ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2005
Members Present: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Staff Present: Ms. Hussey, Mr. Hicks, Mr. Selvek
APPLICATIONS APPROVED: 43 Perrine Street, 70 Kensington Avenue, 46 Cayuga Street, 11 Mary Street, 6 Fitch Avenue, 42 Maple Street
APPLICATION TABLED: 210 Osborne Street, 235 State Street, 82 Owasco Street, 48 – 52 Washington Street
Mr. Rejman: Good evening, this is the Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have the following items: 210 Osborne Street, 43 Perrine Street, 70 Kensington Avenue, 46 Cayuga Street, 11 Mary Street, 6 Fitch Avenue, 42 Maple Street, 82 Owasco Street, 48 – 52 Washington Street.
_____________________________________________________________
210 Osborne Street, R-1, Use variance for consumer service business (hair styling) at site. Yantch Plaster and Stucco Systems.
Mr. Rejman: If there is anyone here for 210 Osborne Street that has been tabled until the July 25th meeting.
_____________________________________________________________
43 Perrine Street, C-1, Anthony Tardibone. Four area variances: 1) 4 foot east side yard area variance; 2) 56 foot rear yard buffer variance of required 60 foot buffer; 3) 36 foot west side yard area variance of the required 60 foot buffer; 4) variance of 23 parking spaces from the required 50.
Mr. Rejman: 43 Perrine Street, are you here? Please come to the podium, state your name for the record.
Mr. Tardibone: Anthony Tardibone.
Mr. Rejman: Tell us what you want to do there.
Mr. Tardibone: I bought a garage and I want to turn it into a gym, a small section of that may be a bar.
Mr. Rejman: You need quite a bit of area variances. There is a 4 foot side yard variance required to the east, 56 foot rear yard buffer of the required 60 feet, and a 46 foot side yard to the west and because of the use that you want to put in you also need a variance for 23 parking spaces.
Mr. Tardibone: I believe it is 2 or 3 parking spaces.
Mr. Hicks: The calculations he is talking about are not descriptive of the bar so we moved the dimension so that we could incorporate half the building so that is how we came up with the parking spaces.
Mr. Tardibone: I sectioned it out.
Mr. Hicks: The only problem is the bar area doesn’t have any exit or entrance doors showing ingress and egress.
Mr. Tardibone: The bar was not an after thought to turn this into a gym like this I wanted the members of the gym to have a bar. The bar is a very short area, it is going to be 24 feet by 40 feet and the building is 5,000 square feet I believe.
Mr. Rejman: OK, we also received a letter from Stephen Lynch, Director of OPED, did you get a copy of this by chance?
Mr. Tardibone: No.
Mr. Rejman: Here is what I would like to do. It is also fair that you get to read this and discuss with Codes and then we will come back to you. I would like you to see what Steve Lynch’s concerns are. Did you get a chance to read Mr. Lynch’s concerns?
Mr. Tardibone: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: OK. After reading that, tell us your wishes.
Mr. Tardibone: Before I bought this place, I looked at the zoning, what could this place be used for, as a bar, gym, many uses. When I bought the place I didn’t realize I had to come before this Zoning Board or Planning next week or whenever it is. I don’t understand why there are zoning laws, I could see if I was trying to make a C-1 in a C-3. I want to do exactly what this is zoned for. There wasn’t like a red tape on this building saying 'Don’t buy this place because you can’t use it'. I checked into it what it could be used for and what I want to use it for.
You want buffers between bars, I don’t understand that. It is not like there is a neighborhood so there is a bar, a blacktopped driveway. I would buffer the whole front end of the parking lot. From bar, to bar, to bar, that doesn’t make sense to me, why you need buffers. Did up your perfectly good parking lot which you don’t have enough parking to start with, which I have the only parking on the whole Perrine Street. I don’t know where Mr. Lynch comes in; I have heard nothing about this. If there is zoning, there is zoning for effect, there is a C-1and it gives 30 uses. I am one of the uses C-1 is zoned for. We have plans to stick some money into this place and make it look good. I was going to do a gym and just open the bar for the gym members.
Mr. Rejman: I can appreciate the fact that you were blindsided by not seeing this. Would it be better for you to table this until next month to give you a chance to talk with Planning at the same time?
Mr. Tardibone: I have owned it for three months, I bought this with a tenant in place and now I have to go to court because I guess the tenant wasn’t suppose to be in the building now I am paying taxes on something. I don’t understand what the zone is for if I can’t put something that the City of Auburn says is alright there, it is not like I am putting a bar and there are no other bars in the area, this is bar central down there. It is crazy down there. I want to do a gym; it would be nice for my members to have a place to go before going out.
Mr. Rejman: I guess the issue here is the bar. Because the bar is pushing the fact that you need all these parking spaces.
Mr. Tardibone: How many parking spaces do I need?
Mr. Rejman: You need 50.
Mr. Tardibone: What is the parking
Mr. Westlake: They lost confirming, pre-existing.
Mr. Tardibone: The bar is proposed to be 24 x 40.
Mr. Rejman: Brian, can you shed some light on this?
Mr. Hicks: The calculations that we did with this proposed use for this structure. We calculated all the square footage and the lot size and what the proposed use which is correct in C-1 here. The thing is that it is a new use. Is it an allowed use? Yes it is. But a new use you must meet zoning requirements for your use. This building was condemned in 1999 and since then any thing that you would there would be new.
Mr. Tardibone: If I took the bar out and just made it a gym, can I get my variance?
Mr. Hicks: It is still a business.
Mr. Tardibone: This can’t be used as a business?
Mr. Hicks: Yes, this is a new use for the building, so it still means that you are going to have to have the area variances for your parking lot. Your parking is calculated different because it is a gym.
Mr. Tardibone: Can we do this? I will throw the bar out; I wanted to make a gym anyway. Am I in conformance with a gym?
Mr. Hicks: A gym can be used in a consumer establishment, also if you want to formulate a new plan for just the one use, we can table it, come back in July with our new proposal.
Mr. Tardibone: I can’t just cross off the bar, I just want the gym.
Ms. Hussey: You can amend it on the record.
Mr. Rejman: Before we amend the application, let me ask this, is there any one wishing to speak for or against the application? Ok, there are a few people that would like to speak. Have a seat for a moment, let’s see what the concerns are and let’s try to address everything at once tonight if we can. Yes, sir. State your name please.
Mr. Morgan: My name is Jerry Morgan. I live at 22 Pulaski Street. I live directly behind this proposed business that he has, directly behind it. I have a drawing of my property and that it would put him exactly at my garage. I am against this. If he needs a rear variance I am not willing to give up that 20 feet that I have on here as an easement for that.
Mr. Rejman: Let me ask this. What business would you be favorable to letting use that property?
Mr. Morgan: I really couldn’t tell you. I haven’t given that any consideration at all other than a wrecking ball.
Mr. Rejman: What if you owned that building
Mr. Morgan: If I owned it?
