ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, APRIL 30, 2007
Members Present: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Bartolotta , Mr. Rejman
Member Absent: Mr. Baroody (called)
Staff Present: Mr. Selvek, Mr. Hicks, Officer Weed
APPLICATIONS APPROVED: 172 Grant Avenue
APPLICATION TABLED: 147, 151 – 153 Pulsifer Drive
Mr. Rejman: Good evening, this is the Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have: 147, 151 – 153 Pulsifer Drive, 172 Grant Avenue. Any corrections to the minutes of the previous meeting? Hearing none, the minutes are accepted as typed.
___________________________________________________________
147, 151 – 153 Pulsifer Drive. R1 zoning district. Michael Sacco, Jr., applicant. Use variance for an increase in the intensity of the non-conforming use.
Mr. Rejman: 174, 151 – 153 Pulsifer Drive, are you here? Please approach the podium, use the mike and tell us your name.
Mr. Newcomb: My name is Dave Newcomb and I am here with my partner, David Wasileski and we are representing Michael Sacco in this matter. There is a letter in the packet a letter of authorization from Mr. Sacco.
Mr. Rejman: Tell us what you are seeking.
Mr. Newcomb: We are the prospective purchasers of this marina in operation for, people tell me, I haven’t been around that long, but 40 or 50 years. As prospective purchasers we are asking for a couple of things.
Number one, primarily what we are asking for to be allowed and it has been operating on a seasonal basis. We are asking to be allowed to operate it in relationship to our competitors in the market. There are a number of different marinas around that operate a little longer hours, they are open on Sundays, they do some winter operations. We have no intention of taking on products doing snowmobiles or any of those kind of things. We would like the opportunity, the boat show is in February, that is the primary income source for us the sales. In order to do we have to have things ready to take to the shows so we have to be open in February, not for customers, but we would like to be able to have the doors open enough so that we can be in there rigging boats and prepping them for the sale in
Syracuse. Additionally my understanding of this is as a residential zoning with a grandfather that means that we are not allowed my understanding of it, we are not allowed to increase the hours of operation. Mr. Sacco has run all over the board on hours. He has two other marinas in other locations. Here he operated a small number of hours. We need to establish firm hours like every business does, open from this hour to this hour. That is the primary thing that we are asking for again is just to be able to match local competitors’ hours.
The second thing we are asking for is the ability on the property are two World War II era Quonset huts. They are in very bad condition, frankly they are unsafe. They serve no purpose what so ever for the marina. Mr. Sacco used them for storage for a little bit of equipment and things like that. What we would like to do is have permission to raze those buildings and put up a proper building which we can store boats in. We proposed a size for the building, the size is not something we are not unwilling to negotiate or consider a different size, if the board or Planning Board decides on something a little different. The other buildings that are there are not only absolutely unsafe but totally un-useable. One of the things that we would like to do is store boats, get them off the property
and inside so they are not such an eye sore for the community. They are safer, they keep people off the property, you can lock them up and develop a better income stream with the boat business. Those are the things we are asking for.
Mr. Rejman: OK. Who initiated the application? Did you just decide to come before us, were you in contact with anyone at City Hall about this?
Mr. Newcomb: I was in contact with Steve as well as Cynthia upstairs, a little bit with Mr. Hicks.
Mr. Rejman: Steve, can you fill us in on the logic of why they are here today?
Mr. Selvek: Any pre-existing non-conforming use in a residential district the business is not allowed to expand in intensity or in the sense of a physical expansion of the business itself. The applicant would like to immediately be able to expand in intensity in such a way as having increased hours, regular hours that have not necessarily been kept by the past owners.
Secondly the applicant would like the ability to raze those existing Quonset huts and construct a new building. Again being a pre-existing non-conforming use once the buildings are demolished by his own doing, he is not allowed to construct new buildings. I further point out is that that portion of the use variance that would allow for is a more of a short to medium term type thing, looking to do that within the next year or two years. It is really here because of the location in a R-1 district and the existing business is not allowed to expand in intensity or physical size.
