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 ON
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 AT 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairman
Steve Hoglin, Dave Remington, John Merchant, Angelo Cimo, Patricia
Martonis, Kathy Hedstrand, Rick Keefer, Attorney William Wright, Code
Enforcement Officer Randy Woodbury and Secretary Valerie Pierce.
ABSENT: None
Chairman Hoglin called the meeting to order at 7:30
P.M. Secretary Pierce called the roll.
Attorney Wright swore in everyone that would be
testifying at this public hearing.
Chairman
Hoglin opened the public hearing for Northgate Church for a sign variance at
County Route 380 and NYS Route 60.
Jeff Ekstrom, representing the Northgate Church,
requested a variance for two 49 SF signs for the Church. Mr. Ekstrom presented the
design from Chautauqua Sign Company for the sign to the Board members
Mr.
Woodbury told the Board that The Town of Ellicott Planning Board had approved
the site plan contingent on the variance approval for the two signs versus one
sign.
Attorney Wright stated that in a mercantile zone you
are allowed to have one ground sign of 100 SF but due to the entrances being
off two roads they would like a variance to have two signs that will each be 49
SF. They will not exceed the total
square footage allowed in the code but need a variance for the two signs. Mr.
Wright told the Board that they were looking at the signed and approved site
plan and the signs were noted on the plans but the approval was contingent on
the Zoning Board’s approval of the sign variance.
Discussion followed on:
1)
the
granting of sign variances – the Board considers the amount of property that is
available and the need for the signs
2)
the
illumination of the signs – Mr. Ekstrom said the back of the letters of the
sign will be illuminated
3)
there
will not be an entrance from Route 60 during phase I of this project
4)
the
signs will be put up during the time when the shell of the building will go up
5)
the
church does own the property
6)
both
signs will go in during phase I
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE TWO
7)
the
signs will satisfy the phase II requirements – the signage might be changed in
phase III
8)
they
will have only one driveway for the first phase
Attorney Wright reviewed the five criteria for area
variances in section 267B of the Town Law.
Secretary Pierce stated that the neighbors were
notified and there was no written response.
There were no neighbors present and Mr. Woodbury had not had any
response from neighbors.
Pat Martonis asked if they had considered any other
methods for the signage. Mr. Ekstrom
said they had considered one sign but being that Route 60 was such a main road
and since they would eventually have a driveway on Route 60 they would like the
two signs. Because you cannot see the
sign on Route 380 from Route 60 you would not know what the building was.
Attorney Wright asked if having a sign on Route 60
without having an entry would potentially create a safety hazard. He suggested
that the sign be put up at the time the driveway was put in. He said the Board
is allowed to impose any reasonable conditions on the granting of the area
variances and that would certainly be a reasonable condition. Mr. Ekstrom stated that would be fine. When asked by John Merchant how much land
they have, Mr. Ekstrom stated they have 35 acres.
Attorney Wright explained that because there was no
coordinated SEQR review and the Planning Board reviewed the long form
environmental form at their last meeting and made the determination that this
project would not have a significant adverse environmental impact, therefore
made a negative declaration prior to taking any action, this Board can adopt
the findings of the Planning Board or do another complete review and make their
own determination. The signs were
included on the plan and were considered by the Planning Board in its review.
Mr. Wright suggested that this Board adopt the findings of the Planning
Board.
Motion made by Pat Martonis, seconded by John
Merchant to adopt the SEQR review of the Planning Board for the Northgate
Church on County Route 380 and NYS Route 60.
Carried. Ayes-7 Noes-0 Absent-0
Motion made by John Merchant, seconded by Dave
Remington to approve the variance for a second sign versus the allowed one sign
for the Northgate Church at County Route 380 and NYS Route 60 with the
condition that the second sign would not go up until the driveway off Route 60
was in. Both signs will be 49 SF. The Code Enforcement Officer would oversee
the conditions.
