ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2001
Members Present: Mr. Hare, Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Gentile, Mr. Rejman
Member Absent: Mr. Temple
Staff Present: Mr. Tehan, Mr. Miller, Mr. Moore
APPLICATIONS APPROVED: 145 Woodlawn Avenue, 77 Franklin Street, 33 N. Division Street, 276 Grant Avenue
APPLICATION TABLED: 6 Lexington Avenue
Mr. Rejman: Good evening, this is the Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have: 145 Woodlawn, 6 Lexington Avenue, 77 Franklin Street, 33 N. Division Street, 276 Grant Avenue
_____________________________________________________________
145 Woodlawn Avenue, LR-2, area variance for a front yard driveway. Shane and Michelle Ely.
Mr. Rejman: 145 Woodlawn, are you here please? State your name for the record please.
Mrs. Ely: Michelle Ely.
Mr. Rejman: Michelle, talk into the mike please.
Mrs. Ely: OK.
Mr. Rejman: What would you like to do there?
Mrs. Ely: I am filing for a variance to park in the driveway and I cam before and we investigated it further to see if there were any alternatives, which I did. The deed did say subject to and together with restrictions, limitations, easements and right of way of record if any. It wasn’t explained and as I told you it was honored for at least 10 years because the neighbors and the owner of the house prior to me, did not use or agree to any of these, so that is why I am here.
Mr. Rejman: Can we see that paper; I will give it back to you.
Mrs. Ely: Yes. Also I have a petition, should I hand you that?
Mr. Rejman: Sure, tell us about that. On the petition, what did you do there?
Mrs. Ely: I just had all my immediate neighbors at the advice of Sam DeRosa, sign saying that it had no negative impact, that none of them had a problem with me using it and I did not wish to exercise the right of way laws that my neighbor and I didn’t agree upon them, they were agreed upon before.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Any questions from the Board? Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against the application? Hearing none, back to the Board members.
Mr. Tehan: Looking at this deed there is not reference to the easement.
Mrs. Ely: No.
Mr. Tehan: About the shared driveway there is no reference to it in this deed.
Mrs. Ely: None of them that I went back to look at that is all that was there.
Mr. Rejman: How many deeds do you think you looked at?
Mrs. Ely: I looked back to when they were hand written, that is all that I found in any of them, was that one little paragraph.
Mr. Rejman: OK, last call for questions from the Board. We will close the public portion, have a seat and we will discuss this amongst ourselves. Dave, in your opinion there really wasn’t a legal right of way.
Mr. Tehan: I can’t say whether there was a legal right of way or not I am just saying that the deed I see doesn’t really refer to it. Now whether or not the neighbor’s deed has some sort of reference in it to an easement or I am not necessarily sure it is an easement I guess necessarily it could be across the neighbor’s property, but the deed that we are seeing doesn’t show that the property has the shared driveway access.
Mr. Darrow: Mr. Chairman
Mr. Rejman: Yes
Mr. Darrow: The document you have their deed, is there a reference on there which Book it came out of and the Page number?
Mr. Rejman: Let me see that document again please. I am going to make the petition part of the record; there are 15 signatures on it.
Mr. Darrow: On the survey it says the easement is addressed in Book 721 at Page I believe 57 in Book 69 at Page 204. These came out of Book 1054, Pages 312 thru 314.
Mr. Rejman: Thinking these may or may not be an easement
Mr. Darrow: Right on the other in said Book. Have you got the plot plan Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mr. Darrow: Last page.
Mr. Rejman: It does refer to it easement see Book 721 Page 57.
Mr. Darrow: I do believe the minutes from the last meeting should reflect that I didn’t address that at the last meeting to check that Book and Page.
Mr. Rejman: There may have been some confusion on that point.
Mr. Darrow: OK.
Mr. Rejman: What if that easement is not for a right of way, what if it is an easement for…
Mr. Darrow: That is it, we don’t…
Mr. Rejman: It could be a gas line or…
Mr. Darrow: Exactly
Mr. Rejman: Telephone cable
Mr. Darrow: It doesn’t say what it is.
Mr. Rejman: Should we table this again? We only have two options here, we have three, yes, no and table.
