Minutes

WEBSTER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES

Michael Short Corrine Volo

James Spampinato Adam Prescott

John Accorso Josh Artuso, Dir. Of Comm. Development

Chris Centola

John DeMarco, Attorney

Katherine Kolich, Planning & Zoning Secretary

Erika Corsi, Planner of Community Development

14, 2026 meeting. As we go through, there will be time for public discussion, and we will be

limiting discussion to 5 minutes per person per application. And the discussions must pertain to

the property being reviewed. We have a total of 6 applications...5 applications tonight. We have

a total of 5 applications tonight that have been published in the paper.

Call Roll/Piedge of Allegiance

Summary of Application Outcomes

TABLED MATTERS

:

1. VERIZON CELL TOWER-LAKE ROAD AND COUNTY LINE ROAD

SCHEDULED MATTERS

:

2. INGROUND POOL/PATIO-1085 HREZENT VIEW LANE

3. CHICKEN COOP-1014 MURA LANE

Board of Appeals one year after approval to renew the Special Use Permit.

4. ADDITION AND REVOVATION-534 FOREST LAWN

Pg. 20 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

5. POOL INSTALLATION-985 DANBY DRIVE

6. RG&E SUBSTATION 73 MODERNIZATION-891 KLEM ROAD

« Front year fence is set 13.7 from the property line.

e The variance for the minimum lot size was removed based on the

recommendation of Town staff.

(Erika Corsi, Town Planner presented a PowerPoint Presentation for each application and

read into the record)

I want to make a statement for all the applicants. The PowerPoint presentation is really

based on your statement of difficulty that was submitted with your application. It is your

due diligence to go through those five criteria to explain to the board why you are requesting

a variance. So, I will have them on the screen for you so you can read them as needed.

Burgdorf for Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems d/b/a Verizon is requesting an AREA VARIANCE for

the height of a communication tower of 125ft with a 4’ lightning rod (129°) where the maximum

height allowed is 100ft on a 7.8-acre parcel having SBL# 037.03-1-44 located in the LL Large-Lot

Residential District under Sections 130-11 and 350-13 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

APPLICANT REQUESTED TO TABLE THE APPLICATION TO MAY 12, 2025

is requesting an AREA VARIANCE to allow a side yard setback of 5ft where 15ft is required in

association with an inground pool installation on a .43-acre parcel having SBL #064.20-1-65 located

in an R-3 Single-Family Residential District under Sections 300-4, 350-12 and 350-46 of the Code

of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board was Christopher Giordano. We are requesting an area variance to

allow for a 5-ft setback off the property line along the west side of the property where a 15 foot

setback is required associated with the construction of a 23 x 40 inground swimming pool. The

area concerned already has an existing 5-foot privacy fence installed 3 foot off the property line

as granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals dated 15" of August in 2018. The proposed edge

of the concrete patio attached to the ground pool will be 2 to 3 feet proposed inside that existing

fence line. The proposed ground pool has dimensions of 23 x 40 situated north to south

lengthwise. This is the only way to position it to be in compliance with being 10 feet from the

overhead power lines. That puts the water’s edge 25 feet from the west property line.

Pg. 21 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

In chapter 300-4 of the town building code setbacks clearly states the edge of the pool is from

the concrete, not from the water’s edge. The existing 5 foot fence that surrounds our backyard

was installed per the variance that was granted back in 2018 with a 3 foot setback, which I

believe that requirement no longer exists. We maintain a 3 foot mulch bed on the outside of the

fence line, so it is pleasing to our bordering neighbors. The proposed concrete patio surrounding

the pool shall be sloped at least a 2% grade or a quarter of an inch per foot to allow for proper

drainage. The entire surface area of the patio will be surrounded by at least a 5 foot landscape

mulch bed to accommodate any rainwater runoff that occurs. The entire scope of this project is

obviously in our backyard which is completely surrounded by the existing 5 foot pressure

treated privacy fence. So, there will be no changes to the existing character of our neighborhood.

