City of Cortland Planning, Zoning & Building Commission met on Monday, October 11, 2010 at 7:00 P.M., at the City Administration Building, 400 N. High Street. Members present: Chairman Scott Daffron, Jim Chubb, Scott Rowley and vice-chairman, Bill Sasse, Charlie Peck, absent, Law Director Patrick Wilson, Service Director Don Wittman and the following individuals:


††††††††††††† Tracy Lucas†††††† †††††† 187 Grove Drive, Cortland

††††††††††††† John Brincno†††††† †††††† 187 Grove Drive, Cortland

†††††† Dawn & Jeff Cook†††††† 193 Grove Drive, Cortland

†††††† Chris & RoxAnn Minor††† 217 W Main, Cortland




Scott Daffron:Today is Monday, October 11, 2010.Iíd like to call to order the Cortland Planning, Zoning & Building Commission for the purpose of public hearing 08-10 ĖVariance Request Ė 187 Grove Drive Tracy Lucas.


ROLL CALL:Bill Sasse, here; Scott Rowley, here; Scott Daffron, here; Jim Chubb, here; Charlie Peck, absent.


Scott Daffron:Who do we have to represent the variance Request tonight?


Tracy Lucas & John Brincno


Scott Daffron:If you could give us information and why you want the Variance Request.


John Brincno: Because the size of the backyard is such that if we would have put the pool further away from the house and put it in the back yard it would be further from the deck we would lose space in the backyard. We enjoy our back yard. Wanted to keep it closer to the house and we did not want to remove any portion of our deck. I am not sure how close the pool is to the property line. The pool sits where it is so we can build a small portion of deck to connect to the existing deck that connects to the house so we would not have to remove any portion of the deck that currently is at the back of the house.


Scott Daffron: So we do not know the exact distance from the pool to the property line.


John Brincno: I believe it is right around 7 ft or just under 7 ft from the edge of the pool to the actual property line.


Scott Daffron: You pretty much verified that Don.


Don Wittman: yes here it says 5 Ĺ ft x 5 Ĺ ft from the property line.


John Brincno: I apologize I thought it was 6 Ĺ ft.


Don Wittman: There were pins locating survey cap, when I was out there with the string line run for the fences, but I did not actually go out and measure the distance from the pool to the fence.


Scott Daffron: So weíre saying between from 5 Ĺ ft to 7 ft.


Don Wittman: yes


Jim Chubb: This 5 Ĺ ft is where pool water starts not the deck or any thing.


Scott Daffron: Right thatís where actual pool starts. Okay thank you and do you have anything else you want to add and question for John Brincno.


Scott Rowley:Is this an existing pool?


John Brincno: No this was a used pool that was given to us. I found a lady that wanted to get rid of an existing above ground pool she thought it was a 21 ft and itís actually a 24ft.


Scott Daffron:So you kind a put it up where you thought it was best with out measuring anything?


John Brincno: I did quite a bit of measuring to get as close to the deck as I could I did not want to destroy any of the deck I did not want to give my self any more work then I needed. I am on limited time I am working 80 hour plus a week and I try to fit in little projects when ever we have time. So I put it as close to the existing deck as I could itís in about a few inches to the deck.


Scott Daffron: Any question at this time.


Scott Rowley: Not at this time.


Scott Daffron: Anyone else want to speak on behalf of this variance request. Anyone want to speak against variance request.


Dawn Cook: Because this pool was put up by home owner not professionals is it covered by homeowners insurance? The homeowners insurance was notified in case something would happen, we are on down grade from their property so all that would come with only being 5 Ĺ ft from our property we have to consider possible property damage in the future.


Scott Daffron: So your concern is not with the distances but the possibility of wall failure and catastrophic release of water.


Dawn Cook:They put up a fence so we can not really see the pool. If we had our choice we would not want it that close to the property line. But weíre not going to dispute it with them; we have private conversation with them.


Bill Sasse: Do you know what the grade is from the pool to your house 5 %.


Dawn Cook:ya probably.


Scott Daffron: itís pretty deep.


John Brincno: I did dig out the base on the pool so the part that is closest into the hill is 18 inches below the grade to bring it down more then the lower part of the yard.


Bill Sasse: Do you remember the make of the pool?


John Brincno: Caribbean.


Jim Chubb: The one question is it going to be covered by homeowner insurance.


Scott Daffron: Does the city have any responsibility if itís covered by the homeowner insurance no the city has no regulations on that, you can ask the question.


Don Wittman: When the fence was put in and a lot of the grade that was there is now leveled out.


John Brincno: yes its level.


Scott Daffron:One consideration that comes to mind if the pool was moved 5ft different.


Dawn Cook: Thatís why I have no dispute with the variance.


Scott Daffron: If the pool was only filled half way or not maintained then there would be a concern about the wall coming down. But with a pool full itís almost impossible to have a wall come down. Have you ever seen that Don?


Don Wittman: I have not seen it in the city since, Iíve be here six years.


