MINUTES OF MEETING                       

                                             September 11, 2006

The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Clay, County of Onondaga, State of New York was held at the Town Hall of Clay, New York on September 11, 2006.

Chairman Fennhahn called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. and upon the roll being called the following were:

PRESENT:  Arthur Fennhahn        Chairman
                     Charles V. Mangan    Deputy Chairman 
                     Eugene Young             Member
                     Harold Henty              Member
                     Vivian I. Mason          Secretary
                     Mark Grobosky          Attorney
                     Cindy Heid Assistant  Commissioner of Planning and Development

ABSENT:    Karen Liebi                  Member

Chairman Fennhahn asked everyone to give thought to today, the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy, and the lives that were lost during the terrorist attack on the United States.

MOTION made by Mr. Mangan that the Minutes of the meeting of August 14, 2006 be accepted.  Motion was seconded by Mr. Henty. Carried. 

MOTION made by Chairman Fennhahn that for the purpose of the New York State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) all new actions tonight will be determined to be Type II actions, and will be given a negative declaration, unless otherwise advised by our attorney. Motion was seconded by Mr. Mangan. Carried.

OLD BUSINESS:

NONE.

NEW BUSINESS:

Chairman Fennhahn announced that he had asked the Board members if they have visited the sites for each case and they all said they had.

Case #1235 - INTERPRETATION & SPECIAL PERMIT - Scott Duerr, 3958 Maider Road:

The applicant is seeking an interpretation of Section 230-23 of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Clay to determine if the current nonconforming use is a legal nonconforming use and for a Special Permit for a home occupation to allow subject premises to be used for firewood processing and sales.

Zoning Board Attorney Mark Grobosky stated for the record that he has known Mr. Duerr and has represented his father, and the mother’s estate.

Attorney Steve Primo stated that they are seeking an interpretation of the zoning ordinance.  The present use on the property is a legal non conforming use and they want to know if it is considered a legal non conforming use. He asked that the request for a Special Permit for a home occupation be withdrawn.

Chairman Fennhahn advised that the applicant needs to prove it’s a legal non conforming use.

Mr. Mangan and Mr. Young said the Board needs to know when the firewood business started.

Attorney Primo explained that the business was started Scott Duerr’s father. Since then they have new machinery that is much quieter than the old equipment. He produced pictures taken in the 70's of their operation. He feels this is a classic legal non conforming use on this property.

Commissioner Heid noted that the Town code in 1978 allows farm products in the agricultural districts.

Chairman Fennhahn asked if the Duerrs had been bringing in wood since 1961 to cut up for firewood and Mr. Duerr said yes, from people’s back yards, from clearing lots etc.

Attorney Primo asked Mr. Duerr how long he has lived at 3958 Maider Road and he said since February 2006, but he has been involved in the business for many years working with his father. He began working with his father when he was seven to eight years old. His father was doing it even before that. Attorney Primo asked Mr. Duerr to estimate when his father started the business and he said they moved there in 1955 and his dad was in the construction business and he sold wood in the winter to earn a living when he couldn’t do construction work.

Mr. Mangan was interested in how the 1955 time line compared to the code.
Mr. Young asked what the actual business was and Attorney Primo said the processing, storage and sales of firewood. Mr. Young asked how many cords of wood were sold a year and Mr. Duerr said 400 to 500 cords a year. It is strictly delivery of the wood. One trip per week day, and weekends two to four trips a day. Mr. Young then asked how long the business has been this size and Mr. Duerr said since 1975 or 1976.

Mr. Henty asked how many cords of wood are on the premises and Mr. Duerr said 800 cords, 400 to 500 are aging. In the year 2000 they started using a processor instead of a chain saw.

Chairman Fennhahn asked if there were any comments or questions.

Penny Gresovic a neighbor who has lived there forty years said that she has no objection to Mr. Duerr’s firewood business that it is not intrusive.

Nancy Fergerson, also of Maider Road, has lived there for 65 years and that the firewood
business has been there every since the Duerrs have lived there.

Earl Harke said that Mr. Duerr moved his wood processing in the late 70's then moved back in the mid 90's.

George Gresovic stated that the firewood business had continued at Mr. Duerr’s through those years.

Lucine Farling of Maider Road stated that she has lived there since 1947 and the business has always been there from 1955 to the present.