Mr. Rejman: If you owned the building and you wanted to put into productive use again, what would you think might work there?
Mr. Morgan: I wouldn’t have a clue because of where it is situated in between bars. As he said it is saturated with bars and this summer all you hear is screaming and fighting and swearing and beer bottles crashing. The whole nine yards. Cars peeling out at all hours of the night, fighting in the middle of the street. I can give you a horror stories all day long.
Mr. Rejman: I live down on Grant Street so I am familiar of the Bermuda triangle there. But what about a 9 to 5 business?
Mr. Morgan: Sure, there an attorney for that matter just bought a place that was the old hardware store on State Street and fixed that up and that looks really nice. I am not against any body fixing up and improving the neighborhood, heck no, putting it back on the tax rolls, but to add insult to injury by proposing another bar there, that is crazy, it is just crazy. That lady there who was complaining about her windows being broken in her establishment.
Mr. Darrow: How do you feel about a health club with a window of hours of operation?
Mr. Morgan: That wouldn’t bother me at all. That wouldn’t bother me at all, but a bar would. I am speaking for my own self. As long as it doesn’t go back on my property line I don’t want that, I like that little cushion that I have here. As it is I am pulling bottle rockets out of my pool, I don’t need any more. So what ever the other residents in the neighborhood fell, that is entirely their own opinion. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: OK, Mr. Morgan, thank you. Any one else wishing to speak for or against? Yes, come up.
Mr. Allen: My name is John Allen; I own the property across the street. My only concern is that a nighttime operation would congest traffic even more than it is, it is terrible now. When I heard about it I thought it was going to be a garage again, I don’t have a problem with that. But any kind of after hours evening operations is going, especially on weekends, it is going to congest the traffic unbearably. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. There is some one else. Come down.
Ms. Reed: Hi, my name is Sandra Reed, I live next door to Jerry Morgan. My property abuts right up against Borza’s old garage and there is an access back door, there use to be an access back door, but if he decides to use that he is butting against my property too, because my line goes farther behind Jerry’s garage. There is congestion already; I can’t see any more congestion. You are talking they can jump the fence; go into our property, no, it is too congested as it is.
Mr. Rejman: What are your thoughts on how to use that property?
Ms. Reed: It has not been used in 4 years now. The last time I did something, Borza owned it and he had two containers back there, what it did was cause animals to live in my back yard, and dig holes and finally got him to get those containers out of there and now you want to open it up again and who knows what is in there or what is under it and now you are going to cause more ruckus, more animals that we got pay to get out of our yard. I just think it is too congested to have another business right down in that area.
Mr. Rejman: So what would be your recommendation for use on that building?
Ms. Reed: I don’t know, I can’t answer that.
Mr. Rejman: OK, thank you. Any one else wishing to speak for or against? State your name for the record.
Mr. Wrobel: Kim and Mark Wrobel. I own Swifty’s and the house next door, 47 Perrine Street and that variance of 46 feet to the west would be butting right up to the property that I have as an apartment house and which would surround the back of my business if they did put a bar there with a bunch of people drinking and carousing back there. It is hard enough to keep them off the street, if you give them a parking area, it will be crazy.
Mr. Rejman: So, what would be your idea to turn that property into?
Mr. Wrobel: 9 to 5 businesses, 9 to 7.
Mr. Darrow: Would you be in favor of a gym there sir? A gym without a bar.
Mr. Wrobel: A gym without a bar, juice bar fine, but 24 x 40 that is as big as Swifty’s.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Is there any one else wishing to speak for or against the application?
Ms. Kogukiewicz: Hi my name is Sue Kogukiewicz, I am Mark’s tenant. My concern is with the bar, as of September I am going into foster care and the only reason I have been accepted for it now is because the bar is fenced off. If something like a bar goes in next-door and it will not be fenced off, I am not going to be able to go into foster care and I would like to see it maybe turned into an auto parts store.
Mr. Rejman: Daytime business. Any one else?
Mr. Barski: My name is Ted Barski, I own five pieces of property on Perrine Street. To have a bar it is already saturated enough on Perrine Street, it would be ludicrous. If he wants to have a gym that would be great something like 9 to 5 with a juice bar, no alcoholic beverages. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Any one else wishing to speak for or against this application? OK. See what we can do here. Would the applicant come back up please? After listening to the concerns of the neighbors, what is your opinion here? What do you think we should do?
Mr. Tardibone: It is just kind of funny listening to the neighbors, people that have bars already in existence there. On the gym I don’t want to be set on 9 to 5 hours or anything like that a gym is a gym. A gym is not noisy. People go to a gym at 11:00 p.m. I don’t see why you can’t, if you have a gym from 9 to 5 you might as well not have anything there at all. People work 9 to 5.
Mr. Rejman: That is true.
Mr. Baroody: I go to a gym and it goes from 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., so people go in there before and after work and on Saturday there are reduced hours.
Mr. Tardibone: A gym is definitely not going to hurt that neighborhood when there are bars open up to 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning, you aren’t going to say that gym is making a lot of noise, you are going to have a problem with the bars. I don’t want limitations on my hours of operation.
Ms. Hussey: With the use being totally limited to a gym, Brian has recalculated the parking and it is determined that Mr. Tardibone needs 27 spaces with 30 is the plan, he more than meets the requirement.
Mr. Rejman: Is there a special way you want us to amend this?
Ms. Hussey: We need Mr. Tardibone to state in the affirmative that he intends to amend the application and you need a vote from the ZBA members here tonight accepting that.
Mr. Tardibone: What do you want me to do?
Mr. Rejman: You wish to remove the bar from the application.
Mr. Tardibone: I wish to remove the bar from the application.
Mr. Allen: Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?
Mr. Rejman: Yes, go ahead.
Mr. Allen: What is the normal membership of a gym? If you have “x” number of members and they are all there at once, what would that typical figure be?
Ms. Hussey: We were controlled by the Ordinance, the City Ordinance and also the New York State Code Requirements and the formula that indicates how many spaces are necessary are based on our Code and the new York State formula, so it is a presumption that all members would be there all at the same time.
VOTING TO ACCEPT AMENDED APPLICATION: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: The application has been amended and accepted. Now the only consideration we have before us is the buffer zones. Questions from the board, comments from the board?
Mr. Darrow: My only concern is that there is some sort of buffer zone. I realize the requirements set forth for the area that he has would be near impossible to obtain, but I still believe something needs to be there. Now is that is the question, how large is the variance, we are required to give the minimal amount of variance as possible. Now at that point that would fall back on Planning after we have set what the variance is going to be.
Ms. Hussey: Correct.
Mr. Rejman: Doesn’t the dimensions of the building and the property line just limit us.
Mr. Darrow: It’s that case because of the pre-existence of the building and where it is in the proximity to the other property lines, does that completely wipe out any buffers or landscaping or does it not, that I what I think we need to.
Mr. Rejman: Limits it to what is physically there now. The rear yard is the rear yard.
