ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Erie County, New York, minutes of the August 21, 2007 meeting held in the Basement Public Meeting Room, S4295 South Buffalo Street.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Lennartz, Chairman
Donald Holmwood
Joseph Liberti
Jo Ann Litwin
Richard Zajac
OTHERS PRESENT: David Holland, Building Inspector
J. Michael Wolf, Deputy Town Attorney Rosemary Seivert, Zoning Board Secretary
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:34 P.M., stating that if anyone appearing before the Board is 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 stated Ms. Bowers resigned her position from the Zoning Board to accept an appointment with the Planning Board. He further stated that he appreciated all her hard work and that she had served the Zoning Board of Appeals well. He also stated that an Alternate member has not been appointed; he requests that the Town Board appoint a new Alternate member as soon as possible.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 19, 2007 AND JULY 17, 20007 REGULAR MEETING:
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the reading of the minutes of the June 19, 2007 and July 17, 2007 Zoning Board of Appeals meetings were unanimously waived as each Board Member had previously received copies.
The Ms. Litwin made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Holmwood to ACCEPT the minutes of the June 19, 2007 and July 17, 2007 meetings as presented.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED
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, Article 16, 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:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
NEW BUSINESS
1. ZBA File #27-07, Mary C. Delia, 6325 Cole Road, Zoned A-1 (Part of Farm Lot 58, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#198.00-2-21.2). Requests an area variance to allow a lot split which created a 12.8-ft. rear setback for an accessory structure. Minimum rear setback for an accessory structure in this A-1 Zone is 20-ft., Section 144-9B, Schedule of Height, Lot, Yard & Bulk Regulations.
APPEARANCE: Mrs. Mary Delia, Applicant and property owner
Mrs. Delia explained to the Board that the original parcel consisted of 22-acres. She told the Board that to meet the requirements of the divorce settlement, the parcel was divided and that she and her husband had no legal say as to how the split would be made. A barn existed on the property for more than thirty-years and not one of the attorneys that handled the transaction informed the Delia’s that an ordinance was violated with regards to the Town’s setback requirements when the parcel was divided. She told the Board that in the past, the barn had housed horses; however, she and her husband will not have animals kept in the barn or use it for farming purposes. She further stated that she did not feel the neighborhood would change and she told the Board that the nearest neighbor did not object to the variance request.
Mr. Liberti established that there will be no alterations to the site; Mrs. Delia told the Board that she and her husband may remove the barn in the future.
Mr. Zajac established that no business will be carried on at the site and that the barn will not be used for anything other than storage.
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 that no communications have been received.
The Chairman concluded that the granting of the variance is a favorable solution to the problem; the structure (barn) has been in existence for over thirty-years and it does not affect the neighborhood.
Ms. Litwin made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Zajac, to GRANT the area variance for the following reasons:
1. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties created.
2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved in another way.
3. The request is not substantial; the barn has existed for over thirty-years.
4. The there will be no adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood or district.
5. The difficulty was not self-created; the petitioner was unaware of the zoning and had no control of the lot line.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
2. ZBA File #28-07, Randall C. Verel, 7810 Milestrip Road, Zoned R-2 (Part of Farm Lot 3, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#153.20-1-20.1). Requests an area variance for an addition to a detached garage which will result in a 1586-sq.ft. accessory building. Building area of dwelling is 1191-sq.ft. Accessory area shall not dominate principal use area, Section 144-5B.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Randy Verel, Applicant and property owner
Mr. Verel told the Board that he desires to create more storage space for his personal vehicles. He explained his plan and told the Board that he feels the addition will enhance the overall appearance of the property. He told the Board that, additionally, he owns one of the parcels adjacent to him.
Mr. Zajac established that Mr. Verel had calculated the amount of space he would need to store his items and the proposed size of the addition is based on this calculation. He also established that there will be an additional garage door with a stone driveway.
Mr. Liberti established that Mr. Verel discussed the variance request with his neighbors and they indicated to him that they support the variance request.
The Chairman told Mr. Verel that the location of the existing pool will become nonconforming if the addition is approved and constructed. If the Board grants the variance he would like Mr. Verel to remove the pool or relocate it to a conforming location.
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 that no communications have been received.
The Chairman noted that the request seems reasonable to him; however, if the request is approved he, again, noted that the pool location must be made conforming.
Mr. Liberti made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Holmwood, to GRANT the variance with a STIPULATION based on the following:
1. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood.
2. The request is not substantial.
3. There will be no adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
4. The difficulty is somewhat self-created; however, this does not preclude the granting of the variance.
This variance is granted with the following stipulation:
1. Once the structure has been completed, the pool must either be removed or relocated to a conforming location.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED WITH A STIPULATION.
