HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-05-20 - BZA TOWN OF ULYSSES
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
MEETING & PUBLIC HEARING
5/20/2003
PRESENT : Chairman George Tselekis, Board Members Ken Christianson, Jim Hickey,
Carl Mann, and Joel Warren, Code Enforcement Officer Alex Rachun, Zoning Clerk
Karin Lanning.
ALSO PRESENT : Michael Addicott, John Benedict and attorney William Shaw,
representatives of the Trumansburg Golf Association, also Harry James, Kate Sinko, Jay
Hart, Marvin Mitterer and Larry Hardesty; Tim and Fran Maguire and Michael May,
their attorney, Marsha Keith and Paula Horrigan .
Chairman Tselekis called the meeting and the public hearing to order at 7 : 36 pm. The
purpose of the public hearing was to hear comments on an area variance requested by the
Trumansburg Golf Association for tax parcel 12 - 1 - 1 . 2 for the purpose of constructing a
machine storage and maintenance building less than 100 feet from an adjacent property
line, as is required by the Town of Ulysses Zoning Ordinance .
Bill Shaw asked if all the Board members had taken at least a brief look at the application
materials he submitted on behalf of the Golf Association . The Board generally answered
affirmatively. Shaw then stated this is the second application for a variance from the Golf
Association for this project; the first was denied. Shaw stated the Golf Association
considered where to construct the new building over the course of several months . The
building as proposed will eliminate at least one unsightly building on the Golf Course, it
will also protect both the Golf Association ' s equipment and residents ' views by putting
the equipment in a storage building, where it will not be visible to passers-by. Shaw
noted that the 100-foot setback requirement is unique to organizations like the Golf
Course; private residences and commercial institutions are only required to have between
15 and 35 -foot setbacks . Shaw noted also that the location selected is the one that will
affect the least neighbors . Shaw then explained the changes from the first variance
application, stating the proposed building site has been moved so that the building will be
50 feet from the nearest property line, that of the Maguire family. Additionally, the fuel
tanks will not be at the construction site, and will be built according to NYS DEC
regulations . Shaw next asked the assembled to note that the site will be landscaped both
with existing vegetation and new plantings so that only about 6 feet of building will
visible to neighbors on one side (the Keith family) , and the building will not be visible to
neighbors on the opposite side (the Maguire ' s) . Shaw stated the Planning Board has
approved the Site Plan with requirements for a full- screen wooden fence and a vegetative
buffer, both of which must be perpetually maintained; the Golf Club is also willing to
plant a second row of trees to supplement the required buffer, and would also be willing
to plant additional trees at the Golf Association ' s expense, on the Maguire property to
further reduce impacts on their property. Shaw concluded by stating the Golf Association
does not know of any environmental impacts that will result from the project, and has
considered the traffic issue, and concluded that traffic resulting from the project will not
result in a significant change, because materials are already brought in by the access road
that would serve the proposed building .
Mike Addicott presented and narrated a computerized visual presentation, with technical
assistance from Larry Hardesty. Addicott explained the setback from the nearest property
line has been increased from 40 feet to 50 feet by omitting and relocating a fuel tank and
shifting the construction site a few feet . The building will be a single-story; green and tan
building that will stand 15 feet high . Addicott explained the traffic to the site will consist
of a bi-annual or annual delivery by a larger truck, weekly stops by the sanitation truck,
which is a one-ton capacity truck, and 5 - 10 employee vehicles arriving and leaving daily.
The existing landscape of the area was shown, and Addicott explained how trees
bordering and existing on the Maguire property and a berm between the Golf Course
property and the Keith ' s property will help screen the building from these neighbors '
view, and then explained, with photos of the proposed site, that the building cannot be
moved any further away from the Maguire ' s property line because of an existing gravel
equipment path, existing irrigation lines , and an existing tee-box . Photos were also used
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
to give the assembled a picture of both the current and the planned layout of the site
including the construction site, means of ingress and egress, and landscaping.
Mr. Christianson asked what would happen to the gravel bed siet for the construction if
the variance is denied. Addicott explained the bed would then be used for storage of dry
goods including sand, top-dressing, gravel, and irrigation-pipe parts .
Chairman Tselekis opened the floor for comments from the public .
