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, June 25 on 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. Old Business: PLZB 2019-38 Daniel Sanders seeks a Use Variance and Area Variance for 523-525 Fourth Ave (80.63-4-2) to amend an approval granted on 4/17/18, for 4 additional dwelling units, resulting in a parking deficiency of 4 spaces. R-2 Zone New Business: PLZB 2019-45 Maurizio Cassano seeks an Area Variance for 438 Fourth St (112.29-5-8) to construct an 11 unit residential building, exceeding the maximum density (11 units proposed, 9.2 units max)and with a front setback deficiency (8’ proposed, 10’ required), not meeting the minimum greenspace requirement (25%), and a parking deficiency (11 spaces proposed, 22 required). R4 Zone PLZB 2019-46 Debra Lockrow seeks a Use Variance for 1 102nd Street (90.38-1-23) to use the existing structure as a workspace, storage, and showroom. R2 Zone PLZB 2019-47 Media Alliance Inc./TAP seeks an Area Variance and Special Use Permit for 3319 Sixth Ave (90.54-2-16) to use the existing structure as an environmental education center with a parking deficiency (4 spaces proposed, 18 required). R4 Zone PLZB 2019-49 Vincent Leach seeks an Area Variance and Use Variance for 172 Pawling Ave (112.33-6-4) to use the first floor of the existing structure as a professional office with a parking deficiency (2 spaces proposed, 6 to 10 required). R2 Zone PLZB 2019-50 Fully-In LLC seeks an extension for variances granted on April 5, 2016: ZB2015-041Use Variance and Major Area Variance to allow for a nonconforming use related to a proposal to construct 15 attached single family homes on a vacant lot at Delaware Ave at Project Road, a CON Zone ID 112-4-15 PLZB 2019-51 Bonita Bain seeks an Area Variance for 31 Woodlawn Ct (112.74-2-12) to construct a 6’ fence where 4’ is the maximum. R2 Zone 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 Hall, 433 River Street, Troy, New York 12180 STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-38 Address: 523-525 Fourth Ave (80.63-4-2) Zone: R-2 Applicant: Daniel Sanders Project description: Daniel Sanders seeks a Use Variance and Area Variance for 523-525 Fourth Ave (80.63- 4-2) to amend an approval granted on 4/17/18, for 4 additional dwelling units, resulting in a parking deficiency of 4 spaces. R-2 Zone Staff Notes:  Initial application was approved for 27 units  All walkways/sidewalks including corners must be ADA compliant, featuring accessible curb  ramps with Tacticle Warning Strips  Project inside CDBG focus area and should correlate with those efforts, see additional comments from CDBG Planner V. Zubkovs (attached) Approvals needed: 1. Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53F an Area Variance is needed for:  Parking deficiency (4 additional spaces now required) 2. Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53B a Use Variance is 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.) 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 ______________________________________________________________________ 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 CDBG Staff Comments : PLZB 2019-38 Daniel Sanders seeks a Use Variance and Area Variance for 523-525 Fourth Ave (80.63-4-2) to amend an approval granted on 4/17/18, for 4 additional dwelling units, resulting in a parking deficiency of 4 spaces. R-2 Zone Prior Zoning and Planning approvals for 27 ( 1) bedroom units and the associated variances at this location have expired. Note: these properties are not being maintained by the current property owners. This proposed project is located in the heart of Lansingburgh’s historic village area, with some nearby homes dating back to the Revolutionary War era. The St. Augustine’s School and the former convent building themselves are monumental buildings within the neighborhood and of high architectural quality. These two buildings, along with the adjacent neighborhood and properties already listed on the National Register, are all located in the center of an area of significant eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Rather than considering whether additional studio apartments and smaller (1) bedroom units can be fitted within these two buildings, the Zoning Board and Planning Commission should be considering whether the alternative of fewer units and larger, higher end loft apartments or condominium units is actually the better alternative for these two buildings and the better alternative to minimize the adverse impacts on the neighborhood as proposed in the is updated proposal for 31 units. The proposed project is located within the City of Troy’s Lansingburgh Neighborhood Reinvestment Project area. The project included replacement of a 7’ width of concrete sidewalk and curbs along the west of 4th Avenue in front of 523-525- 4th Avenue. Follow-up work