Beverly Snow of Jackson Road said she has lived there for 45 years and that Mr. Duerr’s father conducted the business all these years and that they keep the property neat.

James Knight, who lives almost across from the Duerrs, said the business has gotten bigger and that he is trying to sell property but the buyers are discouraged by the firewood business. The logs are delivered by tractor trailer.

Robert Warner of Maider Road said he knows the business has been there at least from 1968.

Jim Hart of Jerusalem Drive, who owns property on Maider said he feels the firewood is an eyesore.

Mr. Mangan commented that he feels that a time line back to 1955 has been established.
Chairman Fennhahn said the Board needs time to review and evaluate whether the firewood business is a legal non conforming us.

Chairman Fennhahn adjourned the hearing to October 9, 2006.
Case #1241 - VARIANCE - Robert LaBrec, 8887 Henry Clay Boulevard (Tax
map#031-01-29.1:

The applicant is seeking a variance to reduce the front yard highway setback from 115 feet to 85 feet and the south side yard setback from 25 feet to 10 feet for the purpose of constructing an addition and garage.

Robert and Elaine LaBrec would like to put on a sun porch and a garage, but because the house doesn’t run with the property lines, they need variances.

Mr. LaBrec addressed standards of proof:

1. They feel the proposed construction will not be undesirable change to the
character of the neighborhood. There is a tree line on the north boundary and
a stone quarry on the west side, and the neighbors on the south have no
objections to the structures they are proposing to build.
2. Because of the way the house is placed on the lot and the way the boundary lines
run on an angle, they feel there is no other feasible method to build the sun
porch and garage without a variance.
3. They believe the variances are substantial.
4. They believe there will be no adverse physical or environmental impact on the
neighborhood.
5. The applicant stated that the need for the variance is self-created

Chairman Fennhahn asked Assistant Commissioner Heid if she had any comments and she had none.

Chairman Fennhahn asked if there were any further questions and there were none. He asked for those in favor of granting the variance and Mr. Madison of 8881 Henry Clay Boulevard, said he had no objection. Chairman Fennhahn asked for those opposed to granting the variance and there were none.

Chairman Fennhahn closed the hearing.

MOTION was made by Mr. Henty in case #1241 that the variances be granted, with the
condition that construction be in substantial compliance with Exhibit “A”. Motion was
seconded by Mr. Young.

Roll call: Mrs. Liebi - absent
Deputy Chairman Mangan - in favor
Mr. Young - in favor 
Mr. Henty - in favor
Chairman Fennhahn - in favor Carried.

Chairman Fennhahn confirmed that the variances were granted. 

Case #1242 - VARIANCE - Niagara Car Wash, LLC. 3567 and 3571 State Route 31
(Tax map #019-02-28.1 & 019-02-29.1):

The applicant is seeking a variance to reduce the following: Lot One area from 160,000 square feet to 81,968 square feet building line width from 400 feet to 161 feet, one side yard from 50 feet to 31 feet, and total side yard from 100 feet to 96 feet and Lot Two area from 160,000 square feet to 63,452 square feet, building line width from 400 feet to 136 feet, one side yard from 50 feet to 26 feet, one side setback from 50 feet to 37 feet, total side yards from 100 feet to 63 feet, accessory structure front yard from 115 feet to 98 feet, and west side perimeter landscape strip from 20 feet to 0 feet, for the purpose of building an automatic self serve car wash.

Zoning Board Attorney Grobosky made note of the fact that he had represented Mr. Erickson when he bought his property.

Hal Romans, Licensed Land Surveyor, represented the applicant. He gave a brief overview of the properties. There is a small frame house on one parcel, and on the balance of the property is a Meineke Car Care Center on the other one.

Mr. Romans addressed standards of proof:

1. They feel that since the car wash is a vehicle business it will be in keeping with the
character of the neighborhood. 
2. There is no other feasible method to build the car wash since the lot is not a
standard size.
3. They do not believe the variance is substantial.
4. They feel the car wash will not have a negative impact. The drainage needs to be
taken care of, but they will be putting in a sewer lateral and other parcels in the
area can tie in, making it possible for them to change over from a septic system,
thus improving the neighborhood.
5. They feel that due to the new zoning code, the need for the variances is not
entirely self-created

Chairman Fennhahn on the advise of Attorney Grobosky noted that a Special Permit was
granted to the Meineke Car Care Center in December of 2003, and a buffering variance in June of 2004.

