A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Owner says garage is needed to ‘age in place’; county returns Bloomfield variance referral with comments

September 09, 2026 | Ontario County, New York


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Owner says garage is needed to ‘age in place’; county returns Bloomfield variance referral with comments
The Ontario County Planning Board returned referral 146, a package of three area‑variance requests for 51 East Main Street in the village of Bloomfield, to the local board with written county comments after brief discussion at the board's monthly meeting.

Staff described the proposal as an attached two‑car garage with a front‑porch addition on a 0.42‑acre parcel. The applicant seeks reductions in two side‑yard setbacks (to about 12–13 feet) and a front‑setback reduction to roughly 32 feet when 40 feet is required. Neighbors who appeared at the local hearing told the referring board they worried the front setback change would obstruct eastern views and was out of character for the neighborhood.

Owner Ken Martin told the county board the forward placement is deliberate to allow "aging in place" features. "Part of on the inside of that garage, there's gonna be a ramp," Martin said, adding the space would also house utilities and pantry functions. He argued the lot's irregular subdivision dating to the 1960s produces nonstandard setbacks and that existing neighborhood setbacks vary widely.

Staff flagged traffic‑safety considerations near the roadway and suggested consulting the county Department of Public Works on sight‑distance or access questions. The board treated 146 as a Class 1 referral (local impacts only) and voted to retain the referral and return it to the village planning board with comments, noting neighbor objections and encouraging the local board to require the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use.

The board's action does not alter the local board's authority; a local decision could override county comments by the local body's supermajority rules, which the county advised be accompanied by a written response explaining why the county recommendations were not followed. The referring file will be returned to the village with the county's report for the local board to consider at its next meeting.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee