MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN OF ELLICOTT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 215 SOUTH WORK STREET, FALCONER, NY 14733 MARCH 31, 2003 AT 7:30 P.M.

 

PRESENT: Acting Chairman David Remington, John Merchant, Steve Hoglin, Angelo Cimo,

                     Patricia Martonis, Attorney William Wright and Code Enforcement Officer Randy

                     Woodbury

ABSENT:    Al Suchar and Kevin Saff

 

Acting Chairman Remington called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Acting Secretary Karyn Okerlund called the roll.

 

Motion made by John Merchant, seconded by Steven Hoglin to approve the minutes of the February 24^th, 2003 meeting.

Carried.                     Ayes-5                     Noes- 0                             Absent-2

 

Attorney Wright swore in every one that would be testifying at this public hearing.

 

Mr. Remington reopened the public hearing for Todd and Jennifer Nelson, 72 Robinson Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY for a garage set back variance and a special use permit to add a third apartment above a garage in a residential zone.  By letter of their attorney, they are withdrawing their application for variance.

 

Motion made by Steven Hoglin, seconded David Remington to accept the motion of withdrawal.

Carried.                      Ayes-5                                    Noes-0                                    Absent-2

 

Mr. Remington reopened the public hearing for Carl and Geraldine Swanson, 185 Howard Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY for an area variance to build a second detached garage.

 

The Town received a letter from Carl and Geraldine Swanson requesting their application be withdrawn and then a second letter requesting that the withdrawal be withdrawn.  They need more time for their attorney to review and present their plans.  The Board took no action as the matter had previously been tabled.

 

Mr. Remington reopened the public hearing for Yaw Oil Co., Inc. 2805 N. Main St., Jamestown, NY for variances for signage, easements and set backs.

 

Ted Bogdan, owner and Dave Rhinehart, from Habiterra Associates, presented plans for a new building with a convenience store and an Express McDonald’s for the development by Yaw Oil Co.  Mr. Rhinehart presented a modified request regarding the set back.  The current easement of Jay Patel is for 50 feet at the southern property line.  They are hopeful that the 50 foot easement will be deleted.  This area is no longer zoned Residential, but Community Commercial Shopping District, thus there no longer is a need for the buffer strip and they would like to modify the set back from 30 feet to 20 feet. 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

MARCH 31, 2003

PAGE TWO

 

This would be the same as the north and west property lines and would allow a larger footprint for McDonald’s, of approximately 5-10 feet. McDonald’s feels the extra footage is needed to run the restaurant more efficiently.  If forced, they would go back to the original footprint which would inhibit the efficient function of both the convenience store and McDonald’s.   Mr. Bogdan is  negotiating with Mr. Patel regarding the easement, which is for utilities and roadway purposes.  The easement must be changed to satisfy the developers but could still be used for utilities.  Mr. Bogdan and Mr. Rhinehart will return to the Zoning Board after the easement issue has been resolved.

 

Mr. Rhinehart is requesting four area variances for the signs.  One for the height of the sign (which will exceed the height of the code), one for the square footage (both signs will exceed the square footage) and one for the number of signs (two rather than one).  A lengthy discussion followed regarding the impact on the neighborhood.   

 

Mr. Bogdan’s original request was for a sign to be 125 feet high.  It has now been modified to 95 feet.  Mr. Rhinehart provided photographs of West Bound areas on I-86 showing the placement of the signs.  The purpose of the placement of the signs is to have them be seen in time to exit from the highway.  The Mobil sign will be virtually the same height as the Comfort Inn sign and will clear the trees.  Mr. Rhinehart feels that if the signs were smaller they would be difficult to see.  The sign could not be high enough to be seen by the eastbound traffic, going 70 MPH, which is why there is a need for such a presence for the westbound lane.  The motel building will not be tall enough to have a sign on it that will be visible from I-86 in the westbound lane.  A computer video of traveling down I-86 and Route 60 was shown.

