ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 1
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Erie County, New York, minutes of the June 15, 2004 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
EXCUSED: Henry Jarocha
OTHERS PRESENT: Deborah Chimes, former Zoning Board Member
David Holland, 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 7:30 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.
The Chairman noted that Mrs. Chimes has resigned her position from the Zoning Board of Appeals to become the Orchard Park Town Justice. He thanked Mrs. Chimes for her service to the Board from January 2002 through May of 2004 and presented her with a certificate of appreciation.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 20, 2004 REGULAR MEETING:
A motion was made by Mr. Lennartz, seconded by Mr. Holmwood, to accept the minutes of the April 20, 2004, 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 ABSTAINED
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE RESOLUTION WAS DULY ADOPTED.
A motion was made by Mr. Lennartz, seconded by Mr. Holmwood, to postpone the reading and approval of the minutes from the May 18, 2004 Zoning Board meeting until the July 20, 2004 meeting.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 2
THE VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION BEING:
ORFFEO 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 the Town Clerk. The Chairman stated that site inspections of all cases presented tonight were made by:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
The Chairman stated that at tonight’s meeting we do not have full Board representation. In these circumstances it will require (3) votes to approve any motion that is presented. If a vote results in a two/two tie, the motion will be defeated. As a result, we offer petitioners the following three options; 1) we can vote on the petition and the petitioner must accept the Board’s decision. 2) We can hear the case and postpone the vote until the next meeting of the Board when a full Board is present. (The absent member of the Board will review the testimony and all appropriate documents prior to the meeting.) 3) The petitioner can postpone making his presentation until the next meeting of this body.
OLD BUSINESS
1. ZBA File #5-04, Michael Metzger & Rolling Ridge Development Co., Re: Vacant Land, west side of South Abbott Road (Part of Farm Lot 35, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#184.00-6-41.1), requests an area variance to reduce lot requirements to be consistent with lots in a subdivision in the Town of Hamburg, which they are part of. Section 144-9B, Schedule of Height, Lot, Yard & Bulk Regulations. Note: This is an amended request for a variance previously granted in 1996 (ZBA File #32-96) and 2001 (ZBA File #5-01). This request was partially approved at the May 18, 2004 meeting.
The Chairman stated that the petitioner has requested to be tabled this evening.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 3
Ms. Litwin made a motion, seconded by Mr. Lennartz to TABLE this case and move the request to the August 17, 2004 meeting.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION IS HEREBY PASSED.
A letter will be sent to the petitioner confirming this information.
2. ZBA File #16-04, Steve Becker, vacant lot, south side of New Taylor Road, Zoned R-2 (Part of Farm Lot 15, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#161.16-1-21). Requests a use variance to construct a two-family dwelling on a R-2 lot of record. Permitted principal use for an R-2 lot of record is single family dwelling, Section 144-9A schedule of use controls. This case was tabled at the May 18th, 2004 meeting and is to be continued at the June 15, 2004 meeting.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Steve Becker, petitioner
The Chairman verified that Mr. Becker would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
The Chairman noted that Mr. Morgan, attorney for Mr. Becker, did not have written authorization to represent Mr. Becker at the May 18th meeting. Attorney Michael Wolf advised Mr. Morgan that he could present Mr. Becker’s case, but that a vote could not take place. It was verified that this authorization has not been received. Mr. Becker gave his verbal authorization that Mr. Morgan did have the authority to represent him at the time of the May 18th meeting. The Chairman stated that the information presented to the Board at that time would be entered into the record for the members to consider in their review of the case. Chairman Orffeo also established that Mr. Becker had not been fully briefed by Mr. Morgan regarding this case. The Chairman summarized the May 18th meeting for Mr. Becker and explained the concerns that had been expressed with regards to his proposed project. Concerns included the fact that the zoning of the area had been created for a purpose, that neighbor’s spoke in opposition and that possible drainage problems will be created.
