Oneonta zoning board approves Community Bank chain-link fence with conditions

The Zoning and Housing Board of Appeals voted to approve a variance that will let Community Bank install a vinyl-coated black, 6-foot chain-link fence around portions of the bank's rear parking area on Main Street, the board agreed at its February meeting. The motion passed by roll call with all voting members recorded as "yes."

The bank's representative told the board the fence is intended to reduce crime, harassment of customers and employees, and ongoing damage to posts caused by snow removal and vehicles. He said chain-link is substantially less expensive to install and repair than wood or aluminum alternatives and that some sections will include semi-privacy slats while other runs will not. "They don't want the full privacy. They don't want it to look like that," the representative said, describing the bank's preference for semi-privacy slats on select sections only.

Board members and staff framed the application as a request for an area variance because the parcel sits adjacent to the downtown historic-review area and the zoning code includes design controls in that context. Staff characterized the environmental review as a Type 2 action with negligible or no permanent environmental impact, and the board voted to affirm that determination before taking the variance vote.

Discussion at the hearing focused on where chain link is already present on adjacent parcels, the practical difficulty of installing posts through pavement (chain-link posts are driven through pavement while wood posts would require jackhammering and deeper work), and the cost and maintenance differences between materials. The representative said chain link posts are typically spaced 10 feet apart while wood posts commonly use 8-foot centers, increasing the number of costly post installations in paved areas. He also showed photographs of nearby chain-link installations, a dumpster enclosure and the existing fences along the property to illustrate how new sections would tie in.

Several commissioners pressed the applicant on public access and safety. Board members confirmed there is no recorded public easement or formal right-of-way through the bank parking lot even though a path has been used by pedestrians for years; staff said they had not found an established easement. Commissioners also raised concern that a solid wood or full-privacy fence could create hiding places and reduce sight lines, potentially worsening safety problems in the alleyway. One member said a continuous, opaque wood fence could discourage visibility around dumpsters and alleys and thus would be undesirable.

To address those concerns the board included conditions in its approval: the 180-foot run parallel to the Deets Street/Artist Lofts building, the connected 30-foot sections and an 80-foot run identified in the applicant's site plan will be installed without privacy slats; a separate continuous run on the left-hand side (as shown in the submitted plan) may be fitted with semi-privacy slats (described at the hearing as slats that reduce visibility at a distance but remain partly see-through). The board also required that the existing steps in the area be covered or otherwise made inaccessible (the handrail removed or cut below grade) so that no steps lead directly into the new fence line, and that grading and landscaping in that area match surrounding ground cover so the installation does not create a new safety hazard. The applicant agreed to convey those stipulations to the bank.

The board discussed alternative material options (aluminum ornamental fencing was cited as visually preferable in some locations but substantially more expensive and mechanically difficult to install at certain angles and on pavement). Several members said the proposed black vinyl-coated chain link would be visually consistent with other fencing already on and near the parcel and that chain link better resists repeated impacts from plows and vehicles. Staff and board members noted the parcel sits outside the formal historic district; because of that, the zoning board's area-variance authority applies rather than a historic-preservation approval.

On procedure, the board first voted to affirm the property's Type 2 environmental classification and then voted on the variance motion as presented, with the conditions described above added into the approval. The clerk's roll call recorded unanimous affirmative votes from the chair and the voting commissioners present.

No formal appeal or implementation timeline was set at the meeting; board members said the applicant should return to staff with final installation details if the bank later seeks to add slats or make material changes not covered by the variance. The meeting moved on to administrative items after the vote, including training notices for board members, and then adjourned.