 

 

Points taken into consideration on the zoning laws:

 

1. Is there going to be an undesirable change produced in the character of the neighborhood, which is zoned Mercantile in the Town of Ellicott and Community Commercial Shopping District in the City of Jamestown, in granting the variance?  Taken into consideration will be size, height and the placement of two signs.  This is an interchange between Route 60 and I-86 and the commercial development of this type is what is generally expected and thus should not cause any undesirable change to the neighborhood.
2.  Can the benefits sought by the applicant be achieved by some alternative, feasible method,  other than the requested area variance?  The existing building and the proposed building are only one story tall.  It is not feasible to build a building tall enough to see a sign from the highways.  Sight lines are blocked by the I-86 overpass and the Comfort Inn and existing hillside of W. Oak Hill Rd.
3. Is the requested area variance substantial?  The proposed number of signs is two, and the existing code only allows for one sign.  There are already two signs and Mr. Rhinehart is asking for two more.  The proposed sizes of the signs are in keeping with the existing signs.  At his time, the proposed signs are the Mobil sign 7’7” h x 19 1 ½” w and the McDonald’s sign is

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

MARCH 31, 2003

PAGE THREE

 

      16’2”h x 20’ w.  Mr. Rhinehart does not feel this is a substantial variance.  Mr. Martini’s signs  

      are the same height and  square footage.

4. Will the proposed variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district?  Mr. Rhinehart knows of no way that the signs would affect the environment under any circumstances.  Since the area is zoned Mercantile and there are existing signs already in place, there should be no adverse affects on the neighborhood.
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created?  The existing buildings were constructed in the 1970’s.  Since that time, the trees have grown significantly and the Comfort Inn was constructed.  As a result, the building can not be viewed, but the sign can somewhat be viewed.  Mr. Bogden has owned this site since the early 1994.  Mr. Rhinehart does not feel that the difficulties were  self-created in any way.

 

There are four variances to be considered:  height, square footage of the high sign, square footage of the low sign and variance for placement of the two signs.

 

Mr. Wright stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals can not make a decision at this time on the environmental impact until results are obtained from SEQRA and laws are complied with. The Planning Board will be the lead agency.  The Board can not act until the environmental has been done.

 

Questions answered regarding the variances:

1. The building will have “McDonald’s” on the side of it.  That sign meets code requirements.  The other side of the building will have a similar sign for that business, also meeting the code requirements.  The high-rise sign is to get traffic from route I-86 (east to west).  The lower sign is within the zoning code for height and is for traffic off I-86.  The square footage will need a variance.  
2. Square footage: the Mobil sign combined with the McDonald’s sign is 317 square feet.  A 20’ x 14-16’ sign does not appear to be very large when it is 95 feet in the air.  The lower sign is much smaller, at 165 square feet.  The Board asked if the size of the smaller sign could be made smaller to be more acceptable. Two bottom lines could be deleted which would eliminate 4 feet in height.  The square footage will be discussed at the next meeting.  The sign will be 75-80 feet off of the pavement.  It was decided that the 95-foot height is needed for the Mobil/McDonald’s sign.  The Comfort Inn sign is approximately 59 feet high, the square footage is unknown.
3. The signs will be lit by mercury- vapor lights, and the light intensity is unknown.  Information

will be obtained from the sign company.   Lower watt bulbs could bring the sign into compliance if needed.  Information will be brought to the Board at the next meeting on the smaller sign.

 

Motion by John  Merchant, seconded by Kevin Saff to table the variances for the signage pending more information from the applicant.

 

Carried.                      Ayes-5                                    Noes-0                                    Absent-2

 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

MARCH 31, 2003

PAGE FOUR

 

Randy Woodbury reported on a notice from Susan Westling, Esq., Director of the Chautauqua County Department of Planning reminding towns in the county that they must comply with the NYS General Municipal Law section 239-m.  The law requires that many proposed town actions be reviewed by the county planning board before final determinations are made.  Mr. Woodbury drafted a letter to the county looking for a way to comply with the state law, but also expedite actions for development. 

 

 

Motion made by Kevin Merchant, seconded by David Remington to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 PM.

 

Carried.              Ayes-5                              Noes-0                           Absent-2    

 

 

 

 

______________________________

Karyn E. Okerlund, Acting Secretary