Zoning Board of Appeals

Schenectady Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes April 10, 2024 I. CALL TO ORDER Commissioner Gleason called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. After calling the meeting to order, Commissioner 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. The meeting is being recorded. II. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Jim Gleason, Chair; Dave Connelly, Vice Chair; Helene Lester, Mary D’Alessandro-Gilmore, Brendan Keller, Jack Connelly- Department of Development staff, Zoning Officer Nora Wallace, Peter Lomtevas, Deputy Corporation Counsel EXCUSED: Mary Zawacki III. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECK Ms. Wallace had a conflict of interest with Mr. Samatulski as he is her landlord. IV. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES The minutes were approved for the March 13th, 2024 meeting. The motion was made by Commissioner Connelly and seconded by Commissioner Keller. The motion carried 4-0 with Commissioner D’Alessandro-Gilmore abstaining. V. Old Business VI. Applications: New Business A. David Kellogg requests a use variance for 1507 Carrie Street (tax parcel # 39.50- 3-35) located in the R-2 Two-Family Residential District to have four living units in an existing house, pursuant to Section 264 Schedule A. Mr. David Kellogg, the realtor representing his client came forward to discuss agenda item A. Mr. Kellog stated that there will be at least $60,000 of structural issues that will be required to be addressed to meet code standards. As a two-family dwelling the property owner will not be able to recover the investment needed to repair the property. The property currently is set up as a multifamily dwelling (4 family) which is owned by the City. Mr. Kellogg’s client is under contract to purchase the property, contingent on the granting of this use variance. Conforming the use of the property to the zoning district would create an economic hardship. Mr. Kellogg stated it is infeasible to have equity gain or profit as a two-family dwelling. Commissioner Gleason inquired how the property is metered and Mr. Kellogg confirmed it is currently metered for a 4 family. Commissioner Connelly inquired if it was a four family before it was on the city’s tax role to Ms. Wallace and she confirmed that it was a four family as well as confirmed that the building is outside the timeframe for a legal nonconforming residential property. Mr. Kellogg confirmed to Commissioner Keller that the building is not in a total state of disrepair but the previous party conducting the renovations created more issues that will be needed to be addressed to meet the code standards. Commissioner Keller asked if any monies will be saved due to the partial renovation. Mr. Kellogg stated that no money is being saved from the partial renovation. Commissioner Gleason inquired if there is off street parking and Ms. Wallace confirmed that there is not off-street parking. As well as clarified the steps required between the BZA and the Planning Commission. That if the variance is granted that the property owner will have to attend the Planning Commission which will refer the property owner back to the BZA for an area variance for parking. Mr. Kellogg stated that the property is in a walkable neighborhood and that parking isn’t necessary. Commissioner Connelly made a statement regarding the revision of the Zoning Code in 2008 creating more issues with the parking requirements for property. USE VARIANCE RESOLUTION Commissioner Keller made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Seconded by Commissioner Connelly. 1. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return for the property as a two-family house 2. As the house is set up as, and has previously been used as a four-unit house it is unique to the neighborhood 3. The character of the neighborhood will not be harmed as a result of this variance  4. As the applicant has not yet purchase the building, the hardship is not self-created The motion was approved unanimously. B. Hayyaf Mashrah requests a use variance for 3082 Albany Street (tax parcel # 60.55-1-6) located in the R-1 Single-Family Residential District to operate a market, pursuant to Section 264 Schedule A. Mr. Shohatee representing the property owner of 3082 Albany Street (tax parcel # 60.55-1-6) proposed a market specializing in middle eastern goods and food. Mr. Shohatee mentioned the neighborhood has significant number of people from Yemen that will benefit from having access to specialty products such as grain and coffee that are unique to the country of Yemen. Mr. Shohatee furthered the need of this type of market in the community by stating many community members only have access to these products by traveling to New York City. Commissioner Gleason inquired the hours of operation for the business and parking. Mr. Shohatee stated that in the winter the hours of operation will be more limited and longer in the summertime. Commissioner Connelly inquired whether or not tobacco products will be sold, and Mr. Shohatee stated that no tobacco or alcohol products will be available. Commissioner Keller inquired with Ms. Wallace the zoning district and she confirmed that it is in the R-2. Commissioner Keller inquired with. Mr. Shohatee what the previous use of the property was which he replied that it used to be a “bookstore” and the current owner is living in the upstairs property. Commissioner Keller inquired if the use needs to be “similar or the same” and Ms. Wallace confirmed that is correct. A member of the public stated why she does not support this business out of concern for traffic safety and noise issues. Commissioner Gleason followed up the complaint with reading