Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Area Variance Carport 3 Roger topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hudson Falls Zoning Board approves carport variance for 3 Roger Street

Hudson Falls Zoning Board of Appeals · July 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Hudson Falls Zoning Board of Appeals on July 21 approved an area variance allowing a carport at 3 Roger Street, issuing a negative declaration on the short EAF; the vote was 4–0 with one member absent.

The Hudson Falls Zoning Board of Appeals voted July 21 to approve an area variance permitting a carport to be built over the driveway at 3 Roger Street in Hudson Falls.

Acting Chairperson Edward Mahan moved to approve the application and Board Member Mary Alice Murphy seconded; the resolution "that the Area Variance application for 3 Roger Street is approved as submitted" was adopted with AYES recorded for Mahan, Board Members Louis Cantiello, Chris Connelly and Murphy and Michael Willig absent. The board also reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form and issued a negative declaration, finding no adverse environmental impacts.

Applicant Olga Aleksandorva told the board she sought relief because winter snow falls from the roof onto the driveway and the side entrance, creating a hazard for parked cars and people using the side door. She requested relief of six feet on an eight-foot setback to place a carport over the driveway and said the proposed roof would be architectural shingle; she told the board she would consider adding a gutter if runoff proved problematic. Neighbor Shannon Landgren of 5 Roger Street said she has a small garden near the side yard but discussed the plan with Aleksandorva and "had no objections."

Village Attorney William Nikas reviewed the board's area-variance findings and the short EAF before the board made its environmental determination. The board's negative declaration on the EAF preceded the approval vote.

The decision was recorded as "duly adopted this 21st day of July 2025" and a notice of final decision was included in the meeting record. There was one member of the public recorded as present. With no further business the board adjourned at 6:20 p.m.