ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 1

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Erie County, New York, minutes of the November 18, 2003 meeting held at the Basement Public Meeting Room, S4295 South Buffalo Street.

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:                Remy Orffeo, Chairman

Donald Holmwood                              

Robert Lennartz

                                                          Jo Ann Litwin, Alternate

                                                          Deborah Chimes

 

EXCUSED:                                Henry Jarocha

 

OTHERS PRESENT:                             David Holland, Assistant Building Inspector

                                                          J. Michael Wolf, Deputy Town Attorney

                                                          Rosemary Seivert, Zoning Board Secretary

 

The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance and the Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m., stating that if anyone appearing before the Board was related through family, financial or business relationship with any member of the Board, it is incumbent upon him to make it known under State Law and the Town Code of Ethics. 

 

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 21, 2003 REGULAR MEETING:

 

A motion was made by Mrs. Chimes, seconded by Mr. Lennartz to accept the minutes of the October 21, 2003, Zoning Board meeting and the reading of these minutes is hereby dispensed with as each member of the Board has previously received copies thereof.

 

THE VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                   AYE

CHIMES                                    AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE RESOLUTION WAS DULY ADOPTED.

 

The Chairman stated that all persons making an appeal before this Board would be heard in accordance with the Town Laws of the State of New York, Article16, Sections 267, 279 and 280a, Subdivision 3, and the Town of Orchard Park Zoning Ordinance. Any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Appeals may present to a court of record a petition, duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition must be presented to the court within 30 days after filing of the decision in the office of

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 2

 

the Town Clerk. The Chairman stated that site inspections of all cases presented tonight were made by:

 

ORFFEO                                   AYE

CHIMES                                    AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

The Chairman noted that during the Board’s pre-meeting session the variance granted for the “Hogg Car Wash” located on Route 20 was reviewed.  The variance granted had stipulated that four existing mature trees located on the property were not to be removed.  The applicant had notified the Zoning Board of Appeals that two (2) of the trees were no longer living, therefore, the Board has given permission for the applicant to remove the two (2) deceased trees.   

 

                                                         OLD BUSINESS

 

1.                                                                                                                                                                       ZBA File #30-03, James Manguso representing Orchard Park Associates, 3025 Orchard Park Road, Zoned B-2 (Part of Farm Lot 461, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#152.12-2-2.1).  Requests a variance to install a 28-ft. high pedestal sign with two (2), 2 ft-8 inch support pedestals and 93.3 square foot of sign area per side.  Maximum height of a pedestal sign is 16 feet.  Pedestal signs are to be supported by one (1) pedestal not exceeding 8 inches in horizontal dimension, Section 144-5B.  Maximum sign area per side is 40 square feet, Section 144-38C(2).

 

  APPEARANCE:  Mr. James Manguso, Architect

                              Mr. Arthur Judelsohn, Berlow Real Estate

 

Mr. Manguso submitted a revised plan for the proposed sign stating that the revisions were based on the comments and recommendations made by the members during the previous meeting.  

 

The Chairman confirmed with Mr. Manguso that evergreen trees would not be planted at the base of the proposed sign and that shrubbery would be used. 

 

Mr. Lennartz complimented Mr. Manguso on the revisions made for the proposed sign and verified that the sign could not be made smaller at the top peak.

 

Mr. Holmwood asked the applicant to verify the location of the sign.   Mr. Manguso stated that the sign would be located where the previous sign had been and would be in compliance with the Town of Orchard Park ordinances.

 

The Chairman commented positively on the revisions that had been made for the proposed sign. He further noted that, although the Board would have liked

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 3

 

the sign height to be less, the building is slightly set back from the road making the signage decision problematic for the Board.

 

Mr. Holmwood noted that he is at a disadvantage as he was not present during the initial presentation for the proposed sign.  He expressed his thoughts regarding the request not being in compliance with the ordinance.  The Chairman noted that under the ordinance tenants would be allowed to have a small sign at the front of their storefront.  He feels that having one pedestal sign listing the tenants of the plaza is preferred.  The Chairman also feels that having the proposed twin brick support pedestal is preferred, as it is more in character with the existing building facade than the allowed single metal pole would be. 

 

The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.

 

The Secretary stated no communications have been received.

