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, 2019 AT 6:30 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Joyce Baranski, Vice Chairperson Mr. Mark Cotch Ms. Mary Shanks Mr. Paul Heroux, Acting Chairperson MEMBERS ABSENT: Mr. Michael Briggs, Chairperson ALSO PRESENT: Robyn King, Deputy Director of Economic Development & Planning CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 26, 2019 MEETING Acting Chairperson Heroux called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm and asked for the Board to review and comment on the June 26, 2019 meeting minutes. There being no questions, Member Cotch made a motion to approve the meeting minutes, which Member Shanks seconded and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN Michael Briggs Absent Joyce Baranski X Mark Cotch X Paul Heroux X Mary Shanks X CONSIDERATION OF AN AREA VARIANCE FOR A FENCE AT 10 CHADWYCK SQUARE Acting Chairperson Heroux read the application aloud noting that the applicant applied to install a 7 foot tall fence to the Glen Meadows Homeowners Association, which was approved. Acting Chairperson Heroux noted that after receiving a complaint about the fence, a City Code Enforcement Officer went to inspect the fence to verify it was 7 feet tall. Acting Chairperson Heroux explained that the applicant submitted a variance application for the fence located at 10 Chadwyck Square, that the property is in the R-1 District and that it’s a Type II Action under SEQR. Acting Chairperson Heroux noted that the applicant was looking for two variances, one for the height of the fence and another for the setback of the fence as the fence exceeded six feet in height. Acting Chairperson Heroux explained that the Homeowners Association has their own architectural standards and the applicant has explained there are some unique circumstances the necessitate this fence. Acting Chairperson Heroux read aloud the six considerations that the Board has to review in exploring an area variance. Ms. Deirdre Martin of 10 Chadwyck Square approached the Board and explained that she was requesting an area variance for the 7 foot tall fence on her property and that she felt there were several unique circumstances. Ms. Martin noted that there is a community walking path adjacent to her property, and that given where the slab in her backyard is set, there is no opportunity to set the fence back from the property line. Ms. Martin stated that she is living in a townhouse within the City, so there’s a minimal sense of privacy right now and a fence would help with this as well as help contain her small dogs as there are larger dogs on each side of the property. Ms. Martin noted that there were already a few issues with neighbors and the higher fence allowed for a little more privacy given that she is tall and her significant other is also very tall. Ms. Martin explained that she did not feel that the existence of the fence caused harm to anyone in any way and is not a safety risk. Ms. Martin noted that while she did not get a permit, the fence was installed by a family member who had 30 years experience with installing fences and that she feels the fence does not cause detriment to anyone in the neighborhood. Ms. Martin also explained that the Homeowners Association had previously approved the 7 foot tall fence, which replaced an existing fence. Acting Chairperson Heroux asked if any of the Board members had any questions. Member Cotch asked if during the Glen Meadows Homeowners Association review, if they notified the neighbors and Ms. Martin noted that she did not think so. Member Cotch asked if they just ask for the submission of the proposed alteration and Ms. Martin noted that a Board member measures the property line, notes how far back it can go and also notes that it cannot exceed the existing fence line. Ms. Martin explained that she detailed what the fence would look like, how long it would take to install, and submitted the formal request which was approved. Member Cotch asked if the Homeowners Association told her she needed a building permit, and Ms. Martin said they did not. Ms. Martin noted that it’s her first home and as she originally grew up in Guilderland, when she lived with her parents she said she remembered that that the Town did not require a permit if a structure was not attached to her house so she thought she was ok. Member Cotch noted that every municipality is different. Acting Chairperson Heroux asked if anyone was in the audience who would like to make a comment. Ms. Nancy Machold from 11 Chadwyck Square approached the Board and noted that she has lived at the property since 1988 and she is the next-door neighbor to the property in question and she had a written statement that she prepared for the meeting. Ms. Machold read the following statement aloud: “My name is Nancy Machold. I have owned and lived at 11 Chadwyck Square, an end-unit townhouse since November, 1988. Almost 31 years. For all of these years the backyard at 10 Chadwyck Squae has been enclosed with a fence that met the standards of the Glen Meadows Park Association Architectural Committee and the City of Cohoes Zoning Ordinances. I am opposing the variance requested by the new homeowner at #10 to allow her to keep the 7 foot fence that she had built without a City building permit. As I detailed in my opposition letter of July 17, the homeowner has included factual inaccuracies and