ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2005
Members Present: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Brower, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Staff Present: Ms. Hussey, Mr. LaDouce, Mr. Selvek
APPLICATIONS APPROVED: 65 Cottage Street, 110 Wall Street, 76 Owasco Street
APPLICATION TABLED: 15 Frances Street, 160 Genesee Street
APPLICATION PULLED: 36 Aspen Street
Mr. Rejman: Good evening, this is the Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have the following items: 36 Aspen Street, 65 Cottage Street, 15 Frances Street, 110 Wall Street, 76 Owasco Street, 160 Grant Avenue. Minutes from the last meeting, any corrections or addition? Hearing none, stand as printed.
_____________________________________________________________
36 Aspen Street, R1A Zoning district. James Salva, applicant. Area variance for installation of 2nd portable garage on premises.
Mr. Rejman: 36 Aspen Street has been pulled.
_____________________________________________________________
65 Cottage Street, C1 zoning district. Michael Grillo, applicant. Area variance for front yard parking.
Mr. Rejman: 65 Cottage Street, are you here? Please come down and state your name. Tell us what you would like to do there.
Mr. Grillo: My name is Mike Grillo as I stated previously in October, I would like to expand my driveway at 65 Cottage Street by 4 feet inward going east from the existing driveway. Do you have the photos?
Mr. Rejman: The members that weren’t here do you have pictures? May have some extra here. What brought about the need to do a driveway change then?
Mr. Grillo: I is a shared driveway with 67 Cottage Street and as you can see in one of the pictures there, the owner of 67 Cottage Street expanded her driveway and it is still not acceptable at this point in time. I need a variance this evening to expand it 4 feet on my property for the use of one vehicle to park there without any conflict.
Mr. Rejman: All right. Questions from the board?
Mr. Darrow: Yes, Mr. Grillo these green like markers is that where you want the driveway to go over to, I am referring to picture 1.
Mr. Grillo: Yes. Expansion from the existing driveway that is installed going right to the east on the property 4 feet from the foundation line to the sidewalk.
Mr. Darrow: So where is it 4 foot just up towards the house, looks considerably less the closer it gets to the street.
Mr. Grillo: The driveway goes at an angle from the foundation of the house towards the apron and the sidewalk.
Mr. Darrow: OK. So in its widest point you are standing at 4 feet?
Mr. Grillo: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: And the narrowest is probably
Mr. Grillo: A foot – foot and a half, especially when you cross the sidewalk line to the existing apron.
Mr. Baroody: There is a fire hydrant in the front of your house so you can’t park there.
Mr. Grillo: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: Let me ask this, any one wishing to speak for or against this application? Hearing none, we will come back. Questions from the board?
Ms. Marteney: The area that is now in your neighbor’s, that is large enough for her to park on her side?
Mr. Grillo: Yes. The illustration with the extension cord with my man holding it actually her car is on the property line. The property line starts in the middle of the driveway and goes at a diagonal to the back of the house.
Ms. Marteney: So the little concrete pads are her’s or your’s?
Mr. Darrow: Show me where you mean, looks like one is on your property
Mr. Grillo: Property line is where the extension cord is.
Ms. Marteney: OK.
Mr. Rejman: OK, we will close the public portion, have a seat.
Ms. Marteney: Certainly understandable.
Mr. Darrow: The two things that stick in my mind is at its widest point it is 4 foot and it narrows down and the other thing is seeing the fire hydrant in front of the house, so they can’t park in front of the house.
Mr. Rejman: It is pretty minimal.
Ms. Marteney: It doesn’t have the visual of being in front the yard, which is what we are always concerned about because the other driveway that is not his but looks like his makes it all look like a side yard.
Mr. Rejman: Motion please?
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Michael A. Grillo of 125 Wall Street a area variance for 65 Cottage Street, in the amount of 4 feet for the purpose of widening existing driveway to the east as submitted with 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. Grillo: Thank you.
_____________________________________________________________
15 Frances Street, R1 zoning district. Carl DePalma for Stanley Panzarella, applicant. Use and area variance for conversion to three (3) units.
Mr. Rejman: 15 Frances Street, are you here? Use the mike, state your name for the record.
Mr. DePalma: Carl DePalma appearing for Stanley Panzarella.
Mr. Rejman: Yes. Tell us what you would like to do there.
Mr. DePalma: Well this property was purchased by Mr. Panzarella of March of 2005 as a three unit as it was advertised by a local real estate. The purchase offer and sale contract was executed in the same manner and I closed the property for Mr. Panzarella. When Mr. Panzarella went to obtain a CO he discovered that the property was now only a two-unit occupancy certified. There was confusion when I did to try to obtain the initial CO there was $150 fee for a three unit and when I subsequently found out $100 that was paid was only a two unit. Again, there was a lot of confusion about this property.