will include tree planting, new street lights, and street paving. The former school crosswalk signs and striping have been removed. The project work does not extend westward along 114th St. and does not include any work on 3rd Avenue. Replacement of bad, broken, heaved sidewalk panels, existing street tree work, etc. is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner and should be indicated on the plans. STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-45 Address: 438 Fourth St (112.29-5-8) Zone: R-4 Applicant: Maurizio Cassano Project description: Maurizio Cassano seeks an Area Variance for 438 Fourth St (112.29-5-8) to construct an 11-unit residential building, exceeding the maximum density (11 units proposed, 9.2 units max) and with a front setback deficiency (8’ proposed, 10’ required) and a parking deficiency (11 spaces proposed, 22 required). R4 Zone Staff Notes:  8 foot setback would be in line with neighborhood characteristics  11 parking spaces may be sufficient for 11 units  Project on bus line and future bike network  Project in CDBG focus area, see comments from CDBG staff (attached)  Some project details are unclear in site plan and may need to be clarified before making a decision  Proposed project does not meet the minimum greenspace requirement- should be required to complete a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan  Planning Commission should be lead agency for SEQRA Approvals needed: 1. Per Zoning Code Section § 285-55D, Area Variances are required for: a. Front setback deficency- 8’ proposed, 10’ required b. Parking deficiency - 11 spaces proposed, 22 required c. Greenspace deficiency (25% required) – 1156’ proposed, 2437.5 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: defer to Planning Commission CDBG Staff Comments : Proposed project is located in the S Troy Osgood Neighborhood, on 4th St., opposite the Unity Sunshine School. Proposed project is located in next year’s South Troy Neighborhood Reinvestment Project area (new widened sidewalks, new curbs) along 4th St. (Jackson to Canal Ave.). -Water, sewer, gas and other underground utility access and connection must be completed before proposed new 4th St. sidewalk, curb, and street work. -Sidewalk will be proposed to be widened ( and street pavement width reduced) by about 1.5’ on the east side of 4th St. -Work will include new sidewalks, curbs, street trees, and street lights with underground wiring. Project comments: - Proposed project is too dense for the typical density of this neighborhood ( too many units proposed) and exceeds R4 zone limits on number of units per lot area. - Requesting a variance of 11 parking space, of which only 4 or 5 can be accommodated by on street parking. - Likely that some of the future tenants will not have vehicles and will rely on walking, biking, or bus transit, therefore a good sidewalk connection must be established at the front, 4th St. entryway to the building, directly to the sidewalk. Should be a minimum of 6’ width to accommodate two persons. - The 3’ wide walk along the front of the building to the north side walk is inadequate and should be a minimum 5’ width. - The 8’ depth front lot buffer zone may be partially occupied by this additional 5’ wide walk to the north side. Balance of the 8’ depth setback is recommended to receive a “no maintenance” or “very low maintenance” landscape treatment. - Dumpster and dumpster pad are to be relocated to the back of the property and accessed from William Street only. Private trash and garbage pickup. - Front elevation design of building does not appear to “fit –in”/ does not complement existing neighborhood architectural designs. Also, note: It will probably be very useful to have the proposed floor elevations identified, the existing sidewalk elevation, and top and bottom of the proposed ADA ramp identified to make sure the ADA accessibility to the front of the building actually works. STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-46 Address: 1 102nd Street (90.38-1-23) Zone: R-2 Applicant: Debra Lockrow Project description: Debra Lockrow seeks a Use Variance for 1 102nd Street (90.38-1-23) to use the existing structure as a workspace, storage, and showroom. R2 Zone Staff Notes:  Use as workspace, storage, and showroom is not expected to have positive or negative impact on the community  Use cannot be classified as community/neighborhood commercial, but is not listed elsewhere in the Zoning Code, requiring a variance in residential zone Approvals needed: 1. Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53B, Use Variance required 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 ______________________________________________________________________ SEQRA: Staff recommends that the Board find this proposal to be an 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 Use Variance of Chapter 285; Zoning Code TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS: I, Debra Lockrow ________________________________________ the owner of the property located at, 90.38-1-23 1 102nd Street __________________________, Tax map number, Sec. ______ 381700 Block_____- Lot _____, Hereby Tax area 381701 petition the Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Troy to grant a variation of the Zoning Code Section(s)_________________________________________, 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: I purchased 1 102 nd Street from the City of Troy it is in a R-3 zone I purchased this property to have an additional showroom,storage for furniture and vintage items I purchase for my business on River Street. I cannot fit all my stock in the downtown location Artcentric Marketplace 266 River Street 2. Demonstrate to the Board of Zoning Appeals that for every use permitted by the Zoning Code under the regulations for that district in which the property is located that the property cannot yield a reasonable return, and provide financial evidence to prove this conclusion. Across the street is a store Family Dollar ,on the end of the block is a corner store. I am not altering the neighborhood with my proposed business. I am an established business in Troy .I own 2 St Pauls Place since 2008 I will add a stable new business, improve a building both inside and exterior Page 1 of 2  3. Explain how the alleged hardship relating to your property is unique when you compare it to similar properties and does not apply to a substantial portion of the neighborhood: I need this variance to get a permit to make improvements to building. I look forward to taking this unloved building and making my neighborhood a better place 4. Explain why the character of the neighborhood will not be altered if this use variance is granted: There are many commercial businesses all around 1 102nd 5. Explain how the hardship relating to the use of the property arose and why the hardship was not self-created (Purchasing property without checking to see if the existing or proposed use is legal under zoning is a self-created hardship): I was assured that I would get support from planning dept for the zoning variance when I put in offer. The building is not usable as a residence ,not having a bar in neighborhood is a huge improvement Date: June 5,2019 Signed: Debra Lockrow Address: 266 River Street City: Troy NY 12180 Phone: 518-691-0007 Email: debralockrow@yahoo.com Page 2 of 2 STAFF REPORT ZB 2019-47 Address: 3319 Sixth Ave (90.54-2-16) Zone: R-4 Applicant: Media Alliance Inc. Project description: Media Alliance Inc. seeks an Area Variance and Special Use Permit for 3319 Sixth Ave (90.54-2-16) to use the existing structure as an environmental education center with a parking deficiency (4 spaces proposed, 18 required). R4 Zone Staff Notes:  Environmental education center geared toward youth could be a great resource for the community  Zoning code parking require are excessively restrictive to this type of use, inaccurately representing the demand Approvals needed: 1) Per Zoning Code Section § 285-55D an Area Variance is needed for:  Parking deficiency (4 proposed, 18 required) 2) Per Zoning Code Section § 285-55C(1) a Special Use Permit is 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.) 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 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 2019-49 Address: 172 Pawling Ave (112.33-6-4) Zone: R-2 Applicant: Vincent Leach Project description: Vincent Leach seeks an Area Variance and Use Variance for 172 Pawling Ave (112.33-6- 4) to use the first floor of the existing structure as a professional office with a parking deficiency (2 spaces proposed, 6 to 10 required). R2 Zone Staff Notes:  Proposed use exists further southeast along Pawling  Proposed use is not expected to generate large parking demand or negatively impact neighboring properties  Applicant also owns 170 Pawling Ave Approvals needed: 1) Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53F(4) an Area Variance is needed for:  Parking deficiency (2 proposed, 6-10 required) 2) Per Zoning Code Section § 285-53B a Use Variance is 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.) 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 ______________________________________________________________________ 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 2019-51 Address: 31 Woodlawn Ct (112.74-2-12) Zone: R-2 Applicant: Bonita Bain Project description: Bonita Bain seeks an Area Variance for 31 Woodlawn Ct (112.74-2-12) to construct a 6’ fence where 4’ is the maximum. R2 Zone Staff Notes: Approvals needed: 1) Per Zoning Code Section § § 285-76D an Area Variance is needed for:  Fences above 4’ in height 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.