Mr. Darrow: I don’t see any drawing of where on the property they are looking to put the driveway in the front. I am gathering by the distance that it would be on the right hand side of the house in front of what looks to be a bay window. Is that correct?
Mrs. Ely: Yes.
Mr. Hare: Whether she has an easement or not she is still not predisposed to fight with her neighbor over using it. Am I correct on that?
Mr. Rejman: Say that again?
Mr. Hare: Whether there is an easement here or not, from what I understand in the interest of good relations with her neighbors, she does not want to use this driveway.
Mr. Rejman: Yes, I think she made that clear one time.
Mr. Hare: So to talk about the easement, wouldn’t that be moot as far as she is concerned.
Mr. Rejman: As far as she is concerned. Someone wish to make a motion then? Or do we table and look at the neighbor’s property?
Mr. Darrow: Also referenced which if it were referenced on here I would be lead to believe that it strictly pertaining to the two car block garage where it says see agreement Book 1024 Page 73.
Mr. Rejman: What is what you would think.
Mr. Tehan: Well, I think that reference, just having seen something like this before, I think that reference appears to be if you look at the drawing looks like the garage is over the property line by a certain amount of footage. It is probably an agreement in relation to that.
Mr. Darrow: OK.
Mr. Rejman: That’s right, it could be that too. What is the Board’s pleasure?
Mr. Hare: I would be comfortable going with the plans we have.
Mr. Rejman: Being the 40-foot lot, rather small.
Mr. Hare: Usually it is just the opposite, we get these cases where they are fighting with their neighbors. It is the first one where I have seen the interest of good relations she is trying to do the right thing and she may not want to come back here again.
Mr. Rejman: Would you like to put that in the form of a motion then?
Mr. Hare: Whereas Shane and Michelle Ely, owners of property located at 145 Woodlawn, City of Auburn, applied to the City of Auburn Zoning Board of Appeals for an area variance to allow front yard parking and whereas
Mr. Tehan: Skip to the last page.
Mr. Hare: Make a motion that the Zoning Board of Appeals does hereby grant the applicant an area variance to allow front yard parking for property known as 145 Woodlawn Avenue, City of Auburn.
Mr. Rejman: Should we tighten it up? One car, two car?
Mr. Tehan: What are they applying for?
Mr. Gentile: Just says driveway.
Mr. Tehan: Do they have room for two?
Mr. Rejman: Probably not.
Mr. Darrow: Mr. Chairman, can I ask Mr. Moore a question?
Mr. Rejman: Yes you may.
Mr. Darrow: If the variance is approved will she still need to get approval from the Traffic Officer from the APD for curb cut?
Mr. Moore: No, from Engineering.
Mr. Darrow: From Engineering, ok.
Mr. Tehan: This may be the way to tighten it up a little bit, well maybe put it on the right referencing to the right side of the house or
Mr. Rejman: An area to be enclosed by the sidewalk and property line.
Mr. Darrow: Pending approval of Engineering?
Mr. Rejman: Single cut.
Mr. Hare: Be enclosed by the sidewalk and what?
Mr. Rejman: Property line to the northeast. Amend the motion
Mr. Hare: Have you decided if this was a use variance or an area variance? You have down here an area variance.
Mr. Rejman: Use variance.
Mr. Tehan: We have done it before in the past, we left it as an area variance this time because in the past well this is the application she was given, it was a mistake made by the staff. Usually it is a use variance because the Zoning Board does not allow the use of front yard parking, however, certainly willing to revisit the issue. Leave it as an area variance because that was the way it was advertised.
Mr. Hare: One more time, I make a motion that the Zoning Board of Appeals does hereby grant to the applicant an area variance to allow front yard parking for the property known as 145 Woodlawn Avenue, City of Auburn. This is for a one-lane driveway, area to be enclosed by the sidewalk on one side and the property line to the northeast on the other side.
Mr. Darrow: I’ll second the motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Hare, Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Gentile, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
Mrs. Ely: Thank you very much.
Mr. Rejman: You might want to check into that to see exactly what that easement might be.
Mrs. Ely: OK.
Mr. Rejman: For future use.