Mr. Darrow: As far as the 4 feet we have got buffers that are also needed on the side and front.
Mr. Rejman: The only way we can change those numbers is to reduce the building size.
Mr. Darrow: Not necessarily. There is space around the building, if you read it here; it is requiring so many plants per hundred feet. That is part of the variance that we are looking at. Now if you look around the building, there is still room for green areas of landscaping but it doesn’t show except at the very front which would be I am gathering next to the sidewalk any landscaping.
Mr. Rejman: Codes Office has already been out taking a look at it, looked at the building and the rear yard property line and it says there is 4 feet there, has to be a 56 foot variance. The same thing to the east and the west, nothing in front, there are no variances required in front.
Mr. Darrow: As long as the variance is given on buffer zone footage and not plant units, that is what I am trying to say.
Mr. Rejman: Planting units, we are doing footage. These are the minimum.
Mr. Darrow: Right, because the building is fixed.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Questions, comments from this side? Let me ask this; is there any one wishing to speak to the area variances that are being proposed here? Do you understand what the whole problem is? Jerry?
Mr. Morgan: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: Come up. (To Mr. Tardibone – have a seat).
Mr. Morgan: As I indicated, Sandy and I are right at his back door.
Mr. Rejman: OK.
Mr. Morgan: If she looks out her kitchen window she is looking at a wall, there is a distance like this.
Mr. Rejman: I agree with that.
Mr. Morgan: And I have a drawing here of my property and it shows an easement that had to go through here and this piece of property that he wants to take off and I am not willing to give up that rear variance.
Mr. Rejman: You are not giving up anything. You are not giving up anything.
Ms. Marteney: He only has 4 feet.
Mr. Rejman: He only has 4 feet that is it. For him to be in compliance, he would have to move that building 56 feet towards Perrine Street, that is impossible. Isn’t it?
Mr. Morgan: I would say so.
Mr. Rejman: So that is the minimum variance he is asking for is to be relieved, he is asking to be relieved of that issue, moving that building. This happens quite a bit.
Mr. Morgan: So you are not going to be developing any thing in the back?
Mr. Rejman: Oh, no, no.
Ms. Marteney: He only has 4 feet.
Mr. Rejman: He has to keep it clean and mowed and tidy. What we are saying here, if you started with a bare piece of property today, you couldn’t put that building there.
Mr. Morgan: I thought what was being asked of us was for him to come back and take that property and I was not in favor of that.
Ms. Hussey: The board can’t vote on that that is private property matter.
Ms. Marteney: The property line is where it is, we have to say whether or not he can actually use that building with only that amount of back yard, that is what we are essentially saying.
Mr. Morgan: I see.
Ms. Marteney: But that is where the building is.
Mr. Rejman: And that is where the property line is.
Mr. Westlake: Can I ask you a question?
Mr. Morgan: Yes.
Mr. Westlake: Are you in favor of just the gym?
Mr. Morgan: I like that automotive parts store being there. A business is beneficial to the community; I wouldn’t mind that at all. I wouldn’t mind the gym at all.
Mr. Westlake: Just wanted to make sure.
Mr. Rejman: OK, thank you. Any other questions or concerns from the audience? I want to make sure every one understands what is going on. State your name again for the record.
Mr. Wrobel: Mark Wrobel. This buffer 46 west side yard area variance, which attaches to my apartment house property, now buffer meaning what is he going to plant shrubs in between there?
Mr. Rejman: Again if we started with a clear piece of property there would have to be greenery around the building.
Mr. Wrobel: OK, I wouldn’t have to put up a fence to protect my property.
Ms. Hussey: The Planning Board in their requirement in considering the site plan because there was a variance may require a fence being put up any way. That is up to the Planning Board. This Zoning Board just looks at the building footprint so to speak and where it is located on the lot.
Mr. Wrobel: There use to be a driveway that ran right through there and that is what I am concerned about that some thing has got to be put there in order to keep people off my property.
Ms. Hussey: That is under the purview of the Planning Board which is meeting July 5 at 7:30 p.m.
Mr. Westlake: Mark, are you against the use as a gym?
Mr. Wrobel: A gym is fine.
Mr. Rejman: Yes, that gentleman here. State your name for the record.
Mr. Schwartz: I am Jim Schwartz, and I own 197 State Street the old Polish Home and I apologize for coming in late. My question – parking is always an issue down on State Street especially with the bars that are located down there and 43 Perrine Street is going to be changed into a gym and I was just wondering about the variance for the parking spaces less than half the parking he is suppose to have - asking for a variance for 23 parking spaces.
Mr. Rejman: I am not sure when you walked in.
Ms. Hussey: By amending his application to have the building used as a gym only, it reduces the requirement that our Ordinance has for parking and his site plan shows 30 parking spaces and what is required under our Code is 27 so he meets that requirement.
Mr. Schwartz: OK, thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Any one else wishing to speak or any one having concerns?
Mr. Morgan: She wants me to ask you another question.
Mr. Rejman: Yes, Mr. Morgan.
Mr. Morgan: As far as emergency exits and all that will there be any areas of emergency exits towards that back?
Ms. Hussey: That is under the purview of the Planning Board, which is meeting July 5th, 2005.
Mr. Rejman: Any business would have to by New York State Fire Code.
Ms. Reed: That is what I was talking about the back of the garage abuts against my property and Jerry’s property. There is an access door that is what I am talking about; I know you have to have an access either way. He can have that access back there that is what I am asking.
Mr. Rejman: Couple things here, come up to the mike. The emergency access door you are speaking of in the rear of the property may or may not be used in the final building plan because we have to let Planning and Codes and New York State Fire people get together and decide how this is going to look. I would think it would be just an emergency exit only, it wouldn’t be a, of course, I can’t speak to that. Planning is meeting July 5th at 7:30 p.m.
Ms. Hussey: Right here.
Mr. Rejman: All right, last call.
Mr. Selvek: I want to clarify the 4-foot buffer on the east side of the property itself. Right now what would be required is a 4-foot landscape buffer along the parking lot itself. The center aisle that he shows right now 33 feet is more than enough he could have that center aisle at 24 feet, which would allow for this required 4-foot landscape buffer along that side of the parking lot. So it is a littler different than just placing the building with the other two area variances.
Mr. Rejman: Anthony, did you understand that?
Mr. Tardibone: No.
Mr. Hicks: This actually would be the primer to Mr. Barski’s bar, the parking lot along that side, that would be the east side of the parking lot.
Mr. Tardibone: The black top?
Mr. Hicks: If you moved it in back 4 feet.
Mr. Rejman: If he cuts it back he doesn’t need a variance. (Mr. Selvek discussed with Mr. Tardibone). Questions, concerns to the applicant? The 4-foot east buffer zone they are talking about, if you just dig up 4 feet of black top you don’t need it, is that your intent to do that or do you want that variance also?
Mr. Tardibone: What is it again?
