►
From YouTube: Zoning Board of Appeals 2023.01.10
Description
CONTENTS
00:00 Call to Order
05:00 48 Blackstone Ave.
10:00 45 Carroll Street
A
Team
good
evening,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
welcome
to
the
January
2023rd
zoning
board
of
appeals
meeting.
My
name
is
John
matzo
I'm,
acting
chairperson
of
the
board
for
today,
for
those
who
have
never
attended
one
of
our
meetings,
I
quickly
explain
how
this
meeting
is
conducted.
First,
we
ask
the
applicant
to
come
to
the
microphone
State,
their
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
discuss
the
proposal
project
before
is
then
turned
over
to
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
in
favor
of
The
Proposal.
A
Next,
an
opportunity
is
given
to
anyone
who
would
like
to
speak
in
opposition
of
the
project.
Once
everyone
has
the
opportunity
to
speak,
the
public
hearing
is
officially
closed
and
no
new
testimony
can
be
taken.
After
all,
public
hearing
have
been
held.
The
board
will
deliberate
and
make
a
decision
on
each
case.
The
public
will
be
welcome
to
stay
through
the
deliberations,
but
again
no
public
input
is
permitted
for
those
applicants
who
wish
not
to
stay
through
deliberations.
Please
call
Mr
Martinez.
If
you
wish
to
know
the
board's
decision.
A
A
A
B
A
A
We
do
have
one
little
incident
according
to
Mr
Nelson
Paul
Nelson.
It
was
not
noted
in
the
paper
that
this
shed
was
exceeding
200
square
feet,
even
though
there
most
people
I
mean,
could
figure
it
out
that
12
by
24..
So
it
is
up
to
the
board
here
to
decide
if
you
want
to
go
on
with
it
or
hold
it
until
next
month's
meeting.
If
anybody
sees
an
issue
with
it
that
it
wasn't
posted,
but
it
was
posted
in
the
mailings
that
it
exceeds.
D
E
So
what
the
code
says
is
that
the
shed
cannot
have
any
Dimension
greater
than
16
feet
and
cannot
be
greater
than
200
square
feet
in
area.
What
the
legal
notice
says
is
that
they're
requesting
a
variance
to
build
a
shed
that
has
a
dimension
greater
than
16
feet,
but
it
doesn't
say
that
they
need
a
variance
for
a
shed
that
exceeds
200
square
feet
in
area.
So
that's
sort
of
a
technicality.
E
The
legal
notice
does
say
that
the
shed
is
12
by
24.
So
it's
not
a
secret
that
it's
bigger
than
200
square
feet,
but
the
person
that
wrote
this
letter
in
opposition
pointed
out
that
technically,
the
variance
should
be
spelled
out
both
marries
and
should
be
spelled
out
in
the
legal
notice.
We
talked
it
over
a
court
Council
this
morning
and
they
said
that
it's
up
to
the
board
how
to
proceed
on
that.
If
you
want
to
so
to
answer
your
question
tabling,
it
would
allow
us
to
do
a
new
notice.
E
B
E
A
B
A
B
A
D
B
F
A
This
is
an
area
of
errands
to
allow
a
54
foot
tall
building
where
45
foot
is
the
maximum
height
allowed
and
a
zero
setback
where
10
feet
is
required
and
to
provide
27
parking
spaces
where
82
are
required
in
a
R3
multi-unit
welding
District.
Does
anybody
here
have
any
questions
on
this
project?
That's
going
forward.
C
A
E
A
C
A
G
G
However,
the
proposed
project
is
not
in
conformance
with
the
long-existing
R3.
Zoning
of
the
area,
as
proposed.
The
project
will
have
detrimental
impacts
on
my
property
and
we
change
the
character
of
the
entire
downtown
R3
District,
which
roughly
extends
south
of
Hawley
Street
and
east
of
Exchange
Street
to
the
Susquehanna
River.
G
The
proposed
building
on
Lyle
Ave
would
replace
an
existing
small
three-story.
