ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2004
Members Present: Mr. Darrow
Mr. Baroody
Ms. Marteney
Mr. Westlake
Ms. Aubin
Mr. Rejman
Member Absent: Ms. Brower
Staff Present: Mrs. Hoffmann
Ms. Hussey
Mr. LaDouce
APPLICATION
APPROVED: 75 Owasco Street
120 Genesee Street
APPLICATION
DENIED: 42 Foote Street
Mr. Rejman: Good evening, this is the Zoning Board of Appeals.
We are short one member tonight but that shouldn’t be an issue. Tonight we have:
75 Owasco Street
42 Foote Street
120 Genesee Street
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2004
75 Owasco Street. C-1. Side yard buffer area variance of 4 feet. James Hutchinson.
Mr. Rejman: 75 Owasco Street, are you here? Yes, step forward, state your name for the record.
Mr. Hutchinson: Good evening, my name is James Hutchinson, 74 South Street, Auburn, New York.
Mr. Rejman: And the issue?
Mr. Hutchinson: 75 Owasco Street and the variance in regards to the parking lot located on the north side of the building. I assume most of you are familiar with this property, a neighborhood and City eyesore that we purchased and we are now in the process of renovating it. Specifically the issue tonight is in regard to the parking lot on the north side of the building. It is an existing parking, it has been there for twenty or thirty years. It is an issue because the store has been vacant for a couple of years so therefore the parking now has reverted back to the status as if you were putting in a new parking lot or expanding it.
The way it is now set up there is about 92 feet of parking lot frontage on the north side of the building. It is paved right out to the street, it is in great condition. We are proposing to eliminate the access over the whole parking lot and have access just along the north side of the parking lot about 22 feet. We are then going to put in a buffer roughly 10 feet by 62 feet long across the entire parking lot to buffer it from the street. We are also going to put new sidewalks and new curbing, replace all the black top between the curb and the sidewalks, put the lawn back in there and put trees and grass back in.
The City is also asking me to provide a buffer of 4 feet by 132 feet long to buffer the property to the north. The property to the north is an apartment house, not well maintained, there is an old driveway there along that boundary line. The parking lot slopes as you go towards the west. I really don’t think it is going to add much but it is going to be a real expense. It is going to be between $3,000 and $5,000 to tear out 4 feet by 132 feet strip of black top, excavate out all the stuff that is there, bring in top soil that you can grow in. I can’t put trees and shrubs in there and put like mulch in, I am going to have to put lawn in because it is sloping, it is going to erode. Going to
have to have something there that is going to stand that erosion. Again, I don’t think it is going to add much to the property other than a lot of expense. Both the property to the north and my property are zoned commercial, but the one to the north is used as two or three family house. That is pretty much it.
Mr. Rejman: Question for Codes. Had the property not gone vacant would this become an issue?
Mr. LaDouce: No.
Mr. Rejman: Questions from the board?
Ms. Marteney: The routing of the traffic has that been approved by Police Department, the new configuration?
Mr. Hutchinson: I have never spoken to the Police Department about it.
Ms. Hussey: It was a random in and out, I think it is more of a safety issue
Mr. Rejman: The Planning Board looked at this.
Ms. Marteney: I didn’t get that in the packet.
Mr. Rejman: This is from last month.
Ms. Marteney: I wasn’t here last month.
Ms. Hussey: Would you like to look at mine?
Ms. Marteney: No, it is fine. I drove past the property.
Mr. Hutchinson: The entrance is going to be as close as I can get it opposite Bradford Street.
Ms. Marteney: What is going to happen there?
Mr. Hutchinson: I have no idea. At this point we are going to renovate the three apartments that are there. Their parking is on the other side of the building and then renovate the store area which is about 5,000 square feet and look for a tenant.
Ms. Marteney: It is looking better already.
Mr. Hutchinson: Got a long way to go. It will be a totally different appearing property.
Mr. Darrow: Do you have any plans using the storefront yourself? You are going to rent it out to a tenant?
Mr. Hutchinson: At this point yes.
