Zoning Board of Appeals

CITY OF CORTLAND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CITY HALL • THIRD FLOOR • 25 COURT ST. • CORTLAND NY MEETING: JUNE 12, 2023| 5:30 PM MINUTES MAYOR RECORD OF DECISIONS SCOTT STEVE __________________ RECORD NO. 2023.06.12 - 01 ADDRESS: 14 Fox Hollow APPLICATION: Area Variance APPLICANT: James Lindley ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION: Approved BRETT BARNES, CHAIR KYLE DAVIS THOMAS LARSON RECORD NO. 2023.06.12 - 02 ADDRESS: 21 Park St. RAY PARKER APPLICATION: Area Variance APPLICANT: Robin Ptak JULIENE RAY DECISION: Approved __________________ CITY CLERK RECORD NO. 2023.06.12 - 03 ADDRESS: 66 Huntington St. ANDY JEWETT APPLICATION: Area Variance APPLICANT: Joseph Netti 607-758-8331 cityclerk@cortland.org DECISION: Approved __________________ RECORD NO. 2023.06.12 - 04 ADDRESS: 72 W. Main St. ZONING & CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER APPLICATION: Area Variance APPLICANT: Danielle Schlenker CAPTAIN ROY EVERETT DECISION: Approved 607-753-1741 reverett@cortland.org __________________ RECORD NO. 2023.06.12 - 05 ADDRESS: 178 Tompkins St. APPLICATION: Area Variance APPLICANT: Brian Rood CORPORATION COUNSEL A.J. MELDRIM DECISION: Approved __________________ RECORD NO. 2023.06.12 - 06 ADDRESS: 98 Evergreen St. DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE APPLICATION: Area Variance APPLICANT: Patrick Fitzgerald LISA HENTY DECISION: Approved as submitted inclusive of the provision that the fence cannot extend beyond the front of the house. OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK • CITY OF CORTLAND • CITY HALL • 25 COURT ST • CORTLAND NY 13045  CITY OF CORTLAND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JUNE 12, 2023 MEETING MINUTES CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The regularly scheduled meeting of the City of Cortland Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) was called to order at 5:32 p.m. in the Common Council Chambers of City Hall, 25 Court St. Cortland NY. The following ZBA members were recorded present: Kyle Davis Thomas Larson Ray Parker (recorded present at 5:41 p.m.) Juliene Ray The following members were recorded absent: Brett Barnes VARIANCE APPLICATIONS Record of Decision 2023.06.12 - 01 Area Variance - 14 Fox Hollow A public hearing was opened at 5:32 p.m. The applicant, James Lindley, seeks a variance relating to minimum lot size requirements for a deck expansion. A neighbor communicated a concern about clutter on the property which was referred to the Code Enforcement Division. The public hearing was closed at 5:34 p.m. The Zoning Board of Appeals considered and discussed the Area Variance Five Factor test pursuant to City Code, Article XV Section 300-150. The following factors were discussed and answered. 1. 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? Answer: No 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Answer: No 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? Answer: Yes 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Answer: No 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Answer: Yes Decision: A motion was adopted to approve the Area Variance application as submitted. Motioned by: Board Member Ray Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes | June 12, 2023 Page 1 of 7  Seconded by: Board Member Davis Approved: Ayes – 3 [Davis, Larson, Ray] Nays – 0 Record of Decision 2023.06.12 - 02 Area Variance - 21 Park St. A public hearing was open at 5:39 p.m. The applicant, Robin Ptak, seeks a variance relating to minimum lot size requirements for placement of a temporary mobility ramp to meet medical, physical and emergency needs. The Code Enforcement Officer clarified that the Area Variance would apply only for the purpose of a ramp. The public hearing was closed at 5:43 p.m. The Zoning Board of Appeals considered and discussed the Area Variance Five Factor test pursuant to City Code, Article XV Section 300-150. The following factors were discussed and answered. 1. 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? Answer: No 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Answer: No 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? Answer: No 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Answer: No 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Answer: No Decision: A motion was adopted to approve the Area Variance application as submitted. Motioned by: Board Member Ray Seconded by: Board Member Davis Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 Record of Decision 2023.06.12 - 03 Area Variance - 66 Huntington St. A public hearing was open at 5:49 p.m. The applicant, Joseph Netti seeks a variance relating to minimum lot size requirements for addition of a carport. Questions were posed relating to run-off of water from the proposed carport and whether the run-off would affect neighboring property. A discussion also took place regarding the amount of space covered by impervious material which exceeds that allowed by the Administrative Code. The Board noted that the map included with the application is not up to date. The public hearing was closed at 6:03 p.m. The Zoning Board of Appeals considered and discussed the Area Variance Five Factor test pursuant to City Code, Article XV Section 300-150. The following factors were discussed and answered. Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes | June 12, 2023 Page 2 of 7  1. 