Building
with
an
enormous
five-story
building
proposal
is
the
is
for
the
entire
east
side
of
this
building
to
be
built
right
up
to
the
property
line
which
divides
the
YWCA
property
and
my
property,
and
for
one
story,
ten
foot
six
inch
by
15
foot
five
inch
wing
of
the
proposed
building
to
be
attached
to
my
building
at
47
Carroll
Street.
The
wide
WCA
proposes
to
disregard
the
existing
requirements
of
the
R3
Zone
by
having
no
side
yard
setback
where
10
feet
setback
is
required.
G
They
also
proposed
to
increase
the
existing
non-conformance
by
building
a
fourth
and
fifth
Story
right
up
to
the
property
line.
This
would
result
in
both
non-conformance
with
the
side
yard
setback
requirement,
but
would
also
result
in
non-conformance
with
the
requirement
that
structures
in
the
R3
Zone
not
exceed
45
feet
in
height,
as
proposed.
This
massive
building
built
right
up
to
my
property
line,
violating
the
required
10
foot
side,
yard
setback
and
exceeding
45.
G
G
I
believe
that
there's
no
justification
for
seeking
relief
force
that
this
setback
requirement
as
the
YWCA
could
easily
reconfigure
the
first
floor
to
utilize,
the
282
square
foot
staff
Lounge
to
accommodate
the
toilet,
reception
area
and
a
reconfigured
Lobby.
If
the
staff
Lounge
is
needed,
part
of
a
545
square
foot
storage
room
could
be
utilized
as
a
staff
Lounge.
G
The
YWCA
is
seeking
relief
from
requirements.
The
buildings
within
the
R3
Zone
be
no
more
than
45
feet
in
height,
they
propose
to
construct
a
massive
five-story
building.
The
plan
may
have
been
that
presented
indicates
the
height
of
the
power
pit
of
the
proposed
structure
will
be
53
feet,
7
inches
in
height,
which
exceeds
the
R3
limit
by
eight
feet.
Seven
inches.
G
There
is
no
indication
of
How
High,
the
elevator
or
stair
bulkheads
will
be,
and
assuming
that
solar
panels
will
be
installed
on
the
roof,
there
is
no
indication
of
how
far
above
the
building
roof
they
would
extend.
There
is
no
basis
for
seeking
such
relief
as
the
circumstances
for
which
the
YWCA
seeks
relief
have
been
self-imposed.
The
zoning
code
regulations
are
known
to
all
prospective
buyers
of
property.
G
There
would
be
a
dangerous
precedent
for
entities
to
purchase
properties
with
the
expectation
that
they
will
be
able
to
flippantly
disregard
long
as
this
thing
requirements
of
zoning
code.
If
the
YWCA
were
unable
to
develop
their
project
on
the
land
that
they
purchased,
they
should
have
instead
purchased
a
different
property
to
meet
their
needs,
rather
than
hoping
to
change
the
rules.
After
the
fact,
the
YWCA
can
easily
stay
within
the
legally
required
height
by
constructing
a
four-story
building,
instead
of
a
five-story
building,
which
would
result
in
a
building
of
44
feet.
G
Three
inches
in
height,
which
would
be
in
conformance
with
the
maximum
height
requirement
of
45
feet
as
I
believe
that
there
is
some
precedent
to
grandfathering
pre-existing
non-conforming
zoning
conditions.
I
respectfully
request
that
if
the
zoning
board
of
appeals
grants
a
variance
for
the
existing
zero
side
yard
setback
for
34
Lyle
Ave
that
the
YWCA
be
required
to
step
back
the
east
side
of
the
fourth
floor
of
the
proposed
building
to
provide
for
the
mandated
10
feet
side
yard
setback.
G
I
also
request
that
the
ywca's
proposal
for
variance
to
create
a
non-conformance
at
45
Carroll
Street
by
constructing
a
five
foot,
four
inch
section
of
a
Lobby
which
would
be
built
right
up
to
my
property
line.
With
zero
side
yard
set
back
where
10
feet
is
required,
be
denied
I
request
that
the
YWCA
building
on
Lyle
Ave
be
mandated
to
conform
to
the
existing
R3
requirement,
the
maximum
height
not
to
exceed
45
feet.