multiple letters submitted to the Department of Development which expressed disapproval for the project. Issues such as traffic and parking were the main reasons for disapproval, noting that the portion of Albany Street in question is more residential than other portions of the street. Commissioner Keller inquired if there was an effort in renting the bottom space to a tenant that may utilize it as a bookstore and was told there was not an effort made towards that. Mr. Connelly clarified the differences between legal nonconforming uses between residential and nonresidential. Ms. Wallace confirmed that clarification from Mr. Connelly. Commissioner Keller inquired that during the 3 years of property ownership that there were no attempts to fill the space. Mr. Shohatee stated that the property owner attempted selling the property to interested buyers but was not successful. Ms. Wallace further clarified that finding the same nonconforming use for a property can be difficult to achieve as a property owner. Commissioner Lester found the use to be intensive for an R-1 district, and Commissioner Keller expressed that he was not convinced that the situation was not self-created. USE VARIANCE RESOULUTION Commissioner Connelly made a motion to deny the use variance. Seconded by Commissioner Keller. 1. The applicant has not demonstrated they cannot realize a reasonable return with the allowed uses 2. The hardship is self-created 3. The property is unique to the area 4. The requested use variance will alter the essential character of the neighborhood The motion was approved 4-1 with Commissioner D’Alessandro-Gilmore dissenting. C. Stockade Inn, LLC. Requests a use variance for 1 North Church Street (tax parcel # 39.63-1-41.1) located in the RH-2 Stockade Historic Residential District to operate a coffee shop, pursuant to Section 264 Schedule A. Mr. John Samatulski, owner of the Stockade Inn came forward to discuss his use variance application for the site. Mr. Samatulski wanted to put a coffee shop, operated by Graham’s Coffee Parlor in a currently unused portion of the building. The coffee shop would be open to the public as well as hotel guests. Mr. Samatulski stated that although he does currently own the property, the hardship is not self- created since the COVID pandemic has drastically changed the boutique hotel business which has led that clientele to expect certain amenities. While he could simply have standard coffee on the site, Mr. Samatulski showed examples of similar businesses around the country which all offer more specialty and high-quality drinks like Graham’s would provide. Mr. Samatulski showed details of the financial state of the Stockade Inn which had been consistently losing money, and believed that the coffee shop would both help business within the hotel as well as provide more foot traffic from outsiders coming to the area. Commissioner Keller asked whether or not the applicant had looked into other options such as having a coffee or espresso bar inside the hotel. To this Mr. Samatulski reiterated the clientele that attends boutique hotels like this expects certain amenities like what would be offered by Graham’s. Commissioner Keller remained unconvinced that the reasonable return criteria was not satisfied. Upon prompting from Mr. Connelly, the rest of the Commissioners stated that they felt confident that the reasonable return element was proven by the applicant. Commissioner Gleason opened up the public hearing. Mr. Ryan Weitz of 14 Union Street said his property was likely the closest one to the Inn, and expressed significant support for the project, stating that it would enhance the community and give more needed options for food and coffee in the Stockade.  Ms. Gloria Kishton of the Schenectady Heritage Foundation spoke during the public hearing to express support for the project, stating that it would be of great benefit to the community. Ms. Colleen Macauley, President of the Stockade Association detailed the historic significance of the site and said that Graham’s would be a welcome addition to the hotel, and would serve the Stockade well. Ms. Katryn Malen, owner of Graham’s Coffee Parlor spoke to her years of expertise in the coffee industry. She responded to some of Commissioner Keller’s concerns saying that although Mr. Samatulski runs a good business he does not have the experience to run the level and quality of coffee shop that is suitable for a boutique hotel. Ms. Malen detailed the difficulties for staffing and training such businesses and said that using normal hotel staff who do not have the training for specialty coffee drinks would not make for good business. Commissioner Gleason closed the public hearing. Commissioner Connelly said that he was convinced that the applicant had satisfied the use variance criteria. Although generally the applicant owning the building would automatically result in a self-created hardship, this situation was unique as COVID along with the large influx of hotels into the Schenectady area has drastically changed the hotel business since Mr. Samatulski purchased the property. USE VARIANCE RESOLUTION Commissioner Connelly made a motion to grant the use variance as requested. Seconded by Commissioner D’Alessandro-Gilmore. 1. The applicant cannot realize a reasonable return under the current zoning laws. 2. The property in question is unique and does not apply to the rest of the zoning district 3. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood 4. The hardship is not self-created The motion was approved 4-1, with Commissioner Keller dissenting. VII. Other Business VIII. Adjourn 7:39 p.m. motion made by Commissioner Connelly and seconded by Commissioner Keller. The motion was approved unanimously.