That’s our proposal.

concrete patio is going to be 2 feet off the fence.

feet inside the fence, existing fence, it’s already....the fence is already 3 feet.

got.

said you were going to maintain a 5 foot planting bed all the way around the concrete.

the fence and the concrete based on what Chris just mentioned.

foot setback.

enough room, especially with the overhead power lines. It pushes us too far to the east. And

we still would like to maintain grass along the back part back half of the house.

between the water’s edge and the edge of the concrete on the west side.

Pg. 22 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

here. They go back right to the power...... pool here. So, it forces us to put the pool over this

way.

the concrete so, the concrete can move.

side, could that have been placed on the east side instead.

and this here.

overhead powerline. Which is right here in the corner of the house.

larger portion of the concrete on the east side. Am I correct, Michael.

Pg. 23 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

(IT IS EXTREMLY HARD TO CAPTURE THINGS BEING SAID WHEN EVERYONE IS

SPEAKING OVER EVERYONE. CAN WE PLEASE ALLOW FOR OTHERS TO FINISH

WHAT THEY ARE SAYING)

Lilacs that have been there for 20 years.

next to the existing patio.

any of your neighbors?

equipment is going to be a little bit on her grass, and I assured her that everything will get

restored.

will return back to the board.

RESOLUTION 26-007 Michael Short made a motion TYPE II

Centola.

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

As submitted, the...granting the variance would not impact the essential character of the

neighborhood. There’s already a fence and well, at least not visually, there might be sometimes

because of the noise of a pool may or may not have, but he said he’s already talked to his neighbor

Pg. 24 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

and they’re okay with it. He just now, if not even before, indicated that he did consider some

alternates, but the value of existing plant material was greater than the convenience of having more

paving closer to the existing patio and not extending it as close to the property line. It’s well....the

variance requested isn’t significant especially since it’s open space, so it doesn’t really set back or

diminish any real setbacks, especially since there’s an existing 5 foot privacy fence there now. It

should not affect any of the existing environmental conditions such as drainage or traffic. Once

again, maybe a little noise here then, but certainly nothing to be concerned about. And because of

the location of the wires, it is self-created, but it does seem to be a good alternative to install the

pool with the area that he needs around it.

RESOLUTION 26-0008 Michael Short made a motion for AREA

Lane. Applicant Christopher Giordano is

requesting an AREA VARIANCE to allow a

side yard setback of 5ft where {5ft is required

in association with an inground pool

installation on a .43-acre parcel having SBL

#064.20-1-65 located in an R-3 Single-Family

Residential District under Sections 300-4,

350-12 and 350-46 of the Code of the Town of

Webster of which was seconded by Chris

Centola.

CONDITIONS:

e The applicant must obtain all necessary governmental permits, including a Town

Building Permit.

e That one-year significant construction shall expire April 14, 2027

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

PERMIT to allow 8’ X 18’ chicken coop and no more than 8 chickens on a 1.3-acre parcel having

SBL #078. 16-1-21 located in an R-3 Single-Family Residential District under Section 350-40 and

350-103 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Pg. 25 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

Appearing before the board was Igor Kurylo. I want to build a chicken coop. A simple project

for my family, for my kids. I don’t know really how to explain why I need it. It is just for

family and it’s not like a big project or something like that. This is how it is going to look.

(APPLICANT HOLDING UP PICTURE OF COOP AND THEN PASSES IT AROUND) I

just printed it last minute.

to be very visible from the front or from the sides. It’s simple. This project is not for me it is for

my kids. It’s more because they’re growing. They want to see how they look, how they act,

just simple. That’s it. Really nothing to say a lot about it because it is a simple project.

that correct?

behind my property.

said chicken coop with nest box. Nest implies that you’re planning on raising additional

chickens.

provided, and it looks like they’re inside of a chicken run.

go out probably. I saw a fox on my property so.

Pg. 26 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

public comment. If anybody wants to speak for or against this project. Please come on up.

