Loading...
1988-12-21 -, ~ QUEENS BURY ZORING BOARD OF APPEALS Regular Meeting: Wednesday, December 21, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Present: Theodore Turner, Chairman Joyce Eggleston Daniel Griffin Jeffrey Kelley Susan Goetz, Secretary Michael Muller Charles O. Sicard Paul Dusek, Town Attorney (in Counsel's Office) Lee York, Sr. Planner John Goralski, Planner Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer Chairman Turner called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.. There were no corrections to the minutes of October 19 and 26, 1988. Corrections on the November 16, 1988 minutes are as follows: Area Variance No. 1438: Pg. 2, 3rd Para.: .. he was advised .. sIb .. he was not advised Area Variance No. 1442: Pg 8, 1st Para.: Sentence Insert: The building $200,000. Pg 8, 3rd Para.: to delete: Taxes have ...... $200,000. lot has been assessed since 1987 for over from to the shoreline sIb .. from the shoreline.. Mr. Sicard moved APPROVAL of the above-mentioned minutes as accepted and corrected. Seconded by Mrs. Goetz. Passed Unanimously NEW BUSIRESS AREA VARIANCE NO. 1446 Yury Yefimenko Tamara Yefimenko The application is seeking minimal relief of the front setback of the already-constructed single family residence in the Twicwood Subdivision, at the end of Cedarwood Drive on the south side, SFR-1A. The lot size is .812 acres. (Tax Map No. 68-5-1.3) John S. Carusone, Esq., represented the applicants. The error was discovered when an application for Title Insurance for the Yefimenko - \ '-' ....-' residence was submitted. The bank requested that the house be plotted on the survey, and the setback was mtssed by 8.4 inches. Mr. Carusone requested amendment of the Application, Page 3, No. I. .. .07 of a foot .. sIb .. 0.7 of a foot ... Public Rearing. no comment Correspondence. Staff comments from John Goralski. This is an uninten- tional mistake by the contractor and is a minimal variation, which will have no affect on public facilities and services. It will not change the character of the neighborhood. The only alternatives would be the removal or shortening of the garage. Mr. Griffin moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1446, Yury and Tamara Yefimenko. The practical difficulty is the error made in sighting the house. It is a minimal relief and a reasonable request, and there is no adverse affect on the neighborhood. The measurement involved is 7/10 of a foot or an 8.4 inch variation. The applicant has submitted the Short Environmental Assessment Form, indicating no adverse environmental impact. Seconded by Mr. Turner. Passed 6 Yes (Kelley, Sicard, Turner, Goetz, Griffin, Eggleston) I Abstain (Muller) AREA VARIAØCB RO. 1447. Ferris Wheel - 90 ft. high AREA VARIAlCB RO. 1448. Condor Ride - 110 ft. high ARIA VAlIARCB RO. 1449. Flight Trainer ride - 70 ft. 6 in. Story town, U.S.A., Inc. d/b/a The Great Escape The applications are for the placement of entertainment rides located in the above-mentioned recreation site situated on Route 9, approximately 25 yards north of intersection with Round Pond Road, RC-IS. Of concern in the three Variances, is that there is a 50 foot height limitation on build- ings. (Tax Map No. 36-2-3, 4, 7) Wayne referred 2.020. Judge, Esq., represented the applicant, Charles R. Wood, and to the Zoning Ordinance Article II, General Provisions. Section 33; ··Building· means any structure which is permanently affixed to the land, is covered by a roof supported by columns or by walls, and intended for shelter, housing or enclosure of persons, animals or chattels. (See ·Structure·)·. A. .... the word ·building· includes the word ·structure,· . 1.. - ""'--- -' Given the broadest possible interpretation of the statute, Mr. Judge stated that Mrs. York and Mr. Hatin concluded that the Town is taking the position that a ride is a structure. However, if the ride was a mobile ride rather than fixed by bolts, etc., then it would not be covered under a height restriction in the statute. Each of the above-mentioned rides come in a park model and a mobile model. Each of the proposed rides is the state-of-the-art ride~ The companies make approximately three to four rides per year and cost more than one million dollars. The plans are to construct one and possibly two rides this year, and the third ride next year. The reason the applications are being made now is because the purchaser would miss out on the rides, if the name is not put on the production list. The complexion of the park has changed over the years. The original area was a Kidde