Mrs. Ely: Who do I have to see about the cut?
Mr. Rejman: Mr. Moore can help you on that.
Mr. Tehan: You are going to need to get an application for curb cut from the Engineering Office on the third floor.
Mrs. Ely: OK. Thank you.
_____________________________________________________________
6 Lexington Avenue, R-1, area variance for sign. Anthony Tardibone.
Mr. Rejman: 6 Lexington Avenue, please. State your name for the record please.
Mr. Tardibone: Anthony Tardibone.
Mr. Rejman: What would you like to bring before us tonight?
Mr. Tardibone: Need permission to keep the signs that I have.
Mr. Rejman: Mr. Moore just gave us a copy of a photograph taken today, yesterday?
Mr. Moore: It was just brought into us today; I don’t know when it was taken.
Mr. Rejman: Jim, from the City’s point of view, can you give us some concerns about the signage here?
Mr. Moore: Yes. Again this one marquee sign that is not on the application but he still has it there and the doorway is only allowed 20% of the glass area in signage and he has got almost the whole door, over the half of the door with signage. Again, the temporary sign, I didn’t go down there today, the last I knew he was going to come in and talk to me. I don’t know if there are any signs on the side or not. Are there signs on the Lexington Avenue side?
Mr. Tardibone: There is one there saying we have lunch and dinners, open now. It is a banner we have been serving lunch for 2 or 3 weeks now.
Mr. Moore: It is a sign.
Mr. Tardibone: It is paper, attached to the building.
Mr. Rejman: It is a sign.
Mr. Tardibone: We are trying to get it zoned back to commercial.
Mr. Rejman: The current zoning where you are at only allows you maximum of 10 square feet.
Mr. Darrow: It is 52
Mr. Rejman: Yes, plus. There are 52 here, this counts, everything counts is the problem.
Mr. Tardibone: That banner changes every week.
Mr. Rejman: It counts.
Mr. Tardibone: I thought the City lets you keep a banner there until the event happens and then it comes down.
Mr. Moore: It is there every week.
Mr. Tardibone: Not the same, it is different
Mr. Moore: Yes, but they are signs, I am not even questioning that, I am questioning the others.
Mr. Tardibone: The ones in the door?
Mr. Moore: Only allowed 20 square foot of the window. Now there is a sign on the Lexington Avenue side that is not included in this
Mr. Tardibone: I can take that down; I took the other one down
Mr. Moore: And you have the marquee
Mr. Tardibone: The marquee I am here for that tonight.
Mr. Moore: Not you are only here for the 20 square foot sign.
Mr. Tardibone: There was a piece of paper on the back of that. I went down today to add that.
Mr. Tehan: You can’t add that to what is here.
Mr. Moore: It was advertised for a 20 square foot sign.
Mr. Tardibone: I thought the marquee was separate from all the other signs.
Mr. Moore: No.
Mr. Tardibone: The marquee is not lit.
Mr. Moore: But it is still a sign.
Mr. Tardibone: We need the signs so people know what is going on, every one else has signs.
Mr. Tardibone: I can’t figure that out myself, how come Tops and all those other ones they have signs.
Mr. Moore: Because they got permits for them. They are in a different location, they are in a commercial location, and you are not. You are allowed 10 square feet, you are here for 20-foot square sign, you can’t include those other signs, not on this application, unless you come back again.
Mr. Tardibone: Can I get this tabled again and see how I make out. This is the only place that isn’t zoned commercial on the whole street.
Mr. Rejman: I know.
Mr. Hare: Wouldn’t he be better off going for commercial than putting a whole different sign on top here?
Mr. Moore: Quite a lengthy process, to change that zoning and I don’t think it will be changed.
Mr. Miller: I think historically it is zoned the way it is because whenever it is brought up all hell breaks lose in the neighborhood.
Mr. Tardibone: I have purchased the lot next to it. The vacant lot next to it.
Mr. Rejman: Just to help the Board here, how long does that process take David?
Mr. Miller: Six months.
Mr. Moore: Yes, there are public hearings on it, everything.
Mr. Rejman: A year in the process of doing this.
Mr. Tardibone: I am supposed to talk to Vijay this week when he gets back from vacation.