19:56

ADDRESS) The way that this town is going, it seems like there’s a lot of preference towards

big developers and cell towers, Engineering Contractors. I’m a huge fan of eggs, free range

eggs. | eat it as the majority of my diet. And what I would expect to see from the town today is

that you treat this gentleman with the same preference that you treat the big developers, not

give them any grief about having chickens even though we’re moving away from rural

homesteading sort of themes. And so, I’m fully in support of the chickens. We need more

chickens. We need to increase the allotted number of chickens. The government has no business

telling us how many chickens we should have in our yard. We need more chicken eggs. Store

eggs are poison.

RESOLUTION 26-0009

Michael Short made a motion TYPE II

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

So, I had the opportunity to come out to the site today. The site is...does have a level of exclusion

to it, which is nice. The location of the chicken coop is going to be far enough back so that it’s

really not going to be visible. So, therefore, it won’t impact the surrounding neighborhood. It’s

not a detriment to nearby properties. Again, especially since you’re going to be maintaining them

Pg. 27 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

inside of a chicken run, they’re not going to be free range. So, there’s not going to be an issue

there. To have chickens for your kids to use, to use and learn about, it’s really not achievable by

any other means so it’s really the only way to be done. It’s not a substantial request. When you’ re

done with the chickens, the coop can go away, and everything can go back to the way it needs to

be. So, really not substantial. There’s no adverse effect on the environmental area, The area you’re

proposing to put it is back in the back kind of in uninhabited area. I’m not going to call it woods,

but you do have a decent amount of trees back there. So, it’s not going to have any environmental

impact and you're also keeping the chickens down to...limiting it to 8 chickens. Difficulties are

not self-created other than you wanting chickens and you want your family to learn about taking

care of animals and allowing them to know where your food is coming from.

Does anyone want to add anything to that.

RESOLUTION 26-0010 Michael Short made a motion for AREA

Applicant Igor Kurylo is requesting a

SPECIAL USE PERMIT to allow 8’ X 18’

chicken coop and no more than 8 chickens on

a 1.3-acre parcel having SBL #078.16-1-21

located in an R-3 Single-Family Residential

District under Section 350-40 and 350-103 of

the Code of the Town of Webster of which

was seconded by: Chris Centola.

town, we are allowed to limit how long that special use permit is viable for. So, we’re going

to limit it for one year. In one year, you will have to come back to this board to seek a renewal of

that special use permit. In that time, the town has the opportunity to come check the area, make sure

there’s no adverse effects. They’ ll talk to your neighbors as well. So, with this application, if the

board approves, you’ ll have, it’ll be a one-year period.

CONDITIONS:

e The applicant must obtain all necessary governmental permits, including a Town

Building Permit.

e That one-year significant construction shall expire April 14, 2027

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Pg. 28 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

With that, any other permits or anything else that you need, you will have to go to the town for

any of that additional stuff. You have one year to complete that, and the special use permit is

only good for one year.

an AREA VARIANCE to allow an east side setback of 11.41 ft and a west side setback of 6.99ft

where 20ft is required, and to allow a total lot coverage of 25.3% where the maximum allowed is

20% in association with the construction of a 727SF addition to an existing two-story home on a

0.25-acre parcel having SBL #048.19-1-11 located in an R-1 Single-Family Residential District

under Section 350-10 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board was Rebecca Barone. Hello, this is the Forest Lawn neighborhood,

and J am representing the owner here. We’re looking to put a 727 square foot edition out front

which is a first floor bedroom addition for aging in place. And we'd like relief from the side

setbacks of the R-f zoning. We’d like to just maintain the existing side setbacks that the home

has currently. The site is very narrow. It’s only 45 sq ft. so, as you see, 20 foot on each side

would be a hardship and not allow for any addition. This is a special neighborhood, and I

believe that most of the homes in the neighborhood are non-conforming to the R-1 district.

Also, we would like relief on the lot coverage due to the small size of the site. I don’t believe

this has any adverse effect on the neighboring community. In fact, it'll be an improvement to

the home, which is one of the last in the neighborhood, I think, to be upgraded. I think a lot of

people are sort of upgrading their homes and it’s important for the owner to kind of have this

first floor master bedroom on that level.

