which is totally incorrect. It is alleged the incorrect address was not a mistake but meant to deceive. The permit was never posted at the construction site, but, the contractor had it in his truck who reluctantly allowed us to view it once. It appears deceptive it was hidden from anyone who has the right to view it at anytime. " Once the details of the application were released to us, it is very clear what is being finally "allowed" built does not come close to what was by the ZBA. The construction plans were not included in the application, at least none were released to us in the FOlL request. Just a simple vague pencil sketch. The actual construction plans were tightly held by the contractor on site and we were not allowed to see them. The "platform on pylons", which a shed was to be placed on, allowing water to flow under during storms was never constructed. Instead the "shed" first floor of the permanent building is ground level, to allow a full second floor to be constructed. The water management consists of a berm with large timbers with a buried drainage system that will attempt to move the rain water to the sides of the building. Further, the height and construction of the berm will force excess run-off and debris from the road during storms to the adjoining neighbors properties. Hardly what the application by Mr. Socha was proposing. See attached photo 5. " Allthe residents oftakeview Road waterfront were eadh of our ittdividual2BA admonishedat hearings in the past years that our sheds would have no accommodations intended for living, sleeping or bathroom facilities. This is made plear in the original maps drawn up for the Town of Starkey approvals in the early 1S60% See attached photo 8 Allegedly Mr. Socha tg| s "shed" individuals he intends to use the for a remote office and plans fo live in it weekends during the Summer while be:has a new house built at his property at 90 Starapy Roint Road after which friends can stay there occasionally. Thusy the need for apertnanent structure and the second floor. The property already has electriditMo can be done easily; With living there the installatiortof thermoepene windows and doors WWshouldn't be surpriseMhe "shed? will allegedly be wired, insulated and an HVAC system installed the wiriter while being oveW hidden behind the tarps cutteritly blocking the wibdowsand dóoredgaik ZBAtold gathis le not what is allowed along the waterfronts Will Mr. Socha now be required tbTpply and be Occupancy" Fanted a "Gertificate of ptior to occúpancy of thershed"THow will this be done or even enforced by the CEO? If a blind eye is turned by Dode Enforcement and 00 "shed" certificate is granted reasoning it is only a and something serious happens bile the building is occupied for living, will the Town of Starkey be willing to be held legally liable for allowing this? 62 6 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Section 5, Construction and Inspection, Part A, Per the Code, nothing should be hidden during the construction process, but with the latest delivery of material, all of the windows "shed" and doors of the have been covered with blue tarps inside, blocking the view of any work being done, most likely the addition of the second floor and other work that should not be allowed. Another code violation. See attached photo 6. "shed" We have also been forwarded from the Town Clerk two letters in favor of the that have been sent so far. We should point out that while nearby property owners have the right to comment, both of them are not relevant to this proceeding. Neither of the two letter writers have property in our section of Lakeview Road and have no idea of the restrictions and codes. One is located on the end of Starkey Point and the other is outside of our area in the north cove of Starkey Point. The letters with their gushing, flowery comments beautification, of upgrades, and non-obstruction of views are somewhat de-meaning and are only being sent at the request of Sean and John Socha, both letters containing the same wording and phrases in each, to deflect from the real issues all of us are presenting to you. So it should be reasonably expected they will not influence decisions regarding this matter. "shed" In closing, we strongly oppose the approval of applicationthis by Mr. Socha. The egregious false statements in application, the non-compliance even to what was wrongly approved the first time around by the ZBA, and numerous attempts to bypass the process to get what the Socha's want warrants scrutiny, and possible legal recourse. We again ask for an immediate "stop work order", no approval moving forward, and complete removal of the "shed", to be replaced by what should be to code by the ZBA. It is up to you to correct this mess. If we carl't depend ortthe ESA to fairlyditigate fules d codes in ary unblased manner tõ all the takpaying residerits whoaresowed due process in theTown of Starkeyewhat is the purpose of having a ZBA? If you have any questions please contact us. Ray and Ginny Brewer 63 7 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 and as can be seen not Photo 1. The "shed", tota y out of character with the other sheds in the neighborhood. conforming 64 8 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Photo 2. Lakeside view of the "shed". Note the compar son to a previously approved ZBA correct shed to the right. Also, one of the drain pipes from the berm can be seen on the left of the building. The first floor is ground level, seen at the entryway. Obviously this is to allow internal height for a second floor. This is a permanent building, not a "shed". It is a cottage! 