ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
Members Present: Ms. Marteney
Mr. Darrow
Ms. Brower
Mr. Westlake
Ms. Aubin
Member Absent: Ms. Aubin – Death in Family
Mr. Rejman
One Vacancy
Staff Present: Ms. Hussey
Mr. Hicks
Mrs. Hoffmann
APPLICATIONS
APPROVED: 137 Washington Street
282 North Street
122 Clark Street
43 Frazee Street
APPLICATION
TABLED: 50 Logan Street
Mr. Darrow: Good evening, I am Vice-Chairman Ed Darrow, our Chairman; Bob Rejman is absent this evening. Tonight we will be hearing
280-284 Seymour Street
137 Washington Street
282 North Street
122 Clark Street
43 Frazee Street
50 Logan Street
This is normally a 7-person board; we have one vacancy that has been appointed yet and two absences. So it takes 4 yes votes for anything to pass. So at this time, if there is any body that would like to table until next month, please come forward because all it would take is one no vote and your variance would be denied. Is there any body that wishes to table until next month?
Mr. Wejko: I have a question.
Mr. Darrow: Yes.
Mr. Wejko: On the denial can we resubmit?
Mr. Darrow: No, there has to be a drastic change in circumstances in order to resubmit after it has been voted on and denied. So all it takes is one of any of the 4 of us to vote no. Every body wants to go forward? OK.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
280-284 Seymour Street, R1A, use variance for three dwelling units on the premises. Area variances of 902 sq. ft. for three units on one lot and area variance for parking buffers. John Juhl.
Mr. Darrow: First we will call for 280-284 Seymour Street. 280 – 284 Seymour Street?
ZONING BOARD OF APPREALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
137 Washington Street, R-1, Area variance of 3’ on north side of building to construct new entry way for tenant on second floor. Jeanette Quill.
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Darrow: How about 137 Washington Street?
Mr. Chirco: Good evening.
Mr. Darrow: Good evening, why don’t you tell us what you would like to do.
Mr. Chirco: My name is Norm Chirco and I am here with Jeanette Quill who filed for a variance here tonight. I know she submitted some materials. Briefly I will go through it and then if you have any questions we can answer them.
She owns the beauty salon on Washington Street. As you know it is on the corner of Washington and Perrine Streets. Right now there is an entranceway that sits on Perrine Street, I think you all have a little diagram here. The situation is this, Jeanette who is standing to my left, use to reside in this apartment. There is a residence upstairs above the salon that exists right now. There is one entranceway both for the apartment and the salon. What she would like to do is create another entranceway for security reasons and safety reasons so that there is an entrance directly to the upstairs apartment so the person renting it does not have to enter into the salon and leave the other entranceway for the
salon itself.
She did begin construction on this, unfortunately believing that some one got a permit and when they found out they didn’t have a permit, they were told to stop work and they stopped work and made an application and it is here before you. The addition is outlined; it is going to be an increase of 40 square feet. She does own the property immediately adjacent to where this entrance way is going to be so there are no neighbors immediately affected and as you know the Church is across the street and it is our belief that it will not affect the character and integrity of the neighborhood and this is the least most intrusive way to do what she is trying to do.
Mr. Darrow: Any questions from the board members?
Ms. Marteney: I want to complement you on your packet though, it was great.
Ms. Quill: Thank you.
Ms. Marteney: The area behind the current staircase where there is a paneled area, is that what you started working on?
Mr. Vitale: That was existing.
Ms. Marteney: OK. (Mr. Vitale points out what is new on the sketch).
Mr. Darrow: May the record show for the members that the applicant is seeking a 3-foot side yard set back area variance. Please be seated.
Mr. Chirco: Thank you.
Mr. Darrow: Is there any body to speak for or against this application? Is there any body to speak for or against this application? Seeing none, we will close the public portion and discuss amongst ourselves.
Mr. Westlake: I think it is great.
Mr. Darrow: Any problems, questions or concerns?
Ms. Marteney: It seems sensible if you want to rent something you don’t want someone to have access to your business. Completely reasonable.