I have signatures from both neighbors on either side. (SEE ATTACHED) in approval of the

project. As stated, I think the request just comes from the existing configuration and the size

limitations of the site as well as the zoning for that area. It’s a very sort of specific lake front

which used to be a cottage area. So, most homes are non-conforming.

house that you are proposing to align with, you are actually demoing. So, you’re actually

aligning with something that doesn’t...won’t exist if this project takes place. You're not

aligning with the house proper. You’re actually aligning with an old porch that’s been enclosed.

Pg. 29 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

is that there’s no crawl space under that. So, it’s most likely a slab or grade, but we don’t know

until we really get in. So, we'd like to maintain that line, but we’d like to put a crawl space so

that we can get heating and utilities through from one...the new portion to the old portion. So,

I wanted to be fully transparent that, you know, while we might be able to save that one wall,

most likely it would just be easier to remove that whole front one story piece and excavate. It’s

just simpler. But if you’ re telling me that I can’t get the variance, then I would try and save that

wall somehow.

12 by 14 bedroom, that...that’s a good size bedroom. The front haliway looks like it 6 maybe

7 feet wide. Might be some space there to save to bring that in if necessary. I’m just trying to

understand. That’s all it comes down to.

home and we’re pulling that into the addition so that’s it’s also increasing the square footage as

well as allowing for, like I said, the aging in place. It’s a little bit more room. You know that’s

sort of what we’re doing these days for wheelchair accessibility, if needed.

of in the dining room.

space. There should be some exterior renderings in your package.

ADDRESS) Again, I’m strongly in support of this. I expect this to go through without any

issues. I feel like the people in Webster need more advocacy. The way that you folks at this

zoning board treat big developers versus the way that you treat regular town folks, it’s clear,

it’s becoming evidently, abundantly clear that you have a separate set of standards that’s far

Pg. 30 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

more restrictive for average taxpayers, residents, the lifeblood of Webster than you do for

developers. You don’t give developers any time restrictions. Yet, you have to hassle these folks

about their siding, their chickens, good grief. Give these folks what they want. Thank you.

please keep it within the parameters of what the request is asking in terms of setback

requirements and the like because that is what this board is reviewing. So, if the public could

please keep it within what is being discussed that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

RESOLUTION 26-0011 Michael Short made a motion TYPE II

Centola.

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

This request is not out of character in the neighborhood: It is an old non-conforming neighborhood.

A lot of the houses are on the property line or very close to the property line. The existing house,

the applicant is not asking for any additional to be any closer to the property line itself. There are

no adverse physical or environmental impacts to the site or neighborhood, other than the

construction. The difficulty, though self-created because of the desire for the addition and the

desire to age in place. It’s something that should be allowed in this day and age. Would the board

like to add anything else to that.

RESOLUTION 26-0012 Michael Short made a motion for AREA

Road. Applicant Rebecca Barone is requesting

an AREA VARIANCE to allow an east side

setback of 11.41ft and a west side setback of

6.99ft where 20ft is required, and to allow a

total lot coverage of 25.3% where the

maximum allowed is 20% in association with

the construction of a 727SF addition to an

Pg. 31 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

existing two-story home on a 0.25-acre parcel

having SBL #048.19-1-11 located in an R-1

Single-Family Residential District under

Section 350-10 of the Code of the Town of

Webster of which was seconded by Chris

Centola.

CONDITIONS:

e The applicant must obtain all necessary governmental permits, including a Town

Building Permit.

e That one-year significant construction shall expire April 14, 2027

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

AREA VARIANCE to allow an above ground pool in the front yard of a corner lot in association

with the installation of a 54in x 21ft above ground pool on a 0.33-acre parcel having SBL #079. 13-

1-43 located in the R-3 Single-Family Residential District under Section 300-4, 350-12 and 350-46

of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board was Jennifer Dries and Chris Dries. I am Jennifer Dries and this is

my husband Christopher Dries. Is it okay that I speak as well.

lot, it’s technically considered two front yard, and we don’t have the backyard space. So, that is

why we are looking to put a 54 inch high 21 inch round....21 foot, ’'m sorry above ground pool.