Mr. Newcomb: I left one thing out, the existing business does not for the last several years been in a position of selling boats. In order to be in a position to buy a marina and have it successful economically, we will need to be able to sell boats as well, which frankly I think the community wants and needs. This community sits in one of the greatest assets we have in this community is our waterway and there are no reasonable quality marinas that sell or does any kind of over all marina work here. We would like the addition of the ability to sell boats as well both new and used. Sorry, I forgot to add that earlier.
Mr. Rejman:Let me do this, questions from the board? I am sure you are going to have some in a minute. Not yet? Anyone wishing to speak for or against the application? Come forward.
Mr. Chadwick: My name is Tim Chadwick, I live next door to the marina. I have pictures that I have taken from my property of the side of the street that they are on. My intention is to review this R-1 zoning. The primary objection of the R-1 district is to maintain the viability of this neighborhood by discouraging the development of the physical size and intensity consistent with it. Myself and many neighbors purchased our properties all boats were stored in two Quonset on the south side of the property. When something is grandfathered in I don’t think it should be unlimited expansion. The marina has become an eyesore. Private property has 7 or 8 parking areas currently there are 50 boats are on the property from September to June. There is a 50-foot right of way
which is the only boat launch in the City. Last year City Council voted against selling any City right of way. The marina’s continued abuse of City property continues, parking in the street is dangerous and limited. Adjacent to the marina is Auburn High School athletic field; baseball and lacrosse fields are connected to this area. When games, tournaments or camps are run parking on the street prohibits emergency vehicles from passing through. There are only single-family homes in this area and number over 100. The school district does not want to sell any land to the marina.
In closing I asked Code Enforcement to check on the boats parked in the grassy area and make the marina owner responsible to City Code for unregistered vehicles. I ask that the marina be returned to its original intention with all boats stored inside.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against?
Mr. Reed: My name is Gordon Reed, I have lived in the neighborhood for 21 years, and I grew up in Auburn. My Mom lived in the neighborhood for over 30 years, just up the street from the marina and I respect anyone that wants to run a business but I don’t think it needs to expand. My concern is this request is premature, from what I see so far. I see small number of local residents. I think we need to alert the entire neighborhood not just a few homes on Fleming Street or Pulsifer Drive. There are people with young children, I hope to have grandchildren running around here, there is going to be boat traffic, much more traffic at the boat launch no one abuses it and again I think it is premature until all the neighbors can get together to talk. That is all I have to say.
Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak?
Ms. Cunningham: My name is Dell Cunningham and I live at 136 Pulsifer Drive, directly across from the marina. When I bought that property in 1973 it was like a park across the way, very residential, ducks and pine trees and lots of trees it was very picturesque and very pretty and I had a house that was built in 1979 or 1980 and the whole living room is all glass to look at this beautiful view of the river and the boats going by. With each owner it has gotten to be more of an eyesore and I have taken some pictures that I would like to share with you. It is wall-to-wall boats from fence to fence and I am not sure if that fence is in the right place. Bright blue plastic. All these years from October to May I have got to look at the blue plastic. It is just an eyesore; I know they have to
make a living, but the original owners use to make everybody take their boats home and their trailers home so that it was just very pretty and picturesque. I love boats, we bought that property because we could keep our boat across the street, I have had boats since I was 14 years old, I love boats and I don’t want to stop anyone from earning a living, I agree with the other statement that we have to have more input on this from the people around the corner. There is a traffic problem there with the high school and the people that go to the games there and I think we need to have more information about this situation. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against this application?
Mr. Villano: Mike Villano, 63 Fleming Street. I am not against the gentlemen doing business there, but I am against some of the ideas they are proposing here tonight. I love the street; I pay a lot of taxes on my house I certainly don’t want to look at a 72 x 72 storage shed. What is it going to look like, one boat on top of the other?
Mr. Newcomb: Yes.
Mr. Villano: How are you going to get the boats in there?
Mr. Rejman: Mike, speak to the board please.