Mr. Darrow: And it is minimal amount. They are absolutely not going for too much.
Would some body like to put a motion on the floor?
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Janette Quill and is it Mike Vitale?
Mr. Chirco: Yes, Mike too.
Mr. Westlake: And Mike Vitale Sr. a 3 foot side yard set back variance for 137 Washington Street, Auburn, New York.
Ms. Marteney: I’ll second.
Mr. Darrow: We have a second. Roll call please.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney
Ms. Brower
Mr. Westlake
Mr. Darrow
Mr. Darrow: Your variance has been approved, Code Enforcement will be in touch with you to continue your work. Thank you.
Mr. Chirco: Thank you.
Ms. Quill: Thank you.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
282 North Street, C, Area variance of 35’ for buffer area next to adjacent residential use. John Wejko.
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Darrow: 282 North Street? Good evening, could you please state your name and address for the record.
Mr. Wejko: John Wejko, 97 Burtis Point, Auburn, New York.
Mr. Darrow: Yes, what would you like to do this evening Mr. Wejko?
Mr. Wejko: We are proposing constructing a 25,000 square foot commercial building on the site at 282 North Street and our reason to be here is after considering many ways of doing the site lay out for the building and parking, we are asking for a variance. The normal side lot on an industrial zone is 25, the City states that when it is next to a residential lot, this happens to be next to Mrs. Whiting’s lot at, actually I don’t remember her address number, but it is south of my property. Now in requesting the 25 feet what we plan, if you look at the site plan, is to take the building and the south side of the building would have absolutely no entry, no windows and would act as a buffer to her property and the area between the
building and her property would be all grassed in area, landscaped, fence if requested, which is not a problem.
We planned it this way to keep all the parking on the north side of the building and the ingress and egress on the north side of the building and that would eliminate any noise and visibility of a commercial, you know, whom ever I as tenants or myself so that would act as a buffer in her regard. We thought about mirror imaging this and turning it around but then all the parking and everything would be to her site rather than away from her. If we go a 60 foot side lot set back on this side, I would reduce a considerable amount of my parking and a good amount of square footage on the building. Mrs. Whiting is here tonight.
Mr. Darrow: Any questions from the board? OK. Hearing none, please be seated Mr. Wejko.
Mr. Wejko: Sure.
Mr. Darrow: Is there any one present to speak for or against this application? Any one to speak for or against? Hearing none, seeing none, we will close the public portion and discuss this amongst ourselves.
What they are looking for is 35 foot side line buffer and a 20 foot rear line buffer, am I correct?
Mr. Westlake: Is it suppose to be 60 and 50?
Mr. Hicks: That is required.
Mr. Darrow: Right they need a variance for 35 and one for 20 for the rear. It is a commercial area
Ms. Marteney: 20 where it backs up to the quarry property, kind of triangular or pointy.
Mr. Darrow: Let me get to the site plan.
Mr. Westlake: Who is applying, is Mr. Wejko applying or Mr. Schooley applying?
Mr. Darrow: Well the applicant is Mr. Schooley but I am sure Mr. Wejko you are the contractor for Mr. Schooley?
Mr. Wejko: No, actually we are purchasing the property from Mr. Schooley and a part of this is, you have two pages that show the purchase offer, so we are acting as an agent for Wejko Inc. which is buying the property.
Mr. Westlake: Can we do it?
Mr. Darrow: We can grant an area variance to the property and then at closing time it becomes Mr. Wejko’s.
Mr. Westlake: OK.
Ms. Marteney: But the property in question in the back is the quarry in terms of bumping into them.
Mr. Darrow: Is this currently before Planning?
Mr. Hicks: Yes.
Ms. Hussey: I believe Mr. Wejko has received preliminary site plan approval up to this point.
Mr. Wejko: I was at last month’s Planning Board meeting and received Planning Board approval on a preliminary plan.
Mr. Darrow: OK, thank you.
Mr. Wejko: And the property in back is all weeded in and part of the quarry lot.
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion.
Mr. Darrow: Sure.
