Zoning Board of Appeals

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2012 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL ROOM CALL TO ORDER: Bill Moore, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. SALUTE TO THE FLAG PRESENT: Bill Moore, Chairman; Adam McNeill, Secretary; Gary Hasbrouck; "Skip” Carlson; Shirley Poppel; Oksana Ludd LATE ARRIVAL: Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman; arrived at 7:12 P.M. STAFF: Susan Barden, Senior Planner Joe Scala, City Attorney ANNOUNCEMENT OF RECORDING OF PROCEEDING: The proceedings of this meeting are being taped for the benefit of the secretary. Because the minutes are not a verbatim record of the proceedings, the minutes are not a word-for-word transcript of the recording. NEW BUSINESS: 1. #2667 SARATOGA SPRING WATER CO., 11 Geyser Road, area variance to maintain an expansion of the parking area; seeking relief from the minimum front yard setback to parking in the Institutional General District. Applicant: Adam Matcore, President; Nick Palma, Plant Engineer. SEQRA: Action appears to be a Type II action. The applicant stated they are here to expand the parking lot. Over time the road became larger and the frontage of the building became closer to the road. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Minimum front yard setback 40 FEET 0 FEET 40 FEET (100%) PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:10 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like to comment on this application.  None heard. Susan Barden, Senior Planner stated a Saratoga County Planning Board referral is required. Adam McNeill, Secretary read into the record correspondence dated August 20, 2012 from the Saratoga County Planning Board with comment specifying any future expansion of parking or buildings at this site to be referred to County Department of Public Works. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman arrived at 7:12 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:13 P.M. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman presented the following motion: IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF Saratoga Spring Water Co. 11 Geyser Rd. Saratoga Springs NY 12866 from the determination of the Building Inspector involving the premises at 11 Geyser Road, in the City of Saratoga Springs, New York being tax parcel number 178 -1-32 in the Inside District, on the Assessment Map of said City. The appellant having applied for an area variance under the Zoning Ordinance of said City, as amended to maintain the existing front yard parking area for a business in the Industrial General District and public notice having been duly given of a hearing on said application held on the 10th day of September 2012. In consideration of the balance between benefit to the applicant with detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, I move that the following area variance for the following amount of relief: TYPE OF REQUIREMENT DISTRICT EXISTING PROPOSED RELIEF REQUESTED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO PARKING 40’ 0’ 0’ 40’, OR 100% As per the submitted plans or lesser dimensions, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has demonstrated this benefit cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant. The application identifies three options to the variance that were explored, including moving the parking area away from the setback or to an alternate location on the site or reducing the number of parking spaces. According to the applicant, these alternatives were not deemed feasible:  Moving the parking area directly away from the road would put the parking area on a steep slope and close to a wetland,  Moving the parking area to the other side of the building would force the employees to walk considerable distances through either a manufacturing plant- with safety and sanitation issues and the need to wear safety equipment- or on a long path outside along a busy road, which would also cause safety risks and force employees out into inclement weather in winter.  Reducing the number of spots would not meet the parking needs of the employees and cause the need to find parking elsewhere- which brings back the first two problems shown above. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 2 of 8  2. The applicant has demonstrated that granting this variance will not create an undesirable change in neighborhood character or detriment to nearby properties. The applicant notes that the existing parking area has not caused more than minimal visual changes, and further notes that this setback encroachment has been in place for nine years without complaints or even comments from neighbors. The Board notes that a condition is requested below to add vegetative buffering to further screen the impact of this parking area. 3. The variance is substantial, however given the uniqueness of the building’s positioning on the property and the fact that this condition is already in place without complaints being received by the applicant, the Board finds the setback variance request to be reasonable. 4. This variance will not have significant adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or district. As the applicant points out, they have maintained a consistent level of permeability over the years. 5. The alleged difficulty is self-created as the applicant wishes to maintain this parking area. However, this is not fatal to the application. Condition: With appropriate approval from County Department of Public Works, purse the addition of vegetative buffering to the area on the southeastern side of the lot, however limited to the planting of low-profile/minimal growth shrubbery as long as such planting will not impair current degree of sight distance. The Board notes that Saratoga Springs Planning Board review is required. Saratoga County Planning Board approval received on August 20, 2012, with comment specifying any future expansion of parking or buildings at this site to be referred to county Department of Public Works. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Gary Hasbrouck noted that the vegetative buffer described in the resolution is on Saratoga County Right of Way. A note should be added to the resolution that the applicant should seek approval from Saratoga County. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 2. #2624.1 KLIKOCKI PROPERTY CELL TOWER 2328 NYS Route 50, second extension to previously granted use variance for a new telecommunications facility (prior applicant was SBA and Verizon Wireless) in the Office Medical Business District and Rural Residence -1 Districts. A Use Variance was originally granted July 16, 2009, with an expiration date of January 16, 2011. The first extension was approved March 14, 2011 extending the approval to July 16, 2012. BACKGROUND: Use Variance first extension granted March 14, 2011. Use Variance granted July 16, 2009. Site Plan approval granted November 2, 2009. DRC Architectural approval granted December 3, 2009. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 3 of 8 SEQRA A SEQRA Negative Declaration was issued on May 14, 2009. Applicant: Walter Klikocki Mr. Klikocki stated this is a second extension of the Use Variance. He explained an issue with the railroad crossing. After the approval for the cell tower the railroad demanded another crossing. This is being resolved. It has taken a longer period of time. SBA approached me back in 2005 and kept renewing their options. The issues with the railroad crossing had them back off of the site. I am now the applicant so the project can remain viable. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman asked the applicant if there were any significant changes to the site or neighborhood and that the circumstances and finding of fact by which the original variance was granted have not significantly changed. The applicant stated extra time is need to resolve build issues. There have been no significant changes to the site or the neighborhood. Nothing has changed. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman stated Site Plan Review and Architectural Review approval have both expired. The applicant was questioned as to why he allowed these approval to expire. Mr. Klikocki stated he did not know he had to request extensions for these items. He thought he only needed to seek an extension from the ZBA. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:34 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience would like speak regarding this application. Mark Sweeney, Whiteman, Osterman and Hanna stated he was representing SBA on this project. Basically we are not here before you tonight because the railroad issues became too complex. Bill Moore, Chairman stated we will defer this application to our meeting next week so all the Board members can have time to review this project and we should have a reply from the Saratoga County Planning Board at that time. Bill Moore, Chairman stated that the public hearing will remain open. 3. #2668 BURKE ADDITION, 18 E. Harrison Street, area variance for attached garage to an existing single-family residence; seeking relief from the minimum total side yard setback and maximum lot coverage for the principal building requirements in the Urban Residential-3 District. SEQRA: This appears to be a Type II action. AREA VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RELIEF REQUESTED Maximum building coverage principal building 30% 47% 17% (57%) Minimum total side yard setback 12 feet 20.6 feet 5.5 feet 6.5 feet (54%) Applicant: Cornelius and Susan Burke City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 4 of 8 The Burke's are looking to seek an area variance due to the non conforming nature of the property they own. We would like to build a garage for storage. We are looking to also do some other renovations to the property. We are looking to build a single attached garage with a master suite built upstairs. This building is an old building and is in need of renovation for energy efficiency and for aesthetics. Skip Carlson asked for the lot permeability calculation, what is existing currently and what it will be. PUBLIC HEARING: Bill Moore, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:48 P.M. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. None heard. Bill Moore, Chairman stated we will leave the public hearing open. If you can provide Susan with the information requested, she will forward it onto the Board and we should have a resolution and a decision for you next Monday. 5. STEWART'S SHOPS CORP., 3 Maple Dell, use variance to permit offices uses on the premises in the Tourist Related Business District. This application was heard at the July 2, 2012 meeting, the public hearing was opened and the application was adjourned to July 16, 2012. The Board asked staff to provide additional information regarding the historic zoning of the property. The public hearing remains open. SEQRA: This is an unlisted action. Part I of and EAF was submitted. PARCEL HISTORY: Most recently the applicant sought a zoning map amendment from TRBD to HGBD or a zoning text amendment to include "business/professional office" and "medical office/clinic" to TRBD. This application was heard at the July 2, 2012 meeting, the public hearing was opened and the application was adjourned to July 16, 2012. The Board asked staff to provide additional information regarding the historic zoning of the property. At the July 16, 2012 meeting the Board requested additional information regarding evaluation of use variances, specifically, level of specificity of use and granting of the minimum relief to alleviate the hardship. The public hearing remains open. Agent: Jennifer Howard, Stewart Shops. Ms. Howard reviewed the application and what had transpired since their last appearance before the Board. Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman stated he was not in attendance at the last meeting however he did watch the web cast and is prepared to render a decision on this application. Shirley Poppel, stated she was not in attendance at the last meeting, however she did watch the web cast and is prepared to render a decision on this application. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 5 of 8 Adam McNeill, secretary stated that they should read through the draft motion because two members were not present and open it up for discussion. Adam McNeill presented the following resolution. IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF STEWART'S SHOPS CORPORATION 3 MAPLE DELL SARATOGA SPRINGS, NEW YORK 12866 I move the above application of Stewart’s Shops for a use variance on above referenced property being tax parcel number 166.5-2-40, limited to the 1,300 square foot building in the east corner of the property, to permit: office- medical/clinics, office-business/professional in the City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Ordinance in a Tourist Related Business District (TRBD). As shown by the submitted documentation and oral presentation to the Zoning Board of Appeals, and public hearing having been duly held on July 2nd and July 16th, 2012, be approved because all four standards required to demonstrate the hardship have been proven by the applicant. 