Mr. Moore: No body has talked to us.
Mr. Tardibone: I talked to Nancy in your office.
Mr. Moore: When did you talk to her?
Mr. Tardibone: Last Wednesday.
Mr. Darrow: Mr. Chairman, I think perhaps the course that we are looking for right now, if on tomorrow or Tuesday he gets the paper work in for he 4 x 8 marquee sign, so that the meeting it will be advertised and then seeking a variance for 42 square foot for the one on the cable and the marquee sign. At least that will give him some advertisement until the wheels turn properly if they do turn, in creating a C-1 there. The marquee sign at least can be changed to show his events, which would hopefully do away with the banners and clean that part up a little. So with that and from what I have heard from the applicant, I would like to put forth a motion that we table this until the next meeting.
Mr. Rejman: Is there a second on that?
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING TO TABLE: Mr. Hare, Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Gentile, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: We will table this until the next meeting. Please see if you can get Vijay, Mr. Moore, and yourself together to come up with a comprehensive plan for signage.
Mr. Moore: All he has to do is come in, told him the last time to come in and see me and he never came in.
Mr. Rejman: We don’t like to keep tabling things so try to have it complete for the next meeting if you would please.
Mr. Darrow: Jim, on the marquee sign, you just count one side correct?
Mr. Moore: Yes.
Mr. Darrow: That is what I thought.
Mr. Rejman: I saw some people coming in during the course of the meeting, if you are here for 202-204 Genesee Street that has been pulled. So you don’t waste your time.
_____________________________________________________________
77 Franklin Street, C-1, area variance of 48 s.f. for pole signs and variance of 444 s.f. in total square footage of signs for Byrne Dairy and two other businesses to be located at the site.
Mr. Rejman: 77 Franklin Street, please. State your name for the record.
Mr. Burnell: Christian Burnell for Byrne Dairy, Al Negleston, architect. We are here tonight for an area variance of signage, number of signs and square footage. As you know we have chosen this Pine site on Franklin Street and Route 5, we want to move our other store, we are closing our other store and moving it to this corner. As you will see from the store, the size of the store and the size of the lot compared to our other store down the road, the signage is really a must for this lot. The other store is much smaller, as you know was right on the arterial, this lot is much larger about 3 times as large as the current store we have.
I do have to give you a different signage package, I talked to Jim Moore must have been two weeks ago he called me to say the DRC looked at our package and I had two pole signs that I would like to have on Route 5 and Franklin Street and he said the DRC review team looked at that and really didn’t see any need for those two pole signs, which I agreed and I compromised and changed to one on Franklin Street to a ground sign which is a 6 x 8 ground sign with wooden posts. What you have in front of you I have reduced the variance from 444 square feet to 396 square feet. You will see in the package that I am going to hand out now that to the Franklin Street sign has been reduced from a pole a 22 foot pole sign to a small 6 foot ground sign with landscape around it. Same package you have
except as I said the ground sign has changed.
To further talk about the square footage issue in your zoning it states that 50 square foot is the max the first time, I spoke with Jim about that and further on they are going to change that in zoning, if that were the case we would be allowed 1100 square feet. 50 square foot max that will no longer be in a couple months, per street. Kind of an unusual site as you see we have 3 street frontages that we are trying to get signs to the customers.
Mr. Rejman: Mr. Moore, do you have any input on this? Give us your assessment?
Mr. Moore: Back when they did this C-1 the signage was C-1 was included in the C-4 and C-5. C-5 is North Street, C-4 is South Street. They changed it to a 50-foot maximum because on North Street you have billboards, you would not want a billboard on North or South Street, that is why they changed it and they dragged C-1 into it too. So we are going to change that, we are not going to change I to like a C-3 but we are going to increase that signage. This area here is going to be a large area, going to be a gas station, the Design Review Committee has liked everything on this, the lights are going to be kept on the property and for a big business like that, like Applebee’s it is same thing you have given Applebee’s the increased signage. We have no problem with it.
Mr. Rejman: OK.
Mr. Burnell: I think the other thing too also to understand the difference between their current operation where they have just the Byrne Dairy Store at one location, this is actually three businesses, the Mobil Gas Station, it is the Byrne Dairy and also Shelby Donuts.