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Charles Schooley of 2264 Turnpike Road, Auburn, New York, a 35 foot side line buffer and a 20 foot rear line buffer for the property at 282 North Street, Auburn, New York.
Mr. Darrow: We have a motion, do we have a second?
Ms. Brower: I’ll second that.
Mr. Darrow: We have a second.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney
Ms. Brower
Mr. Westlake
Mr. Darrow
Mr. Darrow: Your application has been approved, Code Enforcement will be in touch with you after it goes through the Planning steps.
Mr. Wejko: Thank you.
Mr. Darrow: Thank you.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
122 Clark Street, C, Area variance of 30.5’ side yard and 9’ rear yard for addition of vehicle repair bays. Lee Gauthier.
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Darrow: 122 Clark Street?
Mr. Gauthier: My name is Lee Gauthier and I am applying for a side and rear variances for 122 Clark Street. When I originally built down here 15-foot side yard what was required. Since then obviously laws have changed and now it is 60 feet. I don’t think I would have ever purchased that property way back when because it was only 120 x 120 lot, so if we had 60 and 60 back then it would have been of no use to me.
I was granted years ago a side yard variance – 7 feet of the property line, it should be on the map, it would be the southwest corner 7 feet from the property line now. With the new building, I am still looking at a 30-foot side yard and 50 foot rear yard set backs.
Mr. Darrow: Any questions from the board?
Ms. Brower: 50 foot set back and
Mr. Gauthier: And 29 ½ foot is what I have right now, what is proposed.
Ms. Marteney: And this building is going to be used for
Mr. Gauthier: This is going to be my offices, right now my offices are in front of the building next door, we are moving all the offices and bays into the new building. I am putting a new paint booth in and it will be next to the other one.
Ms. Marteney: So that will be your current building.
Mr. Gauthier: This one is going to be just offices and bays.
Mr. Darrow: Any other questions from the board? OK, you may be seated. Thank you.
Is there any body to speak for or against this application? Any body to speak for or against? Seeing none, we will close the public portion and discuss amongst ourselves.
So we are looking for a 9-foot rear variance from the buffer and 30.5 foot, excuse me, are there two or just one needed here?
Ms. Marteney: Two. It says 60
Mr. Darrow: Alright. Well it is suppose to be 60 and he needs 30.5
Ms. Marteney: OK.
Mr. Darrow: And 9 foot from the rear so 30.5 would be from the side. Any questions?
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Lee Gauthier a 9 foot rear line buffer variance and 30.5 foot side line buffer variance for 122 Clark Street, Auburn, New York.
Mr. Darrow: I have a motion on the floor. Any seconds?
Ms. Marteney: I’ll second it.
Mr. Darrow: I have a second.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney
Ms. Brower
Mr. Westlake
Mr. Darrow
Mr. Darrow: The application has been approved. Code Enforcement will be in touch with you. Thank you.
Mr. Gauthier: Thank you.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
43 Frazee Street, R-2, Area variance of 10’ for side yard buffer, Robert Deming.
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Darrow: 43 Frazee Street. Good evening, could you state your name and address and tell us what you would like to do.
Mr. Deming: My name is Robert Deming, I live in Fair Haven, New York. I own property on 43 Frazee Street. I put the property up for sale, sold it as a two unit and I need a variance on the west side for parking. It would be 5’6” variance because of the driveway is too close to the property line.
Mr. Westlake: We just received this tonight. Did any body get a chance to look at it?
Ms. Marteney: Yes. I drove by and didn’t know what we were looking at.
Mr. Darrow: Do you wish for this to be tabled so that the property can be inspected or do you feel comfortable moving forward?
Mr. Westlake: Where the people on either side notified?
Mr. Hicks: Yes, they were notified.
Mr. Darrow: Going to take a poll, is every body comfortable moving forward? OK.
Ms. Marteney: Looks as though it lost its status because of being unoccupied?
Mr. Hicks: The property was condemned at one time. Mr. Deming picked the property up and has rehabbed the property since I believe 1997.
Mr. Deming: Yes.