1. The applicant has demonstrated that this property cannot yield a reasonable financial return as demonstrated by competent financial evidence, if used for any permissible use. The applicant purchased the property in 1971. Annual maintenance costs are $8,500 per year, with an additional $5,100 a year of property and school tax, totaling annual carrying costs of $13,600 per year. There currently is no income being generated from the building. The applicant submitted a narrative which states the property has been marketed for lease starting in July 2011. The property has been listed on stewartsshops.com, and as of July 2nd 2012 there have been thirty contacts with regard to the use of this building. In addition, since July 2011 there has been a “For Lease” sign on the south side of the building, facing Route 50, a busy and well traversed road. 2. The applicant has demonstrated the alleged hardship relating to this property is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the neighborhood or district. In looking at the property in totality, this property is unique in that it has two buildings on one lot, and the uses granted for the two buildings on the lot are substantially different. At the time the current property owners purchased the property business and professional office uses were permitted in the district (B- 2). In addition, a use variance was granted in 1997 to construct a 2,356 sq. ft. medical office building in the C-3 district. This approval was not acted upon and expired. The property is located adjacent to an existing medical office building. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the requested use variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The requested use variance will not be inconsistent with prior uses for this building. In the past, this building has been occupied by a real estate office and computer repair business, uses that are largely similar in scope to the proposed office related uses. The applicant states “The proposal of office use will not alter the character of the neighborhood as the building has been commercial for over thirty years”. In addition, the property is located adjacent to an existing medical office building. Furthermore, the number parking spaces present on site currently exceeds the required number of spaces for the proposed uses. 4. The applicant has shown that the alleged hardship is not self-created. As the applicant states, zoning changes initiated many years after the purchase of this property created the hardship related to this application and has significantly reduced the allowable uses for this property. The property was purchased in 1971 and at the time allowable uses were business and professional offices. A change in the code in 1990 removed the general office uses allowed on the property and limited permissible uses to what was allowed in a C-3 then TRBD district the only office use that was provided for was real estate offices. Note: Saratoga County Planning Board issued an approval on June 21, 2012. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 6 of 8 This motion is made with the following conditions: 1. This approval is limited to the 1,300 sq. ft. existing building positioned on the east side of this property with no future expansion. 2. Any prior use variances associated with this above reference portion of the property are hereby removed. 3. City Planning Board Site Plan Review as may be required to implement the use variance. Seconded by Gary Hasbrouck. Bill Moore, Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Keith Kaplan stated this is an unusual situation, since we usually only have one use on the table and I would prefer that it have only have one use. Bill Moore, Chairman stated he is comfortable with this because of the size of the building. Discussion ensued among the Board members regarding usage and the uniqueness of the project. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, opposed; Adam McNeill, Secretary, opposed; Skip Carlson, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Oksana Ludd, opposed; Shirley Poppel, in favor MOTION PASSES: 4-3 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Adam McNeill made a motion to approve the May 21, 2012 meeting as submitted. Skip Carlson seconded by the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, abstain; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, abstain; Oksana Ludd, abstain; Shirley Poppel, in favor MOTION PASSES: 4-0-3 Adam McNeill, Secretary, made a motion to approve the June 25, 2012 meeting minutes as submitted. Gary Hasbrouck seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, abstained; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor; Oksana Ludd, abstained MOTION PASSES: 5-0-2 Adam McNeill, secretary, made a motion to accept the July 2, 2012 meeting minutes as submitted. City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 7 of 8 Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, in favor; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor; Shirley Poppel, in favor MOTION PASSES: 7-0 Adam McNeill, Secretary made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 16, 2012 meeting as submitted. Skip Carlson seconded the motion. VOTE: Bill Moore, Chairman, in favor; Keith Kaplan, Vice Chairman, abstain; Adam McNeill, Secretary, in favor; Skip Carlson, in favor; Gary Hasbrouck, in favor; Oksana Ludd, in favor; Shirley Poppel, abstain MOTION PASSES: 5-0-2 UPCOMING ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING: Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting is scheduled for Monday, September 17, 2012 at 7:00 P.M. MOTION TO ADJOURN. There being not further business to discuss, Bill Moore, Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:26 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Diane M. Buzanowski Recording Secretary Approved: 10/15/12 City of Saratoga Springs Zoning Board Minutes – Monday, September 10, 2012 - Page 8 of 8