Mr. Villano: I don’t want to look at a storage shed. I don’t want the right of way to be sold. Mr. Sacco got there we were told he was going to do this, it was going to be nice, never happened. If anything they cut all the trees down there. Like I said I am not against anyone doing business. We have boat trailers parked on Fleming Street, parking on Pulsifer Drive. Come up there 4th of July night, you can’t even get through there. It is terrible. I am sure Code Enforcement has been called many times about that right of way being blocked with boats during the summer. I know that for a fact. That right of way should be left open; there should not be any boats on that right of way heading to the outlet. That right of way should be
open. I don’t care who owns that boat yard. I have lived there and I am not going to put up with boats coming down my street trailers coming down, we need to consider a lot of things before we make any decision. Again, I am not denying them to do any business there but you only have so much space to work with there, what are you going to do put skyscrapers? We have to use logic here, we have residents that live there and we pay a lot of taxes on our homes and I don’t want my home to depreciate because of a boat yard down the street. That is how I feel about that.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak for or against?
Mr. Wasileski: I am Joe Wasileski and I have lived in the area for 65 years and I use to go up and down the outlet when I was a kid. There weren’t many houses in that area, it was a marina and the houses and homes went and came up to the marina, they started being built near the marina, close to the marina and all that area since the marina started. Then the high school came and also became an entity in that area so the congestion and every thing else was there after the marina was there. These things are post marina; this marina has been going on for years.
Since the beginning there has been an eyesore over there and I think these gentlemen are trying to clean up that eyesore and make it clean. They want to replace a couple buildings that look like they are rusted with something modern. This is going to be good for the economy. There hasn’t been a service industry on Owasco Lake with a good marina and a good situation where people are fixing boats or repairing things on the lake and servicing the boating industry. Just think what this will do for Auburn create jobs, a couple jobs at least. Try to help out the boaters, to show people a good recreational area. Homeowners will be respected, they have to be respected they live in the area and these gentlemen are trying to come up with a good clean industry something that will help the
homeowners rather than deter. They have potential for some expansion on the other side so that all these boats won’t be stored there in the future and that would be a very good idea. It will be a lot better place, will be run better than the way it has been run for the last 5 or 6 years according to what their plans are. The marina came first and then the houses but they both can live together and that should be taken into consider. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: Anyone else wishing to speak for or against?
Mr. Meyer: My name is Paul Meyer. I have been a past customer of this marina and I have heard some of the concerns from one side over here and I think it is an important part of the lake and the outlet to have a good marina there. Also there are ways that the proposed owners here can work with the marina to take care of the concerns. One of the things I heard was the blue shrink-wrapping, that could be white and that would blend in with the snow. I just want to mention that I think there are solutions here. It has been there for a long time and I am sure it will work out and I am looking forward to going there again.
Mr. Rejman: Thank you. For the record there is a survey attached 11 yeses and 3 pending, 1 informed and 1 out of town. Anyone else wishing to speak?
Mr. Cunningham: My name is William Cunningham, I live at 136 Pulsifer Drive, I am a professional marine technician and I don’t believe this is the proper place to expand the operation.
Mr. Rejman: Anyone else wishing to speak? The applicant can come back. Questions from the board?
Ms. Marteney: Can we have Mr. Cunningham come back so we can ask some questions?
Mr. Rejman: Mr. Cunningham can you come up please?
Ms. Marteney: You were quick with your answer, but I would like to hear a little more.
Mr. Cunningham: Safety issues that are involved here, the extra traffic considering 80% of the people can’t back up a boat trailer. It is not the place to expand it. I work for Bass Pro out at the Mall and I deal around people all the time, it is just not the place down there.
Mr. Darrow: The fact that it would be competition for Bass Pro, does that have anything to do with your speaking?
Mr. Cunningham: No, no, it is my family property, my family home. They have expanded; they rent land that doesn’t belong to them. There is drinking, partying, people arrested there, not a residential type of operation.
Ms. Brower: The maneuvering of the trailers
Mr. Cunningham: There just isn’t enough room. The right of way belongs to the City, there are trailers sticking out in the middle of the road, they just pile them in.
