Southtowns Record

Zoning Board of Appeals minutes — March 17, 2026

Government
Town of Orchard Park
Board
Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting
Mar 17, 2026
Posted by publisher
May 1, 2026
Kind
Minutes
Topics
Zoning and land use

Original document

Text · page 2 of 3

ZBA Mtg. #02  Regular Mtg. #02  March 17, 2026  Page 2

  NEW BUSINESS

1. ZBA File# 03-26, Matthew Lee and Kristin Snyder, 7669 Milestrip Road, Zoned R-2, SBL # 162.08-2-1 (Part of
  Farm Lot 40, Township 10, Range 7). Requests an Area Variance to construct a 60 foot x 60 foot pole barn which
  will create a dominating accessory area. Accessory Area shall not dominate Principal Use Area, §144-5B, Terms
  Defined.
  APPEARANCE:  Matthew Lee, Applicant
  The Applicant stated he is trying to get various items and equipment now housed outside into the new structure.
  Mr. Williams referenced the Applicant’s letter and inquired if the Applicant owns a property maintenance com-
  pany, how far behind the house the structure would be, and how one would gain access to it.
  The Applicant stated that the proposed structure would be cold storage for his personal property only, the
  structure would be approximately 80 feet back, and a driveway would be used for access.
  Mr. Mateer established that the Applicant had spoken to his neighbors, except for the person behind him on
  Graystone Lane. The others were ok with the project. The structure would be barely visible to the Graystone
  neighbor, especially with the foliage.
  Ms. Rodo inquired about the side setbacks and the Applicant confirmed 10 feet were required and the new
  structure would have 20 feet and confirmed driveway placement. The Applicant noted that he was denied a
  second point of entry (Recording Secretary note: Second driveway was denied by ECDPW).
  Ms. Bowers stated that she felt that 60 feet by 60 feet was very large and inquired if the Applicant would be able
  to reduce the size. She also discussed driveway design and placement, and number of doors on the structure.
  The Applicant stated that the smallest he could do would be 50 feet by 50 feet to house the items he needed.
  There was discussion between the Chair and the Applicant that the Applicant would not be taking down any
  trees, some of the items he was storing were quite large, he was a contractor, and he would be storing some
  items used in his business.
  Ms. Rodo asked if he was running a business out of his house.
  The Applicant stated that he was not running a business out of his home; his place of business was behind the
  Target plaza, but that he would put power and water into the new structure.
  The Chair then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak in favor of the granting of
  the Variance.
  (Twice) NO RESPONSE
  The Chair then asked if there was anyone in the audience who would wish to speak against the granting of the
  setback Variance.
  (Twice) NO RESPONSE
  The Chair closed the Public Hearing.
  The Chair then asked if the Secretary had received any additional communication either for, or against, granting
  the Variance. The Secretary stated no additional communications had been received.
  There was discussion among the Board Members as to what size would be appropriate for the structure.
  Mr. Williams stated he was not in favor of the project.
  Ms. Rodo made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Mateer, to APPROVE the AREA VARIANCE for a 50 foot x 50 foot
  main building with an attached 50 foot x 12 foot porch/lean to, based on the following:
  1. Per Section 144-63 (E) (1) All public notices have been filed.
  2. There will not be an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to nearby prop-
  erties created.
  3. The benefit sought cannot be achieved in another way, other than the granting of the Variance.