Mr. Becker told the members that he would like to build a two-family home (duplex) that would not resemble one. Mr. Becker plans to reside in one section and rent the other portion. The proposed project will cost approximately $300,000 to construct and Mr. Becker stated that he would not remove existing trees unless necessary. Mr. Becker did not feel that the construction of the two-family home would alter the drainage of the area.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 4
Mr. Holmwood established that one section of the duplex would be larger and that Mr. Berger will occupy this larger section.
Mr. Lennartz discussed requiring the home to be “owner occupied”. He noted that this could not be enforced. Mr. Becker told the members this would be his primary residence. Mr. Lennartz discussed the fact that if Mr. Becker were to build a single family home the drainage concerns would be no different. He also noted that Mr. Becker could build a single family home without requiring a variance.
Ms. Litwin discussed with Mr. Becker her concerns regarding having the home “owner occupied”. She verified with Mr. Becker that the future could not be predicted and that it would not be possible to know how long Mr. Becker would reside in this home. She further noted that the Board is looking towards the future of the Town in that area. Mr. Becker noted that a two-family home is currently located on the opposite side of the street from the proposed site and that further down the street there are additional two-family homes.
Mr. Lennartz made a motion, seconded by Ms. Litwin, 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
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.
Mr. Lennartz noted that nothing binds the applicant to make the proposed project his residence. Both Ms. Litwin and Mr. Holmwood stated that they had similar concerns.
The Chairman noted that Mr. Morgan, attorney for Mr. Becker, had indicated that at the May 18, 2004 meeting the property owner, Mr. Bergner, would not suffer economic harm if the sale of the property did not take place to Mr. Becker.
Mr. Lennartz made a motion, seconded by Ms. Litwin, to DENY the request for the following reasons:
1. The applicant can gain benefit from the property by developing a single family home.
2. The hardship is self-created. The zoning is designed to have single family homes on this side of the street (south side); development of business and
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 5
two-family homes have been made allowable on the opposite (north side) of the street.
3. Approving the variance will create a change in the character of the
neighborhood. The present zoning allows for single family homes.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION TO DENY THE VARIANCE IS HEREBY PASSED.
NEW BUSINESS
1. ZBA File #18-04, William Sahlem/Sahlem’s Roofing & Siding, 2260 Southwestern Blvd. Zoned B-2 (Part of Farm Lot 404, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#153.07-2-1.3). Requests a variance to install a pedestal sign with an 18” diameter pedestal, 6’ of ground clearance and 128 square feet of sign area. Maximum width of pedestal is 8” and minimum ground clearance is 8’, Section 144-5B. Total sign area is not to exceed 80 square feet, Section 144-38(C)2.
APPEARANCE: Mr. William Sahlem, property owner
Mr. James Allan, Signs Unlimited
The Chairman verified that Mr. Sahlem would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Allan presented plans for a proposed sign designed to display the “Sahlem’s” logo and have a changeable message board. He explained to the members why the sign size was chosen and presented photographs for their review. Mr. Allan told the members that the sign is based on visual effects at various distances and commuter speed. He told the members that the 18” pedestal being requested is for aesthetics purposes only.
Mr. Allan compared the proposed sign to similar signs of the area and it was learned that the Shriner sign and the Fellowship Wesleyan Church sign are not in compliance with the Town of Orchard Park sign ordinance. The Chairman directed Building Inspector Dave Holland to review the Wesleyan church property’s sign. However, the Chairman noted that the Shriner sign is located in the Town of West Seneca and that the Town of Orchard Park sign ordinance does not apply to their sign.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 6
Ms. Litwin discussed the proposed sign with Mr. Allan. She established that the changeable portion of the sign could be made different colors. Mr. Allan presented a correspondence from the Orchard Park Inn, dated 6/15/04 stating that there are no objections to the variance being requested. It was noted that the Orchard Park Inn, located on the east side of Mr. Sahlem’s property, has a sign larger than what Mr. Sahlem is requesting. Building Inspector Dave Holland verified that the Orchard Park Inn sign is a legal, non-conforming sign put in place under the previous zoning ordinance.