Mr. Darrow: Have you spoke with Planning, we have a memo from Planning about their feelings and concerns for that 4 foot by 132 foot variance for the buffer zone. It would be my impression that Planning would want more than just a grassy area, wouldn’t they want shrubby because you have to meet so many shrubs per square foot?
Mr. Hutchinson: Right, I would have to have lawn and put shrubby, the problem is no body put shrubby and trees you have to mound it and put mulch in, I can’t do that because the lot slopes. If you get a hard rain it is just going to run that lot and further down the lot, it is just going to erode that soil.
Mr. Darrow: Wouldn’t it run right to the outlet though? Isn’t the outlet behind you?
Mr. Hutchinson: No, there is property owned by the City and then is a residence that is behind me between the west line of my property and Mill Street. There is a vacant parcel that the City owns that runs down across.
Mr. Rejman: Is there any one wishing to speak for or against the application? Hearing none, last call for questions.
Mr. Darrow: Don’t you feel that the buffer would also enhance your property from the property to your, as you are looking at it to the right that you speak of that is in less than desirable condition?
Mr. Hutchinson: Any buffer you do any green space that you have enhances a property there is no question, but the question is how much is it going to enhance this space, there is a lot of expense because they are going to have to saw cut out the entire depth of the parking lot, excavate it, cart it away, bring in top soil and go on from there with the shrubby. I think there is going to be a little bang for the buck. The whole front of the property is going to landscaped. Even in the front of the building we are taking out all the black top between the building and sidewalk and all that.
Mr. Rejman: No further questions. OK, we will close the public portion and discuss this amongst ourselves. Questions, comments, concerns?
Mr. Darrow: Did you ask if anyone is speaking for or against?
Mr. Rejman: I already asked.
Mr. Darrow: I am not really at a complete ease granting a variance for that buffer zone. One thing that speaks is the fact that the owner of that property isn’t here
Mr. Rejman: The adjacent property
Mr. Darrow: The adjacent property but if that was my property to have a retail establishment that close and not have a side yard buffer zone
Ms. Marteney: That grocery store was there for
Mr. Darrow: Yes, I realize Super Duper was there since I grew up in Auburn and I always remember it there, but there is also the point now where we are trying to enhance and bring back some of the neighborhoods that have fallen into disrepair and by omitting this one step, I am not certain how much of a difference it will make, but I just bring that point up to think about.
Mr. Rejman: Play the devil’s advocate in there. If the neighbor to the north was concerned wouldn’t they have planted bushes a long time a go on their side?
Mr. Darrow: Excuse me?
Mr. Rejman: Wouldn’t they have planted bushes on their side if they were concerned a long time ago?
Mr. Darrow: Well it has been vacant for a number of years and I don’t even know if anyone is living in that house right now. It may be abandoned.
Mr. Rejman: And again the applicant is spending a lot of money to put something and keep something on the tax rolls
Mr. Darrow: Yes, I realize that.
Mr. Rejman: I understand your concern.
Mr. Darrow: We voted in the past all the years on the board you know to cut back the number of shrubs or cut back the number of trees in a buffer zone, to the best of my recollection have never ever removed the necessity of a buffer zone.
Mr. Rejman: I can agree with that.
Mr. Westlake: As the Code Officer said if it didn’t go vacant he wouldn’t even be here.
Mr. Rejman: Right.
Mr. Darrow: That is the same when how many two family houses have we had if they didn’t go vacant they wouldn’t be here, but it is still the fact of trying to
Mr. Westlake: It is going to be much nicer than what is there now.
Mr. Darrow: Absolutely, I am not disputing that, but we are about to do something take an undertaking that we have never done before. We have never just said no you don’t need a buffer zone. We reduced how shrubs to be in the buffer zone, but we have never just said yes you could do away with that buffer zone.
Ms. Marteney: My feeling is that that business was there for a long time and they didn’t have any problem when it was Super Duper that they would have put some kind of line of shrubbery down there. I don’t thing it changes the character of the neighborhood by not enforcing that the buffer zone to be added there. It keeps the character of the neighborhood stays the same and in fact will be enhanced by the buffer zone right to the sidewalk, I think that is going to have greenery and shield some of the parking there. And that other property to the north is also commercial
Mr. Darrow: Is it?
