TOWN OF GUILDERLAND
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 5, 2007
Members Present
|
Peter Barber, Chairman Sharon Cupoli Chuck Klaer Mike Marcantonio Susan Macri Allen Maikels 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.
CONTINUED CASES:
MATTER OF REBECCA REED – 200 FOSTER LANE
Chairman Barber stated that at the last hearing there was discussion about measuring the distance of the kennel from the nearest residence and if this was truly an area variance or a use variance request.
Don Cropsey stated that Rodger Stone had gone to the property and had measured and determined that the distance is less than 300' to the nearest residence.
Counsel Thayer's conclusion as to whether this is an area variance or a use variance was that it is a use variance because the law prohibits dog kennels within 300' of the nearest residence; it is the use that is prohibited and it would not be an area variance. The use variance request would be for her to allow the use within the 300' of the nearest residence. The applicant has two choices; she can move the dog kennel to be 300' away from the residence, or this can be treated as a use variance request.
Chairman Barber stated that Ms. Reed has a lot of property so there is the possibility that the kennel could be relocated.
Mr. Reed replied that she could easily do that.
Chairman Barber stated that the Board would like to see a plan showing that the kennel could be relocated more than 300' from the residence. Chairman Barber stated that if she could show that it is more than 300' from the closest residential property, then she is dealing with a special use permit.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents. There were none.
There was discussion regarding the kennel in this agricultural zone.
Chairman Barber made a motion to continue the hearing to October 3, 2007 for the applicant to submit plans showing the kennel at least 300' from the nearest residence and to discuss the special use permit. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 – 0.
MATTER OF MARY REED – 17 PINEWOOD 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. 4038
Request of Mary C. Reed for Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the construction of a 10' x 20' roof structure to cover a patio. A variance is requested to allow this project to occur on a 4200sf parcel; 5000sf minimum is required.
Per Articles IV & V Sections 280-31 and 280-51 respectively
For property owned by Mary C. Reed
Situated as follows: 17 Pinewood Road Guilderland, NY 12084
Tax Map #40.13-1-25 Zoned: R15
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 5th of September, 2007 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: August 28, 2007"
The file consists of the mailing list to 38 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for this area variance, the Town Planners comments, a letter from a neighbor to the left indicating that they have no problems with the proposal, a brief narrative and a schematic of the overhang on the property.
The Town Planner had the following comments: "The applicant is requesting an area variance for the construction of a roof over a patio on an undersized lot. No planning objections."
Mary Reed, applicant, presented the case.
Chairman Barber stated that the applicant is looking to place an overhang so she can use the sliding glass door and have some cover from the elements.
Ms. Reed replied that was correct.
Chairman Barber stated that the reason the applicant was here because the lot is undersized. Chairman Barber stated the he has no problem with the request.
Ms. Reed submitted another letter from a neighbor who was in favor of the proposed overhang.
Chairman Barber asked Don Cropsey for an overview regarding the undersized lot.
Don Cropsey stated that the zone in which the lot is located is R15 however the lot is much smaller than the 15000 square feet required. The Zoning Law has a provision to allow construction on undersized lots but there are certain minimums that have to be met. Don Cropsey stated that any kind of construction on this lot would need to go before the Zoning Board for their approval.
Chuck Klaer asked if there were any lot coverage issues.
Don Cropsey responded that there were not.
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 Sue Macri. Vote 7 – 0.
Chairman Barber made a motion for approval of:
Variance Request No. 4038
Request of Mary C. Reed for Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: the construction of a 10' x 20' roof structure to cover a patio. A variance is requested to allow this project to occur on a 4200sf parcel; 5000sf minimum is required.
Per Articles IV & V Sections 280-31 and 280-51 respectively
For property owned by Mary C. Reed
Situated as follows: 17 Pinewood Road Guilderland, NY 12084
Tax Map #40.13-1-25 Zoned: R15
In granting this decision, the Board makes the following findings of fact:
A public hearing was duly noticed and held this evening. Two residents provided written comments in support of the application.
This is a Type II Action under SEQRA, not requiring SEQRA review.
The Town Planner had no objections to the request.
The Board further finds that the 10' overhang is intended to provide a covering for a sliding glass door.
The overhang will not alter the character of the neighborhood.
There are no other variances required and there are no lot coverage issues.
The benefits to the property owner far outweigh any potential negative impacts upon the neighborhood.
In granting this decision, the Board imposes the following conditions:
Adherence to the plans as submitted.