Mr. Panzarella should be able to obtain the benefit of his bargain. Mr. Panzarella is not an absentee landlord, the type that we like to avoid. Mr. Panzarella has purchased other properties as well in Auburn and he feels that this is a good market and when he purchases a property he does come in and puts a lot of money and a lot of work into them and cleans the properties up. He is in town two or three times a month, he uses local people, he has a local real estate agent that he works with to rent out the properties, his three properties in Auburn. He uses a local person to all the maintenance, to check the maintenance, which is regularly scheduled. He uses Mr. Jeff Berry for that purpose who is basically on call to him to provide whatever is necessary to take care of the property.
Mr. Panzarella has already spent a considerable amount of money to date, I provided an updated expense log from his records showing he has invested $48, 982 in addition to the purchase price of this property. None of the hardships that he has experienced here were created by him, he purchased by contract a three-unit property. He has provided a plot plan that shows that the property could be as it always was a three unit and he met all the criteria for the lawn areas, the parking, the off street parking. He has already done the sidewalk work but he is getting to be hesitant about putting much more money into this project unless he knows exactly where he is going. He would like to be able to get the paving done, but he is not going to pave the parking until he knows how much parking he needs.
Again, I feel that Mr. Panzarella deserves to get what he bought and he has gone through the expense of having to present this to the Zoning Board as well and I would hope that you would provide the variance for him to be allowed to have what he purchased.
Mr. Rejman: Questions from the board?
Mr. Darrow: First question Mr. DePalma, I see two spreadsheets with numbers of expenses, but I see no copies of receipts to substantiate any of this.
Mr. DePalma: I can provide that, I didn’t want to burden you with multiple receipts, there would be dozens of them, so I felt, I can substantiate that if you need that. As you see he is using local contractors, and he has itemized very well what he is doing to show you the expenses.
Mr. Westlake: Who told you it was only a two family?
Mr. DePalma: When we went for the inspection they told us it was a two unit.
Mr. Westlake: OK.
Mr. Darrow: Shouldn’t that have been caught at closing?
Mr. DePalma: At closing it was presented by the local attorney as a three unit, it was signed as a three unit, the contract is part of the exhibits and you can see that it was purchased as a three unit and also it was advertised as a three unit, that is part of the package as well. That is not something generally picked up at closing if it is not represented by the seller that something has changed. We are buying what they sold us by contract, we have a contract and we rely on it.
Mr. Rejman: OK, would the board take a look at the contract go to page 11 to 13 please, item #8 when you get there. Got it?
Ms. Marteney: Which item number?
Mr. Rejman: Item 8.
Mr. Darrow: 11 – 8?
Mr. Rejman: Page 11, item #8. “If property is located in the City of Auburn and is improved by a structure with two or more residential units, or mixed residential and commercial units, I am not sure if that says buyer or seller
Mr. DePalma: Seller.
Mr. Rejman: Seller will furnish at least five (5) days prior to closing, an unrestricted certificate of occupancy which certifies approval for three units”. My question as a previous realtor is why was the closing permitted to go ahead without the certificate of occupancy?
Mr. DePalma: That was the condition that the buyer and seller agreed to.
Mr. Rejman: If someone misrepresents a property that is one thing, but dump it into our lap and have us legalize it that is another thing and I guess you know how I am going to vote.
Mr. DePalma: I tired to work it out this way at the request of the local attorney rather that a litigation of the matter and rather than have to go about litigating against a local attorney, a local party, a local real estate person, I agreed with Mr. Gunger to come and present this issue and hopefully that we can work it out this way. If this doesn’t work I will have an alternative, but again I would hope that possibly under the circumstances that you had a person that relied on a contract, a person coming into town and spending money and improving property.
Mr. Rejman: If the seller did not provide the Certificate of Occupancy why in fact did it close? It should not have closed without the certificate. It is pretty much self-induced.
Ms. Marteney: Below that it says the buyer will complete all repairs necessary to obtain Certificate of Occupancy. Initialed by the buyer.
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mr. Darrow: Contradicts itself.
Mr. Rejman: That is a point of contention.
Mr. DePalma: The buyer was paying for the expense and it was adjusted at closing and they represented that they had a CO
Ms. Marteney: In your contract it says the buyer will obtain the CO on page 11.
Mr. DePalma: Do repairs
Ms. Marteney: Obtain Certificate of Occupancy.
Mr. DePalma: Yes.
Mr. Baroody: My question is you have two options to resolve this. One through litigation with the seller you are representing the buyer?
Mr. DePalma: Right.
Mr. Baroody: The other would be for this board to grant the variance.
Mr. Rejman: Asking Codes – do you have any history on this, how long it was vacant?
Mr. DePalma: I would like to note that the violations that were noted at the inspection have all been corrected and prepared for another inspection.
Ms. Marteney: Was it listed as a 3 family?
Mr. Rejman: Yes it was listed as a 3 family, I think one of the exhibits here, under exhibit 1.
Mr. Darrow: What bothers me this is another typical one where whether in good faith or bad faith it was misrepresented and yet it ends up back in our lap for correction which isn’t the proper avenue. We are the last resort, not the first.
Mr. Westlake: Exactly.
Mr. Rejman: I think we have issues with the lot size and every thing else any way.
Mr. DePalma: This is the court of last resort, is that what Mr. Darrow is telling me?
