Members Present: Peter Barber, Chairman
Patricia Aikens
Sharon Cupoli
Chuck Klaer
Mike Marcantonio
Susan Macri
Tom Remmert, Alternate
James Sumner
Janet Thayer, Counsel
_______________________________________________________________________
Chairman Barber opened the meeting and pointed out the emergency exits to the left and rear of the room in the event they were needed.
NEW CASES:
MATTER OF SCOTT CAMARRA - 10 WORTHINGTON ROAD
Sharon Cupoli read the legal notice:
"Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Guilderland, New York, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Articles IV & V of the Zoning Law on the following proposition:
Variance Request No. 3977
Request of Scott Camarra for a Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the placement of a storage shed in a side yard.
Per Articles IV& V Sections 280-34 & 280-51 respectively
For property owned by Scott Camarra
Situated as follows: 10 Worthington Road Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map #s 15.09-1-9 Zoned: R40
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 18th of October, 2006 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: October 11, 2006"
The file consists of the mailing list to 24 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for an area variance, the Town Planner's comments, a narrative and a plot plan which depicts both the house and the shed which has been there for five years.
The Town Planner had the following comments: "The applicant is requesting an area variance to allow an existing shed to remain within a side yard. No planning objection although there is no physical reason the shed cannot be properly placed."
Scott Camarra, applicant, presented the case. Mr. Camarra stated that nobody in the immediate area of his house had any problems with the placement of the shed and submitted signatures from the neighbors stating this.
Chairman Barber stated that the shed seems almost flush with the house.
Mr. Camarra stated it was toward the back of the house. Mr. Camarra stated that the placement of the shed was as close to the spirit of the permit as he could get without encroaching on the setback. Mr. Camarra stated that the shed has been there for five years and now there are quite a few things around it that are permanent features of his back yard so it would be very difficult to move it. Mr. Camarra stated that the back yard is sloped so everything runs into the recess pond in the back and the shed would have to be propped up in the back to make it level.
Chuck Klaer asked if the Homeowners Association had given their approval.
Mr. Camarra replied that when he applied for the building permit, he had gotten approval from them.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents. There were none. Chairman Barber made a motion to close the public hearing. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 - 0.
Chairman Barber made a motion for approval of:
Variance Request No. 3977
Request of Scott Camarra for a Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the placement of a storage shed in a side yard.
Per Articles IV& V Sections 280-34 & 280-51 respectively
For property owned by Scott Camarra
Situated as follows: 10 Worthington Road Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map #s 15.09-1-9 Zoned: R40
The Board finds the following facts:
o A public hearing was duly noticed and held here this evening. Six residents signed a statement stating they have no objection or issues regarding the placement of the shed.
o This is a Type II Action under SEQRA, not requiring SEQRA review.
o The Albany County Planning Board and the Town Planning Board's review of this case was not required.
o The Town Planner had no planning objections.
o The Board finds that the shed is a substantial distance from the road and is set in the rear right side yard and adjacent to the house.
o The shed is attractively designed and well maintained with fencing, landscaping and a patio. The shed matches the existing house in terms of color, siding, shingles, windows and trim.
o The shed does not detract from the character of the neighborhood.
o This Board granted an adjacent property owner a similar variance.
o There have been no complaints regarding the shed's placement or appearance.
o Even though the placement of this shed could be argued to be a self-created hardship, this does not preclude the Board from granting the area variance.
In granting this decision, the Board imposes the following conditions:
o Adherence to the plans as submitted; meaning it shall be maintained in the same manner it has been for the past five years.
The Zoning Administrative Office is hereby authorized to issue the permits necessary to implement this decision.
If this variance is not exercised within one year of date of issuance, it is hereby declared to be null and void and revoked in its entirety.
Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 - 0.
MATTER OF NIAGARA MOHAWK - 5215 WESTERN TURNPIKE
Chuck Klaer read the legal notice:
"Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Guilderland, New York, will hold a public hearing pursuant to Articles IV & V of the Zoning Law on the following proposition:
Special Use Permit Request No. 3978
Request of Karen Maxwell of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation for a Special Use Permit under the Zoning Law to permit: the extension of an existing 130' telecommunications tower by 30' for a total height of 160'. A series of yagi antenna will be added to the new structure for the purpose of communicating and dispatching National Grid field resources.
Per Articles IV& V Sections 280-37 & 280-52 respectively
For property owned by Niagara Mohawk/National Grid
Situated as follows: 5215 Western Turnpike Altamont, NY 12009
Tax Map #s 39.07-1-26.21 Zoned: LB
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 18th of October, 2006 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: October 11, 2006"
The file consists of the legal advertisement with mailing to 60 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for this Unlisted Action, the Town Planners comments, a deed indicating the transfer of the property, FCC Communication Statement regarding the impacts upon any nearby airports, an analysis prepared by Fred A. Nunn Corporation regarding the structural capacity of the tower, some drawings and visual depictions of before and after and a referral to the Albany County Planning Board.