Installing a pool will not impact the character of the neighborhood and not cause a detriment to

nearby properties because all aspects of the poo] will meet code including the proper distance

from nearby properties and no drainage to nearby properties as well.

We simply do not have the backyard space to accommodate for our kids and a pool and that’s

just what you know, that’s why we need to put it on that location. We have had an Intex pool

unknown that it does require a permit. So, upon establishing that we tried in the backyard to

obtain 15 feet from the fence line and we just couldn’t do it.

Pg. 32 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

like there really is not a lot of room there, even on your side yard, which is technically your

front yard also, but it didn’t appear to be a lot of room. And I’m wondering, it almost seems

like the pool is going to be on top of the street. I hate to say that to you.

property line and then roughly 8 feet or so from our side part of our garage and then the 21,

yeah, 21 foot round.

of planting or a fence or anything?

not included in the variance is because we are unsure, yet of what our plans are. So, that’s why

right now it’s for the pool but later on we may consider whether that be trees, privacy fence,

something along those lines.

have a very unique property. I drove by today. Very little yard in the back and this side yard

is your yard. So, I understand the ask. My question, 54 inches is not high. Having a pool in

your front yard opens up the entire neighborhood of kids to utilize your pool, and safety and

everything else. So, how and I know what the codes says is required for a pool, a special ladder

that lifts up so people can’t get into it. My daughters who are now grown, but when they were

little, they could climb over a 54 inch pool and get right into a pool. So, have you given thought

to that and how are you going to address that?

absolutely understand that. So, the ladder, yes, it is a safety ladder. It can also be removed.

There is going to be a pool alarm installed, so anything that touches the water, it will sound off

into the home. We do have cameras. One will be also be installed on that side, too and then

like I said, I would like to add whether that be a fence or a deck, probably most likely a deck

with like a gated latch, locked so that nobody can just go up and down to get to the ladder. The

Pg. 33 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

only reason that’s just not in this variance is just because of the details and the time frame to

get it done.

neighbors?

have signed. Most of my neighbors have told me that as far back as they can remember, there

always has been a pool there. For unknown reasons has been removed, but since the neighbors

have gone, but yes.

Please reminder to the public to please keep it in line with the setbacks of this property.

ADDRESS) Good grief, you guys are total control freaks. You’re having them plead their case

for an above ground pool that was previously there and you're concerned about the

neighborhood kids and how it would look from the field of view from the public. This board is

going too far. We need to reel things back. You guys are out of control. Give....goodness

gracious. Calm down. Let them have a pool. Let Webster have a pool. Why do we have laws

against pools...you guys are out of control.

to prepare a few notes that I'd like to read. This corner property already includes recreational

features, including a swing set and trampoline that draw in group activity on a daily basis.

From my personal experience as a man who's home all day, this has brought frequent noise

that affects normal daily living, including evenings. I believe adding a pool would increase the

intensity and duration of this pattern and further expand the property’s role as a neighborhood

gathering point. I would also like to site in Webster Town Code 209-1 states, “People have a

right to and should be insured an environment free from excessive sound.” Now, therefore, it

is a policy of the Town of Webster to prevent excessive sound that may jeopardize the health,

wealth, or safety of the citizens or degrade the quality of life. Also, this pool would be highly

visible from the street on a high traffic corner where I have seen vehicles having to slow down

to stop due to the activities occurring on the street in front of this corner property. I feel this

could possible increase safety hazard for pedestrians and drivers. This pool would also be

highly visible right outside my first floor bedroom window along with their existing swing set

and sandbox. It will also be in plain view from my front porch and for all those across the street

as well. This pool will magnify gatherings and noise and ultimately lead to further disruptions

affecting myself and other in proximity. I’m also worried that the pool may lead to more people

trespassing on my property and invading my privacy by continuing to cut through my front lawn

Pg. 34 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

to access this corner lot. I’m also naturally concerned about any possible drainage or water

runoff issues that may impact my property particularly because last summer I contacted

Webster Sewage Department about water seepage I’ve been having in my basement, and they

informed me about a rising water table affecting this area. Lastly, I'll say, in Webster front

yard swimming pools have never been a common site. This reflects a character that values a

certain residential standard around here. I believe this corner lot is not suitable for this project.