Mr. Darrow: Yes, Zoning Board is after you are turned down, you come to us. We have to give the minimal amount of variance possible.
Mr. DePalma: It is not like we are changing the impact on the neighborhood there is no difference in what it has always been.
Ms. Marteney: Was it vacant?
Mr. Westlake: If it was a 3 he wouldn’t be here tonight.
Mr. DePalma: It was occupied.
Ms. Marteney: The third one wasn’t.
Ms. Hussey: On January 10, 2005 I was requested by Brian Hicks the Code Enforcement Officer to look into the units number and I wrote in that memorandum January 10, 2005 that I reviewed the file and the applicable City Code provisions regarding the status of the above referenced property. Based on the length of vacancy, non-habitation of the east front apartment, apartment B, at minimum since December 2003 the expiration of the building permit October 12, 2004, the lack of Certificate of Occupancy and the zoning map designation R-1, pursuant to Section 305-85 I.1 of the City Code the structure is reduced from a three unit non-conforming use to a two unit non-conforming use. That was at the request of the realtor.
Mr. DePalma: Who was the realtor?
Mr. Rejman: Phil Colby.
Ms. Hussey: Who ever was listing it. This was request from Brian Hicks to myself to review the file.
Mr. Baroody: So it went from a three to a two.
Ms. Hussey: It lost its three-unit status. I can’t state for certain who requested Brian to
Mr. DePalma: It wasn’t us.
Ms. Hussey: I don’t know.
Mr. Rejman: All right. I am not sure, the date of the contract was January 18th and the date of the letter was
Ms. Hussey: December 10, 2004.
Mr. DePalma: Either Colby or Murphy Real Estate, those were the two realtors involved in the transaction.
Ms. Hussey: Brian would have to advise you on that, I did not speak to any realtor personally, as I said I received a request from the Codes Office.
Mr. Baroody: The closing was February 2005?
Mr. DePalma: No it got pushed back, the actual closing date was March.
Mr. Rejman: Contract was January 18.
Mr. Baroody: December 2004.
Mr. Rejman: Yes, December 2004.
Ms. Hussey: Just to correct the record, this isn’t the Court of last resort for Mr. DePalma. Any property owner does have an option of applying for a variance with the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Darrow: But there are other avenues.
Ms. Hussey: All the ZBA can really evaluate it within the statutory parameters.
Mr. Darrow: Right, what is in front of us.
Ms. Hussey: Exactly.
Mr. Rejman: Only two courses of action, we can vote on this in which case you would have to have substantial changes to come before us again or should we just…
Mr. Darrow:The first thing is, I don’t know how the others feel, but just this spread sheet doesn’t substantiate hardship for me.
Mr. Rejman: Good point. Does any one wish to speak for or against this application? Yes, would you come forward please. We will get this on the record.
Mr. DiNonno: Patsy DiNonno, 4 Frances Street. I have been in this neighborhood for a long time and I have seen it continually deteriorate. The reason for the deterioration is rental property. I can in front of my house depending on whether you are going to count this 3 or 2, there are 12 rental properties that I can see, landlords do not live any one of those apartments. I go up the backside of my house, I have about 6 that I can see and again, none of the landlords lives in the properties. This house, the third apartment has been vacant I guarantee you 5 but I think it is more like 8 years.
Mr. Rejman: How long have you lived on the street?
Mr. DiNonno: Since 1966.
Mr. Rejman: OK. So you some history of the street, you know all the history of the street. So you think it has been vacant for 8 years or so?
Mr. DiNonno: I would say so, yes. There is another neighbor here tonight.
Mr. Rejman: Good if you would like to come up.
Mr. DiNonno: I have some problems, we had a couple of other properties in the neighborhood where the same situation developed where they were sold by the seller as being “x” number of apartments and in fact they weren’t. I have been in front of you 2 or 3 times also. A bad contract is a bad contract or whatever way you want to put it, it is bad business deal. These people that continually buy property to make rentals of out, they are in business. When they made a bad business decision, that is not my problem, that is not our neighborhood’s problem, it is their problem between them and the seller of that property. I hate to see our neighborhood go down any further. I will admit that he has put some money into the apartments, no question about that, whether it is
$48,000, I don’t know. They have been working in there off and on.
Mr. Rejman: Good, thank you for your input. Yes, state your name please.
Ms. Whipple: Trish Whipple, 7 Frances Street and I have lived there 17 years. During that time I have seen properties become rental and I my property values have declined. People move in they move out. They don’t have any input into the neighborhood, they don’t care. When I moved in originally the house which would be to my right, had a doctor, then a pharmacist, an engineer and then it got rented to welfare and each time it goes down hill. It is not just the house, it is the parking on the street and this particular property I am not sure where they would park, there is a driveway on one side and one on the other and neither one of them are in very good condition. I take that back, they did fix one of them. I can’t remember the last time that middle apartment
was rented, I think it was quite a few years ago and the last person in there I think was called Tillman. But it hasn’t been rented for a long time. I too am very dismayed to see the number of rental properties that are on that street.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Any one else wishing to speak for or against the application? Hearing none, we will come back.