 

Ms. Litwin made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Chimes, to GRANT the variance as modified for the following reasons:

 

1. There will be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment created to the nearby properties.

 

2. The benefit cannot be sought in another way.

 

3. There will be no adverse effect on the environment or to the neighborhood.

 

4. The difficulty is not self-created.

 

The variance is hereby granted with the following stipulation:

 

1.                                                                                                                                                Shrubbery is to be planted at the base of the pedestal sign, not evergreens.

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                   AYE

CHIMES                                    AYE

HOLMWOOD                             ABSTAINED                    

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING FOUR (4) IN FAVOR, AND ONE (1) ABSTENTION, THE VARIANCE IS HEREBY PASSED WITH A STIPULATION.

 

 

 

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 4

 

                                                     NEW BUSINESS

 

1.                                                                                                                                                                       ZBA File #47-03, William Eberhard, 3580 Southwestern Blvd., Zoned I-1 (Part of Farm Lot 18, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#161.07-5-30).  Requests an area variance to install a 7-ft. high monument sign with 47.25 square feet in area.  Maximum height of a monument sign is 5 feet.  Maximum area of a monument sign is 30 square feet, Section 144-5B.

 

APPEARANCE:  Mr. William Eberhard, Alco Sign Company

 

Mr. Eberhard presented and explained the plan for a proposed
“Nissan” sign.  Mr. Eberhard told the members the applicant desires a larger sign, but has proposed the smallest sign that can be purchased from the supplier.  Mr. Eberhard stated that he believes the proposed sign will be one of the smallest signs in the immediate area.  He also confirmed that an existing “Saab” sign would be removed.

 

During Mr. Eberhard’s presentation, Attorney Michael Wolf informed Mr. Eberhard that based on information he had received the “Saab” franchise was to be eliminated.  Mr. Eberhard told the members that he had no knowledge of this fact. The Chairman stated that he would have preferred to have the applicant or a representative accompany Mr. Eberhard to the Zoning Board meeting.  He desires it to be made clear to the petitioner that concerns exist for any future signage that may be requested for this location.  Mr. Eberhard stated that he would relay this information to the applicant.  The Chairman confirmed with Mr. Eberhard that the “Nissan” sign would be located approximately 75 feet from the road.

 

The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak in favor of granting the variance.

 

(Twice)

 

NO RESPONSE

 

The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak against the granting of the variance.

 

OPPONENT:

 

Mr. Daniel Larivey

S3719 Breem Street

Orchard Park, NY  14127

 

Mr. Larivey commented that the sign would be distracting when it is lit and he is opposed to it.

 

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 5

 

The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.

 

The Secretary stated no communications have been received.

 

Mr. Lennartz stated that if the proposed sign had been larger he would not have supported the variance request.  He feels that the plan presented for the sign to be 7 ft. high is reasonable.

 

The member’s discussion concluded that the perception of a “hardship”, as claimed in the past by the car agencies that have come before the Board with regards to having “standard” proposed sign reduced in size, is not real.

 

Mrs. Chimes made a motion, seconded by Mr. Lennartz, that this is an Unlisted action and that a Negative Declaration under SEQR be made based on the submitted short EAF. 

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                   AYE

CHIMES                                    AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.

 

Mrs. Chimes made a motion, seconded by Ms. Litwin, to GRANT the area variance for the following reasons:

 

1.     There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood.

 

2.     The benefit cannot be achieved in another way as presented by the applicant.

 

3.     The request is not substantial.

 

4.     There will be no adverse effect or impact on the environment or neighborhood.

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                   AYE

CHIMES                                    AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

 THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE VARIANCE IS HEREBY GRANTED.

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 6

 

2.                                                                                                                                                                       ZBA File #48-03, Phillip & Lucinda Teagarden, 6274 Cole Road, Zone A-1 (Part of Farm Lot 58, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#198.00-2-36.2).  Requests an area variance to construct a 24’ x 48’ pole barn with a building area of 1,152 square feet.  Total building area of accessory structures with barn is 1,968 sq. ft.  Building area of dwelling is 1,276 sq. ft.  Accessory area shall not dominate principal use area, Section 144-5B.

 

APPEARANCE:  Mr. & Mrs. Teagarden, property owners

 

The Chairman made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Chimes, to AMEND the public notice to read that the dimensions of the pole barn to be constructed are 28’ x 48’ rather than 24’ x 48’.

      

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                             AYE

CHIMES                                             AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE AMMENDMENT IS HEREBY PASSED.

