ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2009
Members Present: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Ms. Calarco, Mr. Tamburrino, Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Westlake
Member Absent: Mr. Darrow
Staff Present: Mr. Fusco and Mr. Hicks
Staff Absent: Mr. Selvek
APPLICATIONS APPROVED: 213 North Street, 217 Grant Avenue, 114-116 E. Genesee Street, 1-3 Orchard Street
Mr. Westlake: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, this is the Zoning Board of Appeals. Tonight we have the following items: 213 North Street, 217 Grant Avenue, 114-116 E. Genesee Street, 1-3 Orchard Street
If there are no errors, omissions or additions to last month’s minutes of the meeting, the minutes will stand as written. All in favor.
_____________________________________________________________
213 North Street. C zoning district. Area variance for sign. Applicant: Buffington and Hoatland, CPA’s.
Mr. Westlake: 213 North Street. Please come to the podium, state your name and what you would like to do.
Ms. Buffington: Good evening, my name is Elaine Buffington and I represent the accounting firm of Buffington and Hoatland. We are a new business moving our business from 198 Genesee Street to 213 North Street, the old Mutual Candy Factory. I am here tonight to request a sign variance; we occupy the south end of the building. The building has three (3) entrances, one (1) on the south side, one (1) in the back and one (1) in the front which we are requesting to put logo decals as shown in the packet, there are pictures on each of the three (3) entrances. In addition there is on the front, side of the building and the south side of the building there are transom windows which we would like to put signs, decals in, one that says Buffington and Hoatland and the other that says Certified Public Accountants. Currently there is
one (1) free standing sign in front of the building and you can see in one (1) of the pictures it is down further North Street away from the street the City area, you have to pass the building in order to see the sign to show where our business is located. Any questions?
Mr. Baroody: You are just going to put the decals on the doors?
Ms. Buffington: Yes.
Mr. Baroody: The ones that are there now?
Ms. Buffington: Yes. And the others on the transom windows.
Mr. Westlake: Is there anyone here wishing to speak for or against this application? Seeing none, we will discuss amongst the board. Thank you.
Ms. Buffington: Thank you.
Mr. Tamburrino: The signs are small.
Ms. Marteney: If you go by you can completely miss it.
Mr. Tamburrino: That building looks pretty nice. They did a nice job on it.
Mr. Bartolotta: Looks like they have some pretty good occupants too.
Mr. Baroody: I would like to make a motion that we grant Elaine Buffington of 213 North Street, Buffington & Hoatland CPA’s PLLC, a variance for the North Street side four (4) signs for the street front – two (2) allowed, for the south parking lot side three (3) signs for the wall – none are allowed as submitted per the packet.
Ms. Calarco: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Ms. Calarco, Mr. Tamburrino, Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Westlake
Mr. Westlake: Your application has been approved.
Ms. Buffington: Thank you.
___________________________________________________________
217 Grant Avenue. C3 zoning district. Area variances for signs. Applicant: Dunn Tire, LLC.
Mr. Westlake: 217 Grant Avenue, please come to the podium, speak into the microphone, give us your name and tell us what you would like to do.
Mr. Derby: My name is Eric Derby, we applying for different signs on our building at Dun Tire.
Mr. Westlake: Just on the side of the building?
Mr. Derby: Side of the building, change to lighted sign approximately the same size.
Mr. Baroody: Putting additional signs over the doors that face Hess?
Mr. Derby: They were currently painted, said Dunn Tire; we want to get a red-lit sign.
Mr. Tamburrino: Sign there already?
Mr. Derby: The painted sign.
Mr. Tamburrino: Same area, same size?
Mr. Derby: Correct. I believe a little smaller.
Mr. Westlake: Is there anyone here wishing to speak for or against this application? Seeing none, we will discuss amongst the board. Thank you.
Mr. Derby: Thank you.
Ms. Calarco: At that location you need that sign, you can’t see them.
Mr. Tamburrino: You drive by Dunn Tire; you don’t know they are there because they are hidden behind Hess. In fact, I didn’t know there was a sign there.
Mr. Baroody: They are all out of room.
Ms. Marteney: You are not included on the signage on the pylon sign?
Mr. Westlake: Auburn Plaza has a large sign with all the different names on it.
Mr. Derby: We do, but it is kind of small.
Mr. Hicks: It is one of the smaller signs on the lower portion of the pylon signs.
Mr. Fusco: The sign that exited there that was painted over, how large were the letters on that sign?
Mr. Derby: Approximately 4 feet tall and 33 feet long.
Mr. Fusco: 33 feet long and 4 feet tall.
Mr. Derby: Correct.
Mr. Fusco: Same size as the sign you are putting up now?