Mr. Lennartz asked Mr. Sahlem to verify the amount of drive-by business the proposed sign would generate. Mr. Sahlem told the members that presently he has no sign to identify his business. Potential customers go to the nearby Wilson Farms store to ask for directions to locate him. Mr. Sahlem explained to the members that he would like the message board to be able to display the variety of services that he offers, i.e., cleans gutters, snow removal, etc.
The Chairman told Mr. Sahlem that there are various types of venues of advertising available. The Town Board has set a sign ordinance to control the look of the town. The Chairman discussed allowing one sign on the pedestal, as he does not feel that both signs are needed. He also does not believe that Mr. Sahlem could claim an economic hardship if the request is denied.
This discussion concluded with Mr. Sahlem noting that he could install an identification sign and locate the message board on his building. However, Mr. Sahlem told the members that he does not want to locate the message board on his building, as the aesthetics of his building would be compromised. Mr. Sahlem told the members that he desires to have both the message board and identification sign.
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.
(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.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 7
Ms. Litwin stated that she generally does not support the use of electronic message boards and does not like the use of “red” letters. However, Mr. Sahlem did prove his point to her as she had no idea that he offered other services. She also noted that other signs in the area are not in compliance with the sign ordinance.
Mr. Holmwood stated that Mr. Sahlem could solve his problem by placing the identification sign on the building and having the message board on the front lawn. Mr. Allan explained to the members that it would be more costly to have the signs separate and that it would be more aesthetically pleasing to have them together on the support pedestal.
The Chairman established that the signs would be illuminated.
Mr. Lennartz stated that he firmly believes in the sign ordinance created by the Town Board and feels that it should be adhered to as closely as possible.
Mr. Holmwood 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
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.
Mr. Lennartz discussed with Mr. Sahlem the option of allowing one sign to be located on the pedestal. Building Inspector Dave Holland verified that either sign could be placed on the support pedestal if the variance for the pedestal is granted. Mr. Sahlem stated that he prefers to have both signs.
Mr. Lennartz made a motion, seconded by Mr. Holmwood, to DENY the request for the following reasons:
1. The benefit that the applicant seeks can be achieved by conforming to the Town of Orchard Park ordinance.
2. There is no hardship.
3. There will be a change to the character of the neighborhood as the sign request is not in compliance with the town ordinance. This is a combination pedestal sign that essentially changes the character of the neighborhood.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 8
4. The difficulty is self-created.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN NAY
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING THREE (3) IN FAVOR OF DENIAL AND ONE (1) AGAINST, THE MOTION IS HEREBY PASSED.
2. ZBA File #19-04, Joseph D. Cox, 10 Maple Drive, Zoned R-2 (Sub Lot 39, Map Cover 1842; SBL#162.09-3-18). Requests an area variance to construct a deck walkway extension with a 7’-11” rear yard setback. Minimum rear yard setback with rear yard depth variation is 30’. Section 144-22F.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Joseph Cox, property owner
The Chairman verified that Mr. Cox would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Cox presented and explained to the members his plans for a proposed deck walkway extension. The Chairman noted that a letter had been received from Mr. Cox’s nearest neighbor, Mr. Whitmeyer, stating that he is in favor of the variance request.
Mr. Holmwood noted that due to the configuration of this property, Mr. Cox will consistently need a variance if he desires to expand or make an improvement to his home. He further noted that he believes that there would be no effect on the neighbors.
The Chairman established that granting the request would create a safer environment for the family by allowing access to the outside from the bedroom.
Mr. Lennartz noted that he feels positive about the proposed plan.
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.
(Twice)
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 9
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.
Ms. Litwin made a motion, seconded by Mr. Lennartz, to GRANT the variance for the following reasons:
1. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood.