Park called Story town. Later the marketing was broadened to appeal to parents and teenagers, it is necessary to upgrade the rides each year to stay competitive in the amusement park business. Mr. Hatin was concerned about the safety of the passengers, if one of the rides should stop and people were trapped at the top. He informed the Board that Charles Wood has donated a contribution to the Queensbury Central Fire Company of $150,000 towards the purchase of a tower truck, which has a ladder that goes up 95 feet. On the top of the truck is a platform with rails around it. If anyone has to be taken from a building or any ride in the park, the tower truck can be used. A truck identical to the tower truck has been driven through the park, and it will be acces- sible to every ride in the park. It has not yet been purchased, because it requires a trade-in of one of the existing Queensbury Central fire trucks. At this point in time, Mr. Judge is of the opinion that Hudson Falls may wish to purchase the Queensbury Central fire truck. The new truck will be in operation by next Spring. The general scheme of the applications call for the fOllowing. 1. Elimination of the Italian Coaster, Construct the Flight Trainer - 70 feet 6 inches high. The Italian Coaster is one of the oldest rides in the park and is not as high as the Flight Trainer. The location is on the downside of a hill behind the Wachita Motel and not visible from Round Pond Road or U.S. Route 9. The Flight Trainer will not be visible from Round Pond Road or Glen Lake, but it may be visible from some portions of U. S. Route 9. In Mr. Judge's opinion, it will not be visible from the Northway. The ride itself are attached to circle the pole controlled by the loads passengers in individual enclosed cabins, that long arms attached to the center pole. The cabins about 60 feet above ground and can be individually passengers into flips, straight ride, etc. ~ '---' -.../ 2. Ferris Wheel - 90 feet high. The location is in a depression in the campground area, one of the lowest areas in the park. It is near the Water Rapids ride. The ferris wheel will not be visible from Round Pond Road, Route 9, the Northway or anything to the east. It may be visible from some parts around the wetlands area to the north. He does not feel it will be visible from the Glen Lake area, because of a nearby rise in the property. 3. Eliminate the Tumbleweed Ride, Construct the Condor Ride - 112 feet high. The location is in Ghost Town on top of a rise, and will probably be visible from U. S. Route 9, it may be visible from portions of the Northway, it will not be visible from Round Pond Road, and it would probably be visible from the Trading Post area to the north. The ride is a high ride, 20 feet higher than the Tumbleweed Ride. The practical difficulties for the three Variances is that the area is zoned for Recreational Use and, in the preparatory paragraphs of the Zon- ing Ordinance, it says the areas are intended for intense recreational use, apparently meaning an amusement park can be operated. Mrs. Goetz requested further information on the new truck. Brian LeFleur, Fire Chief Queensbury Central Fire Department, stated that his department has removed people from rides approximately three times. Each year inspectors require Mr. Wood to perform an actual removal from the rides. In addition, vehicles are taken through the park to check the roads. The truck presently being looked at costs approximately $440,000. Mr. Woods donation of $150,000, plus the $275,000 which the fire depart- ment hopes to gain from the existing truck, brings the fire department within range to purchase the tower truck. Mr. LeFleur clarified to the Board that the Queensbury Central Fire Company is negotiating with several fire departments, including Hudson Falls, no final decision has been made. The purchase of the new truck is contingent upon the sale of the old one. Mr. Judge stated that the three rides received approval of the Warren County planning Board and the Queensbury Beautification Committee. The Warren County Planning Board did ask if there was another place where the Condor Ride could be put, because of its height. This was discussed with Mr. Wood, but he prefers to leave the ride as the application states. Public Hearingl Michael O'Connor, Esq.1 resident of Glen Lake and representative on behalf of the Glen Lake Association. Mr. O'Connor and the Association are looking for information, there is no stand pro or con the application. Mr. O'Connor has particular concerns 4 -- -....,./ as to whether or