Mr. Derby: Yes.
Mr. Hicks: Each one of these suites has signage determined of the frontage along the interior driveway of the Plaza so if your store front is only say 40 feet wide then they are only allowed 80 square feet total signage and they do not have road frontage according to Code and this is a problem for these locations.
Mr. Baroody: They are deep.
Mr. Westlake: Do I hear a motion?
Mr. Baroody: I would like to make a motion that we grant Dunn Tire of 217 Grant Avenue 45 square feet of the allowed 39 square feet for a 84 square foot sign and 132 square feet for a wall sign facing east over the service bay doors as submitted in the packet.
Mr. Tamburrino: I second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Ms. Calarco, Mr. Tamburrino, Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Westlake
Mr. Westlake: Your application has been approved.
Mr. Derby: Thank you.
_____________________________________________________________
114-116 E. Genesee Street. R1A zoning district. Use variance for beauty salon. Applicant: Michael & Pamela Lavarnway.
Mr. Westlake: 114-116 E. Genesee Street. Please come to the podium, speak into the microphone, give us your name and tell us what you would like to do.
Ms. Lavarnway: My name is Pam Lavarnway and we put a Purchase Offer on 114 – 116 E. Genesee Street and in the grocery half of it we would to turn it into a beauty salon instead of the grocery store.
Mr. Westlake: Is there anyone here wishing to speak for or against this application? Seeing none, we will discuss amongst the board. Thank you.
This has been in front of us many times for many different things, a beauty salon isn’t really going to hurt anything, and it will not be open on Sundays.
Mr. Tamburrino: Less traffic.
Mr. Baroody: This was the White House. We need to do a SEQRA?
Mr. Westlake: Yes we do. Mr. Selvek is not here to read it tonight.
Mr. Fusco: We have page 2, is there a completed page 1?
Mr. Baroody: Yes, right here. (Hand to Mr. Fusco).
Mr. Fusco: The Planning staff has reviewed this application and we have Part I completed as submitted by the applicant. Mr. Selvek’s recommendation regarding Part II is he recommends that we find that this action does not exceed any of the type Part I thresholds. There is no need to get a coordinated review with any other involved agencies with a single agency review. Regarding existing air quality, surface or ground/water quality or quantity, noise levels, traffic patterns, other issues with traffic and noise levels no other environment impacts are expected. With four (4) stations it can be expected that parking would be needed for up to eight (8) cars. That parking would need generally to be on street parking and Mr. Selvek has written a letter to us outlining that particular concern.
Regarding aesthetic concerns the existing structure is commercial, there are only going to be minor exterior changes to the façade therefore there is no anticipated historical or aesthetic concerns.
He recommends that we find that there is no threat to fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species; this is in an urban setting.
Regarding whether this use is consistent with the existing plans, he recommends that we make a finding that although this use is not permitted in a R-1 zone, the existing structure is a commercial structure and very unlikely ever to be used for a residential purposes. The business is located on a major arterial where much of the traffic will be concentrated mainly on Genesee Street.
Recommended we find there wouldn’t be any impact regarding subsequent development that would spawn off by this, this is basically a stand-alone action.
Long term effects or problems he recommends we make a finding that it is not applicable. And therefore makes a recommendation that we make a Negative Declaration of finding that this will not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood. The only concern he has you see in his cover letter, is the parking issue but he does say in his cover letter that alone he does not feel warrants a Positive Declaration, but it is something we ought to think about.
Mr. Baroody: Just so you know, a Negative Declaration is a good declaration.
Mr. Westlake: Do I hear a motion?
Mr. Baroody: I make a motion that for Michael and Pamela Lavarnway for 114 – 116 E. Genesee Street that we make a Negative Declaration for the SEQRA.
Mr. Tamburrino: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Ms. Calarco, Mr. Tamburrino, Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Westlake
Mr. Westlake: Do I hear second motion?
Mr. Baroody: I would like to make a motion that we grant Michael and Pamela Lavarnway 114-116 E. Genesee Street a use variance to put a beauty salon at the location as submitted in the packet.
Ms. Calarco: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Ms. Calarco, Mr. Tamburrino, Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Westlake
Mr. Westlake: Your application has been approved. Good luck with your project.
Ms. Lavarnway: Thank you very much.
_____________________________________________________________
1-3 Orchard Avenue. R2 zoning district. Area variance for fence. Applicant: Dale & Jami Baker.
Mr. Westlake: 1-3 Orchard Avenue. Please come to the podium, speak into the microphone, give us your name and tell us what you would like to do.