2. The benefit cannot be sought in another way. The improvement will allow another egress to the outside.
4. There will be no adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
5. The difficulty was not self-created.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION IS HEREBY PASSED.
3. ZBA File #20-04, Stephen Aszkler, 11 Lynchburg Court, Zoned R-1 (Sub Lot 40, Map Cover 2465; SBL#173.07-4-25). Requests an area variance to construct a deck with a 26.23’ rear yard setback. Minimum rear yard setback with rear yard depth variation is 30’. Section 144-22F.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Steven Aszkler, property owner
The Chairman verified that Mr. Aszkler would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Aszkler presented photos and explained his proposed plans to the members for a deck that he desires to construct. He confirmed with the Chairman that his neighbor Mr. Wischerath, Sr. residing at 9 Lynchburg had sent a correspondence to the Zoning Board office indicating that he had no objection to the variance request. Mr. Aszkler submitted signed statements from several neighbors stating that they had no objection to the variance request. The neighbors reside at the following addresses: 1 Lynchburg, 4 Lynchburg, 5 Lynchburg, 6 Lynchburg, 7 Lynchburg, 8 Lynchburg and 327 Stonehenge. The
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 10
statements will be entered into the permanent file. Mr. Aszkler told the Board that he had spoken with his neighbor Mrs. Dillon, who gave her verbal approval of the request. The north side of Mr. Aszkler’s property is adjacent to an empty lot and he does not believe the proposed deck will be seen.
The Chairman noted that Mr. Aszkler has a practical difficulty because the lot is pie shaped.
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.
(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 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.
3. The request is not substantial.
4. There will be no significant effect on the environment or the neighborhood.
5. The difficulty is not self-created.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION IS PASSED.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 11
4. ZBA File #21-04, William G. Schmid, 7415 Milestrip Road, Zoned R-1 (Part of Farm Lot 8, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#162.07-2-1). Requests a variance for an addition to one of two dwellings on this parcel. Nonconforming uses shall not be extended without approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Section 144-60.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Jonathan Schmid, applicant representing his father, William.
The Chairman verified that Mr. Schmid would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Schmid presented and explained his plans to the members to construct an addition to an existing dwelling. Mr. Schmid would like it to be possible for his aging father to reside close by. Mr. Schmid explained that he had contacted his nearest neighbors and they had no objection to his proposed plan.
Mr. Lennartz established that the existing attached garage will be removed and that the proposed addition will be constructed onto the existing home. Mr. Schmid stated that the property would not be rented.
The Chairman verified with Mr. Schmid that this property has approximately 650’ of frontage. He further established that the closest building on the property located near this structure is approximately 400 feet away. Mr. Schmidt told the members that the main home was destroyed in a fire. The Chairman verified that the property is zoned R1 and that it is Mr. Schmid’s intention to keep this home as a single family home. It was also established that the driveway is 400 feet from the road.
The Chairman verified with Building Inspector Dave Holland that he has no concerns with the proposed addition.
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.
(Twice)
NO RESPONSE
The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 12
The Secretary stated no communications have been received.
Mr. Lennartz stated that he supports the request if it is to remain a single family home and is occupied by a family member.
Mr. Holmwood made a motion, seconded by Mr. Lennartz, 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.
3. The request is not substantial.
4. There will be no adverse effect on the character of the neighborhood.
5. The hardship is not self-created.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION IS HEREBY PASSED.
5. ZBA File 22-04, David Marino & Armor Square Plaza, 5020 Armor Duells Road. Zoned B-2 (Part of Farm Lot 37, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#183.08-4-6). Requests a variance to add 20 square feet of sign area (10 feet per side) to an existing pedestal sign for a total of 120 square feet. Total surface area of a pedestal sign is not to exceed 80 square feet. Section 144-38C(1).
APPEARANCE: Mr. Ken Burgwardt, property owner
Mr. David Marino, representing “Jen’s Super Pizza”
The Chairman verified that Mr. Marino would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
The Chairman confirmed with Building Inspector Dave Holland that the existing sign is not in compliance with the current sign ordinance. However, it is legally in compliance with the pre-existing code.