Mr. Rejman: Right now the application is asking for a 4 foot side yard variance to the east, you were told that if you just took up 4 foot of black top you don’t need that variance.
Mr. Tardibone: Do I have to plant trees?
Mr. Rejman: Grass
Mr. Tardibone: No, I could see if there was a house next door, but I don’t see where that variance comes from.
Mr. Rejman: OK, just wanted to make sure you didn’t amend the application again. Final questions for the applicant.
Ms. Marteney: He still wants that variance?
Mr. Rejman: Yes, he still wants a variance.
Ms. Hussey: Shall I summarize?
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Ms. Hussey: The applicant in his amended application is amending a 4 foot side yard variance of the required buffer to the east and between uses which is along the parking lot to the east. He is requesting a 56 foot rear yard buffer of the required 60 foot buffer and he is requested a 46 foot side yard buffer to the west of the required 60 feet abutting residential use. The applicant has amended his application for the use of a gym only exclusively; therefore, his original application for a variance of 23 parking spaces is no longer necessary.
Mr. Rejman: OK, we will close the public portion, have a seat. Ok, let’s talk this out. Questions, comments, concerns?
Mr. Darrow: My comment is that the 4 foot side yard variance to the east is not needed because there is a solution and we know that there is a minimal amount of variance needed. I can go along with the other two variances, I can understand the way the building is placed and what is needed, but I just cannot go along when there is a way to solve that.
Mr. Westlake: I agree.
Mr. Rejman: Let’s take this in three different motions. Vote on each one of them. Vote on the 4 foot, vote on the 56 and the 46. There are multiple requests here.
Mr. Darrow: Exactly. I would like to make a motion that we grant Anthony Tardibone for 43 Perrine Street a 56-foot rear yard buffer variance for the purpose of establishing a gym at 43 Perrine Street as plot plan submitted.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Anthony Tardibone for 43 Perrine Street a 46 foot side yard buffer variance to the west for the purpose of establishing a proposed gym as submitted on plot plan.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Anthony Tardibone for 43 Perrine Street a 4 foot side yard variance of buffer zone relief to the east side of the property for purpose of a proposed gym at 43 Perrine Street as plot plan submitted.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING AGAINST: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: The application has been approved for 56 foot rear yard buffer and a 46 foot side yard buffer and the application is not approved for 4 foot side yard variance. Next step Planning, good luck to you.
___________________________________________________________
70 Kensington Avenue. R-1, Joseph Slaski. 180 square foot area variance for a 920 square foot garage to exceed the total of 750 square feet for accessory structures.
Mr. Rejman: 70 Kensington Avenue, are you here? Step up to the podium please. State you name for the record.
Mr. Slaski: I am Joseph Slaski.
Mr. Rejman: OK, Joseph, what would you like to do there?
Mr. Slaski: I would a garage, which I have a model of.
Mr. Rejman: OK.
Mr. Slaski: (Produces a model of the garage and of his home). This is our home, which is a raised ranch, which has no storage what so ever. This gives you an idea. I need parking area; I have a truck and various other equipment.
Mr. Rejman: Looks like the garage is big enough to have a little workshop.
Mr. Slaski: Definitely.
Mr. Rejman: This is one of our standard garages. Questions from the board?
Ms. Marteney: He has plenty of room and it doesn’t interfere with the neighbors and it looks like it is going to be close to the other structure to the back side yard.
Mr. Slaski: I believe I am 4 foot from the line; the other people are 12 foot, which is a garage as well.
Mr. Rejman: Let me ask this. Is there any one wishing to speak for or against this application? Hearing none we will come back. Questions, comments? We will close the public portion, have a seat and we will take the matter up. Any comments?
Mr. Darrow: I don’t think that his request is out of line. He has great documentation, great plans, very nice display, aesthetically it is going to fit in and there are no concerns from the neighbors.
Mr. Rejman: That is the big one.
Mr. Westlake: Mr. Slaski is a professional builder so he knows what he is doing too and that makes a difference.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Joseph Slaski of 70 Kensington Avenue a 180 square foot area variance for the purpose of erecting a detached accessory structure as per plans submitted.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved. Good luck with that.
____________________________________________________________
46 Cayuga Street. R-1, Florence Purington. Area variance to ad a second 80 square foot shed to property where a 64 square foot shed already exists.
Mr. Rejman: 46 Cayuga Street, come down. State your name for the record.
Ms. Purington: I am Pat Purington, I am representing my Mother.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Tell us what you would like to do there.
Ms. Purington: Put up a second shed that will store a riding lawnmower, some tools, like air compressor, mechanic tools. Right now there is going to be a small freezer in there that I can’t put upstairs. There isn’t any place to store anything in the house. The basement gets water in it, so you can’t store anything metal down there like a bike or anything like that, so we would like to put up another shed.
Mr. Rejman: OK, the shed is only 80 square feet, 8 x 10?
Ms. Purington: Yes. There was an original one there when we purchased the house, very small one 64 square feet. This will be a second one. Approached the neighbors on both sides and asked them and they don’t have any issues with it.
Mr. Rejman: Good, questions from the board?
Ms. Brower: I see two shed on the property already, is this a third?
Ms. Purington: No. That was the original one; we didn’t realize that we needed to get a variance.
Ms. Brower: Is this going to replace it?
Ms. Purington: No, we need both of them; the other one is already full. I had a lot of stuff in storage and for $85.00 a month it wasn’t like I could use anything; I would have to go to the storage to get it.
Ms. Brower: OK, I see.
Mr. Rejman: Is there any one wising to speak for or against this application? Hearing none, come back. Final questions, none. We will close the public portion.
Ms. Marteney: They want another shed.
Mr. Darrow: Original was 64 square feet, what to add 80 square feet.
Ms. Marteney: There is plenty of room.
Mr. Rejman: All kinds of room there.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Florence Purington of 46 Cayuga Street, a variance for a second accessory structure to be 10 foot by 80 foot to be located on their property as submitted in plot plan.
Mr. Baroody: I will second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
____________________________________________________________
11 Mary Street. R-2 Theresa McAuliffe, Robert Hurd. 6-foot area variance for 26 feet wide parking area. 20-foot width is allowed.
Mr. Rejman: 11 Mary Street, are you here? Thanks for waiting.
Mr. Hurd: I am Robert Hurd.
Ms. McAuliffe: Theresa McAuliffe.
Mr. Rejman: Tell us what you would like to do there?
Mr. Hurd: We would like to widen our driveway from 20 foot to 26 foot.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Why do you feel you want 26-foot wife parking?
Mr. Hurd: Because it is actually a two family house and we want to be able to have 3 cars wide so that no body has to park behind each other.
Ms. McAuliffe: It is not allowed.
Mr. Rejman: Questions from the board? Any one wishing to speak for or against the application? OK, we will close the public portion and discuss this and have a motion.
Two feet wider than allowed but it relieves the fact that you don’t have tenants parking behind one another.
