ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Erie County, New York, minutes of the November 17, 2009 meeting held in the Basement Public Meeting Room, S4295 South Buffalo Street.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Jo Ann Litwin, Chairwoman
Donald Holmwood
Robert Metz
Richard Zajac
Dwight Mateer, Alternate
EXCUSED: Joseph Liberti
OTHERS PRESENT: David Holland, Code Enforcement Officer
J. Michael Wolf, Deputy Town Attorney
Rosemary Seivert, Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary
The Chairwoman called the meeting to order at 7:00 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 OCTOBER 20, 2009 REGULAR MEETING:
The Chairwoman stated that the minutes were not available for the October meeting and that they would be voted on at a later date. She also stated that Mr. Mateer would be a voting member this evening as Mr. Liberti was excused.
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
HOLMWOOD AYE
MATEER AYE
METZ AYE
ZAJAC AYE
NEW BUSINESS
1. ZBA File #37-09, John J. Paz, 5473 Ellicott Road, Zoned R-1 (Part of Farm Lot 4, Township 9, Range 7; SBL#185.10-3-11). Requests (3) Area Variances to construct a detached garage. First, to locate garage within the front yard. No accessory structure shall be located within the front yard. Second, to allow a 5.5-ft. side setback. Minimum side setback in this R-1 Zone is 15-ft. Third, to locate garage 7-ft. from the house. No accessory structure shall be located closer than 10-ft. to any primary structure. Section 144-24A & Section 144-9B, Schedule of Height, lot, Yard & Bulk Regulations.
APPEARANCE: Mr. John Paz, Applicant/Property Owner
Mr. Zajac established that Mr. Paz would like the placement of his proposed garage to be forward of his residence for aesthetic reasons and he does not want to locate it at the rear of the home. Me. Paz does not want to attach the garage to his home because of the costs involved for the foundation.
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 no other communications have been received.
Mr. Mateer asked Mr. Paz to explain his decision to have the setbacks he chose for the placement of the proposed garage. Mr. Paz stated these measurements were based on the original contractor’s drawing and, also, he preferred not to eliminate green space at the rear of his property. Mr. Mateer discussed locating the garage closer to the residence and he confirmed that Mr. Paz had spoken with his adjacent neighbor. Mr. Paz stated that his neighbor did not express a problem with him locating the garage here.
Mr. Zajac asked Code Enforcement Officer David Holland for clarification on the front setback area.
Mr. Zajac made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Holmwood to GRANT the three (3) variance requests based on the following:
1. There will be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties.
2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved in any other way, other than the granting of the variance.
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 or the district.
5. Although the difficulty is self-created this does not preclude the granting of the variance.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LITWIN AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
MATEER AYE
METZ NAY
ZAJAC AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING FOUR (4) IN FAVOR AND ONE (1) AGAINST, THE VARIANCE IS HEREBY GRANTED.
2. ZBA File #38-09, Gary Styka, 51 Breezewood Dr., Zoned R-2 (Sub Lot 3 Map Cover 3285; SBL#172.20-4-11). Requests an Area Variance to allow a shed with an 8-ft. side setback. Minimum side setback for this R-2 lot is 15-ft., Section 144-9B, Schedule of Height, Lot, Yard & Bulk Regulations.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Gary Styka, Applicant/Property Owner
Mr. Styka told the Board that he received a notice from the Building Inspector’s Office that he had installed a shed in his rear yard without obtaining a Building Permit. When he applied for the Building Permit he was told by the Code Enforcement Officer that the shed was in violation of the Town Code side setback requirement. Mr. Styka presented photos for the Board to review, noting that it would be cumbersome to move the shed. He further told the Board that this is his fault and he had not realized he needed a permit when he installed the shed.
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 no other communications have been received.
Mr. Metz made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Metz, to GRANT the Area Variance request for the following reasons:
1. There will be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties.
2. The benefit sought cannot be achieved in any other way, other than the granting of the variance.
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 or the district.
5. Although the difficulty is self-created this does not preclude the granting of the variance.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
LITWIN AYE
HOLMWOOD AYE
MATEER AYE
METZ AYE
ZAJAC AYE
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING UNANIMOUS, THE VARIANCE IS HEREBY GRANTED.
There being no further business to be presented to the Board at this time Chairwoman Litwin adjourned the meeting at 7:16 P.M.
DATED: December 8, 2009 Respectfully submitted,
REVIEWED: December 11, 2009 Rosemary Seivert, Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals
Jo Ann Litwin, Chairwoman