Scott Daffron: Itís a legal matter as for the damage from water thatís why a person has insurance to protect themselves and there property.


Dawn Cook: I understand.


Scott Daffron: Do you have anymore question?


Dawn Cook: No


Scott Daffron: Anyone else want to speak against the variance?


Scott Rowley: You spoke with your home owner insurances and you advised them that you have a pool and fences. And you have some type of coverage?

John Brincno: Yes we have told them we have a pool and fence.


Scott Daffron: We did not ask it. Thatís was not requirement, they can volunteer the answer.


Scott Daffron: ††We have nothing else at this time. Vote on this at regular meeting. Can we have a motion to close the public hearing?


Bill Sasse made a motion to approve public hearing 08-10, seconded by Scott Rowley.ROLL CALL: Scott Daffron, yes; Charles Peck, absent; Scott Rowley, yes; Jim Chubb, yes; Bill Sasse, yes.MOTION APPROVED.




Scott Daffron:Again today is Monday, October 11, 2010.Iíd like to call to order the Cortland Planning, Zoning & Building Commission. Julie, can we have roll?

ROLL CALL:Jim Chubb, here, Scott Rowley, here; Bill Sasse, here; Scott Daffron, here; Charles Peck, absent.


Scott Daffron:Can I have a motion for approval of commission minutes for the regular meeting held September 13, 2010?


Bill Sasse made a motion to approve September 13, 2010 minutes, seconded by Jim Chubb. ROLL CALL: Scott Daffron, yes; Jim Chubb, yes; Scott Rowley, yes; Charles Peck, absent: Bill Sasse, abstain.MOTION APPROVED.


Scott Daffron: No old business on our agenda tonight. New business a motion for approval of 08-10-variance request-187 Grove Drive. Further discuss and vote.

Bill Sasse made a motion to approve variance 08-10, seconded by Scott Rowley.


ROLL CALL: Scott Daffron, yes; Charles Peck, absent; Scott Rowley, yes; Jim Chubb, yes; Bill Sasse, yes.MOTION APPROVED


Scott Daffron: The one issue I have is the pool permit or regulation is that the fence needs to be enclosed. And I donít see that in the drawing I have in front of me why does it not show that?


Don Wittman: Your intent is to enclose. Because having a detached garage in the rear yard you probably have 90% of it enclosed there still is an opening.


John Brincno:That part weíre going to connect the garage to the deck and gate the back portion off on the deck.


Don Wittman: Deck accessible from the drive you might need to put a latch in the gate.


John Brincno: Currently it is, but with the fence connecting to the garage to the deck, the back yard will not be accessible at all from the front yard.


Don Wittman: I guess what I am saying is your deck acts as a barrier for the portion adjacent to the pool but, you will not be able to go from the drive to deck with out going thru a gate.


John Brincno:yes when itís all finished.


Scott Daffron:No old business on our agenda tonight.New business, business moving to new location - I have a motion for approval of 09-10 A

new locationĖ The Real Deal- 217 W Main St Ė Further discussion and vote?


Bill Sasse made a motion for approval of 09-10A, seconded by Scott Rowley.


Scott Daffron: Who do we have to speak on be half of this tonight?


Chris & Roxann Minor


Scott Daffron: You move this business over one building.


Chris & Roxann Minor: yes


Bill Sasse: ††Knox-box??


Chris Minor:We place a order for this weekend.


Bill Sasse: Your placing your order this weekend, our vote is contingency. Do you realize that? You will have to have it put in.


Chris Minor: Well yes August was really slow we did not have extra $160.


Bill Sasse: Okay I understand that.


Chris Minor: We have the form signed by the chief at home on my desk.


Scott Daffron: The fire department was there?


Chris Minor: The Fire department was there on Friday. And inspected it.


Scott Daffron: No other question can we have a vote on 09-10A.


ROLL CALL:Scott Rowley, yes; Bill Sasse, yes; Jim Chubb, yes; Scott Daffron, yes; Charles Peck, absent.MOTION APPROVED


Scott Daffron:Next on our agenda, can I have a motion for approval of 09-10B Ė New relocation ĖThe Real Deal Ė 217 W. Main St.


Bill Sasse made a motion for approval of 09-10B, seconded by Scott Rowley.


Scott Daffron: My understanding that your using the same sign.


Chris Minor: Yes the sign is only couple years old.


Don Wittman: The only issue I have is the sign is a wall mounting now and will be moved to a pole. Itís in code with sign ordinance.


Scott Rowley: Youíre just moving the sign from one building to another with no changes in the sign.


Chris Minor:yes


Scott Daffron: Anything else? Can we have a vote on 09-10B.


ROLL CALL: Bill Sasse, yes; Scott Rowley, yes; Charles Peck, absent; Jim Chubb, yes; Scott Daffron, yes.MOTION APPROVED.


Scott Daffron:That approves your business and your sign. The Real Deal-217 W. Main St.