Mr. Darrow: Yes and I understand that and I think the way it is shown in the drawing none of it is going to be in front of the house. Going out of their way to make sure that it curves away from the front of the house.
Mr. Rejman: Very nice to see. Would some one like to make a motion?
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Theresa McAuliffe and Robert Hurd of 11 Mary Street a 6 foot variance to allow them a 26 foot wide driveway as submitted on the plan.
Mr. Darrow: I’ll second that motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
Ms. McAuliffe: Thank you.
Mr. Hurd: Thank you.
____________________________________________________________
6 Fitch Avenue. R-2 Kevin Hoey. 10 square foot area variance for 160 square foot shed.
Mr. Rejman: 6 Fitch Avenue, are you here?
Mr. Hoey: My name is Kevin Hoey, I live at 6 Fitch Avenue.
Mr. Rejman: Looks like you want to put a shed on.
Mr. Hoey: Yes, I do.
Mr. Rejman: 160 square feet basically a standard shed. 10 x 16. Any one wishing to speak for or against this application? Hearing none, back to the board. The board have any questions? No questions. We will close the public portion. I guess what I was trying to say that these are kits, basic kits.
Mr. Darrow: Exactly and we need to address this because over the past 15 to 20 years a lot of tractors have grown, lawnmowers have grown, but our allowance for sheds haven’t grown. Perhaps a 150 square foot accessory is not large enough and does need to be revisited.
Mr. Westlake: Has plenty of room for it.
Mr. Rejman: Nancy brought up the point that the lot has a lot to do with it.
Ms. Hussey: So many different sized building lots, grandfathered them.
Mr. Westlake: Still is a case by case.
Mr. Rejman: May be nice to have a working group where we could come up with a program that allows it based on the lot size, that would probably be hard to do.
Ms. Aubin: This is a deep lot.
Ms. Marteney: It is going to be back in the corner tucked completely away.
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Elizabeth and Kevin Hoey of 6 Fitch Avenue a 10 foot area variance for a 160 foot shed as per plan submitted.
Ms. Marteney: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved, good luck.
Mr. Hoey: Thank you.
____________________________________________________________
42 Maple Street. R-1, Jeremy Telvock. Area variance for front yard parking.
Mr. Rejman: 42 Maple Street, please. State your name for the record.
Mr. Telvock: I am Jeremy Telvock, homeowner of 42 Maple Street.
Mr. Rejman: Hi, Jeremy, tell us what you would like to do there.
Mr. Telvock: I bought the house in September, I had a mainly dirt and partially stoned driveway to the house and there was no existing sidewalk around that area. I want to put in an asphalt driveway and a concrete sidewalk and concrete approach. According to the Code I am allowed 15 feet 9 inches. I would like to make the driveway 19 ½ feet. The driveway I am not making any bigger than it was when I bought the house. I want to keep is symmetrical with the house and everything around it. According to the contractor that I hired to do the job and my real estate agent, they tell me that I should not have a problem with this because this driveway was I guess grandfathered into the house.
Mr. Rejman: That is what he told you?
Mr. Telvock: I don’t know how true it is, but that is what I was told. I am not trying to make the driveway any bigger. If I was to cut that 4 foot the way the driveway would come it would just off set the whole symmetrical look of the front of the house. I brought in letters from my neighbors which approve of what I am doing I am trying to make it look as good as possible.
Mr. Rejman: Before we move on, is there any one wishing to speak for or against this application? Yes, come to the mike, state your name for the record.
Ms. Kirkconnell: My name is Rebecca Kirkconnell, I live at 40 Maple Street. I am speaking for Jeremy. I think what he is doing is definitely improving the property. It is a little in front of the house but I don’t think it will be unattractive. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you for your input. Any one else wishing to speak for or against the applicant? Questions from the board?
Mr. Darrow: Do you have two vehicles is that why you need the variance?
Mr. Telvock: That is part of it and I want to keep the look of my house.
Mr. Darrow: You don’t think grass in front of the house would be a more acceptable look than asphalt?
Mr. Telvock: According to the plan, the driveway that I would be allowed would be ridiculously tight, when I opened the doors I would be stepping on grass on either side of the doors. To make it look right, you know what I am saying, if I put the driveway, when you opened the doors you would step on the driveway.
Mr. Darrow: You are showing that your proposed driveway is 19 feet. How wide would your driveway be with the grass if it was put back in and you have a single car driveway?
Mr. Rejman: It would be 9 feet 7 inches.
Mr. Telvock: I am not exactly sure at this time. I am not trying to make the driveway any bigger than the exiting driveway is now or the existing driveway was when I purchased the home. It was just dirt before. I believe the asphalt will look better than the dirt.
Mr. Rejman: Any other questions, comments?
Mr. Baroody: You have done a lot of work on the house, looks nice.
Mr. Telvock: Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Ok, we will close the public portion. Did you see the plot plan Ed? He could go in the back that is an option, he couldn’t go down the side.
Ms. Marteney: Parking on the north side behind the house.
Mr. Rejman: These are always difficult the front yard parking, but the neighbors were all in favor.
Mr. Westlake: He did have the letters and no body is against it.
Ms. Marteney: The neighbor to the south has the exact same kind of driveway.
Mr. Rejman: An infamous 53-foot lot.
Mr. Westlake: He wants to extend the parking area.
Mr. Rejman: He wants to continue the pre-existing non-conforming, he just wants to black top it.
Mr. Baroody: He did a nice job.
Mr. Rejman: Seeking area variance for extension of parking area in the front yard.
Mr. Hicks: As far as the Code is concerned he is asking for a variance for front yard parking, which is not allowed in an R-2. He is asking for parking in front of the structure adjacent to the driveway. There are stipulations that we have to meet through Engineering after this variance is granted allowing him to park in front of his structure but it is going to be determining the curb cuts and radius.
Ms. Marteney: Only a little piece, this is a lot right?
Mr. Hicks: You can park in that driveway in front of the house as long as it is an approved driveway.
Mr. Darrow: It would be an area of 9 foot 5 inches x 10 feet.
Mr. Rejman: Nancy, is there such an thing as pre-existing non-conforming driveways parking that we have had in other situations?
Mr. Hicks: If I could back up one second. Our research with Engineering shows no application for any curb cuts or change of use in driveway, so we know that it isn’t that old of an installation. We believe that the excavation started without prior approval. We are trying to make some work here conform.
Mr. Telvock: The reason why I didn’t have a curb cut was before that I did hire a contractor, I asked him if I needed a permit or anything like that, he told me I did not and that is why he went out and did the work. With parking in front of the house I am allowed 15 feet 9 inches, so really I am only asking for 4 foot so even if I put in the Code 15 foot 9 inch driveway I am still going to be parking in front of the structure.
Mr. Hicks: But that part of the driveway did not go in front of the structure adjacent to
Mr. Telvock: I see what you are saying, the other side, but the only thing with that is I am starting at my property line and moving over.