Mr. Baker: My name is Dale Baker and my brother and I own that property. We have a nephew that lives there he has severe downs syndrome and we are looking to fence the property in so that he has nowhere to escape. There is nothing in between the houses the sidewalk and the road. For his safety, we already started fencing it in and they asked us to cut it down, they wanted us to cut it down to 30 inches or something. He would run right through that. He goes to Casey Park School, he has already escaped from there, he has been to the Gravas Center, he has gotten out of there. We are looking to help our sister out and fence in our property where she resides.
Mr. Westlake: Any questions from the board?
Mr. Tamburrino: You want to put a fence right by the sidewalk?
Mr. Baker: Yes. We cut it down to where you can see coming out of the stairs so if you were to come out into the street you would be able to see, we did cut that down. Looking to maintain the height that is there now, which is approximately five (5) foot.
Mr. Tamburrino: Is the backyard fenced in?
Mr. Baker: Yes it is, we fenced the whole property. The City is asking us to get a variance to either keep the height or if we had to lower the fence. If we lower the fence he is just going to be out in the street. He is a lot taller than that, so for his safety we are asking if we could keep it at the height that it is at now.
Mr. Tamburrino: Just trying to figure out if you fenced in the backyard and the leave the front yard
Mr. Baker: Just make the property bigger for him.
Mr. Baroody: Are you right across from the Post Office?
Mr. Baker: No, we are on Orchard Avenue.
Mr. Tamburrino: Look at the plot it looks like it is a fairly good size backyard.
Mr. Baker: It is.
Mr. Tamburrino: If you fence in the backyard should be plenty of room for a child.
Mr. Westlake: If we could think about the variance maybe giving it to Dale and his brother but should the property be transferred for any reason down the line here, the fence would have to come down at that time. That is up to the board.
Ms. Calarco: That was my question, as long as this individual is here that it stays, at the time this individual is no longer residing there, the fence would have to be put to the proper height.
Mr. Baker: That is fine with us.
Mr. Bartolotta: Can we do a condition?
Mr. Fusco: Yes we can make a condition on the variance on the child residing there, should the child no longer reside there the variance is discontinued.
Mr. Bartolotta: It does look like you did make a change to the front so that if you are exiting the property you can see both ways.
Mr. Baker: Yes we did.
Mr. Fusco: How big is the backyard?
Mr. Baker: It is a good size lot; we have a fence all the way around just cut it across the front there.
Ms. Calarco: The only reason I think I am inclined to go along with it including the front yard even with the backyard being big enough is a safety issue. My own kids have a tendency to be able to get out of the house even when they are not suppose to be in the front yard, they are out the front door and the next thing you know they are in the front yard. They don’t belong there, they are not suppose to be there, but they get there and this is even more of a safety issue. If we could put a clause that at the time this individual no longer resides there, the front back to Code.
Ms. Marteney: What is going to happen over where the man and boat are here? Is that your property?
Mr. Baker: Yes.
Ms. Marteney: So what is going to happen there, I see the end of the fence.
Mr. Baker: That is where we were coming down with it
Ms. Marteney: So this is going to be closed in and you have a gate?
Mr. Baker: Yes. None of the neighbors have a problem with it, we spoke to them all.
Ms. Marteney: I think part of it is, while I don’t think it is lovely, it is not on a corner and it is not stopping if you drive down that street it is not going to block your vision of any thing.
Ms. Calarco: Not a very huge traffic area.
Ms. Marteney: It is not a short cut to any where, it doesn’t seem like it would be a convenient short cut.
Mr. Baroody: I don’t have a problem especially make exceptions for kids with special needs. Although I would like to put a sunshine clause in there.
Mr. Westlake: I would like to see that too.
Mr. Baroody: We have a procedure to follow, for a very specific person/purpose. When the child moves or that property is sold, that the fence in front comes down.
Mr. Bartolotta: In the front?
Mr. Baroody: Right.
Mr. Bartolotta: I wasn’t sure you wanted the elimination of the whole fence.
Mr. Westlake: Is there anyone here wishing to speak for or against this application? Seeing none, we will discuss amongst the board. Thank you.
Mr. Baroody: Do you have a problem with the condition?
Mr. Baker: No that is fine.
Mr. Baroody: I would like to make a motion that we grant Dale and Jami Baker, 1 – 3 Orchard Avenue a variance to erect a 6 foot high privacy fence in the front yard providing that if the child with special needs that lives there moves and/or if the property is sold the fence is removed.
Mr. Tamburrino: I’ll second that.
VOTING IN FAVOR: Ms. Marteney, Mr. Baroody, Ms. Calarco, Mr. Tamburrino, Mr. Bartolotta and Mr. Westlake
Mr. Westlake: Your application has been approved, good luck with your project.
Mr. Baker: Thank you very much.
| 