not the rides would be visible from Glen Lake or the Glen Lake ·fen,· or wetland. The area is a Type I wetland within the State, it is an area that is going to be preserved for its wild state, anything that affects the area, even if it is visual, should be considered by the Board. One of the rides (Condor) appears to be within 500 feet of the wetland. Considering the information that has been presented to the Board at this meeting, Mr. O'Connor could not determine if the rides will be visible, he could not determine the hours of operation, noise components have not been discussed, or what lighting will be on the rides. Of particular concern was the Condor ride. Being constructed 120 feet on top of the hill in Ghost Town, Mr. O'Connor feels that it will be vis- ible from Glen Lake~ it certainly will be visible from the wetland. Since there is no topography shown on the maps, it is difficult to determine if the rides will be visible from the Glen Lake fen or Glen Lake. There is a hill between the Condor ride and Glen Lake, which has been used as a camp ground. Mr. O'Connor feels that the Board has to have topographical infor- mation as to what is the elevation at the base of the rides, as opposed to the elevation in the fen, as opposed to the elevation on the lake and what is intervening between them. Showing the elevations could be done by a survey measurement, or some illustration on the ground that is visible. Regarding Article 10, Section 10.040 A. of the Zoning Ordinance, ·...no such Variance shall be valid unless all of the following circumstances are so founds 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions, fully described in the findings of the Board, applying to such land or buildings and not applying generally to land or bUildings in the neighborhood, .... Mr. O'Connor feels that nothing different has been substantiated as to this particular parcel than anything else that would be in the RC Zone, there is nothing ·unique· that has been mentioned. In considering the elevations of the three sites chosen to house the new rides, Mr. O'Connor could not find any satisfactory reason as to why the tallest of the three rides was proposed to be located on the site with the highest elevation. Just because the applicant likes one site as opposed to another site, that could not serve as the practical difficulty or minimum variance requirement. On behalf of the Glen Lake Association, Mr. O'Connor does not prefer to take a stand in opposition to the applicant, but he does feel that more information is necessary before a position is taken. In the face of lack of information or minimizing what has been requested, the residents' posi- tion would be in opposition. Mr. Judge again referred to the meaning of ·Building· on Page 5 of the Ordinance. The rides are not covered by a roof supported by columns or by walls, and intended for shelter, housing or enclosure of persons. The 5 "-- '-'" definition is to buildings. intended for houses, and the height restrictions only apply Mr. O'Connor also referred to the meaning of -Building- and included the word -chattel- to mean any item of personal property, and his opinion is that the rides are personal property. Page 29 --Structure- means any object constructed, installed or permanently placed on land to facilitate land use - Since the rides are proposed to be permanently affixed to the land, he feels the rides to apply to the definition of -building.- Mr. Judge noted that the park closes at 5:30 p.m. and there is no inten- tion to be open at night. However, if Gaslight Village closes, Mr. Wood might open Story town during the Gaslight hours. The rides could be lit at night. Mr. Judge has not heard any of the three rides, so he could not answer the question regarding noises. Mr. Judge requested Approval at this meeting for at least the Flight Trainer and the Ferris Wheel, the applicant would consent to Table the Condor ride. However, Mr. Sicard stated his feeling that this could not be done, in case there was a decision to switch the location of the rides. Mr. Judge again requested that the Board consider the three rides as -structures- and not -buildings,- because a -building- is intended for shelter and a -structure- is different. The statute regulates heights of buildings and not structures. If it regulated structures, then there would be a problem with Niagara Mohawk, and other utilities with pOles that are constructed over 50 feet would be jurisdictional and subject to variances. Mr. Judge agreed with noted that the Board has point, Mr. Dusek was called Board