Being a corner lot, it’s especially accessible and visible, and it attracts unsupervised

neighborhood children that bring high activity levels and excessive noise. Lastly, this is not

about children or families. It’s about maintaining the residential character of the neighborhood

and considering how this project may further impact noise levels, activity, and overall livability

for the nearby residents. Allowing a variance for a front yard pool in this location could set a

precedent that disrupts residential aesthetics and invites ongoing disturbances. Therefore, I

believe it’s a reasonable request to ask the board to deny this variance. Thank you for your

time.

a couple of follow-up questions. The swing set, what are you proposing to do with the existing

swing set because that is not shown on here and that it’s kind of the same spot where this pool

is.

put it into our backyard. I don’t know if that going to............

would either move more towards the front or closer to the road.

keep it in our backyard.

Pg. 35 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

they’re yours because they were playing on the swing set and everything else. My guess is

they’re in bed by 8:00 o clock by the time noise.

before any noise ordinance. They are not outside super early in the morning.

RESOLUTION 26-0013 Michael Short made a motion TYPE I

Centola.

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

So, this request is out of character for the neighborhood. It’s out of character for most

neighborhoods, but it’s not a detriment to most nearby properties. We did hear from one resident

where there are concerns for the property adjacent. The benefit due to this particular property is

not achievable by any other means possible due to the size of the lot the corner and the way that

the lot itself is set up. The request is also not substantial in any way. It is a 21 foot diameter pool

that is only going to be approximately 8 feet off of the house itself. So again, not a substantial

request, especially since we have granted other area variances for other uses through out the town.

The difficulty, other than wanting a pool, is not self-created because of the way the property is set

up. Does anyone want to add anything additional.

resident, increase some pedestrian traffic during times of usage.

and family.

Pg. 36 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

with this because of the lack of any kind of a fence. I understand the difficulty with your backyard.

There’s no way you could put it in your backyard. I understand that. But the lack of a fence bothers

me for a couple reasons. One is just plain screening and the other is as you said Michael, is your

not going to be home all the time. If the alarms goes off in the house and your not home, that’s

when the neighborhood kids are going to run over there and jump in the pool. I had a swimming

pool at one point, and I know the minutes I left the house everybody in the neighborhood was there

and I had a fence around it. And I have a problem with that. Unless it’s screened in some fashion

and with a fence, I can’t support it.

RESOLUTION 26-0014 Michael Short made a motion for AREA

Applicant Chris Dries is requesting an AREA

VARIANCE to allow an above ground pool

in the front yard of a corner lot in association

with the installation of a 54in x 21ft above

ground pool on a 0.33-acre parcel having SBL

#079.13-1-43 located in the R-3 Single-

Family Residential District under Section

300-4, 350-12 and 350-46 of the Code of the

Town of Webster of which was seconded by

Stacie Damelio.

CONDITIONS:

® The applicant must obtain all necessary governmental permits, including a Town

Building Permit.

* That one-year significant construction shall expire April 14, 2027

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso NAY

RG&E SUBSTATION 73 MODERNIZATION: Located at 891 Klem Road. Applicant Eric

Thome of Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation is requesting AREA VARIANCES for the

following listed below in association with upgrades to an existing RG&E Substation on a 0.77-acre

parcel having SBL #064. 14-2-17.WEB located in the R-2 Single-Family Residential District under

Pg. 37 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

Section 350-11 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

A.

B.

Cc.

D.

E.

9’fence within the front yard, located 13.7’ from the property line where a 15’ setback

is required. (That was a typo, but it is indicated on the plans as 13.7, so I would just

like to clarify that.

9” fence within the rear yard, located 9.1’ from the property line where a 15’ setback

is required.

9” fence within the side yard, located 5.8’ from the property line where a 15’ setback

is required.