Carried. Ayes-7 Noes-0 Absent-0
Chairman Hoglin opened the public hearing for
Nicholas Ferreri (Tanglewood Manor) 560 Fairmount Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY for
the renewal of the special use permit for Memory Garden.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE THREE
David Stapleton, Attorney for Nicholas Ferreri and
Tanglewood Manor, requested the renewal of the special use permit. The code requires the renewal of the special use
permit every two years.
Mr. Stapleton stated there were a couple of items
that the neighbors were concerned with when the applicant came in last
month. The garbage pick up was a
concern and also a stop sign at the entrance of the parking lot. He told the
Board that both of those concerns have been addressed. A copy of the letter
from the waste hauling company indicating they were going to change their time
for the collection of the garbage was given to the Board and the stop sign has
been installed. Memory Gardens has been up and running for some time and there
have been no complaints.
Kathy Hedstrand asked if there were any conditions
on the approval of this special use permit.
Mr. Woodbury stated that he read the minutes and there were no
conditions on the approval.
Attorney Stapleton said if the Board had it in its
authority to waive the two-year renewal they would appreciate that
consideration and asked to extent it out for a period of time. They were told the two-year renewal was in
case something changed for the business.
The neighbors were notified and the Town did not
receive any written response.
Shawn Malay, 45 Gifford Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, stated he did not see the
stop sign up as of right now. Brad
Lawson stated the sign was up and Rick Keefer said he had seen the sign.
Motion made by Ang Cimo, seconded by Dave Remington,
to approve the renewal of the special use permit for Memory Gardens for Nick
Ferreri at 560 Fairmount Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY.
Carried. Ayes-7 Noes-0 Absent-0
Mr. Woodbury said the present policy is that the
Town does not notify the applicant of the renewal but future policy will be to
try to get them noted.
Chairman Hoglin reopened the public hearing for Nicholas
Ferreri (Tanglewood Manor), 560 Fairmount Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY for a
special use permit for senior housing with 24 units for independent living.
Attorney Stapleton again addressed the Board on
behalf of Mr. Ferreri. It was his understanding
that the Board adjourned any determination on this request to enable the
neighbors and Mr. Ferreri to meet and to discuss any concerns they had and also
to allow the Board and the Planning Board to tour the grounds. It was his
understanding there were Board members that did tour the back areas of the
property. Mr. Ferreri did meet with 6 or 7 of the neighbors and a couple of
councilmen from the Town Board. The
issues that were raised were the same issues raised at the meeting such as the
location of the driveway and the lighting.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE FOUR
Mr. Ferreri told the Board members as well as the
neighbors that they would look into what they could possibly do to alter the
location of the driveway from coming in on the north end of the property. They have done that and Mr. Carroll is here
to address the issue. Mr. Stapleton
said the expense of putting in that driveway is very high so they do not
anticipate that can be done. They cannot move the driveway to the east side of
the property. The lighting is extremely reduced compared even to the standards
of minimum lighting. Twenty feet out from the light they will have less than
1/10 of a candle.
Mr. James Carroll, Asterhill Planning and Developing
Services, reviewed:
1)
the
lighting – he presented specifications on the lighting – there is low level
lighting to get the residents into the building from their car and around the
edges of the building where there would be pedestrian traffic – the other
lighting is to access the site and they
will use a residential lamppost that they would probably propose be at a 15
foot height – it will be 20’ to 25’ off the road – they will be spaced 25’
apart and will be four to six lamps coming out of the driveway and then
footlights for the paths – it will be enough to identify the entrance but will
not spill over into the street – there are some light posts already there – there
will be a sign on the lamppost
2)
the
amount of traffic - he reviewed the
studies he presented to the Board from the Institute for Traffic Engineers,
Federal Highway Authority guidelines and NYS DOT – they all support senior
housing will not generate any more traffic than single family housing – a
project like this will probably generate 40 % less traffic than a single family
sub-division
3)
the
housing will be for 55 years and over or disabled – Mr. Ferreri said if someone
comes that is under 55 and they need a
handicapped facility they would be able to come into this facility
This project is meant to conpliment Tanglewood
Manor. They will not be renting to families with children. Mr. Ferreri said his commitment if for 24
units and he would not build any more.