Mr. Rejman: The right of way usage there is no way to control that, so the applicants and the present owner can’t be held hostage to that.
Mr. Cunningham: More traffic though compounds the problem.
Mr. Rejman: Adding more people to Cayuga County would compound the problem.
Mr. Cunningham: I said what I wanted to say. Thank you.
Mr. Rejman: OK, thank you very much. Applicant comes back please. Questions from the board?
Mr. Westlake: You say you want comparable hours to other marinas in the area
Mr. Newcomb: Correct.
Mr. Westlake: I don’t know what the comparable hours would be.
Mr. Newcomb: Typically more marinas will open at 8:00 a.m. and run to 5:00 or 6:00 p.m. in the evening. I haven’t had an opportunity to sit down and formula any hours. The problem with a marina is this, a marina is one of those businesses that is, not matter what we do when asking for hours, it is seasonal. Huge percentage of the customers want their boats in at a specific time and want to take them out at a specific time so you need to be in a position where you are open more during certain times of the year perhaps late May, June early July and then again in September or early October for folks to drop their boats off. Then the hours would decrease significantly. But we need the ability to have the hours to get boats ready for the boat show and things like that. So I foresee
the hours being variable. Most of the marinas in the area are that way. Open more during certain times during peak rush hours. I certainly don’t have any intentions of being open Bass Pro hours. I have no interest in being open at 10:00 p.m. at night; we are not that type of marina. We can sit down and formulate the hours. The marina currently is on that type of schedule now. During June and July frequently open until 8:00 p.m. at night, other times of the year close as early as 5:00 p.m.
Mr. Darrow: Is the purpose of the 72 x 72 building to be able to store the boars in the winter so that the boats will not be outside and will no longer be an eyesore in the neighborhood?
Mr. Newcomb: That is correct. Someone mentioned that the neighbors need to be alerted, we actually went around and spoke to a significant of the neighbors on both sides of the river, not just on Pulsifer and Fleming, but we also went over to Owasco and of the 15 people that were closest to it, the majority of the folks had no issue with it.
Mr. Darrow: Your proposed building, I see it is going to sit on the footprint of hone of the Quonset huts, is that because of setbacks?
Mr. Newcomb: No I think it takes up the position of the Quonset hut.
Ms. Marteney: Just one.
Mr. Newcomb: I am sorry you are correct.
Mr. Darrow: To achieve the set back.
Mr. Newcomb: Yes it is, I am sorry.
Ms. Brower: You have the elevation of the building
Mr. Newcomb: We are asking for 24 feet that would allow us to stack boats 3 high. It is going to be a fully enclosed building so we can lock up and close it. We have property on the Owasco Street side and if we have boats left over we can store them over there. We will probably do that this winter right away again just because of the footprint is smaller here.
Mr. Darrow: If we were to grant the variance for this, do you have a problem with a stipulation of the variance being that there are to be no outdoor winter stored boats?
Mr. Newcomb: I do have a problem with that, can we be allowed to keep our own boats there?
Mr. Darrow: What is the definition of your own boat?
Mr. Newcomb: Boats that the marina owns.
Mr. Darrow: Don’t you want your boats in protected from the weather?
Mr. Newcomb: You are asking me now.
Mr. Darrow: Looking into concerns of the neighbors.
Mr. Newcomb: The boats have been there for years and years, we are actually trying to alleviate that problem. Are you asking me no storage of outdoor boats there?
Mr. Darrow: If the building was up would it be a problem contingent upon that you would not be allowed to use any winter storage outside.
Mr. Newcomb: Now I understand the question, no I don’t think that would be a problem. The reason for putting the building up is to alleviate a lot of problems there.
Mr. Rejman: I was in a side bar with Codes talking about the building and I wanted to know how we would even start to frame the motion. What are we looking at?
Mr. Darrow: I would assume we are strictly addressing the use variance for the reconstruction of a new building and the demolition of the Quonset huts and that is it.
Mr. Rejman: It gets more complicated than that.
