Zoning Board of Appeals

STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-22 Address: 2 Campbell Ave (112.70-3-1) Zone: B-2 Applicant: Levon Dekermenjian Project description: Levon Dekermenjian seeks a Special Use Permit for 2 Campbell Ave (112.70-3-1) to use the existing structure for an Auto Service Station. B-2 Zone Staff Notes:  Auto Repair Shops are permitted with the approval of a special use permit, but auto sales are not. Auto sales (new or used) would require a use permit.  Applicant must install ADA compliant curb ramps at the corners of Campbell & Willis St and Campbell and Defreets St. Drop curbs must also comply with ADA standards, and provide tactile warning strips if required- can stipulate further review approval from the Complete Streets Advisory Board or Planning Board  Stipulations should be applied to auto repair shops to ensure lots are tidy and do not have negative impacts on neighboring properties and communities, these (as suggested by Code Enforcement) can include: o Vehicles may not be parked or encroach on the sidewalk, or hinder pedestrian traffic in any way o Vehicles may only be stored outdoors on paved surfaces, in designated areas approved by the Planning Board, to prevent excess vehicles and overcrowding of lot o No loose tires or loose parts stored outdoors on lot o No vehicle may be stored outdoors on lot for over 30 days  Applicant operates an existing auto repair shop at 644 Pawling Ave, and is seeking to move business to the proposed site Approvals needed:  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-59C(2) auto service stations are permitted in B-2 zones with a special use permit 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 II action with sufficient information available upon which to make a determination that the project is not expected to cause significant environmental impact Existing Automasters Lot Proposed Location STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-14 Address: 1035 and 1037 Sixth Ave (112.21-5-5 & 6) Zone: R-4 Applicant: Chris Greklek Project description: Chris Greklek seeks a Use Variance and Area Variances for 1035 and 1037 Sixth Ave (112.21-5-5 & 6) to build two structures, each containing a residential unit in front and indoor storage for construction materials in the rear. Each lot/structure requires Area Variances for setback deficiencies (0’ front and rear proposed where 10’ and 20’ are required respectively, 5’side proposed where 10’ are required), exceeding maximum lot coverage (80% proposed, where 60% is the maximum), not meeting the minimum green space requirement (0% proposed, 25% required). R-4 Zone Staff Notes:  Will there be residential parking provided? Unclear from site plan o If not, proposal will also need relief from parking requirements  (§ 285-55F(1)(a)) New construction requires 2 spaces per unit  Steel facades proposed will not match neighborhood character o Stipulation should be made requiring approval from Planning Commission or Historical Review Committee to ensure new structures match neighborhood character  Lack of greenspace is concerning, as greenspace access in the neighborhood is limited  Exceeding maximum lot coverage is also concerning, also not matching neighborhood character Approvals needed:  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-55: i. Use Variance required for building material storage in a R-4 Zone ii. Area Variance required for: 1. Front, rear, and side setback deficiencies 2. Exceeding the maximum lot coverage 3. Not meeting the minimum greenspace requirements USE VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Use Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The land, property, structure, or building in question can/cannot yield a reasonable economic return if used only for a purpose allowed in the zone, because _________________________________________________________________ 2. The need for the variance was / was not caused by the applicant, because ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. The use shall / shall not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, nor depreciate aesthetic or property values of the locality, because ____________________________________________________________________________ 4. The plight of the owner is / is not due to unique circumstances instead of the general conditions in the neighborhood, which may reflect the unreasonable uses of the zoning ordinance itself, because ______________________________________________________________________  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 1035 & 1037 Sixth Ave Proposed Location STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-23 Address: 143 Seventh Ave (90.39-6-17) Zone: R-2 Applicant: Chris Greklek Project description: Chris Greklek seeks a Use Variance and Area Variance for 143 Seventh Ave (90.39-6-17) to convert a two unit residence into a three unit, with 3 parking spaces proposed where 6 are required. R-2 Zone Staff Notes:  Property is zoned R2, hardship is unclear.  Parking spaces cannot be counted by stacking vehicles (parking one in front of another) Approvals needed:  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53B an Area Variance is required for a three family residence  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53F an Area Variance is required for a parking deficiency USE VARIANCE I move to approve/deny the Use Variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The land, property, structure, or building in question can/cannot yield a reasonable economic return if used only for a purpose allowed in the zone, because _________________________________________________________________ 2. The need for the variance was / was not caused by the applicant, because ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. The use shall / shall not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, nor depreciate aesthetic or property values of the locality, because ____________________________________________________________________________ 4. The plight of the owner is / is not due to unique circumstances instead of the general conditions in the neighborhood, which may reflect the unreasonable uses of the zoning ordinance itself, because ______________________________________________________________________ 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 2019-24 Address: 561-565 Congress St (101.80-2-44) Zone: B-2 Applicant: Adam Wilke Project description: Adam Wilke seeks a Special Use Permit and Area Variance for 561-565 Congress St (101.80-2-44) to create ground-level dwelling units with a parking deficiency (14 spaces required, 6 proposed. B-2 Zone Staff Notes:  Applicant recently was given an Area Variance for exceeding the maximum lot coverage by 21% (max is 60%) at the same site. o Special Use Permit and additional area variances needed now that use plans have developed  On-street parking was removed to create right turn lane (westbound) on Rt 2 Approvals needed:  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-59C a Special Use Permit is required for first floor dwelling  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-59F an Area Variance is required for a parking deficiency 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 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 561-565 Congress St STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-19 Address: 36 Brunswick Ave (101.80-1-16) Zone: R-3 Applicant: Jennifer Zaccaria Project description: Jennifer Zaccaria seeks an Area Variance for 36 Brunswick Ave (101.80-1-16) for a parking deficiency (6 spaces required, 4 proposed). R-3 Zone Staff Notes:  No evidence of previously existing dwelling unit in basement was submitted  Unclear how hardship was not self created  Neighborhood members have contact the Planning Dept with concerns about student housing damaging neighborhood quality of life Approvals needed:  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-54F an Area Variance is required for a parking deficiency 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 2019-25 Address: 110-116 Project Road (112-4-12.115) Zone: R-3 Applicant: 110 East Side Terrace Project description: 110 East Side Terrace, LLC seeks an Area Variance for 110-116 Project Road (112-4- 12.115) for a front setback deficiency (13.2’ proposed, 15’ required). R-3 Zone Staff Notes:  Likely an oversight from 2006, the structure was built without necessary variance.  Lack of front setback is likely preferable in this instance Approvals needed:  Per Zoning Code Section § 285-54D(3) an Area Variance is required for a front setback deficiency 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