3. ZBA File #29-07, Siew M. Liparisa, 67 Breezewood Drive, Zoned R-2 (Sub Lot #228, Map Cover 3284; SBL#172.20-4-28). Requests an area variance to allow a shed within the required side yard of this corner lot. No accessory structure shall be located within the required side yard, Section 144-24A(1)(b).
APPEARANCE: Mr. Ferry Lee, Applicant and property owner
Mr. Lee explained to the Board that a mistake had been made in locating and erecting a shed on his property by his contractor, Sun Enterprises. He told the Board that there was confusion as to where the lot line was located when placement of the shed was being considered by Sun Enterprises. He explained to the Board that it will be costly to move the shed and he feels the shed could remain until someone objects to its location; at that point, he would move the shed to a conforming location.
Ms. Litwin told Mr. Lee that the contractor should have contacted the Town Building Inspector when the question of the lot line’s location arose, prior to erecting the shed. When the area is developed with the roadway this will become a corner lot and the shed will be located forward of the future home that will be built in the adjacent lot.
The Chairman noted that Mr. Lee has a beautiful home. However, a mistake was made and he explained to Mr. Lee why he feels the shed must be moved. He discussed allowing Mr. Lee a period of one-year to remove the shed to a conforming location.
Mr. Zajac told Mr. Lee that he feels that the shed’s location is a detriment to the current property owner that may be trying to sell the nearby vacant property. He feels that the salability of the adjacent building lot is diminished with the shed being placed there as potential buyers may not find it appealing to construct a new home with a storage shed located in what will be their front yard. He suggests that Mr. Lee look towards “Sun Enterprises” for help in relocating the shed.
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. Kenneth Nigro
Chestnut Ridge Village LLC
60 Willowbrook Drive
Orchard Park , New York 14127
Mr. Nigro told the Board that he is the owner of the adjacent building lot and that he feels he can bring the situation to a conclusion. He would like Mr. Lee to agree to move the shed to the opposite end of the property. He told Mr. Lee that he would be willing to remove the existing concrete slab at no cost and also provide Mr. Lee with top soil to fill the area. Mr. Nigro told Mr. Lee he could pour a new concrete slab for the shed at the opposite side of the property and he would like Mr. Lee to share in that cost. Mr. Nigro concluded and that it would be Mr. Lee’s responsibility to have the shed moved; he told the Board that if the shed is moved to the opposite end of the property it will help out all the future neighbors. He further told the Board that he is willing to do a certain amount to help Mr. Lee with this situation as the new road is going in next year. Mr. Lee and Mr. Nigro will discuss this matter further with each other.
The Chairman noted that the Board will make their decision; however, the applicant and Mr. Nigro can meet and discuss the situation between them as that discussion is outside the Board’s realm. He commended Mr. Nigro for his offer to Mr. Lee, noting that it speaks very highly of him to come forward with a compromise.
The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.
The Secretary stated that no communications have been received.
Mr. Liberti made a MOTION, seconded by Ms. Litwin, to DENY the request for a variance with a STIPULATION for the following reasons:
1. The benefit can be achieved in another way.
2. The difficulty was self-created.
The variance is denied with the following stipulation:
1. The applicant has one-year to remove the shed to a conforming location.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE MOTION TO DENY IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED WITH A STIPULATION.
4. ZBA File #30-07, Craig Fitzgerald, 6200 Cole Road, Zoned A-1 (Part of Farm Lot 58, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#198.00-2-61). Requests an area variance to construct a 1,440-sq.ft. pole barn/storage building. Building area of dwelling is 1,340-sq.ft. Accessory area shall not dominate principal use area, Section 144-5B.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Craig Fitzgerald, Applicant and property owner
Mr. Fitzgerald explained that he desires to construct a pole barn to be used for storage of his personal vehicles and family items.
The members’ questions established that the proposed building will provide Mr. Fitzgerald with adequate room for his storage needs and that he will not encroach on the lot line. Mr. Fitzgerald told the Board that he talked to his neighbors and no one objects to his variance request. He indicated that a stone driveway will provide access to the pole barn and that the siding on the existing home will also be used on the proposed pole barn.
The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak in favor of granting the variance.
PROPONENT:
Larry Gollwitzer
6194 Cole Road
Orchard Park , NY 14127
Mr. Gollwitzer told the Board that he supports the variance request. He noted that the request is not substantial as it is barely over the limit; he feels the building will improve the look of the neighborhood with Mr. Fitzgerald being able to store vehicles and items inside the building, rather than outside.