It
should
be
noted
that,
with
the
proposed
fifth
Story
eliminated,
the
YWCA
project
would
still
provide
51
housing
units.
G
There
will
clearly
be
a
significantly
greater
need
for
parking
for
this
project
as
large
numbers
of
daycare
staff,
social
services,
staff,
maintenance,
staff,
security
staff,
service
providers,
tenants,
parents
of
children
and
daycare
and
visitors
will
need
parking
as
per
our
three
requirements.
I
request
that
the
r
I
I
requested
the
YWCA
be
required
to
provide
61
additional
parking
spaces
in
terms
of
the
parking
I
just
heard
from
blast
construction
that
they
are
providing
40
spots
at
the
avra.
G
G
Additionally,
on
the
way
here,
I
noted
the
YWCA,
they
have
a
Young
Wonders
program
day
care
center
on
Holly
Street
and,
as
I
passed,
I
noted
that
there
were
several
cars
with
flashing
lights,
waiting
to
pick
up
their
children
there
so
clearly
having
a
lack
of
parking
is
a
problem.
This
project
is
going
to
be
different
from
the
YWCA
that
is
existing
in
that
it
is
providing
for
permanent
housing
units,
and
although
these
are
affordable,
housing
units
rest
assured
that
people
who
have
affordable
housing,
many
of
them
still
own
cards,.
H
B
G
C
I
will
point
out
that
Mr
Ken's
list
to
come
concerns
were
the
exact
same
ones
that
planning
board
had
before
them.
When
we
were
in
here
last
week,
the
well
the
one
story-
non-con
The,
one-story,
non-conforming,
that's
touching
Mr
Ken's
building
is
an
existing
is
exists
right
now
with
the
building
that
is
on
site.
Where
was
the
Urban
League
building?
No,
it's
not
an
Urban
League,
it's
the
other!
It's
34
Lyle,
we're
not
so
that
we
don't
disturb
his
building,
we're
leaving
that
10
foot
six
and
we're
gonna
we're
gonna.
C
B
C
E
C
F
F
The
employees
of
the
YWCA
have
spaces
that
they
pay
for
on
a
regular
basis
across
the
street
in
the
privately
owned
lot
and
two
blocks
away,
and
those
employees
will
also
still
be
employed
at
the
intergenerational
campus.
They
don't
necessarily
need
parking
to
come
to
work.
They're
right
there,
a
block
away,
the
staff
will
not
increase
significantly
and
the
maintenance
service
will
be
provided
by
an
outside
service.
F
So
we
don't
see
parking
as
an
issue.
We
will
be
providing
60
spaces.
The
parents
don't
park
their
car.
There
will
be
space
right
in
front
of
the
old
Urban
League
building
to
allow
them
to
pull
in
off
the
street
and
safely
get
their
children
inside
to
the
child
care
center.
They
won't
be
on
the
street
with
their
flashers
on
and
then.
Lastly,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
Zoning
Board
of
the
city
of
Binghamton
understands
a
couple
of
things.
F
The
YWCA
was
incorporated
in
the
city
of
Binghamton
in
1892.,
we've
been
there
for
130
years,
providing
services
to
the
city,
much
needed
critical
services,
and
we
have
performed
those
Services
quite
well,
exceptionally.
Actually,
when
you
consider
the
last
couple
of
years
of
funding,
we've
received
from
New
York
State
and
the
City
of
Binghamton
supporting
our
project
and
the
expansion
of
those
needs
to
a
project
like
the
intergenerational
campus
that
you're
seeing
we
at
the
YWCA
don't
take
any
regulations
in
any
City
flippantly.
F
We
are
very
careful
to
make
sure
that
we
are
doing
everything
properly
and
working
with
BOS
Construction
Group,
who
have
been
working
in
the
city
of
Binghamton
for
numbers
of
years
and
have
all
kinds
of
expertise
there
to
lend
themselves
to
us.