Attorney Michael May introduced himself, stating he is the Maguire ' s attorney. May
handed out a memorandum stating the variance should not be granted and supporting this
opinion on 5 points, as well as stating that the variance request has characteristics of a use
variance . May noted he was not sure whether or not a use variance request was also being
considered this evening; Chairman Tselekis stated no use variance is being sought. It was
also noted that the golf course ' s maintenance building is an allowable use .
May summarized and discussed his memorandum as follows : As you will see going
through the various criteria for why the variance should not be granted, the impact on the
character of the neighborhood, detriment to neighboring properties-which includes not
only the presence of the building but also the activities occurring there, with employees
coming and going, for what appears to be a majority of the year, at all hours of the day
and night. It sounds like the building will be the hub for all Golf Course machinery,
where equipment departs from each morning at the start of a shift; headlights from
employees traffic and the noise of machinery, which was compared at the hearing for the
previous area variance request from the Golf Course to the sound of several lawn mowers
all starting up at once. In essence, May stated the whole commercial nature of the
activities at and surrounding the proposed building will be detrimental to the character of
the Pennsylvania Avenue neighborhood, which is, certainly, a relatively quiet residential
area, quieter indeed than the other highways the Golf Course owns frontage on. The
current hub of activity appears to be on Halsey Street. May asked about the presence of
the wooden fence, noting this would be another wall even closer to his client ' s property
than the walls of the proposed building. May stated the exterior lighting of the building,
which is to be largely motion activated, will also be a nuisance to the Maguire ' s ; when
employees are at the site, it is very likely they will activate the lights .
May next asked if another location is possible, presenting a copy of the Town of Ulysses
tax map of some of the Golf Course property to show that there are other locations
available. May suggested constructing the proposed building where the Golf Association
has put in a new parking lot located off NYS Route 227 .
In regards to the substantial nature of the variance, May stated a 50-foot, or 50%
variation is sought; this is very much a substantial variation.
May next presented photos taken from his clients' property, stating the site will very
much be visible from the Maguire ' s property.
In regards to the difficulty being self-created, May stated the Board should rather
consider whether or not there really is a difficulty; the Golf Course has existed as is for a
long time. The Golf Course should consider a smaller building or constructing where the
new parking lot, which would mean building with access to a higher-traffic highway that
already, has commercial traffic .
May stated the last page of his memorandum is a letter from Kenneth Gardner of North
East Appraisals, citing concerns about how a building of this sort could have an effect on
potential buyers views of a property, thus on property values .
Mrs . Marsha Keith stated she and her husband love the Golf Course and have been
members and stockholders since it opened in the 1970 ' s . Keith stated she would not want
to do anything against the Golf Association, but she and her husband do feel other
options are available, like building where the new parking lot was put in or on Halsey
Street where the current building and parking is . It would be better not to build off
Pennsylvania Avenue . Keith stated she did not realize how far this was going until a
,,
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
neighbor contacted her, who was unable to attend tonight. Said other neighbor feels, and
Keith also feels the project will result in too much traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue and
will be lower property values in the area. Keith thanked the Board for their time.
Ms . Paula Horrigan stated she is a resident of Pennsylvania Avenue, a landscape architect
by profession and a former Ulysses Planning Board Member. Horrigan stated she is well
accustomed to living across from a very busy site, the old Village dump, and she has the
advantage of being the house that used to be the only house on her end of Pennsylvania
Avenue. Horrigan stated Pennsylvania Avenue is really an extension of the Village of
Trumansburg, though it is not part of the Village, it is included in all practicality and the
Planning Board does believe Pennsylvania Avenue may ultimately be annexed to the
Village. Horrigan stated that Pennsylvania Avenue , Larchmont and Tamarack Drives and
South Street are by far the most favored walking routes on this side of the Village of
Trumansburg and Town of Ulysses, and that increased traffic would be a very real danger
to pedestrians . Horrigan stated she feels it is not a good idea to take problems on Halsey
Street (in the Village of Trumansburg) and transfer them to Pennsylvania Avenue .
