Zoning Board of Appeals

City of Schenectady Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes October 7, 2020 I. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Connelly called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. Due to the closure of City Hall because of the Covid-19 Virus, the meeting was conducted online via WebEx. After calling the meeting to order Mr. Connelly explained to the members of the public present how the consideration of the applications would proceed. He stated that the applicants would have an opportunity to make their presentation to the Board, followed by any members of the public who would like to speak in favor of the application. Next any members of the public in opposition to the application would be invited to speak, followed by any further discussion or questions the Board Members wished to put forth prior to the vote. He added that after the initial presentation of the proposal the applicant would not be given another opportunity to comment unless directly questioned by a Board Member. II. ATTENDANCE PRESENT: Fred Clark; David Connelly; Mary D’Alessandro-Gilmore; Brendan Keller; Helene Lester; Avi Epstein, Neighborhood Stabilization Coordinator; Jennifer Mills, Secretary EXCUSED: James Gleason, Chair III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECK Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore recused herself from the consideration of Applications C and D by Adam Driscoll on behalf of Home Leasing. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to approve the Minutes of the September 2, 2020 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. V. NEW BUSINESS - APPLICATIONS A. JENNIFER HOWARD on behalf of STEWART’S SHOPS CORP. requests area variances for 1751 & 1757 Van Vranken Avenue (39.43-2- 48 & 39.43-2-49) located in the C-2 Mixed Use Commercial Zoning District, to allow for 2 wall signs were 1 is allowed, and an 8’10” tall freestanding sign that exceeds the maximum allowed height of 7’ pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. Marcus Andrews from Stewart’s Shops presented the application. Mr. Andrews briefly reviewed the application and explained that Stewart’s plans to raze their current store on Van Vranken Avenue, as well as the neighboring former Marty’s Hardware building, and construct a new building and a gas canopy. He noted that Stewart’s had amended the plans to include an entrance on the Van Vranken side of the building, in keeping with the City Code, and thus they are no longer seeking a variance for not having an entrance on the street-facing side of the building, but are seeking permission to have a wall sign by each entrance. Mr. Andrews also reviewed the free-standing sign proposal, explaining that the sign would have an overall height of 8’10” and thus a variance is required. Mr. Epstein noted that the proposed location of the sign does comply with City Code. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION The Board Members indicated that they had no objection to the application. SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to declare the project a Type 2 SEQR action, with no significant adverse impacts on the environment. Motion carried unanimously. AREA VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, seconded by Ms. Lester, to approve the Area Variances based on the following findings of fact: 1. No undesirable change will be produced in the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another method. 3. The variance is not substantial. 4. There will be no adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 5. The alleged hardship is not self-created. Motion carried unanimously. 2 B. BYRON DIAZ requests an area variance for 1 Cheltingham Avenue (49.70-4-1.10), located in the R-1 Single Family Zoning District, to allow for a minimum lot area less than 5,000 SF for the rehabilitation of an existing structure into a townhouse which requires that each townhouse be located on a separate lot with a minimum lot area of 5,000 SF is required pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. Dan Gaudio and Byron Diaz presented the application. Mr. Gaudio explained that after appearing before the Board at the September meeting Mr. Diaz took the Board’s suggestion and revised the proposed property lines for the two townhouses so that the lots would be closer in size to one another. He briefly reviewed the revised application. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR David Hogenkamp of Metroplex Development Authority spoke in favor of the application, stating that he is familiar with Mr. Diaz and his work and that he believes that this project will be a positive addition to the neighborhood. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION The Board Members indicated that they had no objection to the revised proposal, noting that the new lots provide a much more balanced development. SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to declare the project a Type 2 SEQR action, with no significant adverse impacts on the environment. Motion carried unanimously. AREA VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to approve the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. No undesirable change will be produced in the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another method. 3. The variance is not substantial. 4. There will be no adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 5. The alleged hardship is not self-created. And with the following condition: 3  1. A final revised site plan will be submitted to City staff for approval after the new building lots are surveyed. Motion carried unanimously. C. ADAM DRISCOLL on behalf of HOME LEASING requests a use variance for 90 Elmer Avenue (39.83-3-12) located in the R-2 Two Family Zoning District, to allow for the conversion of a former school into 51 senior housing units where multifamily dwellings are prohibited pursuant to Schedule A of the Zoning Ordinance. Adam Driscoll, Development Manager for Home Leasing, Jennica Huff, Executive Director of Better Community Neighborhoods, Ashley Chapman, Attorney for the applicants, Scott Lansing of Lansing Engineering, and Jeff McDonald, Engineer, presented the application. The applicants reviewed the application and the use variance criteria. The applicants noted that they will be seeking historic tax credits for the development and that the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) will be overseeing the project. Mr. Lansing reviewed the site plan and noted that the footprint of the building will remain the same, with the only change to the exterior of the structure being that the small areas that are currently one story will be brought up to two stories. Much of the discussion centered around the argument that the property could not realize a reasonable return within the allowed uses. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR David Hogenkamp of Metroplex Development Authority spoke in favor of the application, stating that Metroplex believes that the proposed use of the building as senior housing will have a positive impact on the surrounding neighborhood. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION The Board Members discussed the application, noting that they agreed that the applicants had set forth sufficient evidence that the building could not realize a reasonable return within the allowed uses. MOTION TO DECLARE LEAD AGENCY Motion by Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Lester, to declare the Board of Zoning Appeals Lead Agency for SEQR review. Motion carried unanimously, with Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore recusing herself from the vote. 4  SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Ms. Lester, seconded by Mr. Clark, to adopt a Negative Declaration on this unlisted action pursuant to SEQR based on the review and assessment of the full environmental assessment forms Parts 1 and 2, with the Negative Declaration being set forth in Part 3 of the full Environmental Assessment Form. Motion carried unanimously, with Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore recusing herself from the vote. USE VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Ms. Lester, seconded by Mr. Clark, to approve the Use Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The property cannot yield a reasonable return within the allowed uses. 2. The alleged hardship is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the neighborhood. 3. The character of the neighborhood will not be altered. 4. The alleged hardship is not self-created. Motion carried unanimously, with Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore recusing herself from the vote. D. ADAM DRISCOLL on behalf of HOME LEASING requests area variances for 90 Elmer Avenue (39.83-3-12) located in the R-2 Two Family Zoning District, to allow for a building height of 64’ where 35’ is allowed, a minimum lot area of 75,114 SF where 114,750 is required, a side yard setback 9.7’ where 12’ is required, a street side yard of 13.9’ where 16.1’ is required, 23 parking spaces where a max of 14 is allowed, and a 32’ SF externally illuminated sign where a 1 SF non-illuminated sign is allowed pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. Adam Driscoll, Development Manager for Home Leasing, Jennica Huff, Executive Director of Better Community Neighborhoods, Ashley Chapman, Attorney for the applicants, Scott Lansing of Lansing Engineering, and Jeff McDonald, Engineer, presented the application. Mr. Lansing reviewed the application and the desired variances, pointing out that the need for several of them stems from the existing conditions on the site that cannot be changed without altering an historic building. The Board and applicants discussed the parking configuration and the proposed sign for the site. The Board expressed some reservations about the size of the sign, but after discussing the size of the current sign on the site it was decided that the proposed sign would not be out of scale with the property. 5  PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION Mark Graynor, resident of the neighborhood, spoke in opposition to the proposal, stating that a use of this density would add parking and traffic problems to the area and questioning why 1.5 parking spaces per residential unit are not being required for this project. FURTHER DISCUSSION The parking on the site was discussed further. Mr. Lansing noted that by analyzing parking habits at their other senior housing properties Home Leasing has concluded that they need one space per each of 60% of the units. Mr. Epstein explained that at the discretion of the City the parking requirements for senior housing have been determined to be less than those of standard residential units. SEQR RESOLUTION See Item C above. AREA VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Mr. Clark, to approve the Area Variances based on the following findings of fact: 1. No undesirable change will be produced in the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another method. 3. The variance is not substantial. 4. There will be no adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 5. The alleged hardship is not self-created. And with the following condition: 1. The project must obtain site plan approval from the City Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously, with Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore recusing herself from the vote. E. KEMRAJ SHIVPRASHAD requests an area variance for 1461 State Street (49.68-5-1) located in the C-2 Mixed Use Commercial Zoning District, to allow for a commercial business to provide 7 parking spaces where 11 is required pursuant to Schedule F of the Zoning Ordinance. Kemraj Shivprashad presented the application. 6  Mr. Shivprashad explained that he recently received site plan approval from the City Planning Commission for the project and at the time it was determined that he did not have room to provide the adequate onsite parking to meet the City Code. He explained that this is a corner lot with an abundance of on-street parking near the site. He noted that there is a CDTA bus stop in front of the property and that much of the traffic to local businesses in the area is pedestrian. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION The Board members indicated that they had no objection to the application. SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to declare the project a Type 2 SEQR action, with no significant adverse impacts on the environment. Motion carried unanimously. AREA VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to approve the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. No undesirable change will be produced in the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another method. 3. The variance is not substantial. 4. There will be no adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 5. The alleged hardship is not self-created. Motion carried unanimously. VII. MOTION TO ADJOURN Motion by Mr. Clark, seconded by Ms. Lester, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. 7