Mr. Hare: Like the one out in Elbridge.
Mr. Burnell: Yes. We had the disadvantage of trying to identify those three different businesses in the limitation of signs so taking that into consideration we are asking for three businesses on three streets, which is 9 signs. If you want to put it in that light.
Mr. Tehan: What was the total square footage of signs we were going to have again?
Mr. Burnell: 396 square feet.
Mr. Tehan: Thank you.
Mr. Burnell: That includes the signs on the store, also included as Jim told me, the pole sign, the ground sign and the 3 canopy legends as I call them legends, right now we are proposing Citco, 3 signs, they are all 10 square foot a piece. I included every bit of signage that I have. So Cities or Towns don’t add those.
Mr. Westlake: I noticed on your other store you have a big banner. Will you have a banner like that on this store?
Mr. Burnell: No that was a unique situation. If you allow us to we will. (Everyone laughs)
Also the design of the signage on the building we kept the scale of the signage on Franklin Street and Seymour Street to 58 square feet which fits with the proportions that they had set up for their business standards and those are small proportion because they are a different type of street than Grant Avenue. On Grant Avenue you are actually 150 feet back from the street, we needed to increase it to 106 square feet just for the readability and recognition identification. We did see this as a safety issue because you do have people on Grant Avenue that are traveling in greater traffic at a greater speed and you really need the business identifications so that they have time to react to yea, let me gas or let me get milk, so we also see it as a safety issue to give good identification so that
people can recognize where it is and make the appropriate traffic decisions.
Mr. Rejman: Very good. Anyone wishing to speak for or against the application? Hearing none, back to the Board, questions or comments from the Board? Seems to be very well thought out, lot of effort went into this signage package.
Mr. Hare: Make a big difference in that area.
Mr. Rejman: OK, we will close the public portion, discuss amongst ourselves and come to an agreement.
Mr. Burnell: Thank you.
Mr. Tehan: Just so you are aware, I had previously passed out a model approving resolution, the variance requested at this time would be for 6 signs and the change will be at #2 for 246 square feet total signage and they have 48 square feet for pole sign.
Mr. Darrow: Could you repeat that again please.
Mr. Tehan: The request is for they are basically looking in essence three variances in this application. One will be a variance to allow 6 signs, so there will be a total of 9 signs there. A variance of 246 square feet total signage as there will be 396 square feet in total and a variance of 48 square feet for the pole sign which will be on Grant Avenue.
Mr. Rejman: Some one wish to make a motion?
Mr. Darrow: I make a motion that we grant Byrne Dairy Inc., three separate sign variances:
1. To allow 6 signs at 77 Franklin Street.
2. To allow 246 square feet of total signage at same address.
3. To allow for 48 square foot of pole sign at above address.
Mr. Hare: I’ll second that.
Mr. Gentile: All at the same address? All three businesses are going to be 77 Franklin Street?
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mr. Tehan: I believe the properties are being merged.
Mr. Rejman: Merging the parcels.
Mr. Moore: They are going to use Pine’s main building and that is 77 Franklin Street.
Mr. Burnell: 77 Franklin Street is Pine’s current address right now on the tax rolls so that is what we will be using.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Hare, Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Gentile, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
Mr. Burnell: Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: When is the grand opening? Any idea?
Mr. Burnell: Probably break ground in March, start the building first, give the tenants ample time to relocate, probably around May. Definitely in the spring.
Mr. Moore: Donated the houses to the Police and Fire for training.
Mr. Rejman: That’s good.
_____________________________________________________________
33 N. Division Street, C, use variance for driveway in front yard. Christopher J. DePalma.
Mr. Rejman: 33 N. Division Street, are you here please.
Mr. DePalma: Christopher DePalma.
Mr. Rejman: What would you like to do there?