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? Answer: Yes 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Answer: Yes 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? Answer: Yes 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Answer: Yes 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Answer: Yes Decision: A motion was adopted to deny the Area Variance application. Motioned by: Board Member Larson Seconded by: Board Member Parker Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 Area Variance Application - 37-39 Port Watson St. A public hearing was opened at 6:15 p.m. The applicant, Paul Gallow seeks a bulk area variance for construction of a multi-unit building. The CEO conveyed concerns from a resident about how lighting and headlights will be kept from affecting neighboring properties. Al Waller, residing at an adjacent property, 52 Church St., and Alyssa Milligan, residing at 54 Church St. expressed concerns about privacy, noise and other issues. The CEO discussed potential mitigation efforts. The public hearing was closed at 6:29 p.m. Tabled: A motion was made and approved to table the application pending submission of updated maps and and further review. Motioned by: Board Member Larson Seconded by: Board Member Davis Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 Record of Decision 2023.06.12 – 4 Area Variance Application - 72 W. Main St. A public hearing was open at 7:28 p.m. The applicant, Danielle Schlenker, seeks a variance relating to minimum lot size requirements for a deck extension. The public hearing was closed at 7:38 p.m. The Zoning Board of Appeals considered and discussed the Area Variance Five Factor test pursuant to City Code, Article XV Section 300-150. The following factors were discussed and answered. 1. 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? Answer: No Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes | June 12, 2023 Page 3 of 7  2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Answer: No 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? Answer: Yes 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Answer: No 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Answer: Yes Decision: A motion was adopted to approve the Area Variance application as submitted. Motioned by: Board Member Davis Seconded by: Board Member Parker Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 Record of Decision 2023.06.12 - 5 Area Variance Application - 178 Tompkins St. A public hearing was open at 7:41 p.m. The applicant, Brian Rood, seeks a variance relating to minimum lot size requirements for a 2 foot enlargement of the driveway. The public hearing was closed at 7:44 p.m. The Zoning Board of Appeals considered and discussed the Area Variance Five Factor test pursuant to City Code, Article XV Section 300-150. The following factors were discussed and answered. 1. 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? Answer: No 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Answer: No 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? Answer: No 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Answer: No 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Answer: No Decision: A motion was adopted to approve the Area Variance application as submitted. Motioned by: Board Member Parker Seconded by: Board Member Davis Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes | June 12, 2023 Page 4 of 7  Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 Record of Decision 2023.06.12 - 6 Area Variance Application - 98 Evergreen St. A public hearing was open at 7:48 p.m. The applicant, Patrick Fitzgerald, seeks a variance for construction of a privacy fence on the front yard of a corner lot. The public hearing was closed at 7:52 p.m. The Zoning Board of Appeals considered and discussed the Area Variance Five Factor test pursuant to City Code, Article XV Section 300-150. The following factors were discussed and answered. 1. 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? Answer: No 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? Answer: No 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial? Answer: No 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Answer: No 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Answer: No Decision: A motion was adopted to approve the Area Variance application as submitted inclusive of the provision that the fence cannot extend beyond the front of the house. Motioned by: Board Member Ray Seconded by: Board Member Parker Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 Area Variance Application - 146 Groton Ave. A public hearing was open at 7:57 p.m. The applicant, Grace Goyal seeks a variance for construction of a fence and future projects. The CEO stated that the Board does not have authority to approve an Area Variance for future project. The public hearing was closed at 8:07 p.m. Tabled: A motion was made to table the agenda item to a future meeting. Motioned by: Board Member Parker Seconded by: Board Member Ray Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes | June 12, 2023 Page 5 of 7 A motion was made and approved to accept the minutes of the May 8, 2023 ZBA meeting. Motioned by: Board Member Parker Seconded by: Board Member Davis Approved: Ayes – 4 [Davis, Larson, Parker, Ray] Nays – 0 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. on motion of Ms. Ray. I, ANDREW T. JEWETT, CITY CLERK FOR THE CITY OF CORTLAND, NEW YORK, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD OF THE MOTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS OF A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE CITY OF CORTLAND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HELD ON JUNE 12, 2023. _____________________________ ANDREW T. JEWETT, CITY CLERK Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes | June 12, 2023 Page 6 of 7