May 12, 2008                 

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
May 12, 2008.

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
                     Karen Liebi                  Member
                     David Hess                   Member
                     Vivian I. Mason           Secretary
                     Robert Germain           Attorney
                     David Balcer                Town Planner

MOTION made by Deputy Chairman Mangan that the Minutes of the meeting of
April 14, 2008 be accepted. Motion was seconded by Mrs. Liebi. Unanimously
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. Hess. Unanimously carried.

OLD BUSINESS:

Case #1294 - Use Variance - Mei Rong Guo, 8182 Oswego Road (tax map #067-01-
02.01):

The applicant is seeking a use variance. The proposed land use activity is not
permitted in the zone district. The applicant is seeking a building permit to add a
second floor living space and converting the existing first floor living space into a
nail salon, thus creating a mixed-use building. This parcel already has a use
variance to operate a salon.

(Adjourned at the April 14, 2008 meeting)

Chris Vandera of Ianuzzi and Romans P.C., representing the applicant, stated that
currently Mr. Guo is using the residence as a beauty salon. He would like to use the
downstairs for a salon and put on a second story to live in. They shouldn’t need
any more parking.

Chairman Fennhahn said if the business increased, they would need more parking
spaces.

Mr. Vandera said there would probably only be two more employees.

Mr. Young pointed out that the standards of proof for a use variance are very difficult
to prove.

Mr. Vandera said he was not aware of the standards of proof and asked that the case be
adjourned.

Chairman Fennhahn advised the applicant that the standards must be addressed and
proved. If he fails just one standard of proof the request will be denied. He asked Mr.
Guo if he understood what he was saying, as the applicant has difficulty with the
English language. Mr. Guo said he understood.

Chairman Fennhahn adjourned this case to June 9, 2008.

NEW BUSINESS:

Chairman Fennhahn asked the board members if they had visited the site and all said
they had.

Case #1298 -VARIANCE - Barbara D. Wicks, 9612 Horseshoe Island Road (tax
map #013-01-26):

The applicant is seeking a variance to reduce the front yard setback from 75 feet to 60
feet for the purpose of installing an accessory structure detached (shed), greater than
100 square feet, per Town Ordinance Number 230-13A(4)

The public hearing notice was read by the secretary.

Melissa Del Guerico, the attorney representing the applicant, presented an updated
survey to the Board. She explained that Ms. Wicks had obtained a building permit and
had constructed a shed last fall. At the time she did not know she had a setback 
requirement.

Attorney Del Gueroco addressed the standards of proof: 

1. She doesn’t believe the shed will detract from the character of the
neighborhood.
2. The shed is already built. Otherwise it would have to be moved.
3. She doesn’t feel the variance request is substantial. 
4. She believes there will be no negative impact on the neighborhood.
5. Because the applicant had obtained the building permit, they didn’t feel
the variance was self-created, but the shed was not built where is was
shown on the survey, thus the need variance is really self-created.

Chairman Fennhahn asked the Town Planner, Mr. Balcer, if he had any comments and
he had none.

Chairman Fennhahn asked if there were any further comments or questions and there
were none. Chairman Fennhahn asked for those in favor and those opposed to granting
the variance and there were none.

Chairman Fennhahn closed the hearing.

MOTION was made by Mr. Hess in Case #1298 that the variance be granted with the
condition that it be constructed in substantial compliance with Exhibit “A”, a survey
dated February 19, 2008. Motion was seconded by Mrs. Liebi.

Roll call: Mrs. Liebi - in favor
Deputy Chairman Mangan - in favor
Mr. Young - in favor
Mr. Hess - in favor
Chairman Fennhahn - in favor Unanimously carried.

The variance is granted.

There being no further business, Chairman Fennhahn adjourned the meeting at 7:50
P.M. 


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