Mr. Marino presented photos and explained his plans for the proposed sign. He noted that the plaza is located on the border of the Towns of Orchard Park and Hamburg. Mr. Marino stated that he desires to have a changeable, readable sign with two or three-inch letters promoting daily specials for their pizzeria business.
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 13
Mr. Marino explained that the business is located at the rear of the plaza and cannot be easily seen, which creates a hardship. He further explained that the business does not have an advertising budget and that business is generated by word of mouth. He further told the members that the proposed sign would cost approximately $1,000 and be in compliance with the height requirements, but is not in compliance with the Town of Orchard Park square footage requirements. Mr. Marino stated that he has found other means of advertising available to him are not reliable.
The Chairman verified that the sign will be attached to the existing sign pole, be illuminated and measure 2’ x 5’.
Mr. Holmwood questions established that the sign would be located at the bottom portion of the existing pole and have the required 8’ ground clearance.
Mr. Marino told the members that on the Hamburg side of the property he uses an “A” frame sign to advertise, weather permitting. This sign enables individuals to know that his business exists. He also told the members that the existing sign pole would be refurbished.
Mr. Lennartz discussed Mr. Marino’s request and stated that he is not convinced that the proposed sign would improve business. Mr. Marino further described how the proposed sign would aid the other businesses in the plaza.
The Chairman stated that he generally opposes requests for sign variances, but in this case the applicant has presented a unique circumstance with the location of the business being partially concealed in the plaza. He further noted that the existing sign could not be reduced or changed to accomplish what the applicant desires. The Chairman confirmed with Mr. Burgwardt that if the variance were granted he would agree to remove the proposed sign if “Jen’s Super Pizza” closed and vacated the plaza,
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.
(Twice)
NO RESPONSE
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 14
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 Ms. Litwin, 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
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
IS MADE UNDER SEQR.
The Chairman made a motion, seconded by Mr. Lennartz, to GRANT the variance for the following reasons:
1. There is a practical difficulty with the business being setback.
2. There will be no adverse impact on the neighborhood as an oversized sign already exists here.
This variance is granted with the following stipulation:
1. As long as the existing “Jen’s Super Pizza” remains in business the sign may be erected. If the business ceases the applicant is responsible for removing the sign.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
ORFFEO AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION IS HEREBY PASSED.
6. ZBA File #23-04, Phillip Rosinski, 6670 S. Abbott Road, Zoned A-1, (Part of Farm Lot 25, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#197.00-1-9.1). Requests an area variance to construct a detached garage in a front yard with a front yard setback of 39.35’. No accessory structure shall be located within the front yard, Section
ZBA Mtg. #6 Reg. Mtg. #6 June 15, 2004 Page 15
144-24A(1)(b). Minimum front yard setback for an A-1 lot divided before 12/89 is 50’. Section 144-9B, Schedule of Height, Lot, Yard & Bulk Regulations.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Phillip Rosinski
The Chairman verified that Mr. Rosinski would like to present his case and have the Board vote at tonight’s meeting.
Mr. Rosinski presented photos and explained to the members his plans for a storage building. He told the members that he desires additional storage space for the tools he uses in his remodeling business and for classic cars.
The member’s questions established that Mr. Rosinski recently moved into this home in March of 2004. It was further learned that ravines prevent locating the proposed storage building at the rear of the property. However, the members reviewed the plans and the Chairman noted that the building could be moved back 5 feet. Mr. Rosinski told the members that he would install a stone driveway leading directly to the road and that he would not conduct any business from the proposed building. He further stated that a culvert would be used to aid with the drainage on the property. The proposed building will be constructed of steel siding.
The Chairman instructed Mr. Rosinski to work with the Building Inspector, Dave Holland to ensure that the height of the proposed building is in compliance with the town ordinance, if the variance is granted.
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.
(Twice)
NO RESPONSE