It is geared to people who have sold their homes want to “age in place”
with no fees.
Mr. Carroll said he did a survey in the County for
senior housing for another project. The County well serves the low housing
income seniors (60% or less of the average medium income) and also the high
end (120% of the AMI). There is a population in the County and the
State where people with 70% or 80 % of the AMI are totally being overlooked and
are having to spent 50 % of there income on housing. This project addresses
that population that has been totally missed.
Ang Cimo asked Mr. Ferreri what his target rent
would be. Mr. Ferreri said he cannot
say but they will be competitive and affordable. Mr. Ferreri said that he
thinks the cost of this project will be approximately $1.6 million but that
does depend on what they get into when they construct it. He stated that they
have always done everything high level but affordable.
Pat Martonis asked if the site plans have been
reviewed and approved. Attorney Wright
told the Board they have been in front of the Planning Board for a sketch plan
because there is no reason to take it in
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE FIVE
front of the Planning Board for a full presentation
prior to it having approval from the
Zoning Board. It would be a waste of their money to complete their plans and
take it to the Planning Board. Rick
Keefer asked if the neighbors could address issues at the Planning Board. Attorney Wright said the issues are very
much the same. The Planning Board will look for other things as well as the
protection of the neighborhood, buffers, lighting and traffic.
John Merchant said that he reviewed the items the
Board asked for at the last meeting such as the tree buffer and the fence around
the pond but did not see them on the plans.
Mr. Carroll said they would present those to the Planning Board. Attorney Wright asked why they did not
present those to the Zoning Board since they had to demonstrate this project
does not alter the character of the neighborhood and aesthetics are something
this Board needs to consider. Mr.
Carroll said they had a dense tree buffer and they agreed that if it were
requested they would add additional evergreen buffers into the heave mass of
plantings as a condition of the approval. Mr. Carroll stated the plans were not
to scale.
Attorney Wright asked how much of the property to
the west of the driveway they own and control.
Mr. Carroll said right now they have 41 feet from the corner of the
building to the north of the easterly property line. They have 20 feet from the residential lots. There is also a
County right-of-way for a sewer easement.
Mr. Carroll said that when they explored an
alternative entrance and the cost would be 10 times more. The preliminary
estimate of the cost for the alternative driveway would have been $220,000 to
$250,000 compared to the $20,000 to $25,000 for the one shown on the plans.
They have soils that are highly unstable and would have to put in a bridge.
Kathy Hedstrand said she would have a safety issue
with putting the alternative driveway through that area because of the children
in the area and asked if they had any other options. Mr. Carroll said since Mr.
Ferreri did not own the other lots they did not have any.
Rick Keefer asked if they could have the cost of the
alternative driveway in writing for the record. Pat Martonis asked about the
traffic studies. They were presented to
the Board at the last ZBA meeting. Mr.
Carroll said he would also provide the letter from a traffic engineer to the
Town.
John Merchant said they he expected to see the tree
buffers and the fences and gates on the plans.
Mr. Ferreri said they will certainly do that and would give the Board
contingencies on what they want. They need the ZBA approval before they go to
the next level.
Kathy Hedstrand asked, since the traffic study was
based on specific senior housing and traffic is big issue for the residents in
the area, if Mr. Ferreri will have an established application process for the housing. Mr. Ferreri stated his goal is 55 years and
over but if someone comes in that is not 55 years old and needs handicapped
accessibility they will consider them.
If they are not handicapped they will have to be 55 years or older.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE SIX
Attorney Wright reviewed section 146-9 of the code.