Mr. DePalma: Can I make a comment?
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mr. DePalma: I think it should be noted that they both indicated the concern about the rental properties, regardless, this is going to be a rental property and how much improvement the property gets is going to be partly determined by whether it is a 2 or 3 units. Now they both have said it looks like there work going on and as I said he has completed the Code violations that was presented to him at the original inspection. He is the type of landlord that should be encouraged to maximize his investment and be allowed to complete the entire plan he has presented to you which he won’t complete and won’t complete that improvement to that neighborhood if he is not able to make benefit of his purchase.
Mr. Rejman: Any questions from the board? We will close the public portion then. Thoughts, concerns, comments?
Mr. Baroody: I this we should afford him an opportunity to show hardship and to explain procedurally what he is looking for on permits.
Mr. Darrow: I would tend to agree with that. Any body that has been before us who has presented an insufficient and incomplete packet has always been afforded the opportunity to come back and verify the information.
I also am concerned when I looked at the property it seems to me, maybe it just was the way people were parked, it seems to be one of our narrower streets similar to like Seymour Street in Auburn. I feel off street parking is also a huge concern there that we are going to need to address.
Mr. DePalma: It has been addressed, there is room for 6 or 7 cars
Mr. Darrow: Out back?
Mr. DePalma: Plot plan shows 5 cars in back, 2 cars in front, parking area for 7 cars off street parking.
Mr. Rejman: I may reopen, but right now the public portion is closed. I want to hear come comments and concerns from each member.
Ms. Marteney: The plot plan for the parking but it doesn’t say how may parking spaces.
Mr. Rejman: What about the original issue. This should have never even be before us.
Mr. Darrow: That is the biggest problem right there.
Mr. Rejman: If people had done their jobs on both sides they wouldn’t be here or would have been here prior to closing. That is different. Some one wants to buy it and here is the hardship, here is what they need.
Mr. Darrow: If this were a 3 unit, how many off street parking spaces are needed for the amount of bedrooms?
Mr. Selvek: Depends on the number of bedrooms that are in each apartment.
Mr. DePalma: According to Brian Hicks 5 ½ spaces were required.
Ms. Marteney: We never have a half.
Mr. DePalma: He said 5 ½ and we have 7 spaces, enough for 3 cars for one unit, two units have two cars apiece.
Mr. Rejman: Let’s reopen this I would like to discuss the hardships and the parking issues and we will put that in the record.
Mr. Darrow: I am satisfied with the parking issue now, I was missing a piece of the map.
Mr. Rejman: All right, no parking issue. Let’s hear the hardship issue.
Mr. DePalma: The hardship issue is the fact that at this point in time he is only able to generate 2/3’s of rent that he expected from the property. As it has been stated here, yes Mr. Panzarella is in the business of being a landlord and property owner, but he is not in the business of being a slum lord, he is in the business of being a proper landlord and properly maintain his properties and he is not hesitant to spend money for repairs that need to be done. I can provide all the records that you need to substantiate those figures, I can give you back up information and again he takes a strong concern for his property, he doesn’t let people get behind on the rent and he doesn’t let people that can’t pay the rent stay there and if they are not maintaining the property the way he
expects them to be, he regularly inspects them himself, he immediately asks them to leave.
He is not looking to bring the neighborhood down, he is looking to improve the neighborhood. He is looking to spend money to bring that about and he has done that with other properties as well and in no short fashion he comes in immediately and does the work that needs to be done. If you look at 55 Walnut Street or 190 S. Fulton Street, you will see that he keeps those properties substantially as well.
Mr. Darrow: The one thing that is really missing in this is some sort of a balance sheet showing projected income as a 2 unit, compared to the projected income as a 3 unit and how he is not going to see a reasonable rate of return on his investment as a two unit.
Mr. DePalma: I will provide whatever information you would like that, but I didn’t know what difference in the rental projections
Mr. Darrow: We are trying to give you a fair advantage Mr. DePalma because if we vote on it and it fails to get adequate support it takes substantial amount of change for you to reapply otherwise you are barred from here.
Mr. DePalma: I understand and appreciate that, I am just asking what would you like me to present to you exactly
Mr. Darrow: A balance sheet showing that he will not receive a reasonable rate of return on his investment as a 2 unit and that he could possibly be losing money from a 2unit compared to a 3 unit.
Mr. DePalma: OK, I can provide the balance sheet. Now in regards to the costs and expenses you want those verified.
Mr. Darrow: Yes.
Mr. DePalma: How would you like them verified?
Mr. Darrow: Just simple copies of receipts, not just numbers put on paper.
Mr. DePalma: That is fine. Cancelled checks be sufficient?
Mr. Darrow: Yes. You have to understand that if this should be granted and a neighbor’s feels that it was granted unjustly and files an Article 78 lawsuit against us and we don’t substantiate our findings it can be simply overturned.
Mr. DePalma: I understand. I am just saying you want cancelled checks to support the documentation. Any thing you would like?
Mr. Rejman: So you are suggesting tabling until next month?
