Zoning Board Agendas and Minutes

MINUTES OF THE COHOES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HELD IN THE COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF COHOES CITY HALL ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 24, 2013 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. Mark Cotch Mr. Dan Kelly Mrs. Joyce Baranski Mr. Francis Houle, Vice-Chairman Mr. John Hughes, Chairman ALSO PRESENT: Ms. Melissa Ashline-Heil, Director of Building and Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM JULY 2, 2013. Chairman Hughes called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. The Chairman asked the recording secretary to take attendance. Member Cotch moved to approve the minutes of July 2, 2013. Vice Chairman Houle seconded the motion, roll of call was taken and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X Dan Kelly X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch X CONSIDERATION OF AN AREA VARIANCE FROM MAXIMUM NUMBER OF BOARDING HOUSE ROOMS FOR A PROPOSED ADDITION AT 14 STANDISH PLACE Frank Verchereau of 17 ½ Hawk Street owns a 20 unit boarding house at 14 Standish Place. He also owns a three unit boarding house at 3 Erie St. Recently a third building sustained damage from a fallen tree and Mr. Verchereau demolished that building. He now requests approval for an addition to construct four more units in the 20 unit building to house the four displaced tenants. Mr. Verchereau averred that boarding house tenants patronize Cohoes businesses more than any other resident because they typically do not have vehicles. As a result, all of their income goes to Cohoes through rent, store purchases and other services. Therefore, he believes these tenants benefit Cohoes more than any other residents: apartment tenants or homeowners who typically shop in surrounding municipalities. The applicant also argued that Cohoes is losing 57 boarding house rooms as several buildings have been converted to student housing. Yet, Cohoes needs more boarding house rooms for adult men who are now displaced and for others as this population is growing. Therefore, Mr. Verchereau claims that denying his application is prejudicial to this population. \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2013\ZBA Minutes 7.24.2013.doc Furthermore, the applicant described his tenants as nice, older men who cannot afford an apartment for a variety of reasons. In fact, his tenants live peacefully and communally in a secluded location behind the bowling alley. Therefore the tenants neither bother neighbors nor (presumably) create a drain on City resources through emergency calls. Councilwoman Diane Nolin countered that additional boarding house units would create a negative impact. Since a variance goes with the land, not with the owner, any good Mr. Verchereau provides as the owner of these boarding houses is lost when he retires or sells. The City has to consider the long-term effects of granting the variance. Furthermore she pointed out that any claimed benefit lacks sufficient data to support the contention. Chairman Hughes explained that only three units are permitted by code. The existing building has 20 units because it is grandfathered. Any additional units or new construction requires compliance with the current code. Moreover, the demolished building had the maximum three units. Why can’t the applicant rebuild? Mr. Verchereau has found that three units do not support construction or maintenance of a freestanding building. He charges $90 a week which covers everything: rent, water, sewer, electric, heat, cable, etc. However, he did not provide specifics on costs. Chairman Hughes questioned whether the applicant received insurance money when the demolished building was damaged which Mr. Verchereau confirmed. Furthermore, the argument that the decision is prejudicial to this population is not for the Zoning Board to decide. However, there are other avenues for this population to pursue for housing: section 8, social services and HUD. In addition, the applicant could increase rent for these tenants in order to meet his costs. Instead, the ZBA’s role is to determine if the requested variance meets the state mandated standards, which in this case has not been met. In this instance, the applicant’s monetary benefit does not outweigh the detriment to the community should the Board grant the variance. In fact, the variance requested would create a negative impact to the community which has sufficient low income housing. Furthermore, the applicant seeks a benefit that could be achieved by some other method, either rebuilding or increasing rents. Moreover, the variance is substantial as the maximum is three units and the applicant seeks approval for 23 total units. Chairman Hughes explained that the Board’s decision creates a precedent that would have to be applied in future requests for boarding house units. Although Mr. Verchereau clearly has created an atypical dynamic in his boarding houses, the Board has to think of the long-term impact of permitting 23 units when the code limits the maximum number to three. As a result, Vice Chairman Houle moved to deny the variance. Member Cotch seconded the motion to deny the variance which passed four to one. Therefore the Zoning Board denied the variance request. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2013\ZBA Minutes 7.24.2013.doc Dan Kelly X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch X Member Kelly moved to adjourn at 7:00 PM seconded by Member Baranski. The motion passed unanimously. \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2013\ZBA Minutes 7.24.2013.doc