Zoning Board of Appeals

City of Schenectady Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes November 3, 2021 I. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Gleason called the meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. After calling the meeting to order Mr. Gleason explained to the members of the public 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: James Gleason, Chair; David Connelly; Mary D’Alessandro- Gilmore; Brendan Keller; Helene Lester; Avi Epstein, Neighborhood Stabilization Coordinator ABSENT: Fred Clark III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECK None. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES Motion by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, seconded by Ms. Lester, to approve the Minutes of the October 6, 2021 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. V. NEW BUSINESS - APPLICATIONS A. Avril D’Souza DMD requests an area variance for 1552 Union St (50.29-1-5), located within the R-2 Two-Family Residential zoning district, to allow for the installation of a handicapped ramp with no side yard setback where a minimum 6ft setback is required pursuant to Schedule C of the zoning ordinance. Mr. Epstein informed the Board that the applicant was not in attendance to present the application as required and suggested moving the item to the end of the agenda. After reviewing the other agenda items the Board made a motion to table the application for 1552 Union St as the applicant was not present.  PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION None. SEQR RESOLUTION No motion was made as the application was tabled. AREA VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Ms. Lester, to table the area variance based on the following: 1. The applicant and or a representative were not present to review the application. Motion carried unanimously. B. Better Community Neighborhoods, Inc. (BCNI) requests a use variance for 430 Hulett St. (49.32-4-33), located within the R-2 Two Family Residential zoning district, to allow for a third dwelling unit where a maximum of two is allowed pursuant to Schedule A of the zoning ordinance. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION Members of the Board agreed that this variance was necessary for the property to be used in a realistic manner. The property is located next to many similar buildings and lots and this variance would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood. 2  SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to adopt a Negative Declaration based upon the review and assessment of the Short Environmental Assessment Forms Parts 1 and 2, with the Negative Declaration being set forth in Part 3 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Motion carried unanimously. USE VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Mr. Keller, to approve the use variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The property cannot yield a reasonable return with 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. There are numerous three family dwellings on the street and within the neighborhood. 4. The alleged hardship is not self-created. Motion carried unanimously. C. Better Community Neighborhoods, Inc. (BCNI) requests a use variance for 422 Schenectady St. (49.32-3-22), located within the R-1 Single Family Residential zoning district, to allow for a two-family dwelling where the legal nonconforming status has expired, and a two-family dwelling is no longer permitted pursuant to Schedule A of the zoning ordinance. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION The Board members stated that this variance was very similar to the prior one and that returning the property to a single family would be a hardship for any owner. SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Mr. Keller, to adopt a Negative Declaration based upon the review and assessment of the Short Environmental Assessment Forms Parts 1 and 2, with the Negative Declaration being set forth in Part 3 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Motion carried unanimously. 3  USE VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Mr. Keller, to approve the use variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The property cannot yield a reasonable return with 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. D. Better Community Neighborhoods, Inc. (BCNI) requests a use variance for 532 ½ Paige St (49.31-4-7), located within the R-1 Single Family Residential zoning district, to allow for a two-family dwelling where the legal nonconforming status has expired, and a two-family dwelling is no longer permitted pursuant to Schedule A of the zoning ordinance. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN FAVOR None. PUBLIC COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION None. CONTINUED DISCUSSION Members of the Board reiterated the same sentiments as mentioned for the previous two applications by BCNI. Rehab of the property without the variance would be an unreasonable hardship for the owners. SEQR RESOLUTION Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Ms. D’Alessandro-Gilmore, to adopt a Negative Declaration based upon the review and assessment of the Short Environmental Assessment Forms Parts 1 and 2, with the Negative Declaration being set forth in Part 3 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form. Motion carried unanimously. USE VARIANCE APPROVAL Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Mr. Keller, to approve the use variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The property cannot yield a reasonable return with 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. 4 VII. MOTION TO ADJOURN Motion by Mr. Connelly, seconded by Ms. Lester, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:38 p.m. 5