Mr. DePalma: I would like to create some parking spots there for some tenants that I have in the building there at 33 N. Division Street. You can see the lot size limits any ability to bring a driveway along side either side of the house and has created a hardship over the years. Fortunately I haven’t had a lot of tenants with automobiles, but it is becoming more and more the case people are in need of a spot to park. I would like to create a parking spot on either side, at the same time I will have to replace all the curbing and sidewalk, it is in real disrepair as it is, so replacing sidewalks running along side of the street, replace entrance sidewalks going into the house and a parking spot on either side. I would have lawn area between the sidewalk and
the parking spots.
Mr. Rejman: Questions?
Mr. Hare: Floodgates are open for Division Street.
Mr. Rejman: Seems to be a problem area.
Mr. Tehan: Is this a one or two family house?
Mr. DePalma: Three.
Mr. Tehan: Three family house.
Mr. DePalma: No parking. One tenant a long time tenant does not drive has not been an issue, as well as another tenant I had recently, but now with the change in tenants has been a real problem. The City citing the tenants for improper parking and things like that, just trying to clean up the whole issue and make it more attractive as well. Make it a little safer situation for everyone. It would be better for the neighborhood as well. Recent similar parking you know right now and other portions of that neighborhood as well.
Ms. Marteney: Are you trying to create two spots on the north side
Mr. DePalma: There is not really room on the north side to pull in, I wanted to have I was going to extend that part of driveway per say so that it would be nice and easy for the garbage to be moved from around the back side of the house. Just to make it easier to move the garbage, make the whole area neater. Make it look a lot better and easier for the tenants as well.
Mr. Rejman: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against this application? Hearing none we will come back to the Board. Final questions? Concerns? OK. Have a seat please will close the public portion and discuss amongst ourselves. North Division seems to be a problem area.
Mr. Darrow: Narrow lots.
Ms. Marteney: You couldn’t park on the road there.
Mr. Gentile: Especially in the wintertime.
Mr. Rejman: With plows going through.
Ms. Marteney: You can’t back out onto that street, I don’t like the idea of backing out, but there is no other alternative.
Mr. Moore: That is a busy street too.
Mr. Rejman: That is the problem.
Mr. Hare: I have no doubt that it will be done very nicely because from what I have seen of the DePalma’s, they are in the construction business.
Mr. Gentile: Concrete driveway.
Mr. Rejman: Yes. I have no doubt that it will be done nicely.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant a use variance for Christopher J. DePalma for property located at 33 N. Division Street for the purpose of constructing two driveways as stipulated in the enclosed drawing.
Mr. Hare: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Hare, Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Gentile, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
Mr. DePalma: Thank you.
Mr. Moore: You need to apply for curb cuts in the Engineering Department.
Mr. DePalma: Sure. Thank you.
_____________________________________________________________
276 Grant Avenue, C-3, area variance from flood map requirements of 6.5’ in height to allow construction of building to elevation of 700.5’ rather than 707 feet. Tricon Global Restaurants.
Mr. Rejman: 276 Grant Avenue, are you here?
Mr. O’Neill: Good evening, my name is Mike O’Neill, I am with American Group One and I am representing Tricon Global Restaurant Systems out of East Hartford, Connecticut and they are going through the planning stages of a Kentucky Fried Chicken and an A&W Root Beer at 276 Grant Avenue, which is the Flops parcel.
In reviewing that particular parcel it has been designated as flood plain which means that we would have to build the floor slab 2 feet above the flood elevation which would put the floor slab at the top of the doors of the existing building. So we asking for a variance from that elevation which is 707 to an elevation of 700.5 - 700.5 is about 6 inches above the existing floor slab.
Mr. Rejman: OK, Mr. Moore, can you help us along with this.
Mr. Moore: First off he does have to go through all this and ask for a variance because it is on the books, but we have had the State DEC in here and this area should not even been included when they did the flood zone because the creek runs right underneath those cars, if you have got the picture, there is a culvert where the water runs through and if it flooded over it would not come here, it would flood down the roadway. This is not even in the flood zone. We are redoing the maps and this will be corrected but it is going to take a year a year and a half.