The Zoning Administrative Office is hereby authorized to issue the permits necessary to implement this decision.
If this variance is not exercised with 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 KEY BANK – 2050B WESTERN AVENUE
Sue Macri 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 III & V of the Zoning Law on the following proposition:
Amend Special Use Permit #23-97/Request No. 4037
Request of Jonathan Wocher of McBride Dale Clairon for an amendment to Special Use Permit #23-97 under the Zoning Law to permit: exterior renovations to an existing branch bank.
Per Articles III & V Sections 280-20 and 280-52 respectively
For property owned by Star Plaza, Inc.
Situated as follows: 2050B Western Avenue Guilderland, NY 12084
Tax Map #51.02-2-5.1/1 Zoned: GB
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 5th of September, 2007 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: August 28, 2007"
The file consists of the mailing list to 61 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for an amendment to a special use permit, the Town Planners comments, a Short Environmental Assessment Form for this Unlisted Action, Albany County Planning Board's notification of 8-16-07, an EDAC waiver, a project description, plans and the previous special use permit.
Albany County Planning Board's notification of 8-16-07 was to defer to local consideration.
The Town Planner had the following comments: "The application is for exterior renovations to the bank building that will not create any site plan changes. No planning objections."
Jonathan Wocher, applicant, presented the request. Mr. Wocher stated that they are proposing exterior renovations to the building which are primarily aesthetic changes. Mr. Wocher stated that they are not proposing any site plan changes; the footprint of the building itself does not change.
Chairman Barber asked if there have been any color renderings submitted.
Mr. Wocher stated that they have not been submitted but discussed the changes that would be taking place.
Chairman Barber asked if color depictions could be submitted.
Mr. Wocher replied that he would be able to submit them.
Chairman Barber asked if they have looked into landscaping for the site.
Mr. Wocher replied that they have no plans at this point to enhance the landscaping on site; the main focus is on the building.
Chairman Barber asked about the lighting on the bank.
Mr. Wocher stated that they would be willing to work with the Building Department on cut off type fixtures for the site.
Chairman Barber also spoke about the sidewalk on the Rt. 155 side of the property and asked him to take a look at it.
Mr. Wocher replied that most of their focus is on the building and most of the issues that Chairman Barber is raising are site issues and at this point there is no site plan developed. Mr. Wocher stated that unfortunately a lot of the issues raised go to another level and would require them to do site work and go beyond the scope of what they were proposing to do. Mr. Wocher stated that the property is a leased property.
Chairman Barber asked Don Cropsey if they could condition their approval on the submission of a lighting plan and a landscaping plan for the project.
Don Cropsey replied that the lighting is fairly simple to accomplish. The landscaping is a little more difficult because it needs to be coordinated with the owner who in the past has expressed an interest in improving his site. Don Cropsey stated that it would be difficult to place a condition for site work on this project without considering the whole plaza.
Chairman Barber asked at what point do they have that opportunity.
Don Cropsey suggested that it be conditioned on a comprehensive landscaping plan and site renovation plan be submitted.
Russ Razone of Key Bank stated that they wanted landscaping directly around the building, they could do that but they do not have any responsibility beyond that point.
There was discussion regarding the heating and air conditioning units on the roof of the bank.
Chuck Klaer asked if any consideration had been given to changing the architecture of the building to hide the units on the roof.
The applicant discussed a possible blind to hide the units and stated that they are trying to stay with the theme of the flat roof.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents.
Jerry Houser of Pineridge Drive talked about the landscaping of the plaza that had been discussed approximately eight years ago. Mr. Houser stated that in terms of Key Bank, they could possibly plant grass and install a sidewalk.
Don Cropsey stated that Mr. Houser was correct that the landlord did represent that he would come in with a plan for the traffic flow and landscaping of the parking lot. Don Cropsey stated that he has been in a couple of times with a plan but the problem is emergency vehicle access.
Chairman Barber made a motion to continue the hearing to give the applicant time to submit a colored rendering, landscaping plan within the leasehold interest and downcast lighting. Motion seconded by Sue Macri. Vote 7 – 0.
Chuck Klaer asked about possibly changing the roofline.
Tom Remmert stated that from a fire point of view putting another roof over an existing roof creates all kinds of problems.
The case of Jonathan Rosen was adjourned to the next meeting as the applicant was not present.