in the Interpretation. Mr. Sicard that this is an Interpretation, and the power to interpret the Ordinance. At this to the meeting and was requested to assist the Dr. Horowitz: Resident of Glen Lake and on the Board of Directors of the Glen Lake Association. Since the skyline of Story town is being elevated apparently on an annual/biannual basis, the residents have no objection to upgrading onself, but the residents want to know what type of rides are planned for the future. Is this setting a precedent? Mr. Turner noted P. 47 of the Ordinance, Section 4.020-1, Recreation Commercial. PURPOSE: -Recreational Commercial zones are areas within Queensbury where the Town wishes to isolate, protect and encourage expansion of the recreation industry. Large scale projects will be encouraged to produce long range Planned Unit Development plans defining uses, intensities, patterns, etc. Residential uses (seasonal included) are 6 \........- .-..-/ considered compatible with Recreational Commercial Zones.- Therefore, the purpose of the RC zones is to encourage the proposed expansion. After reviewing the history of the words -building- and -structure- within the Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Dusek concluded that -building- and -structure- are one and the same, and that if there are height require- ments for buildings, it would also apply to structures and vice versa. The Ordinance has made the words interchangeable (Page 2, Section 2.020), even though the Ordinance has different definitions for each word. Mr. Judge recreational limitations. stated zone is that to a put way to restrict the height of rides in a a phrase in the statute stating the height Mr. O'Connor advised Mr. Turner that presently from Glen Lake Route 9 can be seen, the back of the Flume Ride in Story town can be seen, and he feels that most of the proposed Condor ride will be seen. Mr. LeFleur commented that recently he was up 100 feet next to one of the existing rides in the park with the proposed truck and could see a long distance, but he does not feel it is any different than what is in the area. He could see Glen Lake, the Glen Lake wetland, he could not see the Glen Lake r..idences and he could hardly see the lake. He does agree with Mr. Judge about structures, radio towers, Hiagara Mohawk towers are all going to fall into this Ordinance. This is something that needs to be considered, because if you have to do it for one, you have to do it for all types of structures. Mr. LeFleur finds a radio tower more obnoxious than a ride within a cluster of rides. Public HeariA, Cloae. Correspondence. Warren County Planning Board, Requested that the highest of the three rides be located in a depression. Emergency vehicles must be able to reach eaoh of the proposed looations. Staff Comments from Lee York include definitions of the words -build- ing- and -structure,- in addition to Section 2.020 where it was deter- mined by Mr. Dusek that the words can be used interchangeably. The Zoning Administrator has termed these uses as accessory uses incidental to the principal use. Of immediate ooncern is the health and safety aspect of having a structure over 50 feet, and the applioant will have to address. measure whioh will ensure safe use of the rides. Another concern is the noise and visual impact from Glen Lake. In filling out the Short Form EAF, C. and D. had positive answers regard in. noise levels and traffic patterns. Mrs. York recommended that the applicant fill out the Long Environmental Impact Statement and prepare a map showing topography. Mr. ~elley would like to se. more information regarding. 1) a map 7 '-' 'J showing contour line. depicting the elevation of Glea Lake in relation to the three pro..... .ite., 2) balloon or flag affixed to the maxiMUM height of the ri4e. at t~. locations w_ere the three ride. are going, and 3) have Mr. Judge look into the mechanical noise-making devices that any of the three rides might have. Mr. Judge requested an Interp~etation of the Statute, if the Board is going to 4ete~ine that the word -bu · includes rides, he would like the determiaation at tbia ...t1nt~ are buildings, then the Board cannot require the applicant '.;~f ts, and the applicant has to go for a Variance and provide _. laf on. But, if the rides are not a buildiD9 and not coyered by the S~t.'+' then the applicant does not have to go before the 1..109 Board Of AP....