Mr. Hicks: You are in a very tight situation and seeing how the Code doesn’t take into effect that a lot of these lots are different sizes and the houses are where they are.
Mr. Telvock: Right.
Mr. Rejman: Every one all set?
Mr. Westlake: I would like to make a motion that we grant Jeremy Telvock of 42 Maple Street an extension of his parking are in the front yard of his house as shown on the plan submitted, which is 9.5 x 10 foot extension for his parking area.
Mr. Darrow: I’ll second that motion.
Mr. Rejman: Brian has a comment.
Mr. Hicks: I have one other statement to make. This drawing that he shows here is for a 10 foot length you need to be concerned about that as far as most cars do not fit a 10 foot area between the sidewalk and the house.
Mr. Rejman: Need 18 feet.
Mr. Hicks: If this needs to be amended we need to know what the proper dimension is.
Mr. Baroody: Most parking spots are 8 ½ x 18 feet.
Mr. Hicks: We classify it as 18 feet.
Mr. Baroody: 18 feet. So you are not blocking the sidewalk.
Mr. Rejman: If the depth doesn’t exist then the variance doesn’t exist. Is that what you are saying?
Mr. Hicks: He is asking for a variance
Mr. Rejman: We can allow a variance based on if the depth doesn’t exist then the variance cannot exist.
Ms. Hussey: Engineering won’t issue the curb cut.
Mr. Rejman: That’s right, Engineering won’t issue the curb cut.
Ms. Hussey: Right.
Mr. Hicks: That is correct. If you look at the drawing he is showing 16 and 10, the lawn has been removed. I am not sure if that is now a dimension of 16 or if it is to be 10, we just need clarification on it, we know that parking spaces are required to be 18 ½ feet long.
Mr. Rejman: The neighbors have been kind enough to sign off. The applicant should understand even though we give him a variance there is not enough length.
Mr. Darrow: I still have the second on the motion.
Mr. Baroody: What he is saying he has to have the 18-½ feet. Even if we grant the variance tonight doesn’t mean squat you still have to go through Engineering.
Mr. Telvock: 18 ½ feet the actual driveway?
Ms. Hussey: You can’t over hang on the sidewalk.
Mr. Darrow: You may have that with the lawn out, we are not sure where that 10 foot is, if that is where the lawn was or if that is all the way to your house.
Mr. Telvock: All the way to the house.
Mr. Rejman: Motion has been made and seconded.
Mr. Darrow: It looks longer than 10 foot.
Mr. Telvock: I have a full sized truck and I park there and my truck doesn’t block the sidewalk at all.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved. Good luck with the project.
Mayor Lattimore: Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mayor Lattimore: How are you tonight?
Mr. Rejman: Good.
Mayor Lattimore: I just wanted to thank you for volunteering and all you members. I have been a little lax about coming over seems like there is always a conflict. I was on the Planning Board for 10 years for both the City and County and I know how much time it takes of your evenings. I appreciate your service and you do a good job.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Invitation is always open to you and Council to pop in at any time.
Mayor Lattimore: Thank you.
____________________________________________________________
82 Owasco Street. R-1, John Allen. Area variance of 4 feet for 10 feet high rear fence.
Mr. Rejman: 82 Owasco Street, are you here? Please state your name for the record.
Mr. Allen: Mr. Chairman, my name is John Allen. All I am really asking for is a set it down on a concrete slab, if you look at the diagram there is a “L” shaped area in the back of the house. I have got some neighbors that traipse back and forth across the lot. They are on a deck that is like 3 feet above grade and they holler back and forth, I am not going to be able to use their language, but I figure if the fence was high enough at least the vision would be obscured. They holler back and forth because they have relatives across Frances Street. This is the only cure that I could come up with. There is a patio and I could bring the fence around to where the sidewalk is there. Rather than do that I thought if I had a wall in the garage I could just take that fence
straight across at the property line to the corner of the garage. I misplaced my file, I am working off my survey, so I am not looking at the same drawing you are.
Mr. Hicks: I have one.
Mr. Rejman: So this is another multiple area variance application. We will have to work down through this one at a time just like the last one.
Mr. Darrow: The fence height, in commercial to residential we allow 8 foot, we are talking 2 foot over that. We are talking the height of a basketball rim that is not a fence.
Mr. Allen: I wouldn’t be asking for that height, it is just that they are on a 3 foot deck, it is at least 3 feet.
Mr. Rejman: You are saying you want to block out some on standing on a 3-foot deck?
Mr. Allen: From that angle, they have everything to the south, that fence is only going to block out to the east.
Mr. Rejman: It says south, installation of a 10-foot fence to the south property line.
Mr. Darrow: I have a question, the drawing for 84 Owasco where it shows the porch there, is that a front porch?
Mr. Allen: No, it is a rear porch.
Mr. Darrow: Rear porch, ok.
Mr. Rejman: The 10-foot fence would go from where to where?
Mr. Allen: 14 inches inside my property line there is a great big tree there right at the property line and it would go another 4 feet to the fence beyond the tree. The fence is obscured on the survey but on mine the corner of that garage it would be 26 feet from the property line, which allows the required number of square feet of grass.
Mr. Westlake: The fence you are proposing, is it right here (points to drawing)?
Mr. Allen: Yes.
Mr. Westlake: Just from the garage?
Mr. Allen: Right in back of the tree. The property line that is the only place I want to put a fence, the rest is existing.
Mr. Rejman: All right.
Mr. Baroody: s that your property behind the fence also?
Mr. Allen: Yes. Where it says fence there to the left follow that line on the bottom where it says property line that is all pre-existing fence there.
Mr. Rejman: Have a seat Mr. Allen. Is there any one wishing to speak for or against this application? Come down and state your name for the record. Public heard first and make sure that every one is understanding what is going on.
Mrs. Bennett: My name is Sandra Bennett, and I own the property at 84 Owasco Street. On my letter it says variance from a 4 foot to a 10-foot high rear fence and several other area variances, says nothing about any garage. That is what my letter says.
Mr. Rejman: OK.
Mrs. Bennett: The side of Mr. Allen’s home and the home that I rent to the side of it is approximately 6 feet. You couldn’t even park a car in there, like this gentleman stated, you need 18 feet to park a car. So why would I want a 10 foot fence right in front of my tenant’s window. Also it would come around the side these lots do not run square, our yard is small, very small. Approximately I would say my yard is 15 x 30 feet. There is a deck, it does overlook Mr. Allen’s property, you can look out into Frances Street. If a 10 foot fence or any kind of fence was put up there, my tenant would virtually be locked in and have no view of anything. There would be a fence and the back of the other houses. The tenants that are there have been there for over
two years, they are excellent. It is very hard to find excellent tenants. I am not going to say the problems they have had with Mr. Allen because that is not relevant. What is relevant is I would have, would I have to give him a variance to put up a fence because his lot is very small too. Where would he put a fence and garage? There is just no room. That is what my tenants would have to look at. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Brian, could you get a copy of this and up date the public as to what is going on?