Horrigan expressed her sympathy with the Maguire ' s and other neighbors, stating they
have set a precedent in their neighborhood and enjoyed a small, community-oriented golf
course for many years only to be faced now with a large Morton building; the project will
harm the neighborhood instead of enhance it. Horrigan next expressed disappointment
with the Golf Association, stating they should have carefully planned their growth when
expanding the course years ago, and they have a lot of options that could have been
pursued, including use of the new or older existing parking lots . Horrigan noted that
constructing on Halsey Street or Route 227 would be better for employees than the
Pennsylvania Avenue site in that these highways are more accessible to downtown
Trumansburg and would make leaving for lunch, coffee breaks or even just visiting the
club house for refreshments a much more efficient process being that the Pennsylvania
Avenue site is at the opposite end of the Golf Course from both downtown Trumansburg
and the club house. Horrigan noted she does not believe moving an irrigation line a few
feet is a sufficient obstacle for the Golf Course to refuse to move the building site further
from the Maguire ' s property line . Horrigan also stated she feels the matter at hand is
more like a use variance than an area variance, and stated she feels somewhat concerned
about the Town Planning Board and general Town Government for promoting such a use
and plan. Horrigan concluded by stating she is disappointed all around and feels we could
do better for this community.
Jay Hart stated he lives in the woods next door to the Maguire ' s on land that was the far
corner of the Golf Course . Hart stated he is familiar with the Golf Course and its
horseshoe shape . It occurred to Hart that the location selection by the Golf Association
was probably motivated by the ability to reach all areas of the Golf Course with minimal
travel from this site. In this way, the site selected is favorable, however, Hart stated, there
are other sites that also satisfy that. The site being considered tonight is on the outside
bottom part of the horseshow, but there is a site within the horseshoe; Hart stated he
believes this site is near the Fairway, and has a small A- frame shed nearby. This is an
undeveloped part of the Golf Course that would provide plenty of room, though the
access road would have to be fairly long .
Timothy Maguire noted that he spoke at the last hearing on Golf Association' s previous
variance request and stated that his property line is closest to the proposed site. Maguire
stated he does not think the photos shown give a good idea of the visual impact the
building will have on his property. Maguire stated he can see the berm which will be
behind the proposed building, so he certainly will be able to see the building when it is
built closer to him than the berm is . Maguire also noted he plans to build another house
nearer to the property line. Maguire then stated, he feels the bigger issue, however is the
neighborhood. The Golf Association waters the Course late at night, and during the
summer employees are there very late at night and very early in the morning running
their golf carts, the noise from which was described at a previous meeting as equivalent
to starting five lawn mowers all at once . I think this is a commercial use with
commercial-level noise and traffic that makes the proposal unsuitable for this area.
Another concern is pedestrian safety. One woman [name given] is in her eighties, and
walks on Pennsylvania Avenue each day. I talked to her today, and her concern is that she
does not hear well and, with more traffic , she will not feel as safe walking on
z
I
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
Pennsylvania Avenue. Maguire also noted he spoke to Joseph )Doyle, and he said he
would write a letter against the proposed project. (The Zoning Clerk noted such a letter
has been received. ) Maguire pointed out that the Golf Association ' s statement at hearings
for the first variance proposal, that the only ones complaining , ire the Maguire ' s is no
longer the case. Maguire named several individuals who expressed disapproval of the
project to him, in public comment or by letter. Maguire stated the neighbor on the
opposite side of the project site [name given] will be affected even more than he is, by the
sight of six feet of roof along a building that is ninety feet long, and stated this will
certainly hurt said property owners ' property value, and that [names given] neighbors
across the street will be directly across from the entrance and will be affected at all hours
of the night and morning. Maguire re-stated that all of the activities intended to take place
in the structure will have a detrimental impact on neighborhood and that he does not
believe the site selected is the best location. Maguire noted when the Golf Course was
first envisioned a right of way where the access road is now was purchased with the
intent to construct a clubhouse in that area. Land was sold off, including some 6- 8
additional acres to Mr. Maguire, and the Golf Association did not feel it could afford to
build a clubhouse. The right of way was not at all intended to be an access to a
maintenance building. Maguire next handed the Board copies of local tax maps showing
the Golf Course property and photos he took of this area, noting that the tax maps show
238 ' of frontage on NYS Route 227 that does extend back a good distance . Maguire
noted comments from him and his wife at the second hearing for the initial variance
request suggesting the Golf Association construct off NYS Route 227 were met with
claims that the Golf Association does not own much frontage on NYS Route 227 .
Maguire called the Board ' s attention to one particular picture, which he stated shows the
depth and breadth of the area owned by the Golf Association cuff NYS Route 227 , noting
that this area is more than large enough for the proposed structure and would cause the
additional traffic from the proposed project to be diverted to a road that does not have
Pennsylvania Avenue ' s high pedestrian and bicycle traffic . Maguire concluded by re-
noting the commercial nature of the proposed building' s activiities .