~íO If the rides are not perunent- ly affixed to the realty. then no V.r~.ce would be required irregardles. of the height. ' To assist the Board in the Interpretation, Mr. Dusek reviewed some per- tinent sections of the Ordinance. !he definitioa of -building- does not cover this type of ride. ~he defiaition of -structure- includes build- ings. There are two issues the Board IllUst cover. 1) The Board IllUSt determine if the ride is a structure. 2) once that determination is made and, if it is a structure, then the determination has to be made if the structure is limited to 50 feet in height. Wkatever determination the Board ....~des regarding Section 2.020, that det.~nation must be consistent ~ghout the Ordinance. Mr. Judge's intecpretation i. that -every build~Þ9 is a structure, but not every structure is a building.- The only thing that the statute regulate. is a building. Mr. O'CoDAor's problell i. tþ.e precedent that would be set. He asked the Board -Are you going to regulate the height of only buildings throughout the Town, or was it the 1nteation that you would regulate the height of all structures?- Mr. O'Co.-or felt that is the question that is being asked. -You (the Board) are ~ing asked that if this is not a build- ing then no height restrictions apply. and I think clearly that is not the intent of the Ordinance.- Mr. Judge agreed that that is the correct issue. Mr. Kelley moved to NEGATB the need for Area Variances No. 1447, 1448 and 1449 through the followiag deteraination. There is a provision that the rides are cODstructecl tø be structure. and not buildings. Because they are structure., they are ftot sUbject to the fifty foot height restric- tion. Seconded by Mr.. Goetz. Pass84 6 Yes (Kelley, Sicard, Turner, Goetz, Griffin, Bggleston) 1 ~tain (Muller) AHA .,..1..... IfRt US, 8 \.......; ,......) A,..s Burch The applicant is asking to divide the 1.12 acres of land, so that a mobile home can be placed on the property on Bast Burch Road, SR-1A. At present, there is a single family residence on the 1.12 acres of land. (Tax Map no. 121-1-43) Maurice C. Combs is agent for the applicant and advised the B04rd that there is a s..ller h~e on the þroperty, and he vould like to put a trailer on the property for Mr.. Burch's daughter. Mrs. Burch has owned the home for about 30 years. Mr. Combs purcused a trailer tvo months ago from a trailer' perk, and he received permission from the 'fovn Board to park it on the property, no fou"'tion has been dug and it has been drained and vinterized. 'fhe reason that Mr. Combs purchased the trailer for the dau,hter is because she has a financial hardship and is having a difficult time paying rent in a trailer perk. Mrs. Burch is 75 years daughter wishes to live on mother and the young boy. old and is caring for her grandson. The the property, so that she can care for her The area iasoned for mobile homes and vas recently changed from SFR20 to one acre, tbe problem is a density issue. 'fhe land viII be subdivided, with one lot for Mrs. Burch and one lot for the daughter. In the future, there is the possibility that the lot may end up being one lot. Public ...ri.I' no comment Correspondence. Mrs. Goetz read a letter of approval from Joan Murray, and a letter in opposition from David Minor (on file). Mr. Miner feels the trailer would change the character of the neighborhood. Staff cOlllØ18nts from Mrs. York were read (Exhibit A) stating that practical difficulty must be shown and that no feaaible alternatives are stated. 'fhe hardship has to be in the strict application of the Ordin- ance, rather than personal. Mr. living ished. paid for, money she enough for Combs deacribed the present house as being small, with a kitchen, room and small bedroom. The aheds on the property will be demol- Mr. Combs explained that, since the daughter's trailer will be she will be able to help pey Mrs. Burch's land taxes with the receivea from the State. 'fhe oae-bedroom home is not large the two families. There is vacant property on both sides. Mr. Muller agree. that there is a personal hardship, but the Board cannot base its decision on those grounds. He explained to Mr. Combs the meaning of hardship within the context of the Ordinance, and that the requirement for the zone is one living unit per acre, or create two sub- standaJ:'d lots. After the subdivision, each deeded lot will be less than one acre. Mr. Turner explained that, in the new Ordinance, one of the 9 '- -.