Text · page 6 of 54
Read the whole document on one page (all 54 pages, each with its own heading)
• Counsel (Trapp): Discuss together but make separate written findings; condition approval on use-specific to EV charging to avoid variances applying to different future uses; Type II SEQR confirmed. • Applicant: Small, unusual lot necessitates variances; other development would likely need similar relief. • Public comment: None. AREA Variance Balancing Tests (separate for each variance) 1. Pavement Setback (10' to 3'/4'/6.6') • Neighborhood character: No negative impact; commercial context between two businesses. • Feasible alternatives: No; lot size and economic feasibility necessitate requested setbacks. • Substantiality: Not substantial in context of commercial corridor. • Adverse impact: None anticipated; drainage addressed at site plan. • Self-created: Partially; unique lot constraints justify plan. 2. Front Yard Setback (40' to 6.6') • Neighborhood character: No negative impact given commercial surroundings. • Feasible alternatives: No; only viable plan for economic feasibility on small lot. • Substantiality: Numerically substantial, but context reduces significance. • Adverse impact: None foreseen. • Self-created: Yes, tempered by lot’s severe limitations. 3. Side Yard Setback (5' to 0' for canopy) • Neighborhood character: No negative impact (commercial). • Feasible alternatives: No; setback required to achieve feasible design on small lot. • Substantiality: 100% variance; not substantial in this specific commercial context and use. • Adverse impact: None anticipated; addressed at site plan approval. • Self-created: Yes, but unique lot circumstances necessitate approach. Motioned by Stachowski, seconded by Green to approve EV charging station canopy and setbacks. Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Application 2026-017 - 48 Greenspring Court — Corner Lot Fence Projection Request: Increase fence height from 4' to 6'. Page 6 of 54