Mr. Darrow: That is what I think would be fair because we always allow that when ever some body doesn’t have enough information.
Mr. Rejman: I agree, let’s look at this as fairly as possible before we go forward. So we will table this until next month, we need a P&L. Basically what Mr. Darrow said you need to prove to us that it cannot stand on its own as a 2 unit, that is economically not feasible.
Mr. DePalma: Thank you.
_____________________________________________________________
110 Wall Street, R2 zoning district. Robert Canino, applicant. Use and area variance for conversion to three (3) units.
Mr. Rejman: 110 Wall Street, please.
Rev. Canino: Good evening, Pastor Bob Canino.
Mr. Rejman: Tell us what you would like to do there.
Rev. Canino: The house was condemned to one unit, it was always a two unit and there was an illegal third unit in it. What I would like to do is turn it back into a two unit and add an additional third unit and make it legal.
Mr. Rejman: This is for an area variance.
Rev. Canino: It is a great house. It has sat vacant for about 3 years.
Mr. Rejman: You bought it from the City?
Rev. Canino: No, I bought it from Beneficial Finance, who foreclosed on it.
Ms. Hussey: I need to clarify this. Unlike 15 Frances Street this is located in a R-2 zoning district which allows 4 apartments per structure. Basically this is an area variance which is required for the conversion from 2 to 3 units.
Rev. Canino: Brian told me to do both, that way I had all the bases covered.
Mr. Darrow: Did you say Frances Street?
Ms. Hussey: Unlike Frances Street, Frances Street is an R-1 zoning district and multiple units are not allowed. This is 110 Wall Street is located in an R-2 zoning district multiple units are allowed.
Mr. Darrow: I misunderstood you. Sorry.
Mr. Rejman: So your recommendation is that we just focus on the area variance?
Ms. Hussey: Area variance.
Mr. Rejman: On the area variance then we need an area variance of 3,893 square feet correct?
Ms. Hussey: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: And that is all we need to focus on?
Ms. Hussey: Yes.
Mr. Darrow: Is this revert back because it at one time it was an R-1?
Rev. Canino: No, it was condemned, it would go automatically back to one after it had been vacant for a year.
Mr. Darrow: OK.
Mr. Rejman: Reinstatement. What he is asking is reinstatement of a pre-existing non-conforming.
Mr. Darrow: Yes. The area variance of 3893 square foot that he is shy on lot correct, that is the whole reason that is the only thing that he can do there.
Mr. Rejman: Let me ask this before we go any further. Any one wishing to speak for or against this application? None.
Rev. Canino: I have talked to the neighbors. Every one is happy that I am in there doing something. I am Pastor of the Church right across the street.
Mr. Rejman: I guess that is important that none of the neighbors are here.
Mr. Darrow: Yes. I feel better about it now that there is not a use variance also required.
Rev. Canino: I also bought 1 Chestnut Place as part of the deal and that is an empty lot.
Mr. Darrow: The corner street.
Rev. Canino: Yes right behind this. What I am trying to do is keep it in the confines of 110 Wall as I may build another house right on 1 Chestnut.
Mr. Rejman: Questions from the board? None. We will close the public portion and discuss this and take care of it. This is a little bit different.
Mr. Darrow: It is a lot different. Strictly yard area variance.
Mr. Westlake: Otherwise the house would just sit there an rot.
Mr. Rejman: Goes back on the tax rolls.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Robert Canino of 2763 Sand Beach Road, Auburn, a area variance in the sum of 3,893 square feet for his property located at 110 Wall Street for the purpose of creating a third dwelling unit.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
Mr. Darrow: I thought that counsel said that 2nd was allowed.
Mr. Rejman: Yes, it is, but it is back to a one now
Mr. Darrow: Amend the motion to create a second and third dwelling unit.
Ms. Hussey: He has enough square footage to create a two unit without ZBA action. He wants to go further and create a third.
Mr. Darrow: Restore the 3rd, it is already there.
Ms. Hussey: Right. There is a note, I would like point out that a parking plan needs to be submitted.
Rev. Canino: It should be in there. I made up copies. I have space for 5 cars.
Mr. Darrow: How many bedrooms between the three of them?
Rev. Canino: Four.
Mr. Baroody: I see parking for 3 cars.
Mr. Darrow: It isn’t draw in on ours. Is this
Rev. Canino: This is Chestnut Place
Mr. Darrow: Be entered off Chestnut Place.
Rev. Canino: Right.
Ms. Hussey: I would suggest you reserve and have Code review the parking.
Mr. Darrow: So parking spot 1 and 2 you will access from Wall Street.
Rev. Canino: No they all on Chestnut Place.
Mr. Darrow: All right. I thought this was Chestnut.
Mr. Rejman: Mr. Darrow would you like to make it contingent upon Code review of parking.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to amend that motion that it is contingent upon Code Enforcement’s approval of parking schematic.
Mr. Rejman: We can go ahead and vote on it tonight.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
Rev. Canino: Thank you.
_____________________________________________________________
76 Owasco Street, C1 zoning district. Scott Bell, applicant. Area variance for handicapped ramp.
Mr. Rejman: 76 Owasco Street. State your name for the record.