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Ms. Marteney: All zoned commercial there.
Mr. Darrow: I thought it was R-2.
Mr. Rejman: It is commercial attached to residential.
Mr. Darrow: I thought it was R-2.
Mr. Rejman: Anyone wishing – does someone wish to make a motion?
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Hutco Development Inc. of 2 Elizabeth Street a variance at 75 Owasco Street with respect to the side yard buffer and landscaping required under the Code.
Ms. Marteney: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Baroody
Ms. Marteney
Mr. Westlake
Ms. Aubin
Mr. Rejman
VOTING AGAINST: Mr. Darrow – due to the fact that we would be doing an injustice to the adjoining property due to the fact not knowing what type of retail business may be going into that building in the future.
Mr. Rejman: Application approved.
Mr. Hutchinson: Thank you.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2004
42 Foote Street, R-1a. Use variance for parking space in the front yard. William Conway.
________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Rejman: 42 Foote Street, are you here?
Mr. Conway: Good evening.
Mr. Rejman: Good evening.
Mr. Conway: I am Jack Conway, representing my father, William Conway. The issue is lower Foote, he is at 42 Foote Street, and there is a real crisis there with parking. Basically my father is willing to sacrifice part of his front yard to install a parking space there. Pretty much holiday parking if you will, just during the holidays, a few times a year. He has a shared driveway, which he is not allowed to park in and the lower end of Foote Street if two cars are parked side by side you couldn’t walk between the two cars. The Police Department has been up there 2:00 o’clock in the morning moving vehicles from the street, knocking on doors, it is a real crisis. Once again, he is just looking to take some grass
out put some black top in, the curb already allows access to that area. It will be tastefully done. Dug out, stone and black top.
Mr. Rejman: Ok
Mr. Conway: I don’t know if any body has been up there to see it but it really bad.
Mr. Rejman: This is bit different because it is a use variance and there are some tests have to apply to this. Let me get back to the shared driveway for a moment. Did you look into this shared driveway situation?
Mr. Conway: Before last month.
Mr. Rejman: Bring a few people up to speed, the driveway is shared currently with a vacant lot. There use to be a house there, the house is gone and the neighbor bought that and the neighbor has the right to use it this driveway he would to go one lot to use it. What did you find out talking to the neighbor?
Mr. Conway: As a matter of fact my father talked to him after they tore the house down, just casually asked him if there ever was a time that he wanted to sell that piece of property, contact me and we can, I will purchase it and then we won’t have to share a driveway and the guy wanted absolutely nothing to do with it.
Mr. Rejman: Ok, was he willing to relieve you of the shared driveway status?
Mr. Conway: No.
Mr. Rejman: Did you ask that?
Mr. Conway: Well he didn’t go further seeing it was a negative response. My father would do it in a minute because my father has lived there for, I am 48, he has lived there for 44 years and the shared driveway, why any body with a plan would come up with a shared driveway is beyond me. I guess that is the way they did it during those days, it was access to both houses, they were so close together, but that has just been a real thorn to him ever since he has lived there, but he has dealt with it and when the opportunity arose he did ask his neighbor and it is nothing personal against the neighbor
Mr. Rejman: He was asking the neighbor to consider selling the vacant lot.
Mr. Conway: Oh, no, no, just to purchase the rights to the shared driveway. He was going to pay him money to do it, within reason, but he can’t even park in the driveway like I said. If the vehicles are on the road next to the curb side by side you physically couldn’t walk between the two cars, it is that close and like I said it is only going to be holiday parking, it is not like he is going to park there every day. By the way, I would say at the most a dozen times out of the year, when my sister comes in from out of town, because otherwise she has to park down almost to Lewis Street, maybe not to Lewis, but farther down Lawton Avenue, because on Lawton Avenue they have parking only on one side. There are apartment
houses, there are college students who live on Foote Street, and there are cars just all over the place.
Mr. Westlake: If you park in the shared driveway the guy come over and tell you to move the car?