Hal Romans explained that Mr. Erickson’s sister used the small house on the property for an embroidery business, but it didn’t succeed. He had been told by the Town that if the house became unused that he should close the driveway and use a common drive for any future development. He further explained that Niagara Car Wash wants to own the property so Mr. Erickson wants to keep the property as two parcels.

John Munch, of Gary, PA, explained that in order to get financing from the bank, they must own the property.

Mr. Romans further explained that their plan is to re-zone and split the property in half. The Meineke Car Care Center was built before the Town’s new zoning code.

Mr. Henty asked if they could move the building back and Mr. Romans said the problem with the property is the width. Re zoning and reconfiguring the non-conforming lots would allow them latitude with the required set back. They would be removing the small house. Parking and the vacuums would be where the house is now.

Chairman Fennhahn asked why they needed to be closer to Route 31 and Mr. Romans said so that the car wash would be seen. 

Mr. Henry asked if they could put the vacuums out back and Mr. Munch said that from a traffic flow standpoint, they are better placed out front. They will close the one driveway and share the other one. Mr. Henty asked how many bays there would be and Mr. Munch said three touch less bays. Mr. Henty then asked if they had checked into obtaining a 99 year lease and Mr. Munch said the problem with that is that this is a small business.

Doug Bell spoke, saying that if this property is developed by Niagara Car Wash, it will help the drainage for his property to the east.

Chairman Fennhahn asked Assistant Commissioner Heid if she had any comments and she had none.

Chairman Fennhahn asked if there were any further questions and there were none. He asked for those in favor of granting the variances and there were two, Mr. Erickson, who said he felt the property will be improved, plus they would be getting rid of the old house, and Doug Bell, who agreed for the same reasons. Chairman Fennhahn asked for those opposed to granting the variances and there were none.

Chairman Fennhahn adjourned the hearing to October 9, 2006.

Case #1244 - VARIANCE - Calvary Church, 103 Grampian Road (Tax map #104-03-
16.3:

The applicant is seeking a variance to reduce the side yard setback from 60 feet to 20 feet for the purpose of building a shed for the church.

Ken Lang, Pastor of the church, explained that while he was away the contractor, who assumed they had an approved building permit, built the shed, when in fact, they did not have an approved building permit.

Chairman Fennhahn asked the size of the shed and Pastor Lang said 14' X 18', 252 square feet.  Chairman Fennhahn asked about the concrete pad and Pastor Lang said it was an existing pad, a dumpster to the left of it. Chairman Fennhahn asked why they built the shed there and Pastor Lang replied that they wanted to utilize the existing concrete pad.

Mr. Mangan asked what was being built behind them and Pastor Lang said it was a garage.

Pastor Lang addressed standards of proof:

1. Because the shed is of nice quality, he feels it will not be an undesirable change
to the character of the neighborhood. 
1. They could have built it elsewhere, but the contractor built it while he was away. 
Because it is already built, any other feasible method would be costly.
2. The Pastor did not feel the variance is substantial.
3. Due to the structure, no water will be diverted to create any adverse impact on
the neighborhood. 
4. The applicant stated that the need for the variance is self-created

Chairman Fennhahn asked Assistant Commissioner Heid if she had any comments and she said she had no comment.

Chairman Fennhahn asked if there were any further questions and there were none. He asked for those in favor of granting the variance and Assistant Pastor John Carbone spoke in favor. 
Chairman Fennhahn asked for those opposed to granting the variance and there were none.

Chairman Fennhahn closed the hearing.

MOTION was made by Mr. Young in case #1244 that the variance be granted, with the
condition the variance be limited to the shed as it is now built and not be any larger than 14' x 18'.  Motion was seconded by Mr. Mangan.

Roll call: Mrs. Liebi - absent
Deputy Chairman Mangan - in favor
Mr. Young - in favor 
Mr. Henty - in favor
Chairman Fennhahn - in favor Carried.

Chairman Fennhahn confirmed that the variance is granted.

There being no further business, Chairman Fennhahn adjourned the meeting at 9:50 P.M. 



________________________________
Vivian I. Mason, Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town of Clay

                                                                   
Zoning Board Minutes Archive