Mr. Hicks: In the process he did receive a temporary CO for the lower unit. But he never completed the full CO status. At this point he wishes to sell the property, but he still needs the full CO status. We want to make sure he gets the proper variance before he sells the property.
Mr. Darrow: If this variance should be granted, he will have proper space for the proper amount of off street parking?
Mr. Hicks: He will he is showing two in the front portion of the property and two in the rear. What we are looking for is that sideline buffer. He has 4’6” there now, he needs a variance of 5’6”.
Mr. Westlake: So if Mr. Deming sells this, I am confused, he has one unit right now and he has a temporary CO for that, who ever buys it has to come back to us?
Mr. Darrow: No, he needs a variance so that they do inspection for the CO for two units so that way he is creating enough off street parking so it would be a legal two unit.
Ms. Hussey: He is located in an R-2 zoned district so even if he lost his occupancy for the two units he can legally have two units, however he has the one provision, according to the Code, once something is abandoned and if you re-occupy it, it has to meet current Code now, so any code violations don’t get grandfathered in and our parking requirements require the off street parking for an R-2 district.
Mr. Westlake: OK. I wish we had this a little sooner.
Ms. Hussey: It is in a R-2 district so multi-units are allowable, but he had to bring everything under current Code.
Ms. Marteney: Is that an existing driveway on that side? There was a car there when I drove by.
Mr. Hicks: All driveways must be hard surface or dustless surface and I can’t tell what is there.
Ms. Marteney: OK, I thought it was the driveway because there were two cars there.
Ms. Hussey: Are there curb cuts?
Mr. Hicks: There are no curb cut applications for that property. That is an item that must be completed before a CO will be issued, but that is a Code Enforcement issue.
Mr. Darrow: Will it go before Engineering?
Mr. Hicks: Code Enforcement and Engineering, these are all items that will have to be addressed before a CO will be issued. Right now we are just looking to see if he can get the variance for the parking.
Mr. Deming: That driveway is black topped, 20 feet from the sidewalk.
Mr. Darrow: Any other questions from the board members? You may be seated.
Is there any one wishing to speak for or against the application?
Mr. DeBois: I am Don DeBois, with Barb Vine Real Estate and I the realtor representing the sale. I have a question, you just said something about the property is located in an R-2 something about the vacancy? I was confused as to the term of vacancy during Mr. Deming’s ownership.
Ms. Hussey: It was prior to Mr. Deming’s ownership, it was a condemned property, condemned vacant property and because there was no parking that was allowed to continue because it was non-conforming but it was grandfathered in. Once that building that dwelling became vacant and condemned it lost its non-conforming status so in that rest in order to occupy it again it has to meet Code.
Mr. DeBois: Thank you.
Ms. Hussey: But there is no limitation on him having the two units because it is a R-2 district.
Mr. DeBois: I don’t know the approval process. It is under contract as you know. We have a 30-day extension on the original contract, which expires February 28th. We don’t know if the buyer is going to be willing to go forward, ultimately she is waiting for, she can’t get her final commitment from, she has bank commitment, she can’t get her final commitment from the bank pending the CO. So hopefully we will have a second 30-day extension as far as Code Enforcement application. I know we are right at the end of the line here as far as timing.
Mr. Hicks: This is all conditional on a full CO.
Mr. DeBois: Two CO’s for both units that is correct.
Mr. Hicks: And a full CO for the structure by the 28th.
Mr. DeBois: Our 30-day extension expires on the 28th of February. When we were talking with the buyer, with the buyer’s attorney and the seller, my self and both brokers, we were under the impression we had information that we had we thought we were having that CO’s because the property was at one time a 4 to a 3 to a 2 and ultimately down to a 1 and hopefully now back up to a legal 2, what the CO’s are needed for the buyer’s bank just a CO for the two units and ultimately the driveway is playing in here now on the variance.