Mr. Hicks: The applicant came forward with a proposed building in this application because he wanted the board and the public to know about the proposed building. This application right here in front of you is for the expansion or the increase in intensity of the non-conforming use only. He can build the building but it is going to have to be within the parameters of the Code. He may be back in front of the board for an area variance. You can get a building to conform but it may not be what the applicant needs. This application is strictly for the expansion or increase in intensity of the non-conforming use, but he is being up front with his plans for the future.
Mr. Bartolotta: The building that he is proposing is going to be larger than the physical structures that are currently on the property, is that right?
Mr. Hicks: That is correct.
Mr. Darrow: We are talking about going from 2240 square foot to 5184.
Mr. Bartolotta: Use variance for that as well?
Mr. Rejman: He can build the building, it is what he is going to do with the building is the issue.
Mr. Hicks: He is going to increase the intensity of this use, which is not allowed by Codes at this point in time.
Mr. Darrow: What is he increasing intensity to?
Mr. Hicks: There is no black and white on this.
Mr. Darrow: Our first order of business was – when the buildings area razed they are no longer conforming and therefore put any thing back up.
Mr. Selvek: That is why he is seeking the use variance to allow him to reconstruct the building on a non-conforming site.
Mr. Bartolotta: Right so the use variance is for both the intensity of use and for the structural expansion of the property.
Mr. Newcomb: My understanding is I am seeking an extension to allow increasing the activity in the business. That is my primary request. The building is something that I am bringing forward as a solution for a problem.
Mr. Darrow: How are we increasing any, he is going to offer the services that is currently does offer so we are increasing
Ms. Marteney: Number 11 is very specific about what he wants to do. Amend the current hours to match competitors with year round usage, which you said you might not be open year round and current business operation to include sales, service, parts, marine goods, dry goods and beverages, rentals, storage of marine products and demolish the Quonset huts and build a new building. .
Mr. Newcomb: Only additions in terms of services that are being offered currently are sales.
Mr. Westlake: Mr. Sacco wasn’t allowed to operate in the wintertime?
Mr. Rejman: He didn’t chose to.
Mr. Darrow: How can we say now that he can or can’t operate year round. Is it strictly by a guiding precedent from the past year or two, Mr. Sacco did not operate in the winter, that says it is a seasonal business and he shouldn’t be open year round because it is grandfathered in as a pre-existing non-conforming?
Mr. Rejman: Great question.
Mr. Darrow: We are in gray area, how can we redefine the business that has already been defined?
Ms. Marteney: Except it hasn’t been defined in the application. I have no idea what went on at that marina 50 years ago.
Mr. Westlake: Why was the application denied?
Mr. Hicks: Because of the information that was given to us as far as the fact that he wants to increase intensity of the use of the business at that location.
Mr. Westlake: That answers my question, nothing tells me the increase he is going to make, are there 10 boats and he is going to put 100 boats? Is it from 9 to 5?, 9 to 10 at night? Lot of questions.
Mr. Rejman: We still have to go back to just because the previous owner didn’t go from 9 to 5 or whatever, doesn’t mean he couldn’t.
Mr. Darrow: It would be much clearer if that marina was unoperational for a year, they would have lost their pre-existing non-conforming, but that is not what has happened. It has been in operation.
Mr. Newcomb: Current operation has been form 8 in the morning until 6 at night. You can also make a strong argument that they have been operational all winter since they are storing boats.
Mr. Darrow: Collecting rent on boats.
Mr. Rejman: All great questions and these are all going to go to Corporation Counsel. I am going to recommend that we table this until we find out what is going on. Just so the neighbors understand and the owners understand, we sit hear and we have to weigh two things, we have to weigh the rights of the owner against the rights to neighborhood. There is the right of way issue and the parking in the street, we don’t know if they are customers of the marina.
Mr. Darrow: The 4th of July is busy because of the fire works; we don’t know if they are marina customers, they could be from Onondaga County. We don’t know that.
Mr. Westlake: We do need more information from the new owners here, they say they want more intensity, but we don’t know
Ms. Marteney: Does it matter what really went on there before the business was always there.