-' requirements in the zone is an increase in lot size, but a decrease in density. Mr. Combs advised Mr. Turner that Bert Martin in the Building Department said there would be no problem with the plans, and Mr. Combs bought the mobile home based on that statement. Mr. Martin visited the property about two months age, before Mr. Combs bought the mobile home and was told where the trailer would be placed and what was going to be done on the property, including keeping the present small home. Since the Board is unsure of the date of Mr. Martin's visit, it is unknown whether Mr. Martin's answer was based on the old or new Ordinance. Darlene Morgana Ms. Morgan asked if the property could be divided and if the daughter could then come before the Board to request a Variance for the trailer. Mr. Muller advised her that, in order to divide the larger parcel, subdivi- sion permission would have to be received. The reason for the subdivision is that no one could take the land away from the daughter, if something should happen to the mother. Ms. Morgan reiterated the personal hardship of the family, and the fact that she and Mr. Combs are attempting to pre- serve the respect and dignity of the grandmother, 12 year old son, and the daughter and her two children. Ms. Morgan also noted that those people objecting to the Variance are not neighbors. Mr. Muller emphasized that the zoning Board is very sympathetic to the personal problem, but also explained that this is not the Town Board and is very limited in its jurisdiction. The Board is empowered to give Inter- pretations and give exceptions to the Zoning Ordinance, if a party can go before the Zoning Board and represent that the property has some limita- tions that should be considered a special case with a special example. Personal hardships that relate to the property or there is something in the Zoning Ordinance that is unfair, then those concerns have to go before the Town Board. The Zoning Board takes their instructions from the Town Board. Mr. Muller advised Ms. Morgan that the Board could not approve attach- ing the mobile home to the house, because there are no plans describing what that move would entail. The lot is entitled to one dwelling unit and an owner can expand upon one dwelling unit. He suggested that Ms. Morgan and Mr. Combs visit David Hatin of the Zoning Department and discuss whether or not the mobile home could be attached to the home legally. Ms. York informed them that the Town Board is currently considering rezoning the area. Area Variance No. 1450, Agnes Burch, was TABLED by the Zoning Board of Appeals, upon the request of Maurice C. Combs, Agent. AREA VARIAlCE MO. 1451 10 ~ ~ Jean C. Taylor The application is requesting to subdivide the existing lot (4.699 acres) to make a second parcel, upon which to place a single family home to the west of the present single family home and natural tree line on Fuller Road, LC-10A and SR-1A. (Tax Map No. 123-1-15.1) Robert Chattin represented the application and stated that in the area basically there are no 10 acre lots. He was informed that the reason for the 10 acre zoning was to protect density. The subject land is not on the West Mountain slope itself; it is before the mountain and is in the Adiron- dack Park. The bulk of the property is in LC-10; one corner is in SR-1A, but is not big enough for the project. The elevation is not steep, it is relatively flat. Mr. Turner suggested that the applicant go before the Town Board at a public hearing, for the purpose of submitting a petition to rezone the lot. Mrs. York advised Mr. Chattin that any change in rezoning has to have the approval of the Adirondack Park Agency. Mr. Muller advised the applicant that the Zoning Board at this meeting will continue with the Variance process, then it might be advisable to either Withdraw or Table the application, so that the applicant can determine the best route to take in the future. Correspondence. Mrs. Goetz read letters in opposition from Christopher J. St. Andrews and Jane M. Santarelli, and Mary Ann and John Dody (on file). On file also are letters for the application. Mrs. Goetz read Staff comments from Mrs. York. ert and Brenda Chattin, has been TABLED for of Appeals, so that more information on the ained and alternatives can be explored. This is in and Brenda Chattin, applicants. Area Variance one month by th property can be 0 agreement with Robert AREA VARIABCE RO. 1452 Jean C. Taylor The application is for an addition of a 24 ft. x 24 ft. two-car garage and an 11 ft. x 24 ft. family room at the rear of the garage on the east side of Cleverda1e, WR-1A. Location. Brown board and batten contemporary style structure on the east side of Cleverdale Road, past Wayside Chapel. Lot size. 11,000 sq. ft. (Tax Map No. 14-2-10) Dennis Davis was agent for the applicant and advised the Board that