Mr. Miller: Last week we had a meeting with the FEMA people and the DEC people, it was just coincidental, it wasn’t about this project, but just coincidentally and in the course of doing the review of the Auburn maps Jim took the DEC man who handles flood issues out there to look at this and this shouldn’t even be in the flood zone. That is the key point to understand, but even if it were, in the memo that we prepared for the Board, there are really four questions that you have to deal with. One - are there similar structures nearby that would have this problem? Yes there are. Is the project a flood way, in other words a creek bed as opposed to the flood plain? It is not. There are areas adjacent to the flood way. Is the variance the minimum needed? Again he just explained that it is the elevation he needs in order to level it off properly. And finally will there be an increase in flooding down stream? You determine that by a statement from a licensed professional
engineer, Mr. O’Neill has provided that type of a statement within his application materials. So it is our conclusion that they have met the four tests pertinent to a variation of that from the flood regulations, which the law allows this Board to grant.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Let’s do it this way, is there anyone wishing to speak for or against the application or anyone in the audience who has a question about the application? Would you step forward please and state your name.
Mrs. Gentile: My name is Rose Gentile, I live at 140 Prospect Street. I am just concerned about the if that goes into effect there are big piles of stone that stop the cars from coming over to Prospect Street. They tell me that they will have the right to move those stones. Once those stones are removed, they can do their business and cut right through onto Prospect Street, there was trouble a long time ago. I feel there is enough traffic on Prospect Street. Should make it a one-way street from Grant Avenue to Seneca Parkway.
Mr. Darrow: Unfortunately in my interpretation of the question, that is a problem that has to be addressed with Planning, because Planning has all site plan approval.
Mr. Moore: It is not only that, she is talking about the upper lot.
Mr. Darrow: Right.
Mr. Moore: This is the lower lot.
Mr. Darrow: I think the part that we need to emphasize what the problem, what is concerning tonight is the elevation and what is going to happen with the flood plain. When they appear before Planning again that would be the proper time to address any concerns of egress from the property.
Mr. Tehan: Just as you received a notice of tonight’s meeting, you will certainly receive a notice regarding any site plan review by the Planning Board.
Mrs. Gentile: I called and told them about that and they said this would be a good time to come.
Mr. Rejman: I think your concerns are more directed toward the Planning side of it.
Mrs. Gentile: The traffic, we have enough traffic coming down now.
Mr. Rejman: OK, thank you very much for your comments.
Mrs. Gentile: All right.
Mr. Rejman: Anyone else wishing to speak or anyone else having a question on the application? Questions and closing comments. Questions Ed?
Mr. Darrow: No, I have a grasp of what they need to do and what we need to do.
Mr. O’Neill: For the record, when we go before the Planning Board for the site plan review we are not going to propose any ingress egress as Rose mentioned on Prospect.
Mr. Westlake: So this doesn’t have anything to do with that creek coming down overflowing on Prospect and going down Brookside Drive, that has nothing to do with that whatsoever right?
Mr. Moore: No.
Mr. Westlake: That does overflow and nothing can hold the water back it goes right down Brookside Drive.
Mr. Moore: But down the road.
Mr. Westlake: Right down the road ok.
Mr. Moore: Yea.
Mr. Rejman: We will close the public portion, have a seat.
Mr. O’Neill: Thank you.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we approve an area variance for Tricon Global Restaurants of 276 Grant Avenue for the purpose of creating an elevation at 700.5 feet which would be granting a 6’5” variance in elevation from said flood damage protection plan.
Mr. Hare: I’ll second it.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Hare, Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Gentile, Mr. Rejman
VOTING AGAINST: Mr. Westlake
Mr. Rejman: That portion of application has been approved, good luck with Planning.
Mr. O’Neill: Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Any other business that wishes to come before the Board?
Mr. Rejman: Housekeeping December meeting. There are two options here December 17th and also proposed that we slide into next month and do like the 2nd which is a Wednesday. So our December meeting is actually the first Wednesday of January and fall back into our regular schedule again.
Mr. Hare: Works for me.
Mr. Darrow: Wednesday, January 2nd?
Mr. Tehan: Yes. Probably most advisable since there is a 10-day lead-time really only gives about maybe these two weeks to get applications so that we can get them advertised.
Mr. Rejman: And it is a buy time for everyone. What is your pleasure?
Mr. Darrow: Works fine for me and then back on schedule for the 28th?
Mr. Rejman: January 2nd, 2002.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
| 