 

Mr. Teagarden submitted several signed letters from neighbors.  After reviewing these letters, the Chairman pointed out to Mr. Teagarden that the letters did not clarify neighbor support of the variance being requested.  The submitted signed letters basically confirmed that neighbors had been notified and were aware of Mr. Teagarden’s request.

 

Mr. Holmwood reviewed the plans and dimensions of the proposed building with Mr. Teagarden confirming that collectible cars will be stored inside.  Mr. Holmwood commented that the proposed barn over powers the dwelling.  Mr. Teagarden noted that the building will be constructed behind the existing garage and would not be seen from the road. 

 

Mrs. Chimes established that Mr. Teagarden does not anticipate storing more than six (6) vehicles in the proposed building and that the existing garage currently houses several family vehicles and lawn tractors.  Mr. Teagarden noted that other alternatives may exist to store the collectible cars, but he explained that it is more convenient for him to keep these cars at his own property.  Mr. Teagarden told the members that he would be performing restoration work on his vehicles. However, he would not be restoring or performing work on other individual’s vehicles.

 

The Chairman verified that Mr. Teagarden does not have any intent to operate a

 

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 7

 

business from the proposed structure.  In addition, no restoration of other people’s vehicles or the sale of vehicles will take place.  The Chairman confirmed with Attorney Michael Wolf that a business could not operate at this location, as it is not zoned for this use.  The Chairman also spoke regarding the difficulty that he had encountered in finding the petitioner’s location.     

 

The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak in favor of granting the variance.

 

PROPONENT:

 

Mr. Alan Yox

66 Green Lake Drive

Orchard Park, NY  14127

 

Mr. Yox stated that he believes there are other buildings larger than this in that area and he would like Mr. Teagarden to be able to store his cars.

 

The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak against the granting of the variance.

 

(Twice)

 

NO RESPONSE

 

The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.

 

The Secretary stated no communications have been received.

 

Mr. Lennartz made a motion, seconded by Mr. Holmwood, to GRANT the request for the area variance for the following reasons:

 

1.  There will be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood.

 

2.  The benefit cannot be achieved in another way.

 

3.  Although it is substantial, I do not believe that there will be an adverse effect on the environment or neighborhood.

 

4.  The difficulty is self-created, but it does not preclude supporting the proposal.

 

This variance is granted with the following stipulation:

 

1.  No business is to be operated out of this structure of any kind.

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 8

 

ORFFEO                                             AYE

CHIMES                                             AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE AREA VARIANCE IS HEREBY GRANTED WITH A STIPULATION.

 

3.                                                                                                                                                                       ZBA File #49-03, Mary Anne Carr, 3555 North Buffalo Road, Zoned B-3 (Part of Farm Lot 14, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#161.08-2-16.1).  Requests an area variance to install a second freestanding sign on parcel occupied by Home & Office/M.A. Carr building.  One freestanding sign is permitted per parcel, Section 144-38B(1).

 

      APPEARANCE:  Ms. Mary Anne Carr, petitioner

 

Mr. Lennartz made a motion, seconded by Mr. Holmwood, that this is an Unlisted action and that a Negative Declaration under SEQR be made based on the submitted short EAF. 

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                          AYE

CHIMES                                           AYE

HOLMWOOD                                    AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                       AYE

LITWIN                                             AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.

 

Ms. Carr told the members that she operates a special occasion shop and explained the need to have a permanent sign to identifying this business. Presently, visibility is achieved by displaying a temporary sign during business hours.  Individuals driving past this location during the evening and on Sunday do not realize that a business exists.  In addition, first time customers attempting to visit the shop have difficulty locating it.  Ms. Carr submitted a letter for the Board’s review from Nichole Jensen, of 36 Joanne Lane, Cheektowaga, New York.  Ms. Jensen expressed in her letter how difficult it is to find Ms. Carr’s business. The Chairman, under the disclosure law, announced that he and his wife had sold a home to Ms. Jensen.  He further stated that this would not have an impact or affect the outcome of the appeal being made.

 

Ms. Litwin reviewed a rendition of the proposed sign. She also discussed the driveway layout, noting that two entrances exist on the property.

 

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 9

 

Mr. Lennartz stated he agrees that Ms. Carr requires the signage for her business, but noted that he would like the size of the sign to be reduced.  Mr. Holland told the members that size of the proposed sign is in compliance with the ordinance.  Ms. Carr explained to the members why she could not reduce the size of the sign, citing visibility from the road as a reason.

