Zoning Board of Appeals

Catherine Conroy Steven Strichman Chairperson Commissioner of Planning Phone (518) 279-7166 Fax (518) 268-1690 Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Troy, New York will conduct a regular public hearing at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, February 26th the 5th Floor of 433 River Street, to act upon the following requests for approvals and appeals from decisions made by the Bureau of Code Enforcement of the City of Troy. PLZB 2019-01 Joseph Palin seeks Area Variances for 821 Second Ave (80.24-7-5) to construct a pool in his back yard, creating side and rear setback deficiencies (6’ side and rear setbacks proposed, 25’ and 30’ are required, respectfully) Property is zoned R-1. PLZB 2019-04 Russell Brooks seeks a Special Use Permit for 37 First St (100.60-4-4) to use as a single family residence, including the first floor. Property is zoned B-4. PLZB 2019-05 Sandra Rouse seeks Area Variances for 159 First St (100.76-9-8) to construct a new 1.5 car, wood frame garage to fill width of lot at alley, requiring variances for side and rear setback deficiencies (0’ and 9’ proposed, 10’ and 20’ required, respectively), and for exceeding the maximum lot coverage (74% proposed, 60% maximum). Property is zoned R-4. PLZB 2019-06 Juan Colon Rivera seeks an Area Variance for 446 Second St (111.44-7-41) for a parking deficiency (0 proposed, 2 required). Parking required for proposed laundromat (permitted use). Property is zoned R-4. PLZB 2019-07 Patrick Berry seeks an Area Variance for 55 Carroll Hill Ct (112.47-3-24) for a parking deficiency (2 existing, 4 required). Parking required for an additional dwelling unit (permitted). Property is zoned R-3. PLZB 2019-08 Tesla Associates LLC seeks an Area Variance for 647 Second Ave (80.47-2-6) to add signage exceeding maximum signage allowed (182’ proposed, 100’ allowed). Property is zoned B-2. Additional information regarding the above listed actions is available in the Department of Planning and Community Development located on the 5th floor of Troy City Hall, 433 River Street, Troy, New York 12180. Telephone: 279-7169. E-mail: james.rath@troyny.gov. Office hours are weekdays 8:30 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. As required by Americans with Disabilities Act, auxiliary aids and services are available upon request. Please give one-week advance notice for services needed. City of Troy Zoning Board of Appeals Catherine Conroy, Chairperson James Rath, Executive Secretary City Hall, 433 River Street, Troy, New York 12180 STAFF REPORT PLZB 2019-01 Address: 821 Second Ave (80.24-7-5) Zone: R-1 Applicant: Joseph Palin Project description: Joseph Palin seeks Area Variances for 821 Second Ave (80.24-7-5) to construct a pool in his back yard, creating side and rear setback deficiencies. 6’ side and rear setbacks proposed, where 25’ and 30’ are required, respectfully. Property is zoned R-1. Approvals needed: 1. Area Variance for a side and rear setback deficiencies  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53D(3), structures and accessory structures must have a minimum rear setback of 30 feet, and side setbacks with five feet on each side or 10 feet on one side, if zero lot line design. AREA VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. An undesirable change will / will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to nearby properties will / will not be created by the granting of the area variance, because ___________________________________________________________________ 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can / cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because __________________________________________________________________________ 3. The requested area variance is / is not substantial, because __________________________________________________________________________ 4. The proposed variance will / will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district, because ___________________________________________________________________________ 5. The alleged difficulty was / was not self-created, because ___________________________________________________________________________ (Consideration 5 shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.) SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be an Type II action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-04 Address: 37 First St (100.60-4-4) Zone: B4 Applicant: Russell Brooks Project description: Russell Brooks seeks a Special Use Permit for 37 First St (100.60-4-4) to use as a single family residence, including the first floor. Property is zoned B-4. Staff Notes: Residential use on the first floor in a B4 zone is not expected to have a negative impact. Approvals needed:  Special Use Permit allowing residential use of first floor in a B4 zone. SPECIAL USE PERMIT I move to approve/deny the Special Use Permit based on the following findings of fact: 1. The proposed project will / will not cause substantial injury to the value of the surrounding property values, because ______________________________________________________. 2. The applicant does / does not meet the landscaping and screening criteria established for Special Use Permits, because __________________________________________________. 3. The Special Use Permit is / is not expected to impair the public health, safety, convenience, aesthetic quality, or environmental quality of the surrounding neighborhood, because ____________________________________________________________________. SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be a TYPE 2 action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-05 Address: 159 First St (100.76-9-8) Zone: R4 Applicant: Sandra Rouse Project description: Sandra Rouse seeks Area Variances for 159 First St (100.76-9-8) to construct a new 1.5 car, wood frame garage to fill width of lot at alley, requiring variances for side and rear setback deficiencies (0’ and 9’ proposed, 10’ and 20’ required, respectively), and for exceeding the maximum lot coverage (74% proposed, 60% maximum). Property is zoned R-4. Staff Notes:  A neighboring property has a similarly located garage, with similar setbacks  Abnormal parcel shape may have created the need for a variance  Located in historic district, where most structures are made of brick, contingency could be placed on planning approval Approvals needed: 1) Area Variance for setback deficiencies:  Rear Setback: 9 feet proposed, where 20 feet are required  Side Setback: 0 feet proposed, where 10 feet are required 2) Area Variance for exceeding maximum lot coverage:  Proposed structure would result in 74% lot coverage, where 60% is the maximum allowed AREA VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. An undesirable change will / will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to nearby properties will / will not be created by the granting of the area variance, because ___________________________________________________________________ 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can / cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because __________________________________________________________________________ 3. The requested area variance is / is not substantial, because __________________________________________________________________________ 4. The proposed variance will / will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district, because ___________________________________________________________________________ 5. The alleged difficulty was / was not self-created, because ___________________________________________________________________________ (Consideration 5 shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.) SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be a TYPE 2 action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact  Parcel View from alley STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-06 Address: 446 Second St (111.44-7-41) Zone: R4 Applicant: Juan Colon Rivera Project description: Juan Colon Rivera seeks an Area Variance for 446 Second St (111.44-7-41) for a parking deficiency (0 proposed, 2 required). Parking required for proposed laundromat (permitted use). Property is zoned R-4. Staff Notes:  Property currently vacant  Parking requirements (in this case) seem to be outdated or unnecessarily prohibitive  Parking deficiency not expected to have negative impact on community  Appears there is space in rear that could be designated for parking- but not appropriate for customers  Appears dumpster may need to be moved- and a space for recycling should be required Approvals needed: 1) Area Variance for parking deficiency:  0 parking spaces proposed, 2 required AREA VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. An undesirable change will / will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to nearby properties will / will not be created by the granting of the area variance, because ___________________________________________________________________ 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can / cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because __________________________________________________________________________ 3. The requested area variance is / is not substantial, because __________________________________________________________________________ 4. The proposed variance will / will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district, because ___________________________________________________________________________ 5. The alleged difficulty was / was not self-created, because ___________________________________________________________________________ (Consideration 5 shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.) SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be a UNLISTED action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-07 Address: 55 Carroll Hill Ct (112.47-3-24) Zone: R3 Applicant: Patrick Berry Project description: Patrick Berry seeks an Area Variance for 55 Carroll Hill Ct (112.47-3-24) for a parking deficiency (2 existing, 4 required). Parking required for an additional dwelling unit (permitted). Property is zoned R-3. Staff Notes:  Property located on cul-de-sac/dead end road, on-street parking seems to be abundant  While it appears the proposed driveway can park 4 cars, official number of spaces determined by number that could pull in and out (without cars parked behind one another) Approvals needed: 1) Area Variance for parking deficiency:  2 parking spaces proposed, 4 required AREA VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. An undesirable change will / will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to nearby properties will / will not be created by the granting of the area variance, because ___________________________________________________________________ 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can / cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because __________________________________________________________________________ 3. The requested area variance is / is not substantial, because __________________________________________________________________________ 4. The proposed variance will / will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district, because ___________________________________________________________________________ 5. The alleged difficulty was / was not self-created, because ___________________________________________________________________________ (Consideration 5 shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.) SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be a Type II action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-07 Address: 647 Second Ave (80.47-2-6) Zone: B2 Applicant: Collar City Auto Haus Project description: Tesla Associates Collar City Auto Haus seeks an Area Variance for 647 Second Ave (80.47-2-6) to add signage exceeding maximum signage allowed (182’ proposed, 100’ allowed). Property is zoned B-2. Staff Notes:  Structure neighbors residents and other small businesses  Unclear why similar effect cannot be achieved by a 100’ sign  Not affiliated with Tesla Motors Approvals needed: 1) Area Variance for exceeding maximum allowed signage:  182 square feet proposed, where 100 square feet of signage is allowed AREA VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Area Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. An undesirable change will / will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to nearby properties will / will not be created by the granting of the area variance, because ___________________________________________________________________ 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can / cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because __________________________________________________________________________ 3. The requested area variance is / is not substantial, because __________________________________________________________________________ 4. The proposed variance will / will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district, because ___________________________________________________________________________ 5. The alleged difficulty was / was not self-created, because ___________________________________________________________________________ (Consideration 5 shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.) SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be a UNLISTED action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact  City of Troy Application for Area Variance of Chapter 285; Zoning Code TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS: I, Phillip Krzemeieniecki ________________________________________ the owner of the property located at, __________________________, 627 2nd Ave Tax map number, Sec. ______ 80 Block_____ 47 Lot _____, 2-6 hereby petition the Zoning Board of the City of Troy to grant a variation of the Zoning Code Section(s)_________________________________________, 285-101 to allow the following as described below or shown on the accompanying drawings which have been denied by the Building Inspector, as specified on the attached Notice of Noncompliance (attach additional sheets as necessary to address any of the following sections). 1. Describe your application as proposed: Stainless and plastic signs facing 2nd ave (dimensions and design provided) 2. Explain why you believe that your variance request will not create an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or be a detriment to nearby properties if it is granted: New building and new stainless signs will enhance 2nd ave and bring a new fresh look 3. Can the benefit you seek by virtue of this variance application be achieved by revising your proposal? If not, explain why there are no other alternatives. Due to size of building on 2nd ave smaller signage would not work on building Form 20060814 Page 1 of 2 4. Explain why you believe the proposed variance is not substantial. Sign is High End and wouold match the new facility 5. Explain why you believe the proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. Would only make the neighbor hood look better 6. Explain why you believe the difficulty that requires the variance was not “self-created.” The sign is proportionate to the building Date: 2/20/19 Signed: Address: 647 2nd ave City: Troy Zip Code: 12182 Phone: 5188011111 Email: Philkrze@gmail.com Form 20060814 Page 2 of 2