Mrs. Taylor recently moved here from California and plans to live with her daughter. This is the reason for the request for the garage and family 11 "- ~ room. The existing 1, story house is six years old and has a new septic system, there will be two occupants in the house. The property is 83 feet lake frontage, 93 feet road frontage, 120 feet deep and the lot is approx- imately 11,000 square feet. Although the application is for a 24 foot garage with a 16, foot door, Mr. Davis said there was a possibility the garage could be reduced to 20 or 22 feet. Regarding permeability, the Ordinance calls for 65' and this property is 80% permeable, the proposed building covers 20' of the property. The family room would be 24 feet off the north side of the building. The second floor of the house is 16 ft. x 28 ft., with a cathedral ceiling in the back, presently the house is 1,580 sq. ft. Mr. Davis agreed to a 16 foot garage, the proposed deck will wrap around and come up to the garage. Public Hearing. no comment Correspondence. Warren County from Alice and Harold Hubert, denied for lack of information Staff comments (Exhibit C). Planning Board. Mrs. Goetz read a letter which requested that the application be (on file). Also presented was Lee York's Mr. Turner moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1452, Jean C. Taylor for one relief of the front setback. The new proposal will be a one-car garage, 16 feet wide, the relief granted is 12 feet. All other setbacks will be maintained that are existing and required. The practical diffi- culty is that the house exists at its present location. The applicant is entitled to a garage. The Short EAF was reviewed and shows no negative impacts. Seconded by Mr. Sicard. Passed Unanimously AREA VARIAIICE NO. 1456 D. Brooks Teele The ft. x setback. application is for an addition onto the single family residence, 22 28 ft. This will be increasing the encroachment upon the shoreline Lot size is 37,840 square feet. (Tax Map No. 19-1-32.1) Mrs. York was informed that some members of the Board were unable to locate the site, in addition, maps were not distributed, so the Board was unclear regarding pertinent information for consideration. Mr. Kelley estimated that the setback from the stone wall at the wood dock to the deck of the frame house is 55 feet. Mr. Teele stated he would be going no 12 '--' '--" closer to the lake. The reason the addition is to the north is because the septic system is behind the camp. The proposed addition will house the family room, the cottage is comprised of two bedrooms, a living room, and a bar eating area with a small kitchen. With the addition of the new addition, 96' of the property will still be grass. The cottage is winterized. A bathroom will be added inside, and the septic system will be upgraded with the plan. Public Hearing. no comment Correspondence. Warren County Planning Board approved. Mrs. Goetz read Lee York's Staff comments (Exhibit D). Mr. Muller moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1456, D. Brooks Teele. The applicant has demonstrated the practical difficulty for the addition onto the single family residence, 22 ft. x 28 ft. is reasonable. It is the minimum necessary to afford reasonable use of a small dwelling. The encroachment on the lake will be 23 feet. The Short EAF was reviewed with no negative impact. Seconded by Mr. Kelley. Passed Uaanimously Chairman Turner adjourned the meeting at 12.50 a.m. Theodore Turner, Chairman Date Date /. {D .ff I 13 Jown 0/ Queendbul''fJ -../ '- ...:::.¡' "NOTE TO FILE" ~r~l[ C@PV Planning and Zoning Department LEE YORK , Senior Town Planner Application Number: Area Variance No. 1450 December 21, 1988 Applicant/Project Name: Agnes Burch This application is to divide 1.12 acres of land into two parts. The zoning of the parcel is SR-1A. Neither of the proposed lots could meet the zoning requirements. The property in question is proposed to be divided for placement of a mobile home. There currently exists a single family residence on the property and it is in a mobile home overlay zone. The application is to modify the density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance so that almost twice the density is allowed on the lot in question. The applicant must demonstrate that strict application of the regulations would cause a practical difficulty. The variation from the requirements is a 100 percent increase in density which is significant. The applicant does not describe why there are no feasible alternatives except to dividing the property to place a second home on it. This is the critical issue. The hardship has to be in relation to the strict application of the Ordinance. This hardship appears to be a personal hardship since the owner currently has a use allowed by the Ordinance on the property. ~,; lit·,.. . ~. ,."