Mr. Bell: Scott Bell.
Mr. Rejman: OK, Scott, tell us what is the issue, what you would like to do there.
Mr. Bell: I want to put a ramp on the backside of the apartment.
Mr. Rejman: So I take it your tenant is handicapped and needs the ramp there.
Mr. Bell: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: Before we go further. Is there any one here wishing to speak for or against this application? Hearing none, we will come back. Counsel has just given me an idea that in situations like this that maybe we could on an area variance sunset it by terminating the variance with the termination of the lease.
Ms. Hussey: Of the tenancy.
Mr. Darrow: Absolutely.
Mr. Rejman: How would that work if tenant A moved out and tenant B again was handicapped, would have to come back to us?
Ms. Hussey: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: That is kind of a nice idea, so we don’t have to be as nervous sometimes about some of these variances.
Mr. Darrow: But the only downside being the devil’s advocate with this how do you police when that tenant moves out that has the handicap need. Is there something maybe yearly
Ms. Hussey: He is required to do a 5 year CO of if there was a complaint then that would be a violation of our Zoning Ordinance which would be enforced.
Mr. Darrow: OK.
Mr. Rejman: Any questions for the applicant? None.
Mr. Baroody: It is going between the fence and the house?
Mr. Bell: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: They need 1 foot 6 inch side yard variance.
Mr. Darrow: Is it side or is it also front?
Mr. Bell: The ramp is going to go down the side of the building and into the front lawn.
Mr. Darrow: Will it be encroaching upon the 10 foot of the front yard, that is why I am asking so that we can word it properly. Is it a 1-foot 6-inch side yard and a front variance because of the encroachment in the front?
Mr. Rejman: And a 2 foot variance in the front? Is that what you are saying?
Mr. Darrow: I am asking the question, because I am not sure.
Mr. Rejman: That is what it looks like on the schematic.
Mr. Darrow: Right because we are suppose to be 10 foot from the walk it is 8 foot so it also means 2 foot front yard variance from the walk that is how I am interpreting it.
Mr. Rejman: Why don’t we frame it so that we cover both bases.
Mr. Darrow: That is what I will do, put them both into one.
Mr. Rejman: Good.
Mr. Darrow: I would like to make a motion that we grant Scott A. Bell of 1346 Fuller Road, Port Byron, New York a area variance at 76 Owasco Street consisting of a 1 foot 6 inch side yard variance and a 2 foot front yard sidewalk encroachment variance for the purpose of erecting a handicap ramp with a sunset clause that ends on the termination of the existing tenancy.
Mr. Baroody: I’ll second.
Mr. Bell: Does that mean that when he moves I can come and reapply for the next tenant?
Mr. Rejman: Yes. If the next tenant needs that ramp.
Mr. Bell: If they need it.
Mr. Rejman: Yes.
Mr. Bell: OK.
Mr. Rejman: If they don’t need it, it will have to come out.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Ms. Aubin, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
_____________________________________________________________
160 Grant Avenue, C3 zoning district. HDL Property Group, applicant. Area variance for animated LED sign.
Mr. Rejman: 160 Grant Avenue please.
Mr. O’Neill: Thank you Mr. Chairman, my name is Mike O’Neill, I am with American Group One, 11 East Genesee Street, Skaneateles, representing Walgreens and HDL Properties the developers of 160 Grant Avenue. With me this evening is Brian Donovan and Mike Medico of HDL Properties.
I have a couple of photographs to pass out, essentially we are asking for a variance for LED reader board on a pylon sign. Effectively the reader board basically would have four functions. One is time and temperature, one is community announcements, one is the actual Walgreens advertising and the fourth the Amber Alert system. Walgreens has instituted a program nation wide in over 4,000 stores that they have computer operated Amber Alert system and what they do is by email and computer notification notify all of their stores in a particular market of any local, state or national Amber Alert type requirements. So we have been asked specifically by Walgreens, Chicago office to ask this board for consideration for this.
I have signs that I will pass out that are photographs of existing signage along Grant Avenue. It is basically our opinion that we don’t like the reader board signs that have the individual letters on them and that is what these photographs are of. What we find is that quite often the letters fall off or are blown off and the sign itself is somewhat unattractive so I will pass these out.
In addition, we have a drawing of what the actual reader sign would look like. Effectively as proposed the pylon sign is 25 feet, it is landscaped at the bottom. If you recall in our site plan we have approximately 50 feet in depth by the full frontage of landscaping in front of the store. The reader board itself as proposed is 3 feet 8 inches in height and 10 feet 11 inches in width. The capability exists for one, two, three or four lines across the reader board.
One of the most important aspects of the variance is that Walgreens corporate analysis of their stores indicate that stores with this type of sign and reader board do approximately 20% more in sales than those without it. In real numbers we project the first year approximately $6 million dollars in sales at Walgreens, probably peaking out at $10 million dollars after the store is established. We feel a 20% margin is $2 million is significant to the City also with respect to the sales tax issue. The City would get 4% of the revenue or approximately the difference approximately $80,000 more per year with the increased sales at Walgreens.