It stated apartments; multiple dwellings and group houses are allowed in
residential zoning as a special permit use.
Section 146-64 C list the criteria to be considered to grant a special
use permit.
Secretary Pierce stated neighbors were notified and
no written responses were received by the Town Clerk’s office.
Lee John, Merlin Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, stated that he was
disappointed they were unable to move the driveway from Gifford. He had concerns that there was nothing
showing many aspects of the planning.
There were no buffers shown and the plan is not to scale. He has no issues with the existing business
and the concept but this is “plopping” a business into the middle a residential
neighborhood. Mr. John said he was
concerned with the fact that Mr. Ferreri said anyone could live in the
residential housing, the traffic, no sidewalks or curbs and the safety issues.
Brian Jeffrey, Gifford Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, showed where his house was
located and the direction he thought the traffic would go, which would increase
the traffic on both Gifford and Merlin Avenues.
Shawn Malay, Gifford Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, told the Board he had
concerns about the additional traffic, maintaining the integrity of the
residential neighborhood, the property values and the buffers.
Pat Martonis asked if any of the neighbors had asked
a realtor how this would affect the property values. She has concerns with lack of documentation on both sides and
agrees with John that she expected to see the requested items shown on the
plans. Rick Keefer said he read about a
court case that determined that they did not necessarily need a traffic study
and could based their decision on the neighbors comments but he felt that it
would help to have the documentation.
There was discussion on the traffic light the NYS
DOT would be putting on Warwick. The
neighbors did not feel that is where is should go. Mr. Ferreri stated that was
a DOT decision and they were the experts.
Mr. Ferreri said that decisions should be based on studies done by
experts.
Mr. Malay said that the Dot did not have prior
knowledge that the community was going to double when they made their decision
to put the traffic light on Warwick. Mr. Ferreri said they had not presented the additional developments in the area.
Pat Martonis said that she was looking at what the
neighbor’s issues were. They would like is to see the driveway moved, to see
specifications, they had concerns with no sidewalks and curbs (which create a
safety hazard), the traffic, the number of units, the property values and the
trees not mature for the buffer zone.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE SEVEN
Mr. Malay asked, because the project borders the
Village of Celoron, if there are special requirement that need to be met. Attorney Wright stated that the Chautauqua
County Planning Board would review and offer input. They do not have approval
authority but the Planning Board cannot act until they have that input.
Mr. Lee told the Board that the drawing was the same
as the Board saw before and there in no indication of the changes. Because Mr.
Ferreri stated at the neighborhood meeting that anyone could live there it
changes the whole scope of the project. He also asked about the drainage that
was not shown on the plan.
Mr. Malay placed on record a letter from Richard
Slagle, Merlin Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY stating his opposition to this
project (see file “Tanglewood Manor zoning variance for senior housing”).
Connie Kennedy, Merlin Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, stated they have lived in
the neighborhood over 28 years. She
said that the project will be beautiful but why not take the project somewhere
by itself. They have received two
letters from Mr. Lawson asking to purchase their property but did feel the
offer what the property was worth. The second letter said that Mr. Ferreri had
acquired six properties when he had actually only acquired two.
Don Ellis, Gifford Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, stated he has lived in the
neighborhood for 57 years. He now has
two grandchildren living there and they will walk the street everyday so he had
concerns about the safety. He works for an independent living center and works
with elderly and handicapped people everyday. They do have a lot of services
and have a lot of transportation in and out everyday. He is concerned with the additional traffic. He stated there is a
need for the facility and handicapped apartments but those people are generally
on Medicaid or Medicare and do not have a lot for the rent. He also had
concerns about the buffers.
Mr. Lee read a portion of Mr. Slagle’s letter. Pat Martonis asked if the neighbors would
feel more secure if the statement was made that it was going to be senior
citizen housing and for seniors over the age of “such and such”. The neighbors said they would not because
they have problems with the driveway and the doubling of the residents in the
area and they stated the problem has become “the project”.