 

Mr. Holmwood stated that he does not feel having two signs on the property will be a problem; however, he told Ms. Carr that he feels the sign is too large.

 

The Chairman discussed sign co-location with Ms. Carr, noting that he would prefer one larger sign, rather than two (2) separate signs located at this property.  Ms. Carr told the members that she and Mr. Yox had discussed co-location.  Ms. Carr explained to the members why this alternative would not be effective in her situation. Chairman Orffeo noted that he had found it difficult to locate Ms. Carr’s business and stated that he understands the difficulty Ms. Carr is describing to the members.  

 

The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak in favor of granting the variance.

 

PROPONENT:

 

Mr. Alan Yox

66 Green Lake Drive

Orchard Park, NY  14127

 

Mr. Yox, owner of the property, presented a survey to the members for their review.  Mr. Yox told the members that when he had bought the property he received two different tax bills and that two lot numbers existed.  Mr. Yox described the layout of the property relative to his business and Ms. Carr’s, noting that there would be approximately 100 feet between his sign and Ms. Carr’s proposed sign.  Mr. Yox also noted that signs exist closer than this in the area.  He stated that Ms. Carr needs the sign to gain visibility. 

 

Mr. John Mills

80 Highland Avenue

Orchard Park, New York  14127  

 

Mr. Mills, as a former and newly elected Town Board member, spoke regarding this situation.  He believes a hardship has been created for Ms. Carr due to the way the lot was divided.  Mr. Mills does not want to see this business close and for Mr. Yox to loose a tenant.  Mr. Mills commented that the Zoning Board of Appeals should initiate a note to have the Town Board review the sign ordinance.  He further stated that he feels businesses need to be treated more “user friendly” and that perhaps the Board could start tonight with Ms. Carr.

 

 

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 10

 

Mr. Dave Borodzik, Proprietor

Runner’s Roost – Village of Orchard Park

7280 Omphalius Rd.

Town of Boston, New York  14033

 

Mr. Borodzik told the members that Ms. Carr needs the sign for visibility.

 

Connie Rogers, Proprietor

Vintage House Antiques – Village of Orchard Park

4184 North Buffalo Road

Orchard Park, NY  14127

 

Ms. Rogers stated that Ms. Carr needs the sign for visibility.

 

Matthew Lattimer, Proprietor

Subway – Village of Orchard Park

4327 South Buffalo Street

Orchard Park, NY 14127

 

Mr. Lattimer stated that proper signage is essential to operate a business.  Ms. Carr is an asset to the community. In light of the construction that had been endured over the last three years, he feels it is time for the Board to take a step forward and allow businesses to conduct their business in the proper manner.   

 

The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak against the granting of the variance.

 

(Twice)

 

NO RESPONSE

 

The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.

 

The Secretary stated no communications have been received.

 

The members concluded that the petitioner does need the proposed sign in order to have her business survive.  The Chairman noted that Councilman Mills’ comments regarding the direction the Board should take in helping small business was well taken.  It was determined that the following needed to be taken into consideration by the members in making their decision; the configuration of this property, the fact that the Board should assist small businesses and the fact that the sign is not distasteful.

 

A motion was made by Ms. Litwin, seconded by Mrs. Chimes, to GRANT the variance request for the following reasons:

 

 

ZBA Mtg. #11              Reg. Mtg. #11            November 18, 2003                  Page 11

 

1.   There will be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties.

 

2.   The benefit cannot be sought or achieved in another way.

 

3.   The request is not substantial.  The sign is very tasteful and is in compliance with the ordinance.

 

4.   There will be no adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood.

 

5.   The request was not self-created.  The applicant needs to operate a business and requires a sign; with the way the parcels are set up individually and yet with a connection.

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

 

ORFFEO                                             AYE

CHIMES                                             AYE

HOLMWOOD                             AYE                      

LENNARTZ                                AYE

LITWIN                                               AYE

 

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS HEREBY GRANTED.

 

There being no further business to be presented to the Board at this time, the Chairman, Remy C. Orffeo adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m.

 

 

 

 

DATED:                 November  26, 2003                            Respectfully submitted,

REVIEWED            December 18, 2003                                      Rose Seivert, Secretary

                                                                                        Zoning Board of Appeals

 

 

 

 

 

Remy C. Orffeo, Chairman