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, JUNE 25, 2014 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. John Hughes, Chairman Mr. Francis Houle, Vice-Chairman Mr. Randy Koniowka Mr. Mark Cotch Mrs. Joyce Baranski ALSO PRESENT: Mrs. Melissa Cherubino, Director of Building and Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM MAY 28, 2014. 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 March 26, 2014. Vice Chairman Houle seconded the motion, roll of call was taken and the motion passed four to one absention. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X Randy Koniowka X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch X CONSIDERATION OF AN AREA VARIANCE FROM SETBACKS FOR A POOL AT 19 RIVER STREET Carl Jourdanais sought an 8.5’ area variance approval for his existing 16’ round above ground pool which is located 1.5’ from the side property line abutting Jackson Avenue. Mr. Jourdanais uses the principal structure as a single family home for him, his wife and children. A recently renovated catch basin sits on the corner of Jackson Avenue and River Street. The pool replaced the same product on the same footprint that failed eight years ago. At that time the pool wall collapse did not flood any neighbor or the street. According to the applicant the pool is at least 60’ from any neighbor. When questioned whether any other location would accommodate the pool and preserve the required setbacks, Mr. Jourdanais explained that his yard does no have any other space 15’ wide or greater to accommodate the pool. He has 4’ from the pool to the house, but needs to preserve that path. When questioned whether a deck is used for access or conversely the placement of the removable ladder when not in use, Mr. Jourdanais described placing the removable ladder on the other side of the yard. Furthermore he drains off 1.5’ of water off in the fall for storage until the next summer. \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2014\ZBA Minutes 5.28.2014.doc Mr. Koniowka questioned the powerline showing on a submitted photograph. Mr. Jourdanais removed the lead cord and replaced with an underground dedicated line as required by code. The only overhead line is a phone cable which isn’t directly over the pool. As a result, Vice Chairman Houle moved to approve the variance. Member Baranski seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X Randy Koniowka X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch X CONSIDERATION OF AN AREA VARIANCE FROM SETBACKS AT 259 VLIET BOULEVARD The applicant did not attend the meeting. Therefore, Vice Chairman Houle moved to table the variance. Member Cotch seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X Randy Koniowka X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch X CONSIDERATION OF AN AREA VARIANCE FROM SETBACKS AT 580 SARATOGA STREET Bill Pterniak proposed replacing his existing 10’X17’ garage with a 24’X24’ garage. The existing garage won’t accommodate even one vehicle. The new structure would accommodate two vehicles and basic lawn tools. Vice Chairman Houle asked whether it would have a pitched roof, whether any drainage problems would result and the garage height. Mr. Pterniak described 8’ walls with a pitched roof as staying below the code maximum of 15’. He hasn’t experienced any drainage problems to date. Chairman Hughes asked what is adjacent to the structure and Mr. Pterniak explained that the neighbor’s home is 30-40’ away beyond the driveway. Member Baranski added that the house sits back on the lot. As a result Vice Chairman Houle moved to approve the variance. Member Baranski seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2014\ZBA Minutes 5.28.2014.doc Randy Koniowka X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch X CONSIDERATION OF REHEARING AN AREA VARIANCE FROM FENCE HEIGHT AT 43 DAVID DRIVE Laurie Kmiec of 42 David Drive requested a rehearing of the area variance from fence height for 43 David Drive approved at the May 28th meeting. She hired a surveyor who determined that the neighbor’s existing fence is 6” on her property. Furthermore the survey shows that her fence is 6” in from the property line, making the three newly installed 8’ high cedar panels – which are 12” from her fence – only 6”-9” from the property line. She also described a letter written by a real estate agent she retained to assess her property value indicating that the fence lowers her property value. Chairman Hughes explained that the property values argument was considered during the original request. He then asked the Building and Planning Director whether Ms. Kmiec had disclosed the location discrepancy with Code Enforcement. Mrs. Cherubino confirmed that code measured the fence height and distance; however the exact property line dispute can only be resolved as a civil matter since the City lacks any definitive legal description of property boundaries and the neighbor could dispute survey findings with their own survey. Chairman Hughes added that the Zoning Board can not mediate property line or neighborhood disputes as its only purpose is considering variances from the zoning code. Councilman Roger Ceccucci commented that he is against fence variances. He is concerned that it will prompt other neighbors to request fence variances. Chairman Hughes pointed out that the time to speak in favor or against a variance is during the variance proceeding, not at the consideration of a rehearing. Member Koniowka moved to approve the rehearing request. However, since no other board members seconded the motion the rehearing request failed. CONSIDERATION OF A USE VARIANCE FOR OVERNIGHT TRAINING AT 244 ONTARIO STREET Architect Dan Sanders represented owner Dr. Vrao Volenti in a request to convert a former medical office buildings into a training school with overnight accommodations for students on the second floor. The building contains a Samaritan Lab, but is 90% vacant at this time leaving 3500 sq ft on the first floor and 3800 on the second floor. Mr. Sanders suggests that the limited availability of parking – the lot contains 14 spaces – which is too few for the size of the building and any proposed or permitted use, precludes permitted uses in the building. At the same time Mr. Sanders suggested that the proposed use would negate a need for parking spaces since the participants would arrive by public transportation from out of town. Mr. Sanders also explained that the applicant scaled back the proposal to three rooms with two beds and one single room for the instructor. In addition the applicant will keep offices on the \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2014\ZBA Minutes 5.28.2014.doc first floor and in one