Mr. Hicks: I have a survey plus a tax map of the property here, if that will do.
Mr. Rejman: This shows the proposed garage.
Mr. Hicks: I got that here.
Mr. Rejman: I still want input. Any one else wishing to speak for or against this application?
Mr. Davis: My name is Lou Davis, my wife owns 2 Frances Street. I am looking at this plan, I think we are all looking at, these lines are very deceiving. There is no room you can squeeze – for one this proposed garage, is this for cars, is this for tractors? I don’t know. Second of all a 10 foot fence all around here, all I want to say there is no room in here for this. If it is a garage and he is going to have a vehicle in there that means there is going to be more vehicles on this stone which by the way is on Frances Street that kids pick up and throw all over. I feel this hand drawing is wrong, proposed line with fence that runs next to Frances Street, I think buts up closer to 84 Owasco than it shows. This is deceiving. I think there is grass area
showing with the 20 foot its shows a wall here and 26 foot to the property line, I don’t think any of this is correct. I think this area is a lot smaller than it is. If this is going to be for a car then it is going to be more traffic on that corner. I don’t know if you people know where this is. It is a heck of a corner any ways. When my wife’s parents lived there they had little posts in the lawn because people cut through there, the back corner right there (points to drawing). I am totally against this. A 10-foot fence, I am sorry if there is a problem between 82 and 84, but that porch is only like a 3 x 8 porch, you can get 2 or 3 people on it. I don’t know what else to say other than I am totally against it and I think you are trying to do a lot with a little piece of property in there. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: OK, thank you. Any one else wishing to speak for or against?
Mr. DiNonno: My name is Patsy DiNonno, I live at 4 Frances Street. I have some concerns with what Mr. Allen is proposing to do here. First off as Mr. Davis mentioned a 10-foot high fence, you are talking basketball hoop high, I agree with him as to whether or not this should be allowed in a residential area. Beyond that if the garage is allowed to be put in the property we are virtually losing about half of the green space or more that is back there. There isn’t much there to begin with. I don’t know if the – according to the statements by the Code Enforcement Officer basically lose about 125 to 250 square foot of green space, we have lost half of that already.
This building almost takes up the whole property. You get the driveway cut in there and allow room to park the cars off the roadway, that it, the property is full, there is nothing left.
I have some safety issues if the garage is built and we put the fence across there, it is going to stop the people from coming back forth across and I know what he is going through because I had the same problems on the back fence line of my house also and that goes back to the landlords. The landlords should make these people that they are renting these properties to aware of what they are suppose to be doing as part of the neighborhood.
The safety issue as far as put that garage up now I think we have a very bad exposure problem with a potential fire hazard if either or of the two buildings were to catch on fire, they are basically on top of each other, there is not much of an area there and I don’t know what the Code calls for now.
Another concern is with this area being taken up by the garage we are literally taking out half of the green space out where is the snow going to end up? If you ever come up through that area now in the winter time because of the angle of the road that Lou is referring to, the plows have a hard time pushing that snow over properly and the road way the curb line gets pushed out into the road a lot more so the snow removal will be a problem. How many cars are going in the garage? I question that also or what else is it going to be used for? Mr. Allen also states that it is only one new wall. Well I guess when you consider you are going to put up two walls but you replace the one wall with a wall that you are already looking at, I guess you can come up with one wall and say that it, but
actually he will be putting up two new walls here and taking up more property area space and for those reasons I am against allowing the garage to be built on this property.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Thank you. Any one else wishing to speak for or against? OK. Will the applicant come back please. The garage, tell us about your proposed garage, why you need that big, why you think that is the right dimensions to have that garage.
Mr. Allen: First of all it wasn’t intended for vehicles at all, not at all. I would be perfectly happy with a roof over it and the one wall and the fence to separate the commotion you get across the street, incidentally we do have enough of green space, I will invite any body over to measure it and time they want to measure it to satisfy their own need. But this neighbor problem is out of sight. Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Bennett don’t live there. They don’t reside at 2 Francis Street. Mr. DiNonno knows the problems we have in that neighborhood. He suffered through them a lot more years than I have and it doesn’t seem to be getting any better. We had arrest the street the other day, but the problem is that there are relatives across Frances Street and they go
back and forth all the time, with the language, it is terrible. I would be happy without a garage door.
Mr. Rejman: There is something to be said that good fences make good neighbors, but maybe not 10 foot fences make good neighbors, you know.
Mr. Allen: I have to address the fact that she says they are great tenants, one jumped out the window and broke the window.
Mr. Rejman: John, that is all hearsay, let’s stick to what is on this piece of paper here. The other issue is yea, if the proposed garage here 14 x 22 does cut into the open space, you need 50% variance for open space.
Mr. Allen: I don’t have the plan again.
Mr. Hicks: Due to the fact that we didn’t have the calculations on the dimensions of the lawn or all the green space, we calculated what we could find there and came up with a plan plus or minus 125 square foot variance for the open usable green space.
Mr. Rejman: And the requirement is 250 square feet.
Mr. Allen: Green space?
Mr. Rejman: 50%, yes, the over all coverage cannot exceed 35%, building coverage.
Mr. Allen: First of all Mr. Chairman, this drawing is doesn’t really represent, is not to scale, the plot plan which you don’t have, in the corner of that building that extends out, let me describe it, the center of the building from that corner to the fence on the lower side is 46 feet and area on the left hand side is 26 feet, that is all green space. From the corner of that building the driveway only comes in the stone, only comes into that middle corner, rest is all green space. It doesn’t extend past the building.
Mr. Westlake: I am uncomfortable with the way the thing is drawn.
Mr. Rejman: Are you saying this is not to scale?
Mr. Allen: Not it is not to scale.
Mr. Rejman: OK, fine. As Chairman of this board this application be denied and I would like to see a refreshed application next month to scale. We can’t vote on anything if it is not to scale. We work in feet and inches, that is job, square feet and inches and if it is not to scale we can’t do anything.
Mr. Allen: Mr. Chairman, the dimensions on there
Mr. Rejman: (To Mr. Hicks) Are you comfortable with the numbers that are in here?
Mr. Hick: I am comfortable with what I put on for denial, yes. With the application that I have from what I can calculate, I have shown my work on some of the other, the tax map, the calculations that were used here, I am comfortable with what I came up with. As far as the green space, the set backs for the garage and the fence, I am comfortable with that.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Is the proposed garage a garage or storage area or just a scroll off the building or none of the above? What is it?
Mr. Allen: If there is a problem with the so-called garage, with a door that opens and closes
Mr. Rejman: Does it have a garage door on it?
Mr. Allen: It was the intention to have a garage door, but it doesn’t have to. I don’t really care. I was concerned with a roof and a wall on that left hand side and a concrete slab, which is not extending out. If you prefer to scale drawing I would be more than happy to do that. Probably will be the best thing to do. You will see that there is enough of green space and everything that is required. I agree with their concerns and it is deceiving. Absolutely. It looks deceiving any way.