Mr. Darrow: I don’t know if there is going to be a substantial change to the character of the neighborhood or what they are going to do. We don’t know if there is going to be a substantial change to the business that is going to substantially change the character of the neighborhood because we haven’t completely got our arms around what the bench mark is and what the new bench mark is going to be and I think we have to ascertain those before we can arrive at a decision.
Mr. Rejman: Let’s pretend there is a restaurant, pre-existing non-conforming that goes to change ownership, does the new owner have to come before us because he is buying that restaurant? You are expanding the use by giving good service.
Mr. Darrow: My main concern is the storage building is it going to aesthetically blend in with the character of the neighborhood or is it going to stick out like a sore thumb?
Mr. Westlake: They have to come to us for that building before he does it as far as setbacks.
Mr. Hicks: Accessory structure, he will need a height variance, square footage variance, most likely a sideline set backs.
Mr. Darrow: If he tears it down what would his maximum be 2240 or 760?
Mr. Hicks: Couple issues involved because of the residential zone. He could erect a garage but he already has a service bay as the primary structure, so we would have to calculate the square footage that would be allowed at that point.
Mr. Darrow: Then go for the difference.
Mr. Westlake: If you buy a business and you happen to be a better business person than the owner before you, you run a better business and you get more customers, that is not my fault, I am just a better business person.
Mr. Rejman: With the permission of the board, I think we should table it, I would like Codes and Counsel and the applicant to get together and come back with a revised application that gives specifics.
Mr. Newcomb: On hours?
Mr. Rejman: Whatever Codes and Counsel advises
Mr. Darrow: If you look back at the profit and loss statements it pretty much defines what they were doing by inventory that they were carrying. You can see boat sales, boat rentals what was brought in, winter storage, docking, parts, oil, labor costs so all those are pretty laid out on the profit and loss so if there is a profit and loss they are obviously doing a service. We have to make our benchmark off the profit and loss for what services they are currently offering.
Mr. Rejman: Can’t do that.
Mr. Westlake: We are the Zoning Board of Appeals all we can do is something that has to do with zoning.
Mr. Darrow: I am looking at the profit and loss and I am seeing losses so I am thinking well they are making their argument with the profit and loss a financial hardship of not having perhaps hours or services so I was looking at this, I thought they were trying to prove financial hardship with the profit and loss.
Mr. Newcomb: That was my intention.
Mr. Bartolotta: Before we get to that, Brian do you know what year the zoning change created the non-conforming use, do we know how far back that goes, at one point this was in compliance with the Code.
Mr. Hicks: From what I can gather there was no zoning code for that section when the marina was there and then the residential came in.
Mr. Bartolotta: If we could pin point that date and determine what the uses where at that time.
Mr. Hicks: I can do some research on that.
Mr. Rejman: This is the first time I have ever seen intensity. We have made decisions based on use, can I use it for this, can I use it for that, but can I increase the intensity, that is like saying, can I make my business grow, can I have more people at my house? Sure you can, why not. I am not sure why this is here.
Mr. Newcomb: That was my primary request, the building and storage those were things that came up later on. Our request is the ability to run our business and increase it and I was informed or lead to believe that I would need a variance just simply for the hours. The place has done sales for many, many years, it hasn’t the last year or two but it has for many, many years, it has done rentals and every thing it is currently doing still.
Mr. Rejman: Is it your intent to be open the same hours as previous owner and to do pre work in the spring?
Mr. Newcomb: Correct.
Mr. Rejman: Are we treading on ground by saying business hours from
Mr. Darrow: I don’t think it really needs to be before us because there is no structural changes that concerns zoning.
Mr. Rejman: I think we need to get counsel involved with this and we need to review this.
Mr. Newcomb: This is a business that time and I understand your concerns if this takes another month or two I am out of the boating season.
Mr. Westlake: What are we stopping you from doing right now?
Mr. Newcomb: Nothing.