The Town Planner had the following comments: "For the record, I live across the street from this location on Carman Road. The applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit to extend an existing 130' tower by 30' to collocate additional communication antennae. Although this is a collocation which is generally favored, I continue to have concerns regarding how high this structure is growing with each succeeding application.
As stated previously, my main concern is that the structure, which was just recently approved for another extension, already reaches higher than the trees. The situation has been made worse since the majority of vegetation on the Carman Road side was removed for the power pool's expansion. Antennas are restricted to a maximum of 100' because extensions beyond this height become almost impossible to screen.
Although I am not objecting to the application, I do feel the Board needs to consider how many extensions are permitted before the visual impact is just too great."
Karen Maxwell presented the request. Ms. Maxwell stated that they are looking to extend the existing tower to its full height of 160'. The extension is needed to allow them to communicate adequately with their field crews and other resources especially in cases of emergency.
Colin , communications expert, reviewed the need for the tower extension. Colin stated that recently the building has been designated as a disaster recovery site so this will be the prime site for dispatching crews. Colin stated that they would be moving existing antennas above the cell structure to a point where they will give them better coverage.
Chairman Barber asked what height their antennas were at the present time.
Colin replied that they start at 30' and go up to 105'.
Chairman Barber asked how many antennas they had.
Colin replied that there were 17.
Chairman Barber asked if they rely on a series of towers they rely upon for disaster recovery.
Colin replied that this site has a control station; this site will actually talk to a station in Troy or to a station in the Heldebergs.
Chairman Barber asked if they went to 160' would that allow them to add additional third party providers.
Colin stated that the tower is effectively closed out with the last addition. The people that originally designed the tower for the cell company that just got their special use permit to 130' are restrengthening the bottom portion and if Ni Mo is allowed to go to 160', the top portion will be similarly strengthened and that is the design load of the tower; they cannot go any higher.
Chairman Barber asked if 160' is that much better than 150'.
Colin replied that it is.
Chairman Barber asked if he was able to identify which properties would be most affected visually by the 160' height.
Colin replied that the properties from the Mobil station up past the Elks seem to be most affected.
Chairman Barber asked if they have done any analysis of the cumulative effect of all of the antennas at this site.
Colin replied that the antennas that he is in charge of are public safety and they do not transmit all the time.
Jim Sumner asked what would be the minimum height they would be able to get away with using.
Colin replied that every foot you get is better for the coverage and he would like to see the minimum be 160' but would have to settle for what he is granted.
Chairman Barber stated that they would have to have a TDE review this application.
There was discussion regarding the frequencies that they would be operating in.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents.
Chuck Klaer asked about the height of the tower as far as airports are concerned.
Colin replied that at 200' and above it has to be lit.
Chuck Klaer asked if there is any chance that the current system is going to be revamped to change the nature of the frequency and communications so that police and everyone else could talk to them.
Colin replied that with very little work they could include police, fire, etc. right in their system; it would just take the cooperation of the local communications.
Karen Maxwell stated that the ERCC next door is the heartbeat of their electrical operations and this tower is very important to them.
Sharon Cupoli asked if they moved their antenna further up would another carrier be able to go in their original spot.
Colin replied that the structure is maxed out.
Chairman Barber made a motion to appoint Boswell Engineering as the TDE to look at the following items: the need for the rise in height of the tower, the structural analysis, and the visual impacts (additional plantings?). Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 - 0.
MATTER OF ROGER CARR - 6588 RT. 158
Chairman Barber stated that this is a continued hearing for the operation of a kennel.
Chairman Barber stated that the Town Code states that you can have kennels in an agricultural zone only if two requirements are met: the kennel has to be at least 300' away from a residence and the dogs have to be confined in a building from 10pm to 7am and asked Mr. Carr if he could meet those requirements.
Mr. Carr replied that he will be able to meet the requirements down the road.
Chairman Barber stated that the Board needs to address what the applicant has right now, not what he will have down the road.
Mr. Carr replied that he cannot meet those requirements right now.
Chairman Barber stated that if some point down the road he acquires more land or something happens so that he meets the requirements, the applicant can come back and reapply but at this point the legal requirements are not being met.
Chairman Barber stated that the applicant might want to withdraw his application. Chairman Barber stated that by withdrawing the application, he cannot operate the kennel there, he will not be able to have more than three dogs on site.
Mr. Carr stated that his next-door neighbor said that he would take two of the dogs.
Mr. Carr stated that he would like to withdraw his request. Chairman Barber made a motion to accept the withdrawal. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 - 0.
Chairman Barber stated by withdrawing the request if there are more than three dogs on the site and it is a kennel, it is an illegal use.
The neighbors were concerned with the neighbor taking in the dogs.
The meeting adjourned at 8:30pm.
| 