Additionally, I would like the board to note that there is an additional request on here under letter F

for the minimum lot size requirement. Because this is not a new substation, they are doing upgrades.

We are not requiring the applicants to receive a variance for the minimum lot size of this parcel.

Does the board have any questions for me before the applicant takes over.

substation and the lot is there is existing non-conforming. Does the last have a variance already

before the size of the lot.

previous requests that have come through to this board, we want to maintain that.

F. Minimum lot size of 0.77-acres where 3-acres for non-residential use is required.

Appearing before the board was Mary Steblein. I’m sorry, allergies are really causing a problem

with my voice tonight with LaBella Associates and I’m here tonight with Eric Thorne of RG&

E. We’re here in support of RG&E station 73 modernization program. We appeared at the

Planning Board last week to start our site plan review process and have preliminary approval.

So, now we have come here to seek variances associated with this application. So, station 73 is

an existing electrical substation with a yard, fence, transformer, and a small building and some

grass lawn. The proposed modernization and expansion will help support upgrades to

transmission and distribution lines in the region, provide backup circuits which will reduce

customer outages and support the growing electrical demand in the Penfield and the Webster

Area.

So, the proposed substation would include tow gas insulated switch gear buildings, one control

building, and a transformer. A new substation yard, high security steel palisade fence with

vehicle gate and man gate, screening and new access to the yard. And all these things are

designed in accordance with the Nation Electrical Safety Code and associated clearance

Pg. 38 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

requirements between equipment and buildings. So, that’ really what’s dictating the layout of

this proposed expansion. I don’t know if you want me to go into the review criteria. It is an

existing electrical substation and the...... So, the character of the neighborhood should not

really change since we do not suggest any land use since we do not suggest any land use changes

for this. We considered alternatives such as building a brand new substation, but we think that

expanding the existing property is more desirable and developing a brand new property and

building a substation and then having to reconnect everything together. It allows us to continue

to use the existing network infrastructure, so it helps avoid larger impacts.

In terms of significance of the requested variances, they may appear significant, but we want to

take that into context. This is not your standard use. It’s an electrical substation, therefore

maintaining health and safety and welfare of the public is paramount and we want to keep the

public our of this yard, which is justification for the fence. The dimensional variances are

necessary for this construction on order to keep the existing substation online during

construction, So, we have to build around it and that will help reduce any outages in the are

during construction.

In terms of physical and environmental conditions, we will be replacing what is now lawn, grass

lawn, with the stone substation yard. But as the Town Engineer weighed in last week, the

substation section will allow some rainwater to infiltrate through the stone. There may be some

minor increase in traffic and noise during construction, but following the construction, the

substation will be unmanned, so there will not regularly be people there. And the substation

does not require any additional public services, doesn’t need, you know, water, sewer, anything

like that.

As to the difficulty being self-created, it is self-created. We have no choice though but to put

in arelatively tall fence. The National Electrical Safety Code requires at least a7 foot minimum.

So, it would always be contrary to the zoning code and then we want to be able to keep people

out of the substation yard for their safety. In the dimensional variances are also self-created but

again, continue allow the continuous use of the operation while the new substation

improvements are being constructed.

for Erika. Are the switch gears or the switch house and the other buildings, are they considered

out buildings.

Pg. 39 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

line, but the property line is also set back almost 5 or 10 feet if I remember correctly. It’s more

from the road edge because that’s really what people are going to notice. It looks like you’re

about 13.7 feet from...I guess that’s the property line. Is that the property line at 13.7?

I should...

growing. We need more power. And instead of building a new spot and taking up more space,

use the space that we already have that you’re already using. So, I don’t have any other

questions.

the project. Please keep it to the variance being requested.

Pg. 40 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

(DID NOT SIGN IN AND HARD TO FIND ADDRESS) Today, RG & E is here to ask for area

variances and to build a fence so they can expand their substation wherever that map indicates,

and I would like to present a question to the board. First of all, you already know my grievance

with you, which is that you give big utilities and developers special discretion. You fill in the

blanks for them, and it’s just awful to watch. The strong bias toward the big developers and

the big corporations and the how scruples you are about irrelevant things like pools and

chickens.