~;â~';è ,,~~;~,;:. .-.,. ....... ",' ,.1 "~,""'T>( ·."r,' , ,_.' In ,"; ',~: ¡f.'~'¡',~';¥j':'J:' ír,;. j~ ~ ~;..;.,1i"~" fÃ......X~:.·\:\~':~7:~.1~;·:7~::<:,·:2'¡ BAY AT HAVILAND ROAD QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK, 12801 TELEPHONE: (518) 792-5832 ... ~£TTLED 1763. . . HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE K X #-1 ø./ T II' -.-~. Jown o/Queen:JtuP'fj "'-"" ""--" "NOTE TO FILE" ~~ f\l£ tOP~ .~ Planning and Zoning Department LEE YORK . Senior Town Planner Application Number: Area Variance No. 1451 December 21, 1988 Applicant/Project Name: Robert and Brenda Chattin This application is for the division of 5 acres of land into two equal lots of approximately 2.5 acres each. This variance will increase the density on the property by 100 percent. The majority of the property is in the LC-I0 acre zone and this is a substantial variation from that zoning. Further, it appears that the property in question is within the AP A jurisdictional area and would require review and approval by that agency. The strict application of the Ordinance does not cause a practical difficulty since there already exists an allowable use on the property. The difficulty appears to be a personal one rather than one which relates to the strict application of the Ordinance. pç; k ~~-;~ ,,'!' ,!,' ',', ~,!.1;¡J~;: . ¡jI1!P" ,'. .Ji~,,,,, . ,;.~_~ll;~~~((! ,,' .' .;u'y-_., ."..:!""~",,,,, ,,:.~,"" J ',-'" r~k>:' .~:~' ::;;~ ,-,¿~J!·:~::·~~~)t:¡~'~:'_:';::.2:' ~;',. ~~~~,:,:'i; , BAY AT HAVILAND ROAD QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK, 12801 TELEPHONE: (518) 792-5832 l SETTLED 1763 . . . HOME OF NATURAL BE AUTY . . . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE /J. If Ý-/Nß./7 (;,J..... Jown 01 QueeniJur'j ---' ""'--' ',';::"¡'. n>o "NOTE TO FILER Planning and Zoning Department fBlf C V:J .~ LEE YORK , Senior Town Planner Application Number: Area Variance No. 1452 Applicant/Project Name: Jean C. Taylor The applicant is requesting a variance from the side yard and shoreline setbacks. The plan represents a 38 percent variance from the sideyard setback and a 24 percent variance from the shoreline setback. By adding the additional living space to the house the proposal is creating a potential for increased use. This may have an effect on the existing septic system. There is an extremely steep slope along the northern part of the property where the new construction is proposed. At present there is off street parking for two cars on the site. A one car earage could be constructed and still have been enough room to park another car off the street. Also, a garage could be constructed without the family room. This would not increase the encroachment on the lake. ;J~" ~.~;\. ~ 1"1'" ,t·,. BAY AT HAVILAND ROAD QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK, 12801 TELEPHONE: (5IB) 792-5832 L.. SETTLED 1763... HOME Of NATURAL BEAUTY... A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE FfII/A/TC!- Jown 01 QueenjtuP'fl --- --.. "NOTE TO FILE- [" ~r'i!\1U ~. f~l t GtJf~ i .~- Planning and Zoning Department LEE YORK , Senior Town Planner Application Number: Applicant/Project Name: D. Brooks Teele Area Variance No. 1456 Dec. 21, 1988 The application is for a variance from the area requirements of a 75 foot setback from Lake George. The applicant's cottage is cun-ently 50 feet from the lake. He proposes a 22 ft. by 28 ft. addition which would be 52 ft. from the lake, a variation of 23 ft. from the mandated setbacks. The applicant is prohibited from putting the addition behind the cottage because of the septic system . location. He cannot locate it to the other side of the cottage because of the proximity to the property line. There appears to be no other feasible location for the addition. There is no adverse effect on the neighborhood character because of this addition. There is no adverse effect on public facilities. There are no feasible alternatives, except not to do the construction. It does not appear that the applicant can minimize the 23 foot encroachment on the lake. ~\; lit / LEE YORK Senior Town Planner ~, BAY AT HAVILAND ROAD QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK, 12801 TELEPHONf:: (518) 792-5832 SETTLED 1763 . . . HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE E '1/1, /3./ T .J)