Mr. Selvek: The issue at hand is specific to the fact that the applicant wishes to purchase this property. He is purchasing this property with it being a non-conforming use and then come back to the board requesting use variance to create that building. Setting aside the intensity use specific to building a new building on that site he cannot request basically the argument of a self-created hardship knowing that he is not by zoning raise those two buildings and build a new building.
Mr. Darrow: From my understanding he is not looking to do that right away. Wouldn’t it just be putting off one month any closing, he can still operate the store.
Mr. Newcomb: I can’t operate it if I don’t close on it. Mr. Sacco can, I can’t.
Mr. Darrow: I think we are trying to look at something that counsel may tell us we don’t have to look at.
Mr. Rejman: All in favor of tabling until next month. All agreed. We want to do it right the first time, not come back and try to fix it.
Mr. Wasileski: Is it possible to have an emergency meeting prior to next month?
Mr. Rejman: Talk with counsel, I think need to have 10 days notice to have it in the paper. Letters will be going out again. It will be on the 21st next month because of Memorial Day.
_________________________________________________________
172 Grant Avenue. C3 zoning district. HDL property Group, applicant. 9’ area variance along the SSE side property line, which abuts Walgreen’s for the placement of a new structure.
Mr. Rejman: 172 Grant Avenue please.
Mr. Mark: Good evening, my name is Rick Mark.
Mr. Rejman: Tell us what you would like to do there.
Mr. Mark: I am with Dunn and Sgromo Engineers and we are here tonight representing the developers and owners of the parcel at 172 Grant Avenue. We are request a side yard setback in a C3 zone 10 feet to 1 to accommodate the construction of this commercial project.
Mr. Darrow: It is the south east corner (Mr. Mark shows a map).
Mr. Mark: This building this location where my finger is is 1 foot from this property line that was formed recently when this subdivision was undertaken. What we are asking for is a variance this is now a side yard between Walgreen’s and the plaza here, asking for a variance from the 10 feet as required by Codes to 1 foot to accommodate the placement of this building right here.
Mr. Darrow: Same property owner for both?
Mr. Mark: I don’t think it is, this is a subdivision.
Mr. Darrow: So Walgreen’s actually owns their property, it is not owned by John Smith?
Mr. Selvek: I don’t believe Walgreen’s owns that property.
Mr. Darrow: I think they both are owned by John Smith and he leases the property to Walgreen’s and the other tenants.
Mr. Westlake: You are asking for a 9-foot area variance.
Mr. Mark: Yes.
Mr. Rejman: Any one wishing to speak for or against the application? None. Closing questions from the board?
Mr. Darrow: I have none, pretty simple. I would like to make a motion that we grant HDL Property Group, LLC, a 9 foot area variance on the south south east side of the property abutting Walgreen’s for the purpose of erecting a new strip plaza.
Mr. Westlake: I second that motion.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Darrow, Ms. Brower, Mr. Westlake, Mr. Bartolotta, Mr. Rejman
Mr. Rejman: Application has been approved.
Mr. Mark: Thank you very much.
Mr. Rejman: We have one other item here, a letter.
Mr. Darrow: My first question is can we discuss it without it being advertised.
Mr. Rejman: That is a good question.
Mr. Darrow: Without notifying the neighbors we are in violation of the open meeting law.
Mr. Rejman: Looks like we need counsel!
Mr. Westlake: We need counsel bad tonight.
Mr. Darrow: I suggest our Chairman, as our representative should let the manager know how bad we needed counsel tonight.
Mr. Rejman: I will give him a call.
Mr. Hicks: I believe if there was a letter from the board that it might suffice, but I believe we have already put that information forward to the manager, that was my understanding.
Ms. Brower: Is Andy just absent tonight?
Mr. Selvek: My understanding following the discussion we had at the last meeting the following day your concerns were expressed to the City manager and Andy Fusco spoke to the City manager and at that point was instructed that because the board felt that corporation counsel was needed at each and every meeting, corporation counsel was instructed to attend the Zoning board meetings.
Ms. Brower: So he is just absent tonight.
Mr. Rejman: Before we close I want to seek unanimous consent to table this request until the next meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
| 