Kathy Hedstand asked how many community members are
now within the two streets. Mr. Malay
told her there were 35 households and that he thought 95% of the households
signed the petition (see file “Tanglewood Manor zoning variance for senior
housing”). Kathy and Pat reviewed the
petition signed by 26 people with 18 different addresses on the petition.
The Board recessed at 9:25PM.
The Board reconvened at 9:35 PM.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE EIGHT
Mr. Stapleton asked the Board to refocused their
attention on the facts, as they perceive them to be. They are dealing with a 24 unit senior housing project that will
be handicapped accessible. The unit
will be 1 and 2 units with approximately 30 people living there and will not
double the population of the neighborhood because it will not be equivalent to
24 single family homes with two to five people. The statistics used nationally indicate at the most they will end
up with approximately 18 cars within the parking lot permanently. It is highly offensive to say that Mr.
Ferreri has been lying to anybody because everything has been very up front
during this entire transaction. He has met with the neighbors. There have been
many discussions about the purchase of property and Mr. Ferreri has offered the
assessed value or higher to each of the property owners and he did have six
properties under contract. If they feel
that their property is under assessed they should contact the proper taxing
authority. They have not heard of
anyone listing their property with anyone at a specific dollar amount.
Attorney Wright said that the Board’s consideration
is under the section of code that was read and the determination that this
project will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The purchasing or non-purchasing of property
is irrelevant to the determination.
Mr. Carroll reviewed the number of residents and the
number of cars based on the studies.
The driveway has a 20’ to 25’ buffer on either side of the driveway. Attorney Wright asked if there would be
occupational limits on the apartments and if three people could occupy them or
would it be limited to two. Mr. Ferreri
said it was his intention that it would be one or two people in the apartments.
Restrictions can be placed in the lease.
Mr. Lee stated again it was stated that anyone can
live in these apartments and that will in fact change the neighborhood.
Motion made by Rick Keefer, seconded by Dave
Remington to table this application because the SEQR encompasses both this
project and the next project for area setbacks variances for the day care
facility and cannot be done without environmental review and until they look at
the other project.
Attorney Wright explained that the long form EAF was
prepared and given to the Town that encompasses the entire site, which include
the 24 unit apartment building and the day car facility. The environmental cannot be determined or
reviewed separate from one another. If
they want to separate the projects they would need to have the EAF redone.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE NINE
Chairman Hoglin opened the public hearing for Nicholas
Ferreri (Tanglewood Manor), 14 Merlin Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY for area
variances for setbacks for a parking lot and building setbacks for a day care
facility.
Mr. Stapleton presented plans for the day care center. Mr. Carroll reviewed the plans with the Board. He said they had presented a sketch plan to the Planning Board. The Planning Board suggested they modify their plans or they would have to come before the Zoning Board for setback variances. Mr. Carroll explained the variance they were applying for. It was determined that Merlin was the back of the proposed building at the Planning Board meeting. Discussion followed.
Attorney Wright reviewed the six variances that have
been identified with his conversations with Attorney Stapleton.
1)
for
the front parking lot which is the three spaces toward Gifford the required setback is 30 feet and they are
requesting a variance to 14’ 11”
2)
on
the north side of that parking lot the requirement is 25 feet and they are
looking for a variance to put it right on the property line for 0 setback
3)
on
the building there is a 25 foot requirement and they are requesting 0 setback
4)
on
the west parking lot (on the north side of the seven car parking lot) there is
a 25 foot requirement and they are looking to take that to 0
5)
on
the west side of that parking lot there is a 25 foot setback requirement and
they are asking to take that to 11 feet
6)
on
the south side of the seven car parking lot there is a 25 foot requirement and they are asking to
take that to 20’ 2”
The applicant withdrew the sidewalk crossing to the
residential lot, which would have been a use variance issue, and take it around
to the other side of the property. There would be 6 individual lot line set
back variances and no use variance.