Mr. Rejman: This is in an R-1 zone, I know the building is an issue, but the garage is probably
Mr. Darrow: May be it was mislabeled, maybe it should have been proposed storage.
Mr. Allen: Mr. Chair, if you prefer, I just as soon call it a patio.
Mr. Darrow: If you look at it, it is 14 x 22 foot, maybe if you put something in diagonal
Mr. Rejman: That is what I was thinking.
Mr. Darrow: It couldn’t be used as a garage.
Mr. Rejman: Great storage area.
Mr. Darrow: It is proposed garage, mislabeled, should be proposed storage area.
Mr. Rejman: It is an R-1 area, storage area for a business use.
Mr. Darrow: Couldn’t it constitute an attached shed?
Mr. Rejman: What is your feeling on the green space?
Mr. Darrow: You can’t take away that kind of green space. That is a substantial loss for this property.
Mr. Rejman: Final questions for the applicant?
Mr. Westlake: I can’t make hide nor hair of what he is really trying to do here, so I need something for my own self.
Mr. Rejman: He is trying to square the building off.
Mr. Westlake: I don’t have enough that makes me feel comfortable to vote, myself.
Mr. Darrow: I would concur with that, to be fair to Mr. Allen and to be fair to the neighbors, I think the least we can do is look a plot plan that is a little more substantial.
Mr. Rejman: I agree with that. Mr. Allen on 82 Owasco Street if you could help us with additional plot plan or any additional attachments to this to help us, we would appreciate it.
Mr. Darrow: With more measurements.
Mr. Allen: I would be glad to.
Mr. Darrow: Then we will table until next month.
Mr. Rejman: All in favor of tabling. All in favor. This item it tabled until next month’s meeting.
Ms. Hussey: Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Bennett has a question.
Mr. Rejman: OK.
Mrs. Bennett: How many feet I don’t understand this variance, but would he have to have from my property line to do anything.
Mr. Rejman: Brian would you sit with Mrs. Bennett and review this very quickly with her and we can move on to the next item.
_____________________________________________________________
48 – 52 Washington Street. C, John Allen. 15 foot front yard area variance for storage building; variance of 50 plant units in buffer area.
Mr. Rejman: 48 – 52 Washington Street, please. Seeking a 15-foot front yard area variance and 50 planting units. Tell us about 48 – 52.
Mr. Allen: As you all are aware there use to be a structure there and it burned down in 1993 I believe. Along the road there is an existing footer that goes from the creek and there is a sea wall along the creek and comes to the footer in the road and then goes down 200 whatever I put down feet to the edge of an existing slab, next to the parking lot.
Mr. Baroody: This is the old Procino & Rossi and Roods.
Mr. Allen: Follow the same conditions that previously existed although this time that wall is going to be intended to eventually house storage units on the opposite side and block the rest of the view of the property from the road basically. Over the years we have cleaned it up quite a bit, they left a lot of fill in there which we graded off and more greenery in there that I ever wanted to see in my life. My proposal is to, actually I didn’t include this, but Track Key proposed a substantial number of storage buildings in there, I don’t think we are going to approach it all at once, but it shows, this is all Washington Street, my proposal was to take and put a number of units in there. This is going to be the correct number of units, all it is going to be is a shell and close them in as
needed.
Mr. Westlake: I don’t mean to hurt your feelings Mr. Allen, but I still don’t have enough information on this to give an honest
Mr. Rejman: There is a chain link fence that goes from the outlet all the way down the whole property. There are three parcels of property there and Mr. Allen owns all three and that building that sits back there sits on its own separate parcel and then the old P & R and Roods that was another parcel and that is what we are addressing with this right here. To do what they want done, we have to rip up that whole concrete area. Once a upon a time there was a walk way under Washington Street, did you know that?
Ms. Marteney: The problem with this application is doesn’t really say there is going to be buildings there, it says there is going to be a wall and implies the other stuff but it doesn’t show any of that on our application. No outline in our packet.
Mr. Allen: Mr. Chairman, I can respond to that. It is my understanding because it is commercial property, one thing I have to go before the Zoning Board to get approved is that set back variance the rest of it is supposedly is an application to build.
Mr. Rejman: This is a front yard variance, what we are saying is there is a pre-existing
Ms. Marteney: I drove by and looked at it, I understand that
Mr. Rejman: But he is saying he just wants the variance so he could move it there, instead of moving it back 15 feet from the road.
Mr. Darrow: My question is do we want a metal building that close to the road front without a buffer zone?
Mr. Rejman: If you took that metal fence and you put those strips in it, you can’t see through them. You would have a fence that close to the road, what is the difference?
Mr. Darrow: That is all commercial zone. If you ever drove down Hiawatha in Syracuse there are storage building right next to Hiawatha.
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mr. Darrow: And it is not a pleasant sight.
Mr. Rejman: I say, let me be devil’s advocate again. Gee why don’t we tell the prison to move back 15 feet from the road that is not a pleasant sight either.
Mr. Darrow: Right, that is something we can’t change Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Rejman: That is true, it is in the line of sight.
Mr. Allen: I would add to Mr. Chairman, I have had that property a number of years and kind of have been holding off doing something with in maybe to coordinate with neighborhood response to the other side of the street and nothing is happening and I am not anticipating anything happening and I have to take steps to do something with it.
Mr. Darrow: I think that it is great that you want to develop.
Ms. Marteney: Will look a lot better than what is there.
Mr. Darrow: Absolutely.
Mr. Rejman: I would like to table this if everyone approves. Give us a small plot plan like that and also tell us in the event the board says no, what the cost would be to put that 15 foot of greenery in there.
Mr. Darrow: Show us the hardship.
Mr. Rejman: That normally doesn’t happen with a use, in this case it might be helpful, because it is going to cost a lot of money.
Mr. Allen: I can tell you this to remove all that concrete it is pre-existing, it is going to be costly.
Mr. Darrow: That is what I am saying, something in writing by a contractor.
Mr. Rejman: Vitale or some body to write something that would help us. I would like to see a plot plan, so that we can get a feel of how you are using this.
Mr. Darrow: Does this plot plan verify that?
Mr. Allen: That is the proposal from Track Key. That is all it is.
Mr. Darrow: OK. Even what we are looking at here, Mr. Chairman may not be accurate, but it is stamped.
Mr. Allen: I want to make the best use of that property.
Mr. Rejman: I just asked Brian to give us aerial views for next month for Washington and Owasco.
Mr. Darrow: I think the aerial views would be helpful, just as visiting the property was helpful, but also knowing where the buildings are going to sit in relationship to the property lines or an aerial view is also going to be helpful.
Mr. Allen: This survey that I have is current on Owasco, but there is no current survey on Washington Street.
Mr. Rejman: Motion to talk, all in favor. All in favor. This item is tabled until next month’s meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Thank you, it has been a long night.
| 