Mr. Conway: He hasn’t yet, but the previous resident of the house that was torn down, they would come right out the front door and say you have to move that car.
Mr. Westlake: Well when it was a shared driveway I could see that
Mr. Conway: Just out of common courtesy he doesn’t park there. That driveway is only used to access the garage, there is no parking in it. Like I said it will be tastefully done, the grass taken out, stones, professionally black topped.
Mr. Westlake: There is really not that much room between the fence there and where you want to put your parking area.
Mr. Conway: Enough room for one car.
Mr. Westlake: Don’t they have to be so many feet away from the property line?
Mr. LaDouce: No.
Mr. Conway: On the other side that is double lot that goes from Morris Street all the way to Foote Street, so it is just a vacant lot.
Mr. Westlake: It is not vacant, it is the people’s back yard.
Mr. Conway: Right, all one.
Mr. Rejman: We are still dealing with a use variance and we still need, one of the tests is economic hardship and I think you stated there wasn’t any in the application.
Mr. Conway: No there isn’t, I will be honest with you, there is no economic hardship it is just helping out the crisis there with the parking that is all. Even if he doesn’t put it in, something is going to have to be done about the street – you have Police knocking on the door at 2:00 o’clock in the morning.
Mr. Rejman: Let me do this, any one wishing to speak for or against this application? None. Any questions from the board?
Ms. Marteney: No indication of economic hardship.
Mr. Rejman: I know, that is the problem.
Mr. Darrow: I have a question for Mr. Conway. I viewed the property last month, I didn’t do it again this month, as I recall is there ample parking or enough for one spot where if you came down the driveway and went to the right behind the house, I understand there is a problem with the garage or garage door that is why he is not always going in and parking in the garage.
Mr. Conway: Right.
Mr. Darrow: Is there a reason why that parking slip couldn’t be put behind the house on the right hand side of the driveway?
Mr. Conway: Yes, there is a jog about 5 foot at the end of the main house and he has sun porch there and there is a fence between the sun porch and the garage and you would have to angle in there and it is almost impossible to get in there.
Mr. Baroody: Your father still has use of the garage, no one else can park in the driveway.
Mr. Conway: No parking is allowed in the driveway.
Mr. Rejman: Ok, we will close the public portion and discuss amongst ourselves. Thank you.
Really strange situation, because we are only dealing with 38 x 80 foot lot, we have an absentee shared owner because the house isn’t there so there is no body
Ms. Marteney: What does it say in the deed?
Mr. Rejman: Says that the person in the vacant lot to the left has access to the shared driveway.
Mr. Darrow: The person that owns the lot lives on the other side of the lot. Mr. Conway is on the right of the vacant lot and the owner of the vacant lot lives on the left.
Mr. Rejman: And it is a use variance and we really don’t have any ground to stand on. Any comments?
Mr. Darrow: Stuck between a rock and a hard place. Because A you are suppose to give the least amount of variance possible which by looking at the patch that they are looking to put in I couldn’t imagine it being any smaller – putting a match box car on it. Also at the point where he needs to prove hardship, economic hardship and there really isn’t any economic hardship or no loss being derived from us not allowing it.
Mr. Rejman: We do need to move forward, we need an affirmative motion.
Mr. Darrow: We need to do a SEQRA review before we move forward with the other motion.
Mrs. Hoffmann: I just passed out the forms.
We are down as far as C, Part II, at C.
Does this action result in any adverse effects associated with the following:
Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? No.
Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? No.
Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? No.
A community’s existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? No.
Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? No.
Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects no identified in C1-C5? No.
Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy?) No.
Will the project have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a critical environment area? No.
Is there or is there likely to be controversy related to potential environment impacts? No.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to put forth a motion that we adopt a negative impact study of the SEQRA review.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Darrow
Mr. Baroody
Ms. Marteney
Mr. Westlake
Ms. Aubin
Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: We have the negative SEQRA review. I need a motion.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to put forth a motion that we grant William Conway of 42 Foote Street, a use variance for the purpose of constructing a 7 x 8 foot parking area in the front right hand side of the house for the purpose of off street parking as submitted on attached plot plan.