In summation we don’t quite fit the criteria in the City Ordinance and we are respectively before the board this evening to ask if there is something that we can work out with respect to this type of sign. Again as I said this was a requirement direct from Walgreens Chicago office to us to ask that they be allowed to include this not only as part of their Amber Alert but it is also obviously a marketing for the store, time and temperature and community announcements.
Mr. Darrow: Where about is the sign, is it 27 or 28 on the plot plan?
Mr. O’Neill: Right at the corner
Mr. Darrow: Right here (points to plot plan)?
Mr. O’Neill: Yes it is.
Mr. Darrow: Ok, thank you.
Mr. O’Neill: What we have done is this entire area use to be blacktop it is now landscaped.
Ms. Marteney: The whole area along Grant Avenue?
Mr. O’Neill: Yes it is, it is 50 feet deep and it is all landscaping. One of the other issues that in order to accommodate the amount of landscape we moved the building to the east the same distance and so what that does is basically as you are coming east bound on Grant Avenue the building sets back so that is why Walgreens asked us to come back and revisit this particular issue.
Ms. Aubin: How often does the advertising change? What is the time frame?
Mr. O’Neill: It is kind of up to the board. We can work anything out with the board that makes sense to the board. We were hoping the that that was basically the alternative that we could come out with. We would like any increment from 10 seconds to 30 seconds. That message would be up before it changed.
Mr. Westlake: Is that once a day?
Mr. O’Neill: Well, probably the time and temperature would work obviously we would like it more often than that. We are willing to compromise with the board. We realize that what this particular sign is but we do have in all the Buffalo stores and Rochester stores.
Mr. Westlake: How much bigger is this than your competition across the street?
Mr. O’Neill: That I don’t
Ms. Marteney: It says here 8 to 20 seconds.
Mr. O’Neill: This is 90 square feet of sign.
Mr. Westlake: How much bigger is this than your competition across the street?
Mr. O’Neill: I don’t know the size of that one, I don’t know.
Mr. Darrow: The variance isn’t for the size of the sign
Mr. Westlake: Right
Mr. Darrow: Because it is animated and I think the Zoning Ordinance doesn’t allow flashing lights and animation comes in.
Mr. O’Neill: Excuse me, the LED is a portion of the sign, everything else the height is ok, we have it landscaped, the signage itself is ok, it is just the reader board, it is the function of the reader board that doesn’t meet the exact criteria of the City. We are also willing to remove the P&C sign that exists there. We would be allowed two pylon signs but we also felt that we should take that down if we can get this approved.
Mr. Darrow: We approved for Kinney Drug at Seymour and State Streets and scrolling that doesn’t seem to be bad or obtrusive, too fast too bright.
Ms. Marteney: We haven’t had any complaints, the neighbor there thought it might be.
Ms. Aubin: It is also not Grant Avenue a four-lane highway.
Mr. Darrow: It is Grant Avenue, not a residential area.
Mr. O’Neill: We would hope obviously that we needed the Amber Alert to be utilized however in Oswego just approximately a month a month and a half ago we had that type of an issue and we don’t have that capability of Amber Alert in the City at this time.
Mr. Darrow: Is this a stationery or is this also something that changes?
Mr. O’Neill: Basically that can be changed, a log of a particular product.
Mr. Darrow: Oh, those are film rolls?
Mr. Donovan: Yes they are.
Mr. Darrow: I thought they were beer cans.
Mr. Rejman: What part is going to be the LED?
Mr. Darrow: Just this part of it right? This is all that is going to be LED (points to photograph).
Mr. O’Neill: Little more than half the sign is going to be LED.
Mr. Baroody: I just came back from a wedding in Buffalo and the Transit Road has several of these signs. The ones that run relatively smoothly look fine, but the ones going 8 or 10 seconds look like Mardi Gras.
Mr. O’Neill: We will work with the board on that, we have no problem with that.
Mr. Donovan: Brian Donovan, I live in Rochester. Some of the stores in Buffalo the older ones, some of the older technology similar to what you have seen with the Kinney Drugs with the bright lights. Technology that is used for the reader boards probably costs around $40,000, they are like plasma screens, very nice, high definition, very professional looking so it is almost like a picture being up there and according to Code, I can go forward and do something like what Taco Bell or Burger King has with the white with the black lettering but it is not professional looking and one thing about the Walgreens everything is about their image. Building a first class store, running a first class operation I think is what we are trying to do.
Mr. Baroody: I was in Buffalo over the weekend for a wedding and that is one of the comments some of the people making.
Ms. Marteney: How long does one stop typically at a stoplight and particularly at that intersection?
Mr. O’Neill: I would say the red light is probably a minute to a minute and a half, in that range.
Mr. Darrow: I personally feel that this is good, moving forward because those other signs with changeable letters half the time you can’t make out what they are saying on them after the wind blows half the letters off. I think this is good, my personal feeling is it would behoove us to try and pick 8, 10, 12, 15 seconds because they realize the attention span of the motorist and you can’t give them too much at once or they won’t remember anything. I am sure they have some sort of marketing survey that says how long each should be up whether it is 10 seconds, 15 seconds, you know.