If there were ever a corporation that we should not allow any easement of ever or any variance

and I really want to emphasize how strict my personal policy is on this RG& E issue. RG & E

wants to come into Webster. Here’s my position. Absolutely not. If they ask for anything, I will

never give it to them. RG & E is ruining people’s lives. People can not afford RG & E with all

the rate hikes and the regulators and all these extra charges, the smart meters, etc., etc. and

now they're coming in here asking us for more. Well, my response to that is there’s nothing left

to give. But of course, this Zoning Board is going to fill in the blanks and find something that

they haven't yet given on behalf of the taxpayers to RG & E who has already taken so much

from so many people. I already know how you folks feel about this subject. You're going to

advocate for RG & E over the citizens, but I want to make it clear on the record at this Zoning

Board meeting that I am absolutely intolerant of RG & E and I will never forfeit any space, any

variances or special use permits to RG & E until they start to negotiate with us and get the rate

hikes lowered to so that people can live without the grief from RG & E. That is all I want to

say, thanks.

RESOLUTION 26-0015 Michael Short made a motion TYPE II

Spampinato.

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

Granting the variances will not impact the essential character of the neighborhood. There’s an

existing substation there. They’re expanding it and the expansion will include some buildings that

will make it fit in more with the residential character along Klem Road. They did consider an

alternative building a new one that would have to be somewhere or in the same area and they found

that it was probably better to expand and improve what they have versus trying to develop a whole

new site. The requested variance is not substantial based on what’s there now and what they’re

asking for. There aren’t any detrimental physical or environmental conditions at least that as were

Pg. 41 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

described or presented this evening based on the construction or the improving of the substation.

And while it is self-created it’s necessary and it’s....it becomes a public safety issue in this

particular case for the use of the site.

more power is required. Which means the substations have to be increased or more substations

have to be included, which instead of taking up additional green space within the town, RG & E

has opted to utilize an existing substation property to make those improvements.

RESOLUTION 26-0016

CONDITIONS:

Michael Short made a motion for AREA

Applicant Eric Thorne of Rochester Gas and

Electric Corporation is requesting AREA

VARIANCES for the following listed below

in association with upgrades to an existing

RG&E Substation GIS Building - Front

setback of 29.5’ where 60’ is required.

. Control Room - Rear setback of 40.6° where

55’ is required.

. 9 fence within the front yard, located 13.7’

from the property line where a 15’ setback is

required. (That was a typo, but it is indicated

on the plans as 13.7, so I would just like to

clarify that.

. 9’ fence within the rear yard, located 9.1’ from

the property line where a 15’ setback is

required.

. 9 fence within the side yard, located 5.8’ from

the property line where a 15’ setback is

required on a 0.77-acre

9 fence within the side yard, located 5.8’

from the property line where a 15’ setback is

required.

. Minimum lot size of 0.77-acres where 3-acres

for non-residential use is required parcel

having SBL #064. 14-2-17.WEB located in the

R-2 Single-Family Residential District under

Section 350-11 of the Code of the Town of

Webster of which was seconded by Chris

Centola.

Pg. 42 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

e The applicant must obtain all necessary governmental permits, including a Town

Building Permit.

e That one-year significant construction shall expire April 14, 2027

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

project be started.

well on your way with.

e Approval of minutes for March 10, 2026 (SHORT/CENTOLA)

VOTE:

Mr. Short AYE

Mrs. Volo ABSENT

Mr. Spampinato AYE

Mr. Prescott ABSENT

Mr. Centola AYE

Mrs. Damelio AYE

Mr. Accorso AYE

Since there are no further applications before the Board, Michael Short adjourned tonight’s

meeting at 8:15 p.m.

Cen DAVE RE?

Corrine Volo, Secretary

Katherine Kolich, Recording Secretary

Pg. 43 April 14, 2026 Zoning Meeting

MAY 13°26 avi10-38

ILED WEBSTER TWN CLK