Chairman Steve Hoglin called the meeting to order at 7:06 PM

&n= bsp; MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE= TOWN OF ELLICOTT ZONING

BOARD OF APPEALS HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 215 SOUTH=

= WORK ST., FALCONER, NY 14733 ON A= UGUST 31, 2009 AT 7:00 PM.

Chairman Steve Hoglin called the meeting to order at 7= :06 PM. All those present stood f= or the Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call was taken.&= nbsp; Minutes of the July 27, 2009 meeting were approved.

All audience members planning to speak at tonight̵= 7;s hearing were asked to stand and be sworn in.

The first item on the agenda was the request for a 10 = year renewal of a Special Use Permit by Margaret Servoss to operate a kennel and grooming business at her home on North Main Street Extension.

Miss Servoss stated that her business has not changed = since her original request and granting of 1 year ago. She has had a maximum of 5 dogs wh= ich she houses inside her residence. There are no exterior cages. She stated it was her intent to change the grooming portion of the business to a mobile unit where she would go on site to customer’s homes. She is presently await= ing approval for financing to purchase the mobile unit.

K Hedstrand asked if there were any other employees an= d Miss Servoss stated she was the only worker.&nb= sp; Due to the potential of the change to the business was recommended a= Two Year renewal be requested.

A motion was made by Al Hendrickson to approve a Two-Y= ear Renewal of the Special Use Permit to Margaret Servoss to operate a kennel a= nd dog grooming business in her home.

A second to the motion was made by Jean Holton.

Ayes – 7 &n= bsp; Noes – 0

New York RSA No 3 Cellular Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless is requesting to amend their Special Use Permit for its existing Telecommunications facility located at Idlewood and Orchard Roads. Verizon Wireless was represented by Jared C. Lusk, Attorney.

Packets of information were offered to the Board which included a Structural Analysis of the tower, a Notice of Safety Compliance, SEQR Form (short form) and an engineers drawing of the existing structure a= nd proposed structure.

Attorney Lusk stated the upgrade to the existing trunk= line is needed to accommodate the increased volume of calls and to keep up with changes in technology.

Mr. Hoglin asked if there would be any structural chan= ges to the existing tower. Mr. Lusk = stated the changes would be minimal.

Mr. Lusk stated that the upgrade would include the rem= oval of one 10’ diameter dish which would be replaced with one 6’diameter dish and one 8’ diameter dish. The addition of steel would be req= uired for re-enforcement of the existing structure.

Mr. Woodbury brought it to the attention of the Board = that the Structural Analysis by Armour Tower, Ed Rosebloom, Engineer noted the existing structure was found to be “overloaded wit= hin the scope of this analysis to support the proposed antenna loading.”<= /p>

It was noted that upon if this permit was approved, the structure would need to be re-enforced to comply with the EIA 222-F standar= ds for Chautauqua County.

K Hedstrand asked if the previous drainage problem had= been corrected. Mr. Woodbury and M= r. Wright assured that the problem had been corrected quite nicely by the coordinated efforts of the County DPW and Verizon. No drainage problems exist at this= time.

Neighbor Roger Loewenheim of <= st1:address w:st=3D"on">Orchard Road asked if the structural changes would comply with wind requirements.

Mr. Lusk stated with the re-enforcements it would. Mr. Woodbury explained that the structural change would need to include re-enforcement of the tower itself = in order to comply with the F Standard.

Mr. Loewenheim asked if there would be any aesthetic c= hanges to the area.

Mr. Lusk= stated there would be no aesthetic changes.

Resident Dennis Lefler asked how long the Project woul= d take and if the upgrade would include bringing in any heavy equipment or taking = down any trees.

Mr. Lusk stated the Project should not take any longer= than one week, but he is not an engineer and stated that this could change. Mr. Lusk stated there would be no = heavy equipment brought in and no trees would be removed.

Mr. Lefler asked if there would be any changes to power requirements.

Mr. Lusk stated there would be no changes to power requirements.

This project is subject to SEQR so Chairman Hoglin com= pleted the SEQR short form. A motion= was made by John Merchant to accept that this Project would not create an adver= se Environmental Impact. The mot= ion was seconded by Al Hendrickson.