The other issue Mr. Wright identified was under
146-24 of the code. There is a 20-foot vegetative buffer requirement between
the neighborhood business development and residential property. He interprets that it would have to be no
the neighborhood business zone and he did not see that in the plan. Mr. Wright said the Board could treat the 20
foot required vegetative buffer as an additional area variance.
Attorney Stapleton stated in reality they would end
up with a buffer of 40 feet on property owned by Mr. Ferreri and there is an
additional setback of 5 feet. If anyone were to build on the next residential
lot there would be 45 feet of buffer instead of the 25 feet required. They
would guarantee as a condition there would be no building on that lot and they
would put up a 20-foot buffer of trees.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE TEN
John Armstrong, Merlin Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, said he was informed when he
was before the Zoning Board several years ago that the Zoning Board’s main
purpose was to keep the character of the neighborhood. In his personal
experience with Tanglewood Manor he finds them to be positively exemplary in
their actions and they do a wonderful job and does not have anything against
the day care center for senior citizens.
He has been in the neighborhood for many years and there is a lot of
commercial activity on Fairmount Avenue, however, Gifford and Merlin Avenues
are residential neighborhoods. They are
changing the character of the neighborhood and he feels there are other options
that could be addressed. As for the
specific area variance for his property line he request the Board deny the
application and keep the nature of this neighborhood as a residential
neighborhood.
Rick Keefer asked Mr. Armstrong if they keep the
character of the building residential would he be in favor of the approval. Mr.
Armstrong said creating a day care center changes the nature of the
neighborhood because it is a commercial building not a residential home. Rick
asked if it were the activity instead of the aesthetics of the neighborhood
that Mr. Armstrong objected to Mr. Armstrong stated it was the changing of the
nature of the neighborhood and the charter of the Board is to decide if this
will cause an undesirable change to the neighborhood.
Mike Johnson, Merlin Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY was sworn
in. He had concerns with the safety of his
children, the business atmosphere, no buffers and the changing of the nature of
the neighborhood. He has lived in the
area for two years and the neighborhood has been a quite residential
neighborhood. He purchased his home
because it was residential and probably would not have purchased the home if
the day care facility were there.
Shawn Malay, Gifford Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, stated that currently the
property boundary has a 12-foot fence that keeps the commercial side of
Fairmount Avenue on the commercially zoned side of the residents. If the Board grants the variances they would
decrease the size of the neighborhood and decrease the value of the life style in the neighborhood. He asked the Board maintain the codes as
they are written and not allow the additional variances.
Attorney Stapleton addressed the Board and gave the
Board some more facts about the property.
The building is approximately 3850 SF and will look much like a
residence. There will be parking for 10
vehicles, three on Gifford and seven on Merlin. There will be up to 20 people that will come into the day care
property with two or three staff members.
There will be one bus in the morning and one bus in the evening. The hours of operation will be limited to
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM so it will be much quieter than a residential area. This proposal has nothing in terms of usage
of a residential area and there is no building in a residential area. There is a 40-foot buffer for the two lots
that Mr. Ferreri owns and will not build on. He will guarantee that there will
be no selling of that property or conveyances of that property independent of
the other property. Under the current zoning there could be a house and
building within 30 feet of each other. The zoning provides for a setback of 30
feet between the two areas and they are giving 45 feet. Mr. Ferreri will put up
whatever trees they want on the residential area so all they will see is trees.
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE ELEVEN
Mr. Stapleton requested the Board grant the areas
variances because all the activity is within the neighborhood business district
and this is a use by right in that district.
Ang Cimo asked if the parking will be adequate and
Mr. Ferreri said it would because they would utilize parking from areas they
now have at Tanglewood Manor that is right across the street. Mr. Ferreri said
there might be two times that the bus comes and goes in the morning and
evening.
