ZBA - Febraury 17, 2009

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Erie County, New York, minutes of the February 17, 2009 meeting held in the Basement Public Meeting Room, S4295 South Buffalo Street.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Jo Ann Litwin, Chairwoman

Joseph Liberti

Donald Holmwood

Robert Metz

Richard Zajac

Dwight Mateer, Alternate

OTHERS PRESENT: David Holland, Code Enforcement Officer

J. Michael Wolf, Deputy Town Attorney

Rosemary Seivert, Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary

The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance and the Chairwoman called the meeting to order at 7:30 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.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY, 2009 REGULAR MEETING:

A motion was made by Mr. Metz, seconded by Mr. Liberti, to accept the minutes of the January 20, 2009, 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:

LITWIN AYE

LIBERTI AYE

HOLMWOOD AYE

METZ AYE

ZAJAC AYE

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

The Chairwoman 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 Chairwoman stated that site inspections of all cases presented tonight were made by:

LITWIN AYE

LIBERTI AYE

HOLMWOOD AYE

METZ AYE

MATEER AYE

ZAJAC AYE

NEW BUSINESS

1. ZBA File #02-09, Timothy R. Wood, Bounce Magic, 2881 Southwestern Blvd., Zoned B-2 (Part of Farm Lot 409, Township 10, Range 7; SBL#153.06-2-3). Requests a variance to install an oversized pedestal sign with a 5-ft. R.O.W. setback. Pedestal signs in this B-2 Zone must comply with Section 144-38C & pedestal sign definition. Minimum R.O.W. setback for this pedestal sign is 15-ft.

APPEARANCE: Mr. Paul Strada, N.A.S. Quick Sign, Inc.

The Chairman confirmed that Mr. Strada has permission on file to represent Mr. Wood in this matter.

Mr. Strada told the Board that Mr. Wood has three (3) issues regarding this request before the Board; height, overall size and setback. Chairman Litwin noted that the Board’s vote will cover all three issues.

Mr. Strada noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance in 2003 for the existing signage. The issue with the overall size is that the present tenants report that their customers have a difficult time locating them. Mr. Strada stated that the sign has 4-inch letters and that motorists traveling at 40 to 50-miles per hour find it difficult to read the signage. Mr. Strada presented photos for the members to review of several nearby signs (McDonald’s, Avis, Lowe’s/Tops Plaza, Shanghai Buffet, Buffalo RV). He compared these signs to the proposed signage. He told the Board that he did not feel the proposed sign would change the character of the neighborhood when compared to these signs and he further noted that Mr. Wood did not have the benefit of a traffic light to slow traffic down as these businesses do. In addition, he told the Board that Mr. Wood has the potential for five-tenants to be listed on the signage; he currently has four.

With regard to the issue that remains with the height of the signage, Mr. Strada stated that the existing sign is not designed well and is not “doing the job”; Mr. Wood would like to erect a pole sign to aid those traveling northwest.

With regard to the setback, Mr. Strada told the Board that, if needed, Mr. Wood could eliminate this portion of the request. He also discussed the pole cover and explained the proposed signage to the Board noting that the design should solve the difficulties the current tenants are experiencing.

The Board members discussed Mr. Strada’s request at length.

Mr. Metz inquired as to what the setback was for the existing signage; however, Mr. Strada told the Board that he did not know.

Mr. Liberti discussed placing the address vertically on the sign to reduce the square feet; however Mr. Strada stated that he does not feel that type of signage is effective; therefore, he does not design signs with vertical lettering and he would rather use smaller horizontal letters. Mr. Liberti asked how flexible Mr. Strada was with regards to the size of the sign and Mr. Strada discussed this with the Board. Mr. Strada con-

cluded that Mr. Wood has the potential for an additional tenant at the plaza; therefore, reducing the square footage of the proposed signage is not desirable.

Chairman Litwin stated that she did not feel the proposed signage colors were attractive. She discussed reducing the sign by having the portion that reads “Bounce Magic” made smaller; however, Mr. Strada told the Board that Mr. Wood’s business is “Bounce Magic” and he is the client paying for the signage so it would be unlikely that he would reduce his area on the sign. With regard to colors, Mr. Strada stated that he might be able to have Mr. Wood agree to use a darker green to “warm up” the look of the proposed signage. Ms. Litwin asked that Mr. Strada to please do so as the proposed colors are not appealing to her.

Mr. Holmwood suggested increasing the size of the lettering for the address and placing the address at the base of the sign. Mr. Strada told the Board that this could not be considered as the triangle represents the “bounce house” and it is the logo for Bounce Magic. He discussed other ways to reduce the size of the signage without eliminating the triangle logo with the members.

Mr. Mateer stated that he feels using the same font and size lettering on the proposed signage for each tenant will not improve the signage. Mr. Mateer explained that different fonts in various sizes creates more recognition. Mr. Strada stated that he agrees with Mr. Mateer and he explained to the Board that the tenants will be offered space on the sign to feature their logos, fonts and particular colors. Mr. Mateer told Mr. Strada that he feels the request before the Board is for a very large sign; perhaps if he were to use different fonts he would not need a new sign. Mr. Strada stated that the reason Mr. Wood requires the larger sign is based on the number of tenants that currently exist and the potential tenant Mr. Wood could add in the future.

Mr. Zajac established that Mr. Wood’s hardship exists with his building being located perpendicular to the roadway. Mr. Strada told the Board that Mr. Wood does not have the benefit of placing additional signage on the building, as it would not be visible.

Chairman Litwin noted that each variance request stands on its own and that the Board looks at the effect of a request on the character of the neighborhood, but they also look at the need demonstrated by the applicant.

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

(Twice)

NO RESPONSE

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

(Twice)

NO RESPONSE

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

The Secretary stated that no other communications have been received.

Mr. Zajac stated that he does not feel Mr. Strada’s example of signage used by Shanghai Buffet is a consideration as it is not in the immediate neighborhood of the applicant.

Chairman Litwin stated that she would like the Board to consider the applicant’s need and determine if the Board can satisfy this need with consideration of the hardship of this particular variance. She stated that she feels the Board should reduce the height of the proposed signage; and have the sign the same height that the current sign is. It was established that the signage will be internally illuminated. Ms. Litwin stated that she feels the proposed pole is acceptable.

The Board discussed the proposed signage with the applicant and determined that they would like the size of the sign reduced.

Mr. Zajac confirmed with Building Inspector Holland that the applicant is allowed to place signage upon the building with up to 20% coverage. However, it was noted that the applicant would have narrow exposure on Route 20 due to the location of the building.

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 UNANIMOUS, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS MADE UNDER SEQR.

Chairman Litwin made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Liberti, to GRANT the variance request with the following STIPULATIONS:

1. The existing R.O.W. setback shall not be reduced.

2. The overall height shall not exceed 16-feet.

3. The sign panel shall not exceed 60-square feet.

4. The pole cover width shall not exceed 24-inches.

THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:

LITWIN AYE

LIBERTI AYE

HOLMWOOD AYE

METZ AYE

ZAJAC AYE

THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.

There being no further business to be presented to the Board at this time Chairwoman Litwin adjourned the meeting at 8:00 P.M.

DATED: March 3, 2009 Respectfully submitted,

REVIEWED: March 6, 2009 Rosemary Seivert, Secretary

Zoning Board of Appeals

Jo Ann Litwin, Chairwoman