quadrant of the second floor. Mr. Sanders explained that the applicant has had difficulty marketing the property to doctors or hospitals, so he would consider other professional offices such as lawyers, accountants or other professionals. Vice Chairman Houle asked how many doctors’ offices would fit in the space. Dr. Voleti explained that the building could accommodate one to two doctors’ offices. Dr. Patel spoke on the applicant’s behalf and as a former part-owner of the building. The doctors in the building took ownership because the mortgage wasn’t paid at the time but has since been satisfied. Many of the physicians retired, while others passed away and yet others relocated practices. Meanwhile, despite efforts to market to hospitals and doctors, code violations as well as the size of the building deterred the local hospitals from investing in the building for satellite offices. Therefore the doctors who owned the property transferred title to the Indo-American Senior Citizens Care Foundation, a non profit created by Dr. Voleti. He avers that the proposed training center would bring activity to the building. In fact, the applicant prefers the overnight accommodations so someone can watch the building. Second Ward Councilman Fred Turcotte spoke against the proposal, citing the vagueness of the proposal. He is also opposed to the idea that the owner cannot make a permitted use of the property, pointing out it appears the applicant is more focused on making it tax exempt than on repairing or occupying the structure. Fourth Ward Councilwoman Diane Nolin also spoke against the proposal, pointing out that the variance would stay with the property, not this particular proposal. Dormitory or transient dwelling uses are not permitted in the commercial district. Neither are educational facilities. Yet the presence of this proposed training academy would likely make it more difficult to market to permissible uses. Chairman Hughes explained that uses variances standards are significant – requiring proof that the owner cannot make any other permissible economic use of the property. He pointed out the applicant did not submit any economic justification including expenses and income. He questioned the cost of needed repairs to bring the building to code. Dr. Voleti suggested $100,000 for new roofing, siding and interior work. Chairman Hughes commented that the proposed work sounded more like $200,000. Would the asking price support the current conditions of the property including needed repairs? Why wouldn’t the applicant invest that money to make a permitted use of the building rather than this training academy? Both Chairman Hughes and Member Koniowka asked who would run the training center. How did they find this opportunity? Dr. Voleti personally knows Surya Salupa who lives and works in NYC and incorporated the SAI Foundation, a group financed by a separate corporation. Dr. Voleti called Mr. Salupa to answer questions. The SAI Foundation helps create employment opportunities for people in need. Students would arrive by train to participate in computer training. In five years the Foundation and applicant would build another facility in East Greenbush. Board members expressed concern that the variance would run with the building and the proposed use is short term. Mr. Sanders averred that the lack of parking deters potential tenants. However Chairman Hughes stated that an area variance for parking is an easier standard to overcome than the use \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2014\ZBA Minutes 5.28.2014.doc variance. Furthermore, the Chairman recommended opening or marketing the site as a daycare site since parents could use the municipal lot for pick-up and only a few employees would be on- site all day. Vice Chairman Houle questioned whether the applicant would consider running the academy without the overnight accommodations. Dr. Patel agreed that he could house the students in his motel on Central Avenue. Member Koniowka asked is Dr. Patel owns the Skylane or Monte Carlo, which the doctor denied. When asked which motel Dr. Patel offered both the Comfort Inn and Days Inn by the airport. Finally, the Board questioned the specifics of the computer training academy. Dr. Voleti claimed to have sent details to the Building and Planning Director. However the only documentation was a vague description for a certificate of incorporation. Chairman Hughes questioned the graduation rate and the specific computer training provided by the academy. He also questioned who pays the tuition and how much it cost to provide training to a student. For the amount of capital needed to bring the building to code and install a computer lab wouldn’t it be easier to create the facility where it’s permitted by zoning? Member Koniowka asked the age of students as well as from where these students would travel to Cohoes. Dr. Voleti phoned Mr. Salupa to answer questions. Mr. Salupa explained that another corporation pays for the program. First he indicated students would come from NYC, then within 100 mile radius, then from Kingston. The program lasts two weeks and is arranged with the State although the applicants did not provide any proof of the state’s involvement in the program. He described the students as 35-40 year olds who earned a master’s degree, whereas earlier in the application process he described students as unemployed and in need of employment computer training. Vice Chairman Houle questioned the need for another program when the area is saturated with educational institutions whose existing facilities could be used for such a program. Mr. Salupa countered that these are not college courses, and the program is free unlike college courses. However he did not specify the content of the courses. Vice Chairman Houle clarified that less capital would be required to establish the program where facilities are available – such as at a college. Vice Chairman Houle also explained that each of these questions would have to be addressed – and clearly. As a result of the proposal’s vagueness and failure to prove an inability to make any other permissible economic use of the property, Member Koniowka moved to deny the variance. Member Baranski seconded the motion which passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN John Hughes X Joyce Baranski X Randy Koniowka X Frank Houle X Mark Cotch ABSENT \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2014\ZBA Minutes 5.28.2014.doc Member Koniowka moved to adjourn at 8:15 PM seconded by Vice Chairman Houle. The motion passed unanimously. \\cohoes.local\CoC-Data\Users\mashline-heil\Boards, Commissions, & Agencies\ZBA\ZBA\minutes\ZBA Minutes 2014\ZBA Minutes 5.28.2014.doc