65 9 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Photo 3. A typical shed at the Lakeview waterfront. Note the kayak storage that is common in the area, which contrasts with Mr. Socha's alleged intentions to store his inside, vertically. 66 10 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Photo 4. More of the typical sheds on the Lakeview waterfront. 67 11 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Photo 5. The berm with associated drainage pipes (buried and not seen). pylons" This reveals the "platform on was never constructed and allegedly never intended to be. The previous owner had an approved wooden shed and the yellow seen on the ground (parallel to red line) are 6 inch tall concrete parking stop blocks used to prevent vehicles from hitting her shed. As can be seen, the entire berm has been raised at least 6 inches, burying the blocks in the ground, and designed to force run-off to both neighboring properties. Also note in the background another shed with the common means of storing kayaks. 68 12 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Photo 6. This recent, 12/22, image shows all windows and doors being blocked with blue tarps, a violation of Starkey Town Code Section 5, Construction and Inspection, Part A 69 13 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Photo 7. A view north along the Lakeview waterfront showing more sheds, all approved in past years by ZBA with tight restrictions. This is in stark "shed" contrast to the oversized permanent or cottage that is being allowed to be built. 70 14 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 71 15 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 c - 44 NECA @°A outerspaw A LAKE 37A ar.swage 34A he,¾e, XTA of am 394 km ang no 24 tack 3 A A")ot is pam*aw showms 36A ble PLA 29A Svecines N 4tes 4 of 20'aidatten 28A Scale.• well LOT 27A___.-..___.... enn0t+ S on Ed"K 24A any or 15A A'lot. eac.h 7.4A tot cW54ashpreA,*FÆ"a)t 23A . e, 2? sa"ww " z aga½g 204 6 .r- 0. o O -C oMC O 9- O C o z o ¦ m 2É- B ¦ 2 .E C a ¦ m C -o 3 •Q C c¦ c ø e E ±-All -o _C C o ene -- OO > O . 16 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 Erica Davis 37 Red Cedar Lane . . Dundee, NY 14837 To whom it may concern, I am writing on behalf of my neighbors, Sean and Christa Socha. t have had the pleasure of observing their process of makingimprovements to their lakefront parcel this summer and I can attest that the investments are making are much needed and ultimately will benefit the they Lakeview Road community collectively. I own a parcel on 1.akeview as wel; approximately five units to the south of Mr. and Mrs. Socha, They have removed a dilapidated old shed and a dangerous and unsightly and an old tree from the property. In an area where a little TLC is much needed, Mr. and Mrs. Socha have gone above and beyond to raise the standard of what lake living on Seneca Lake should resemble. As a next generating property owner in the area, I, like the Socha's believe that it is our duty to maintain these properties in a manner that they may be enjoyed safely by our families for generations to come. Mr. ond Mrs. Socho ore doing exactly thatt The have erected a beautiful flew structure that adds a distinctive (and much needed) element of class to the Lakeview Road community. Their design is insync with current design trends.The structure does not in ony way compmmise thè view ofany other rèsidents occupying their own personal properties. Similar structures to theirs can be seen abundantly throughout the finger lakes as the next round of property owners are choosing to invest in the revamping of lakefront property in the region. As a neighboring resident, I appreciate their thoughtfulness throughout the process and attention to detail with the design itself. The high quality of their work will help set the Lakeview Road region apart in the most desirable way possiblel In closing, the Socha's have done a superior]ob on their renovation, which in turn helps us alli It would be my pleasure to speak more on this matter with you at your convenience. Most Sincerely, Erica Davis efiavis@williamsoncentral.org 585.880.6032 17 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 . c 74 18 of 56 FILED: YATES COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2023 08:45 AM INDEX NO. 2023-5098 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2023 M Gmail Agninst Sacha vanance approval Tom Schomer Tue ec*63 2Ó22 at 2:30 To: Brian Shriver starkeystipervisor@gmail,com I forgot to sign the previous letter, so in case that makes a difference, I baye signed this one. These are the reasons I believe the Socha Variance application should be denied arid the structure removed: 1. The delivery of a large load of lumber alerted Lake Neighbors that a construction project appeared imminent on Mr. Socha's lakefront lot. After conferring with each other it became evident that none of us had received notice of any proposed structure. Several of us immediately went to visit the Starkey CEO (Code Enforcement Officer) and expressed our concerns. Mr. Shriver adamantly refused to accept the possibility that we had not received sa