MATTER OF PAUL SCIOCCHETTI – 122 DEDHAM POST ROAD
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:
Variance Request No. 4036
Request of Paul V. Sciocchetti for a Variance of the regulations under the Zoning Law to permit: an inground swimming pool without a fence enclosure encompassing the entire perimeter of the pool.
Per Articles IV & V Sections 280-34 and 280-51respectively
For property owned by Paul Sciocchetti
Situated as follows: 122 Dedham Post Road Schenectady, NY 12303
Tax Map #28.17-4-15 Zoned: R40
Plans open for public inspection at the Building Department during normal business hours. Said hearing will take place on the 5th of September, 2007 at the Guilderland Town Hall beginning at 7:30pm.
Dated: August 28, 2007"
The file consists of the mailing list to 22 neighboring property owners, the Town's required forms for an area variance and documentation provided by the applicant.
Paul Sciocchetti, applicant, presented the case. Mr. Sciocchetti stated that the pool cover is a better alternative to a fence.
Chairman Barber asked how the cover was automatic.
Mr. Sciocchetti replied that you turn a key. Mr. Sciocchetti stated that the pool cover covers the entire portion of the pool.
Chairman Barber stated that he has never seen pool covers identified as a safety issue, they are usually for convenience.
Chairman Barber stated that the Town Code states that a fence shall be put around the pool, and the fence shall be at least 4' high. Chairman Barber stated that in applying for a variance, you have to meet certain requirements and asked if installing a fence would create an undue hardship or a practical difficulty.
Mr. Sciocchetti stated that part of the problem is the 50' no disturbance area around the properties that he cannot even put a fence on if he wants to and his pool is up against the 50' no disturbance area.
Chairman Barber stated that the 50' no disturbance area was there when he purchased the property and he installed the pool right up to the no disturbance area. Chairman Barber stated that there is a patio and a woodshed that are both in the no disturbance zone. Chairman Barber stated that they are still dealing with the fundamental issue of how to get around the Town Code requirement for a fence around a swimming pool. Chairman Barber stated that part of the practical difficulty and undue hardship is whether or not that 50' disturbance area was there before the applicant purchased the property and before the pool was put in. Chairman Barber stated that it appears to him that there is enough room to place a fence between the pool and the no disturbance zone.
Mr. Sciocchetti stated that from a practical perspective the safety issue is being accomplished in a better way with the pool cover rather than the fence.
Chairman Barber stated that the Town Board would be the one to amend the provision regarding fences around pools, not the Zoning Board. Chairman Barber stated that the Zoning Board needs to show that there is practical difficulty with the applicant complying with the code.
Jim Sumner asked the applicant when the pool was put in and why the fence was not put in then.
Mr. Sciocchetti replied that he did not believe that the fence was included in the application or permit.
Don Cropsey replied that any permit issued for a pool is with the understanding that a barrier must be installed around the pool. Don stated that if the Zoning Board grants this variance to allow the applicant to eliminate the need for a fence pursuant to the Zoning Law, he still has another hurdle with the State Building Code which clearly requires a 4' fence around an inground swimming pool.
Chairman Barber stated that to get relief from the State Building Code the applicant must go to the State Building Code Board of Review.
Mr. Sciocchetti stated that he would contact the State Building Code of Review.
Chairman Barber asked if there were any questions or comments from the residents. There were none. Chairman Barber made a motion to continue the hearing for one month and have the applicant report back to Don Cropsey and submit additional information for the Board members if he so desires. Motion seconded by Sharon Cupoli. Vote 7 – 0.
OTHER:
The Board discussed the issue of eliminating the sidewalk which surrounds the base of the building at 1450 Western Avenue and whether or not they can do that without Board approval. The owners wish to remove it for maintenance, safety and to increase the greenspace. Chairman Barber stated that he felt it would require an amendment to their special use permit.
Gerald Houser spoke and stated that two sections of the sidewalk had already been removed and there was no body in this building in support of the removal of these sidewalks.
MINUTES The Board approved the minutes of 7-18-07 with minor changes.
SIGNS:
The Board approved a 39sf identification sign for MNB Communications at Carman Plaza contingent upon there being no banners in the windows. Vote 7 – 0.
The Board approved a 15sf building mounted identification sign for David Brickman at 1664 Western Avenue. Vote 7 – 0.
The Board approved two signs for a total of 49.59sf for White House Black Market at Stuyvesant Plaza. Vote 6 - 1. (Sumner)
The meeting adjourned at 9:30pm.
| 
