Text · page 3 of 4
Agenda Item 2026-039: 1151 Center Road The applicant, property owner Kevin Smith, requested a variance to install a six-foot privacy fence that extends 13 feet past the rear of the house into the side yard. Town code requires fences in the side yard to be no more than four feet tall. The purpose is to provide privacy and screen a new gas generator from view. The applicant provided signatures of support from neighboring properties, and Erie County offered no objection. AREA Variance Balancing Test 1. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties? No. Fences are common, and this one will improve curb appeal by hiding a generator and providing privacy. 2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? No. A compliant four-foot fence would not provide the desired level of privacy or effectively screen the generator. 3. Is the requested area variance substantial? No. The increase from a four-foot to a six- foot fence is not considered substantial. 4. Will the proposed variance have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? No. The professionally installed fence will not have any adverse physical or environmental impact. 5. Was the alleged difficulty self-created? Yes, but this was not the determining factor in the board's decision. • Motioned by: Tronolone • Seconded by: Greenan for approval. • Vote: Ayes: 4, Noes: 0. The motion carried. Agenda Item 2026-040: 111 Summit Avenue Mark Filipski, representing his daughter (the homeowner), requested a variance for a six-foot privacy fence on a corner lot. The proposed fence would extend 40 feet along the side yard, connecting to an existing fence. The purpose is to create privacy. The fence will match the neighbor's existing fence. Letters of support were provided from multiple neighbors. AREA Variance Balancing Test 1. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties? No. With letters of support from neighbors, the board viewed the fence as an improvement to the property's appearance. 2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? No. Alternatives like shrubbery would require more maintenance and might not provide the same level of privacy or aesthetic appeal.