Scott Daffron: Let the records reflect there is no one in the Audience. Can I have a motion to Table 10-10.


Bill Sasse made a motion to set New Business-for 10-10, seconded by Scott Rowley.

ROLL CALL:Scott Daffron, yes; Charles Peck, absent; Scott Rowley, yes; James Chubb, yes; Bill Sasse, yes. MOTION APPROVED.


Scott Daffron: Don Do you know anything about them not showing up?


Don Wittman: They were given notice, this is going to be a internet parlor was my indication a cyber zone, and gamble off site. There are other locations, Niles, Boardman.


Patrick Wilson: The next generation of what they hope to be legal gambling and the attorney general has not taken a position to oppose it.


Scott Daffron: The computer gamble machine.


Patrick Wilson: That is the question? I have not seen it defined. I was not aware I have a newspaper article. But I donít have it with me but Iíll circulate it to the group.


Scott Daffron: I had no idea what this business was.


Bill Sasse: If a new business is going to come to us with a new business they need to give us all the information about the business.


Scott Daffron:Absence is maybe better on their part.


Bill Sasse: I see that Belleria has their sign out again.


Don Wittman: They took it down. I did notice that is was up one day last week.

Scott Daffron: It seems to be put up on the weekends.


Bill Sasse: They keep putting it up on the weekends and leave it up overnight. I donít know if itís up through the week or not.


Scott Daffron: It seems like there just putting it on the weekend does not seem to be there on the week days. Thatís something that Charles wants to talk about the sign. I want you to keep your eye out for signs that are in city of Cortland, for the next month and weíll discuss it next meeting.


Bill Sasse: The Speedway sign the cigarettes sign, a lot of little signs, and chevy place is getting a little carried away with the signs on the post, there were three big ones this weekend.


Scott Daffron: when we talked about the sign at speedway and voted down the gas sign at speedway we had talked about gas only sign, we specified talk about no cigarette sign when we went to appeals what latitude did we give them with what is on that sign.


Bill Sasse: Scott if I remember correctly they did put on the application as coffee on the sign.


Scott Daffron: Just make sure we did not give them any more latitude then actually what we voted down.


Patrick Wilson: Their application would define the latitude and I donít remember what that was on their application.


Don Wittman: The issue with the Speedway sign was original it had the gas price and I donít remember if they had latitude with the coffee in there. Patrick, right now there talking about 16oz coffee list as $.99 on the price panel.If they wanted to change the sign they would have go up and remove the coffee and add something different and thatís not something that could be done easily.


Scott Daffron: The big discussion is the cigarette sign.


Bill Sasse: They have a big cigarette sign up on the post now.


Scott Daffron: I just donít know what kind of latitude youíre saying the original application had. They have latitude based on the original application and there were no restraints in any of our discussions that qualifies that decision. Nothing we talked about factors into that and it is pretty much free range.


Patrick Wilson: Right.


Jim Chubb: When we discussed their sign they gave us a guarantee that the cigarette price would not be on there.


Scott Daffron: Thatís no longer a guarantee.


Patrick Wilson: I donít recall what was said. About the cigarette sign.


Jim Chubb: They said it would not be put on the new sign.

Scott Daffron: Thereís only ever going to be two lines.


Bill Sasse: And it was going to be coffee. Thatís just the way to get the morning people in.


Scott Daffron: So then they go to appeals anything agreed on the only thing they were approving were the lights.


Patrick Wilson: Thatís what the appeal Board addressed and that was the augmentative appeal.


Scott Daffron: They still varied two other ordinances with out ever getting an okay on it, right I made that clear here we were voting on them as one sign.

Patrick Wilson: And once that happened.


Scott Rowley: Scott was that the number of signs because of the location they could not be moved. Is that what we agreed?


Don Wittman: They were applying for a variance for the sign ordinance three provision number, Height, prohibition on electric variance message board.


Bill Sasse: Next meeting discuss the sign in town.


Jim Chubb: Violation on the cigarette sign then we need to send Speedway a letter.


Don Wittman: We had a discussion on that, I know in other communityís†† instead of doing the notification of who to send it to at speedway. Send to Water bill account, then it goes up to corporate and someone sits on it an does nothing and it sits there forever, there are stickers that you go in an you put them across a prohibited sign. And that services to education not only the person who put the sign up, but when they come back to get the sign and the passer byers see you leave the sign in place, you educate and you destroy the nature and the intended use of the sign.


Bill Sasse:embrace the people in others words, who going to pay for the stickers.

Don Wittman:The citizens of Cortland.


Bill Sasse: made a motion to adjourn, seconded by James Chubb. ROLL CALL: Jim Chubb, yes; Scott Rowley, yes; Bill Sasse, yes; Scott Daffron, yes; Charles Peck, absent.MOTION APPROVED.


Meeting Adjourned:_7:30 p.m.


____________________††††††† ________†† __________________

Scott Daffron, Chairman††††††† Date†††††††††† Julie Shaffer-Wood, Sec.