Rick said that the lights were a concern and the
code states the facilities should have their lights off ½ hour after the close
of business. Mr. Ferreri stated his building will look like a house but he did
not have a drawing.
Steve Hoglin made a motion, seconded by Pat Martonis
that the Board enter into executive session at 10:25 PM.
Carried. Ayes-7 Noes-0 Absent-0
The Board reconvened at 10:55 PM.
The neighbors had no other comments at this time.
Attorney Wright reviewed the criteria for the area
variances noting:
1) the neighbors argued that the project would alter the character
of the neighborhood and the
applicant stated it would not
2)
the
applicant stated that the variances are the minimum variances that can be
requested to
get this on the property, the applicant has not looked at any other
property,
3)
the
substantially of an area variance is determined on a per variance bases
4)
if
the proposed action will have an adverse effect on the impact of physical
or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood is a safety
criteria
5)
if
the alleged difficulty is self-created which is relevant to the decision but
not necessarily
preclude the granting of an area variance
Attorney Wright asked if they had a drawing for the
day care building. They just have a footprint.
Brad Lawson said the description for the building is a one story,
residential in type with vinyl siding, residential windows and doors, a higher
peaked roof in the center portion of the building with a couple dormers and
other roofs coming off it. Mr. Ferreri
said the interior would be like a neighborhood with a country kitchen similar
to Memory Gardens.
Mike Johnson told the Board this building may look residential
but there is no home in the area with over 2000 SF or 10 parking spots.
Motion made by Dave Remington, seconded by Pat
Martonis to table to table this application due to the fact they do not have
enough information to make a decision.
Carried. Ayes-7 Noes-0 Absent-0
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005
PAGE TWELVE
John Merchant said that he would like to see an
actual plan and a drawing of the building.
He does feel that the variances are excessive and asked if they could
revisit the site plan and look at the variances they requested. John said this is the first time the Board
has seen the plan for the day care facility. He said another issue is the need
for the ten parking spaces.
Mr. Ferreri said he would have to look at the cost
of the project. They know they have a community that does not want them to
expand in the senior housing area. He owns all of the 11 acres and right now he
can’t use the acres. He is paying taxes and will have to rethink that to.
Attorney Stapleton asked if they were looking for a
picture or architectural drawings. Mr. Stapleton said for purposes of the
record he would like it to reflect that these are split lots and that
traditionally when you have zoning lines that go through properties that divide
properties into different zoning district the courts have allowed the
setbacks. Some zoning ordinances and
some case laws have built in exemptions and if not the variances are
granted.
Rick Keefer asked if the Board members could get
some of the information on those cases.
Mr. Stapleton said that Attorney Wright should review that not the Board
but Mr. Woodbury could give the Board what they need.
Mr. Armstrong asked what the minimum square footage
is to build on in the Town of Ellicott. Randy said that would depend on the
setbacks. Mr. Armstrong said then they
could build on that lot.
Attorney Wright asked the Board what additional
information they would like to see.
They would like a rendition of the building, the adjoining lots shown
and the buffer zone to scale for the day car center. For the senior housing they would like to see tree buffers,
fences around the pond, lighting, property lines and the actual driveway. Pat
said she would like to see specific information and maybe the neighbors should
go to a realtor and get some facts to show if this could decrease the value of
their property. The applicant will also
go a realtor. Pat asked if the applicant could look for an alternative for the
driveway.
Mr. Ferreri said that he will not bring the
residential housing project in again for awhile but will bring the day care
facility back next month. Ang asked if
they have looked at the other property for the day care facility and Mr.
Ferreri said if he did that he would be looking at a use variance because it
would be in a residential zone.
Attorney Wright told the applicant they need to
revise the EAF if they are going to revise the project.
Motion made by Rick Keefer, seconded by Pat Martonis
to adjourn the meeting at 11:25 PM.
Carried. Ayes-7 Noes-0 Absent-0
______________________________
Valerie Pierce, Secretary