We
will
be
sure
that
this
project
is
not
going
to
be
detrimental
to
the
city
of
Binghamton
or
the
people
who
live
in
the
city.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
that
was
understood.
A
C
A
F
I
D
B
B
B
E
B
E
B
A
I
I
E
Yeah
that
should
read
21.
got
it
so
I
just
wanted
better
and
one
more
point
of
clarification
on
that.
The
40
spaces
you,
the
board,
should
consider
in
making
their
decision,
but
they
don't
technically
count
as
official
parking
spaces.
So
your
decision
on
the
variance
will
be
on
21
parking
spaces,
where
I
figure
out
what
the
total
required
amount
was
it's
supposed
to
be
82
right,
so
you
can
consider
them
for
practical
purposes.
E
C
E
C
A
A
E
The
Planning
Commission
approved
the
site
plan,
subject
to
you
all
approving
the
necessary
variances
and
they
did
Issue
a
negative
declaration
under
Seekers.
So
you
don't
have
to
be
in
any
further
environmental
review.
At
this
point,
you
would
just
deliberate
on
the
requested
variances
I
think
you've
all
decided
essentially
to
deny
the
zero
foot
side
setback
variants.
C
Is
that
they're
located
in
the
building
such
that
you,
you
can't?
You
won't
be
able
to
see
them
they're
in
the
middle
of
building
and
we
originally
designed
a
four-story
building,
but
the
setbacks
and
side
yard
and
stuff
like
that
were
very
restrictive
and
the
number
it's
it's
kind
of
a
game
of
Economics
yeah,
the
minimum
number
of
you.
You
know
you
still
have
to
pay
the
bills
right,
and
so
we
did
have
a
four-story
in
mind
first,
but
the
building
footprint
was
too
large.
So
that's
the
reason
we
did.
B
B
A
A
A
A
I
B
A
An
adverse
impact
on
the
physical
or
environmental
conditions:
does
anybody
see
anything
there
and
then
is
it
a
self-created
hardship,
yeah
two
and
to
a
point
I
would
think
it
is,
but
right,
on
the
other
hand
too,
it
is
something
that
the
city
is
in.
The
YWCA
is
looking
forward
to
and
I
think
even
in
this
area,
and
it
will
enhance
I
think
that
side
of
town
quite
a
bit
with
this
new
project
going
on,
that's
my
opinion.
What's
everybody
else
look
at
it
and
how
do
you
think.
A
For
each
variance,
yeah
so
can
I
get
a
motion
on
the
let's
start,
with
the
heist
of
the
building
going
from
45
feet
to
54
feet,
tall
can
I
get
a
motion
to
approve
that
can
I
get
a
second
second,
all
in
favor
all
right
and
then
on.
The
21
parking
spaces
were
82
are
required,
which
they
are
allowed.
An
extra
40
over
to
the
avre
parking
lot
can
I
get
a
motion
on
that
one
all
in
favor
and
then
with
the
when
this
is
spelled
out.
A
So
you
know
I
get
somebody
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
this
or
deny
it
'll
make
a
motion
to
approve
it.
Let's
make
a
motion
to
improve,
as
amended
with
the
54-foot
tall
building,
where
45
foot
maximum
height
is
allowed,
the
zero
setback
will
be
removed
from
that
one
portion
of
the
lobby
and
the
21
parking
spaces
will
be
allowed
at
45
Carroll
Street,
with
an
additional
40
40
spaces
at
the
AVR
avre
building
correct.
We
need
the
address
for
the
ABR
B
building
or
no
no.
E
H
C
D
B
E
E
E
E
So
what
what
we
all
just
discussed
there
is
that
if
we
do
not
consider
that
the
YWCA
has
rights
over
that
easement
area,
then
that
would
result
in
a
zero
foot
setback
for
the
new
multi-story
portion
on
the
northeast
corner
of
the
site.
So
the
question
is:
do
you
want
to
Grant
a
zero
foot
side?
Setback
for
that
portion
of
the
building,
but
not
for
the
lobby?
Is
that
what
I
understand?
Yes,.