Frances Maguire noted one point not yet mentioned, that the pictures shown by the Golf
Association do not show the view of the project that the neighbors located directly across
Pennsylvania Avenue [names given] will have of the site. Maguire noted this would be a
significantly different and more unsightly view than any of the pictures presented this
evening indicate, and urged the Board to stop and look at this view.
Mr. Christianson asked if the Golf Association and neighbors have met at any point to try
to resolve their issues .
Timothy Maguire stated he was contacted by one individual [name given] from the Golf
Association, but he told said individual while they could talk, his feeling is that the
proposed building is just not appropriate for the neighborhood .
Maguire noted that a long time ago a company [name given] wanted to build a veterinary
chicken operation on Pennsylvania Avenue. Though the operation would have brought
jobs and money to the area, Maguire explained, the comment at that time of a neighbor to
the proposed project puts it in perspective, "if you want it so much, put it next to your
house". It sounds good, is good for the community, but put it next to your house and
consider how you would feel . I think that is the sentiment of the neighborhood.
Mr. Christianson asked whose house Mr. Maguire would have the building next to?
Timothy Maguire stated his feelings are the classic "NIMBY", but noted if the building
were built off NYS Route 227 it would at least be accessed from a major thoroughfare
constructed to handle the traffic . Maguire stated, though the Golf Association may give
many reasons not to build in this location, it appears obvious that there is enough room to
do so .
Paula Horrigan stated all+ of the problems mentioned by the Golf Association are things
that a professional landscape architect could address and fix ; they are all solvable.
Horrigan asked why, if the Golf Association can hire a lawyer, couldn' t they hire a
planner to plan its growth ahead of time. Horrigan stated there are probably a lot of better
A
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
alternatives for construction sites, some of which would be better for the Golf Course in
many ways, by way of example, Horrigan noted a site closer to the main building and
entrance would make it more feasible for employees to get refreshment from the main
building or by going to Trumansburg . Horrigan suggested closer consideration of the
Golf Course ' s need to grow, and its plans for the future .
Michael May stated he feels the Board needs to closely look at the governing statutes and
criteria and carefully balance the residential are of Pennsylvania Avenue with Route 227
or Halsey Street to consider the best place for such a building. May stated Route 227 is a
busy road with no residences as close as those on Pennsylvania Avenue are to the site,
and which already has commercial activity. May noted by looking at the five statutes
which the Board must consider, the Pennsylvania Avenue site weighs heavily as a poor
site for the proposed building. May also noted that it would seem in the some 130 acres
of land owned in the Town of Ulysses alone it must be possible to fit in a 30 by 90-foot
building so that it will not violate the Zoning Ordinance .
Mr. Maim asked what time the irrigation crew works .
Michael Addicott answered that the irrigation crew comes in at 6 pm and usually works
until 12 midnight. At time, when it is really dry, the crew stays until 3 or 4 am.
Mr. Mann asked what time the grounds crew starts work in the morning.
Addicott stated the grounds crew employees start at 7 in the spring and 6 during the
summer.
William Shaw stated this has been an experience of what democracy is all about, though
it has been frustrating that no consensus has been reached. Shaw reminded the Board that
the request before them is an area variance, not a use variance, and that the applicant
therefore does not need to prove hardship, only practical difficulty. Shaw next pointed
out that the photos do not show the fence nor the vegetative buffer that has been called
for by the Town Planning Board in Site Plan Review, and which the Golf Association is
obligated to construct and plant, respectively if they do get a building permit. These two
items would address the view issue . Shaw stated it ' s also critical to keep in mind that
while many of the complaints are legitimate and valid concerns that were articulately
presented, the board ' s consideration is not with noise or traffic but only with the impacts
of a variance from the 100-foot setback requirement, and therefore whether or not to
grant the requested variance. Shaw next commented on Attorney Michael May' s
memorandum. In response to May' s statements in the memorandum about various
detriments including lights, fencing and vegetative buffers, Shaw stated these issues were
considered and discussed at great length by the Town Planning Board during Site Plan
Review procedures . The fence and vegetative buffer and the style, voltage and motion-
sensor activation of the lights will all address these issues and were handled under Site
Plan Review. In regards to building off NYS Route 227 , Shaw stated, to the best of his
knowledge, the Golf Association does not own a land- swap made it so that most of the
frontage noted by Maguire any longer. Shaw stated if the ownership of adequate frontage
along NYS Route 227 is the only concern of the Board, he would be willing to come back
later for an additional hearing with detailed and up to date information on what is and is
not owned along Route 227 , and reasons why the land is or is not a suitable site for the
proposed building. In reference to the setback requirement, Shaw noted that while the
variation requested will allow the Golf Association to build half as far away as the
Zoning Ordinance requires, the regulation is unique in the Zoning Ordinance in that only
parks, golf courses and similar groups have the 100- foot setback requirement.