Ms. Brower: The problem is distracting people while they are driving. Getting their attention and taking off the road, they look up and the next thing you know someone is stopping in front of you and that is a busy intersection.
Ms. Marteney: If it changed 6 times in a minute, that would be very distracting, but if it only changed twice in a minute
Mr. Rejman: When is the projected opening date of Walgreens?
Mr. O’Neill: The store itself will be turned over to Walgreens February 1st and it will actually take them a couple of months to fixture the store, in the spring.
Mr. Rejman: That is what I am looking for. My feeling, you are right, time changes, signs are being automated all the time, there are signs like LED, there are signs that are flipped, see the billboards that turn, but the other problem we have here is we have no input from traffic, we have no input from counsel because their could be liability issues here, if some one is rubber necking looking at this thing and get into an accident, I suppose we get sued too probably. The big thing is what do you do with the next one that comes before us, well gee, Walgreens has it, I want one and then I want one and I want one, all of a sudden we have 20 of these things and we don’t have any guidelines from the City.
Mr. Darrow: I do agree with you Mr. Chairman that I don’t think it would be a bad idea seeing the time line that we have to get some input from the Traffic Officer Tom Weed, see what he feels. I don’t think that is a bad idea at all. As far as you know them popping up all over, if they are like switch outs and they already have the signage there, you can switch them out, but if it is something they are already operating under a variance and they go to add more or add one of these
Mr. Westlake: As you pointed out to me, this is the variance we are talking about tonight. So if somebody wants to change a sign on Grant Avenue they have to come for the same variance.
Mr. Darrow: Yes, you are absolutely right.
Ms. Marteney: The cost of $40.000
Mr. O’Neill: We are willing to work with the board and are willing to actually put up the sign and come back at any time, the board can say it is too fast it is too slow
Mr. Westlake: If it is going to make an extra million dollars, $40,000 is nothing. The $40,00 is not an issue here.
Mr. Baroody: If we could ask Mike to ask Walgreens if they have information on what they normally do. I am sure that they have spent substantial sums of money to determine this size letter, this many times a second. If he could get that information.
Ms. Hussey: The legal issue is the board sitting here tonight and determining in an arbitrary method the increment of the timing of the messages and that is not sustainable.
Mr. Darrow: There are two things that I think would be good ideas, please let me know if you agree.
A. We have Officer Weed’s input, what he thinks of it.
B. In this day and age to have a 2-minute DVD shot of what an existing store, what it actually looks like when it is running. I mean every body had a little portable DVD players. So that we actually see, see one in operation, see what it looks like.
Mr. O’Neill: We are quite willing to do that work with the board, yes. Not a problem.
Mr. Rejman: I think what I am hearing and the feelings I think I am seeing is that we would like to go ahead we just a little cautious here.
Mr. O’Neill: I understand, not a problem.
Mr. Rejman: We don’t know where the ditches are on each side of the road.
Mr. O’Neill: I did mention to Brian Hicks that there were existing signs that were flashing signs on Grant Avenue and he asked me where they were and I said well at Fastrac and Hess and any other gas station because the price of gas is changing so often, the signs are actually flashing. (Everyone laughs)
Mr. Rejman: OK, so what I think I would like to do is table this until next month. Get together with Officer Weed, give us any other information that Walgreens happens to have.
Mr. Donovan: Let me clarify this, you want a videotape showing one in operation.
Mr. Rejman: That would be fantastic.
Mr. Donovan: What would you like to see?
Mr. Medico: Mike Medico, 1814 James Street, Syracuse, New York. The standard for Walgreens as I understand it is the intervals go from approximately 5 to 10 seconds on the majority of their signs, being that too long is not good, too short is not good and 5 to 10 seconds is something that doesn’t disrupt the traffic.
Mr. Rejman: OK, if you could show us that
Mr. Darrow: Shot a 2 to 3 minute DVD of a Walgreens sign in operation going through its pattern.
Mr. Westlake: Where is there one say in Syracuse? Is there one in Syracuse now?
Mr. Donovan: We are currently under construction over in Camillus.
Mr. Rejman: Are there any of these signs in the Central New York area?
Mr. Donovan: Right now the ones moving are in Buffalo and what I can do is where there is a comparable intersection just to get a general idea of what the expression on people faces are like and like that, I will take care of that.
Mr. Westlake: You are not incorporating these signs in your Syracuse store?
Mr. Donovan: They are, they are being a part of the Syracuse. Any new store any where in the country it is pretty much a requirement for them to have a LED reader board. That is the way of the future.
Mr. Rejman: Yes, because two or three years from now we are going to see these all over the place.
Mr. Donovan: The intersections are probably two times as worse as what is on Grant Avenue, we don’t see any accidents over there. I will take care of it.
Mr. Rejman: That is good. I think what we are worried about down the road.
Mr. O’Neill: Thank you and as always Happy Holidays.
Mr. Rejman: Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
| 