Mr. Westlake: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Darrow
ABSTAINING: Mr. Baroody
VOTING AGAINST: Ms. Marteney – there was no proof of financial hardship.
Mr. Westlake – same reason, no proof of financial hardship.
Ms. Aubin – same reason.
Mr. Rejman, unfortunately no, no financial hardship.
Mr. Rejman: Application is not approved.
Mr. Conway: Thank you.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2004
120 Genesee Street. C-2. Area variance of 50 square feet for sign at Bank of America.
Syracuse Fence.
_____________________________________________________________________
Mr. Rejman: 120 Genesee Street.
Mr. Hubeny: Good evening, my name is Rich Hubeny, I am here on behalf of Bank of America for the area variance for sign at the top of the building. First and foremost I was called in at the last minute so I don’t know the background exactly. All I know I was asked to come in here to answer any questions for you.
Mr. Rejman: We were short handed last month, very short handed. Any application requires a
Mr. Darrow: This was not a carry over from last month.
Mr. Rejman: I thought he said he didn’t know what happened last month.
Mr. Hubeny: I was just brought in at the last minute because of some problems with Allied Sign Company they were fired from the project. I haven’t even had a chance to see the application. I will try to answer questions for you.
Mr. Darrow: What it boils down to is the Bank is requiring a 230 square foot wall sign, the applicant is allowed 180 square foot so you need a 50 square foot of variance for the signage.
Mr. Hubeny: Is this on the top of the building?
Mr. Darrow: I am not sure if it is the rear sign or forward sign.
Mr. Rejman: I am going to let you use my application.
Mr. Hubeny: If you take the sign and measure the Bank of America and simply measure the flag it is 102.8 square feet.
Ms. Aubin: It is not a flag, it is a logo.
Mr. Rejman: The application is very clear. It is nice to have these pictures. Seems like one of our generic sign requests.
Mr. Westlake: Who knows what bank they will be next month. (Every one laughs).
Ms. Aubin: All the signs are already there except the one at the very top.
Mr. Hubeny: And this is the newest version type sign it is all LED lights inside the sign, no neon, state of the art, lighter sign.
Ms. Aubin: Are they all going to be lighted?
Mr. Hubeny: Lighted yes.
Ms. Aubin: They will be lighted?
Mr. Hubeny: Yes, they are LED lights.
Ms. Aubin: Because right now the only one that lights is the one in the front.
Mr. Hubeny: The old one I was told today use to light up.
Ms. Aubin: Up on top, the very top.
Mr. Hubeny: That is the one we are talking about.
Ms. Aubin: Ok, the one at the back door never lit.
Mr. Rejman: Questions from the board?
Mr. Darrow: When were these put up?
Ms. Aubin: August 8th.
Mr. Hubeny: Sign on the top is not up.
Mr. Darrow: I noticed the one in back was up tonight.
Ms. Aubin: They went up before Customer Day One, which was August 16th.
Mr. Hubeny: I am assuming they had permission to do that, but they are required by Federal Law to have the sign with the name of the bank by the weekend, Federal requirement.
Ms. Hussey: I believe the variance is for the front sign only.
Mr. Darrow: Ok, they showed the rear
Ms. Hussey: I think that was just a question of showing where the sign placement was.
Mr. Rejman: Total of the project.
Ms. Hussey: It is the front, there is a maximum square footage allowed.
Mr. Rejman: Further questions? Any one wishing to speak for or against? None. Close the public portion and discuss it. One of our generic sign requests.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Syracuse Signs and Bank America of 120 Genesee Street a 50 square foot area variance for the purpose of erecting a new sign on the façade of 120 Genesee Street at the higher elevation to as submitted by attached photos.
Mr. Westlake: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Mr. Darrow
Mr. Baroody
Ms. Marteney
Mr. Westlake
Mr. Rejman
ABSTAINING: Ms. Aubin
Mr. Rejman: Application approved.
Mr. Hubeny: Thank you. In order to put up this sign we have to bring in a large crane and bucket.
Mr. LaDouce: Check with the Police Department, Officer Thomas Weed.
Mr. Hubeny: Thank you.
| 