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 that no communications have been received.
Mr. Holmwood made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Liberti, to GRANT the variance as follows:
1. There will not be an undesirable change to the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties.
2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved in another way.
3. The request is not substantial.
4. There will not be an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood.
5. The difficulty is self-created, but that does not preclude the granting of the variance.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
5. ZBA File #31-07, Linda Smith, Vacant Land East Abbott Grove Zoned B-2 (Sub Lot 43, Map Cover 897; SBL#161.09-3-24). Requests a use variance to permit a single family dwelling on this B-2 lot. This residential use is not permitted in this B-2 Zone, Section 144-9A, Schedule of Use Controls.
APPEARANCE: Ms. Linda Smith, Applicant and property owner
Ms. Smith told the Board that this property is for sale, contingent upon receiving approval of being allowed to construct a single-family home. She noted that the potential buyers are present in the meeting room.
The Chairman told Ms. Smith that if the request is approved, it would be important that the bulk regulations in the R-3 Zone are complied with as the Board would like the newly constructed home to conform to the existing homes.
The Chairman then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak in favor of granting the variance.
PROPONENT:
Mr. Paul Winkler, potential purchase of this property
35 Hunters Ridge Road Apartments
Orchard Park , NY 14127
Mr. Winkler told the Board that he will comply with the R-3 zoning restrictions when building his new home.
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 that no communications have been received.
Mr. Liberti made a motion, seconded by Mr. Zajac, 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:
LENNARTZ AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.
Ms. Litwin made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Liberti, to GRANT the variance request with a STIPULATION as follows:
1. Strict application of the regulations will deprive the applicant of economic use of the benefit of the property.
2. The hardship is not unique as a home will be added to the neighborhood, which is a residential area.
3. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
4. The hardship was not self-created.
The variance is granted with the following stipulation:
1. The new property owners must comply with the bulk regulations of the R-3 Zoning lots.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED WITH A STIPULATION.
6. ZBA File #32-07, Hortland Development, Vacant Land South Taylor Road, Zoned I-1 (Part of Farm Lot 23, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#161.19-2-5.1). Requests an area variance to construct an office building with a 10-ft. side setback. Minimum side setback for this I-1 lot is 20-ft. where adjoining any residence, Section 144-9B, Schedule of Height, Lot, Yard & Bulk Regulations.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Robert Gill, Architect
Mr. Gill presented and explained plains for a proposed one-story office building, noting that his clients were present in the meeting room and that they seek relief from the side-yard requirement.
He told the Board that the building will be used solely for office space; there will be no construction vehicles at this site. The roadway into the site will comply with the Town ordinance and adequate room will exist for emergency vehicles. He further told the Board that the property has an unusual shape that makes it difficult to locate a building upon it.
Mr. Zajac established with Mr. Gill that the request for a 10-foot side setback could be reduced by re-locating (shifting) the building. The members discussed the request further and Mr. Gill agreed, after consulting with his clients, that the request could be reduced to 15-feet. Mr. Gill told the Board that the proposed building will be located approximately 80-feet from the adjacent residential home. Mr. Gill concluded that the compromise will leave a nicer balance of green space area.
The Chairman discussed buffering the adjacent residential property with landscaping and also established that the applicants had not spoken to the neighbors with regards to the setback variance being requested.
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. Ray Stromecki, adjacent property owner
5236 Murphy Road
Orchard Park, New York 14127
Mr. Stromecki told the Board that he owns the adjacent property affected by the variance request. He had comments and questions regarding the project and was not necessarily against the variance request. He noted that the building is very attractive and that the proposal will improve the look of the area. Mr. Stromecki concluded that he is agreeable to the compromise of a 15-foot setback with landscaping used to buffer the site.
The Chairman then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communications either for or against granting the variance.
The Secretary stated that no communications have been received.
Ms. Litwin 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:
LENNARTZ AYE
LIBERTI AYE
LITWIN AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.
Mr. Zajac made a MOTION, seconded by Ms. Litwin, to GRANT the area variance for a 15-foot setback, as discussed by the Board as a compromise based on the following:
1. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties created.
2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved in another way.
3. The request is not substantial.
4. There will be no adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood or district.
5. The difficulty is not self-created; the configuration of the lot is unusual.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LENNARTZ AYE
LITWIN AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
LIBERTI AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE MOTION IS PASSED.
Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
DATED: September 10, 2007 Respectfully submitted,
REVIEWED: September 18, 2007 Rose Seivert, Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals
Robert Lennartz, Chairman