Commercial and residential setbacks typically range between 15 and 35 feet. In regards to
the letter from real estate appraiser Kenneth Gardner, submitted by Michael May as an
appendix to his memorandum, Shaw pointed out that the letter does state only that the
building could have negative impacts on property values of the area, not that it will . Shaw
also pointed out that, on the other hand, a golf course is a desirable neighbor that
typically does increase property values of an area. Shaw urged the board to weigh the
positive impact of the golf course with the potential negative impact of the proposed
structure on a golf course in considering the impacts on the neighborhood. Shaw also
noted many of the comments this evening have addressed noise and views, while the
WEI
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
Board ' s concern is with the 50-foot variation request from the setback. Shaw noted the
Golf Association realizes the building will be visible, but has agreed to several means of
mitigating the impacts of the view on neighboring properties . In concluding his
statements, Shaw reviewed the five criteria the Zoning Board must consider when
deciding whether or not to grant the variance, as per the Ulysses Zoning Ordinance. In
regards to how substantial the variation requested is compared to the requirement, Shaw
again asked the Board to consider not only that a fifty-foot variation from a 100-foot
setback is being requested, but the fact that few other types of property have anything
over a 35 -foot setback. In regards to increased population density and consequent
increased demand on government services, Shaw stated there is no change. In regards to
the project ' s resulting in a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood or
creation of a substantial detriment to neighboring property values, Shaw stated there is no
change in the character of the neighborhood-with or without the building, traffic will
come and go along the access road, and noted that the Board is not deciding based on
whether or not there will be any detriment, but whether or not there will be a substantial
detriment. In regards to whether the difficulty can be obviated by other feasible methods,
Shaw stated the Golf Association has pursued every other avenue they know of. While it
has been suggested that there are other places to build, the situation with a golf course is
that available space consists of isolated spots around the parameter of the actual course.
Though the Golf Association may own a lot of acreage, much of it is used for the game of
golf. Shaw also noted that all such sites were looked at and would all have required an
area variance. On Halsey Street in the Village of Trumansburg , Shaw stated, the building
would be within 50 feet of numerous neighbors, with no fencing or vegetative buffers,
and, on NYS Route 227, as far as Shaw knows, there is not enough land to build. The site
selected is the only practical site . In regards to the final criteria for Board consideration in
the granting or denial of an area variance, the interests of justice, Shaw stated he believes
the Board will find that the Golf Association has tried to meet every alternative, has
mitigated the view and noise concerns and that the interests of,justice do lean in favor of
the Golf Association.
Shaw excused himself and his clients to discuss the ownership of land along Route 227 .
The Zoning Clerk read two letters received from Elizabeth K. Stanton and Joseph P .
Doyle, both opposing the granting of the requested variance ini:o the record. Stanton ' s
letter objects on the grounds of reduced pedestrian safety, and Doyle ' s letter objects on
the grounds of the building' s having an adverse affect on property values, commercial
traffic and noise. The Zoning Clerk noted these are the only two written comments that
the Town has received.
William Shaw and the Golf Association representatives returned.
Shaw stated, based on the information available, the tax maps, he believes there is an
error on the tax maps, and that the Golf Association does not own all 238 feet of frontage
show. Shaw stated he believes some of this was deeded to [name given] on a land-swap
deal. Shaw further stated that the area is a wetland and, further., narrows significantly as it
extends away from NYS Route 227 . Shaw stated again, he would be willing to come
back at a later date with more information.
Mr. Hickey noted, since the Board does need to consider alternative feasible methods, the
Golf Association should come back with more information on the portion of its property
along NYS Route 227 at a later date. Mr. Hickey asked if the Golf Association would
consider a site along NYS Route 227 from the standpoint that such a site could work.