But ultimately and it looks as though we might have to apply for another 30 days extension on the contract. If the buyer is not granted a 30-day extension on the contract obviously the deal is going to fall through and with the personal situations that are at hand, we are not sure where the property is going to actually fall. We will be honest with you and up front. So that and Mr. Deming was in contact with the Code Office and I believe the inspection dates are somewhere around April I believe they are booking for and we were actually hoping for either a cancellation or a special inspection date or something like that just to expedite everything, as long as the driveway issues and the variances are all up to standard
with the City. That is where we are, that is where we are coming from. And ultimately no one wants the deal to fall through, the buyer is looking to moving forward, the seller is looking to moving forward and obviously so is the City.
Mr. Hicks: You are aware that the Zoning Board is just a small portion of the whole CO process?
Mr. DeBois: Absolutely, I understand that.
Mr. Hicks: That is the bigger issue.
Mr. DeBois: I didn’t know that and the buyer doesn’t know that the issue is going to come up with a 4.5’ driveway issue or 4.6 variance was going to be needed. I was not aware of that until just now. I am certainly hoping on the City’s behalf and on Mr. Deming’s behalf and the buyer that hopefully we can all come to some sort of agreement across the board.
Mr. Darrow: The first step is us going ahead with the area variance tonight.
Mr. DeBois: Absolutely.
Mr. Darrow: If we approve that then it is between you folks and Code Enforcement to schedule an appointment and get every thing up the way they need it and Engineering, you have to be in contact with Engineering for them to approve the curb cut. OK?
Mr. DeBois: Absolutely. Thank you.
Mr. Darrow: Thank you. Is there any one else wishing to speak for or against this application? Seeing none, hearing none, I will close the public portion, we will discuss this application amongst ourselves. Any questions, any problems or concerns?
Ms. Marteney: Not knowing exactly what we were suppose to be looking at when I drove by. I can’t picture in my head what was on that side what they are asking for. The picture is here but I don’t know, I can’t remember how close the other house is or any thing like that to be able to
Mr. Darrow: The one thing that I always keep in mind if this helps at all, is that there was no body to speak for or against.
Ms. Marteney: I understand that.
Mr. Darrow: We know that they were sent letters, every body within 500 feet.
Ms. Marteney: I just can’t remember how close the other house is on that side either.
Mr. Darrow: It is understandable.
Ms. Marteney: I didn’t know what I was looking at when I went there. I looked at it, kind of saw where there was a driveway, but it is covered with snow.
Mr. Darrow: If you are not comfortable, I mean, we can table for 30 days so that when the house and property is examined you all are aware of exactly what you are looking for.
Ms. Marteney: It appeared to me that there was enough space for a driveway on that side, because there was a car parked there and room around it, I just don’t have a complete picture of the area.
Mr. Westlake: I just wish that they had gotten his stuff here sooner so that we could have looked at it. It is a gamble on his part that one of us don’t vote no.
Mr. Darrow: Yes, yes it is.
Mr. Westlake: I wonder if he would want to request it?
Mr. Darrow: I had already put it out at the beginning of the meeting.
Mr. Westlake: OK, fair enough.
Ms. Marteney: Will this make enough parking spaces for them too?
Mr. Hicks: Four are required.
Ms. Marteney: OK.
Mr. Darrow: And that is without parking behind each other, correct?
Mr. Hicks: Correct, no stacking.
Ms. Marteney: No what?
Mr. Hicks: Stacking.
Ms. Marteney: OK.
Mr. Darrow: Any other discussion? Any body like to make a motion?
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Robert Deming of 14594 Lake Street, Fair Haven, New York, a 5’6” minimum side yard buffer to the west for tenant parking at 43 Frazee Street, Auburn, New York.
Mr. Darrow: Thank you, we have a motion on the floor. Do we have a second?
Ms. Marteney: I’ll second.
Mr. Darrow: We have a second.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney
Ms. Brower
Mr. Westlake
Mr. Darrow
Mr. Darrow: Your variance has been approved. Please stay in contact with Code Enforcement and Engineering so that they can further this request through.
Mr. Deming: Thank you very much.
Mr. Darrow: Thank you.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2004
50 Logan Street, R-2, Area variance of 10’ for side yard setback. Michael LaVarnway.
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Darrow: 50 Logan Street? 50 Logan is a no show.
Tabled until next month.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
| 