defamatory statements to support her appeal. I will not take your time now to read those but I refer you to my opposition letter – primarily item #3. I have new information for the Appeals Board’s considerations. In the early evening of July 19, my neighbor at #12, Joan DelSignore and I were in our front yards with our dogs, my 19 pound Beagle and her smaller Maltese, when the owner of #9 came home. In a brief conversation she said she had given her dogs away to good homes because she could not afford to keep them. Consideration # 1. The benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant; The only benefit of the variance would be to the new homeowner of 10 Chadwyck Square. Now I have a 7 foot wall, that measures nearly 8 feet from the ground on my side, next to my 6 foot fence. Besides the disparate optics of it, this completely changes the nature of my property where, for nearly 30 years, I was able to have conversations over the back fence with a friendly neighbor. The wall, along with the knee high weeds in the decorative landscape rock in the front yard of #10 have a detrimental effect on the resale value of 11 Chadwyck Square. The 7 foot high wall stands 1 and a half to 2 feet higher than the other fences in the neighborhood which are mostly 5 1/2 to 6 feet high. Safety was not considered in the removal of the existing fence and the eight day wait for the new one to be installed. I could have missed it but on installation day I did not see any cement being mixed or put in the pre-existing post holes. It’s possible that the posts are not “encased in multiple feet deep of cement” as asserted in the application for a waiver. Consideration #2. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance; During a four year term that I served on the Glen Meadows Board of Directors, there were several discussions when homeowners decided to make unauthorized changes to their property. Our discussions centered on harmony and following the rules. By allowing a variance for a 7 foot tall fence I believe that the Zoning Board of Appeals establishes a precedent that as others of the 267 homeowners apply for similar waivers could eventually diminish property values throughout Glen Meadows and result in a loss of tax revenue to the City of Cohoes. Consideration #3. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance; I maintain that it is not the responsibility of the Glen Meadows Park Association or of the City of Cohoes Zoning Board to cater to each homeowner’s personal preferences. I don’t believe that people’s height is a legitimate reason for changing the character and harmony of a neighborhood. I wonder why someone would purchase a townhouse in a densely populated area like Glen Meadows when privacy is a key issue and then demand it as an entitlement. Consideration #4. Whether the requested area variance is substantial; Most fences in the area are 5 and one-half to 6 feet tall. The variance to allow a 7 foot fence –one to one and one-half feet taller is substantial. Consideration #5. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; and The variance, if granted will have a direct impact on me and, I believe, on the value of my property. Who is going to buy a townhouse with a 7 foot wall in the backyard and knee high weeds in the landscape rock in the front yard next door? Consideration #6. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The alleged difficulty was self-created when the homeowner at #10 chose to move into an interior townhouse on Chadwyck Square. I am not opposing a fence at 10 Chadwyck Sqare. I am opposing a fence, with or without a topper, that exceeds the city’s zoning ordinances of 6 feet. Thank you” Acting Chairperson Heroux asked if all fences within the Glen Meadows neighborhood were 6 feet tall exactly, and R. King noted that a code enforcement officer measured some of the fences in the area from grade, and some slightly exceeded six feet. Acting Chairperson Heroux confirmed that the Homeowners Association did approve the application, and Ms. Martin re- affirmed. Ms. Machold asked if the Homeowners Association form had been submitted and properly filled out, and R. King noted that the approved Homeowners Association form that was submitted to the Board stated that it would be a 7 foot fence. Acting Chairperson Heroux asked if there were any other comments from the Board. Member Cotch asked if there were any pictures, and R. King noted that the pictures are included in the Board packet, which was also shared with Ms. Machold. Acting Chairperson Heroux noted that he thought it was an attractive fence, and that since there are other fences within the Glen Meadows neighborhood that are slightly taller than 6 feet, and since the Homeowners Association approved the application that Ms. Martin submitted, it made sense to approve this variance. R. King noted that most fences are six feet, there are just a few exceptions around the neighborhood. There being no further questions or comments, Acting Chairperson Heroux made a motion to approve the two variances, which was seconded by Member Cotch and the motion passed unanimously. YES NO ABSTAIN Michael Briggs Absent Joyce Baranski X Mark Cotch X Paul Heroux X Mary Shanks X Adjournment There being no further business, Member Cotch made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 6:49 pm, which was seconded by Member Shanks and passed unanimously.