John Benedict agreed to do so .
Paula Horrigan stated the Site Plan file should include full, engineered plans and stated
the site plan map should be part of the record and in the room tonight.
William Shaw stated the same materials are not brought to both site plan review
proceedings and variance request hearings. Shaw also noted the Board members have
photocopies of the revised site plan for this project.
Michael May asked how long ago the land swap took place.
K
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
Representatives of the Golf Association guessed about three years .
Michael May stated he believes the New York State statue he cited in his memorandum is
the governing criteria, not the 1978 Town Zoning Ordinance which calls for the Board to
consider whether or not "substantial" detriments will result from a proposed variance
request. The State statute does not include the word substantial . May submitted that State
law takes priority. May also stated that the Maguire ' s have personally had to move a
proposed building to meet Town law, and that the Board can and should consider the
activities that will take place in the building. May concluded by suggesting the Golf
Association ask to buy land along NYS Route 227 .
Mr. Hickey stated he does not believe the Zoning Board of Appeals may require the Golf
Association to ask to buy land from adjoining property owners . May agreed the Board
cannot require it, but could suggest it as a solution.
Mr. Tselekis noted the Keith' s' concern about seeing 6 feet of the building over the berm,
and asked if the Golf Association could plant bushes or other vegetation to help shield
that view. Michael Addicott stated the Golf Association would plant pine trees along the
berm, as required by the Town Planning Board . As far as May' s submission that the
Board use the State ' s regulations instead of the Town Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Tselekis
noted that scarcely any variances could be granted that would have absolutely no impact.
Mr. Hickey stated he believes the Board is bound to use the Town Zoning Ordinance .
Paula Horrigan stated she has not heard any reason why, if the Golf Association decides
to be bad neighbors and builds on the selected site despite the neighbors ' concerns, the
construction site could not be shifted further from the Maguire property. Horrigan stated
you could move an irrigation line and relocate a green . With 140 acres, it must be
possible to relocate the proposed building. I think it would be irresponsible of this board
to grant the variance ; there is not a demonstrated hardship . It should be the Golf
Association' s cost. I haven' t heard any rationale for not moving this .
Frances Maguire stated she agrees with Ms . Horrigan and again, asked the Board to
consider the views from the Keith ' s ' house and from Pennsylvania Avenue .
Marsha Keith stated the Golf Association should build on either the old or new parking
lot, both located in the Village of Trumansburg.
Mr. Hickey noted the Board couldn ' t tell the Golf Association where to build.
Keith stated the Board should decide whether the site chosen, however is the right place
for the proposed building .
The Board discussed the matter briefly.
Mr. Mann moved to adjourn the Public Hearing to a later date to be scheduled, before
which the Golf Association shall present a certified survey map of the entire Golf course
property for the Board' s review, and to which the Golf Association will bring full
information on its property supporting its inability to construct the proposed building
elsewhere on the property. Mr. Hickey seconded .
Mr. Christianson aye
Mr. Hickey aye
Mr. Mann aye
Mr. Tselekis aye
Mr. Warren aye
Adopted.
After brief discussion and consulting the calendar, Mr. Hickey moved to schedule the
reconvening of this evening ' s adjourned public hearing for 7 : 30 pm on Wednesday, June
18th• Mr. Mann seconded.
I ;
Zoning Board of Appeals
05/20/2003
Mr. Christianson aye
Mr. Hickey aye
Mr. Mann aye
Mr. Tselekis aye
Mr. Warren aye
Adopted.
Mr. Mann moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of March 25th, 2003 as
presented . Mr. Hickey seconded.
Mr. Christianson aye
Mr. Hickey aye
Mr. Mann aye
Mr. Tselekis and Mr. Warren abstained, as they were excused from this meeting.
Approved.
Mr. Mann moved to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 15th, 2003 as presented.
Mr. Christianson seconded.
Mr. Christianson aye
Mr. Maim aye
Mr. Tselekis aye .
Mr. Hickey and Mr. Warren abstained, as they were excused fiom this meeting.
Approved.
Hearing no further business, Mr. Warren moved to adjourn the meeting and Mr. Maim
seconded the motion.
Mr. Christianson aye
Mr. Hickey aye
Mr. Mann aye
Mr. Tselekis aye
Mr. Warren aye
The meeting adjourned at 9 : 13 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Karin T. Lanning
Zoning Clerk
KTL: kl
Q