Ayes – 7 &n= bsp; Noes – 0

A motion was made by John Merchant to approve the application of RSA # 3 Cellular partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless for a two year permit renewal with the modification presented.

Second by Jean Holton.

Ayes – 7 = Noes - 0

Tanglewood Manor/NTF Properties of 560 Fairmount Ave W= E, Jamestown has req= uested a 10 year renewal of their Special Use Permit with modifications.

Mr. Brad Lawson, Operations Manager represented Tangle= wood Manor. Mr. Lawson stated they will = be constructing 2 cottage style single family residences of property near the pond.

Mr. Lawson presented a sketch drawing of existing cott= ages on the premises. Mr. Lawson a= lso presented a site plan showing the area where the cottages are to be built.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> He noted there would be a driveway constructed entering from = Gifford Avenue. The water system would be provided by the Jamestown BPU which would benefit other residents of the neighborhood. He stated it would be his first ch= oice to have electricity be provided by underground cables but they may need to = go overhead.

Mr. Hoglin asked where the storm water runoff be directed. Mr. Lawson explaine= d the storm water would run into the ponds.

Mr. Lawson stated there would be no negative changes t= o the neighborhood, only positive ones.

The cottages will be available to seniors ages 55 and = over.

Discussion ensued regarding modification to Special Use Permit renewals. The Town Code states that modifications to Special Use Permit Renewals may= be granted for only 2 years, according to Attorney Wright.

Mr. Nicholas Ferreri questioned why he could not be gr= anted a 10 year renewal. It was not= ed that the other structure on his property which was previously awarded a 5 y= ear renewal would also expire in 2 years anyway which would coincide with the renewal for this permit if granted.

Mr. Woodbury explained that there had been discussion = among members of the Comprehensive Plan Team to include homes for the elderly in a “Use by Right” category which would exempt business such as Tanglewood Manor from having to renew its Special Use Permit in the future. Mr. Woodbury explaine= d that this was only discussion.

Mr. Wright interjected that the Plan would need to be written and approved by the Town Board before any exemptions could be implemented.

Mr. Wright stated this project is subject to SEQR.

Mr. Hoglin completed the SEQR short form.

A motion was made by Al Hendrickson that this project = would have no adverse environmental impact to the neighborhood.

Jean Holton seconded the motion

Ayes – 7 &= nbsp; Noes – 0

A motion was made by Al Hendrickson to approve the req= uest for a 2 year renewal of a Special Use Permit with modifications to include = the construction of 2 cottages.

Second by Phil Pratt

Ayes – 7 &n= bsp; Noes – 0

Mr. Joseph Radack of 12 S Hanford Ave WE Jamestown requested an area variance fo= r an addition to an existing detached garage.

Mr. Radack provided a sketch drawing of a proposed 16&= #8217; x 22’ addition to his existing 16’ x 24’ garage. The bottom of the addition would b= e a carport type structure with a concrete slab bottom with a barnlike storage = area above. He would use the carpo= rt to park vehicles and the storage area for general storage.

It was noted that the existing garage presently has a 1’ setback to adjoining property at the same time his neighbor’s garage is 1’ away from the same property line leaving only 2’ between the structures.

Mr. Wright explained that there is a need for a mainte= nance easement in order for the structures to be maintained.

It was noted that the 2’ between the buildings d= id not meet the fire code for non-living quarters.

Mr. Radack explained that he also owns the adjoining property to the rear of his residence.

Mr. Hendrickson asked why Mr. Radack could not build o= n the other parcel of land.

Mr. Radack stated he had thought about that, but after realizing there is a required 50’ set back from the road along with concern of building too close to a neighbor, he decided to seek an alternative.

Mr. Hoglin asked Mr. Radack if he would be willing to = seek other alternatives at this time.

Mr. Radack said he would like to seek other alternativ= es and asked that his request for an area variance be tabled at this time.

Jean Holton made a motion to table this application at= the applicant’s request.

Second by Dave Remington.

Ayes – 7 &n= bsp; Noes – 0

Motion to adjourn made by John Merchant

2^nd by Phil Pratt

Ayes – 7 &n= bsp; Noes – 0

= ;_____________________________

Kathy Hedstrand, Acting Secretary