Loading...
Staff Notes Packet for ZBA Mtg Wed June 29 2916 Staff (Votes Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Date : Wednesday, June 29, 2016 10% Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meeting: Wed nesd ay, June 29', 2016, 'ri m e. 7-.00- 11:00 pm Queensbury Activities Center- 742 Boy Road Agenda subject to change and may be found at: www,.qu,eensbury.net New Business: licant John Dennelt AreaVariance No M-0t,61,2016 OwnEE(q_ John Dennelt SEQRA.Type 11 kmnt(sLot in Q_ag Acre(s) .............. Location 20 Jay Road West-Ward I Zoning W'R Ward No. Glen Lake. Tax Ed No 289.10-1-23 Section 179-5-060 Cross Ref 2P 90-765 RA Ides. lt a rr;;_C2MM1Xj!!RRR!qn1a Public Hearing Ju.ne29,2016Ad i rondack Park l4 en n1a PrPA".w., App[leaiit proposes to remove a 240 sq._ffi+1--i Fng-lc stake dock and,construd a.498 sq_ft. U-shaped dock. Relitf MILIeSt rrot'n rainii'mun allowabte property I ine setbads. Tbe'Fown regi lation on tb is matter states that the dock mustmect a 20-foot setback fiery an extension 0f the ria art, line into the lake. ——----- Applicant(,$) Jeff Gneawood for Mr.Kinney's Automotive Arco Variance No P 501-2016 Owner[q McK[miey"s West TEM LI., EQRA Type AgLent(s) ieffGreenwood Lot SJ?A 0.28 acres Location 70 Coil nectictit Avenue-Ward 4 Zoning NR Ward No. Tax Id No 1 309.9-1-80 Section 17!J-3-040 Cross Rel' CC-254-2016;BP 2012-064 Sign,BP 2011-608 C/O Warren County Planning oda I and o1her,perni it roles Public,Hearing I Jolle 29,20J16 Adirondack Fork Agency nitt I?Toiect Descriptio Appli,"wt proposes to rep[ace:a 24 ft.t)y 311 ft,roof and raise it 3 ft. to match adjoining service:bay. ThL-existing bay is 10 f1. 9 In,and,wi 11 be raised to match ad 1 oining biaaX to, 13 n.,9 in. for replacement of an ex i sti rig auto-lift, Ikel lef requestedfOT MtNWkS. Applitant(s) Jeffrey& Kari� enwa areaVariance No PZ-0'152-2016 Ovine s; Jeffrey&Marie Benway J! ....... Agent(s) JIM Lot Size Loeativn 13,Fam Lane.. Ward 4 Zoning 58-20 at time of SB approval Ward No. Sherman Pines Phase 3, Current: MDR Tax Id.No 301.1'8-1 g Section 179,5­020 Cross Ref BOTH-237-2016 pool;BP 2009-099 Res.Alt.,; WArren County Planning ala. BP 2000-055 SFD Public Hearing June 29,2111w'r A(I iron d ack Prank AgD!cn/a _y — Prolggt DogrIP09,11 Applicant propses construction of a t4 ft-by 28 ft, inground swimm ing poo I with a patio surrouindn F' thOPOT]. Cletief rcquested from the min !S�rernenxs ib�rpool loegion, Appficant(s) Joel Moaroe -Tr—eaVir—,a n c"T-N-o PZ-0151-2016 Owners) Robert(fl[sworth SE QRA T rM 11 Agent(s) Wa Lot Size 0.99 acres Location 55 Ellsworth Lane-Ward I Zon Ing RR-3A Ward No. Tax (d No 1 265.00-1-6 Section 179-3-040 Cross R4 near ountyr P1 R n n ing Yune'2016 Public Hearin n 9, ALD jj�Z__Zql Adirondack Park Agency ])�reet D�Escri ti�cn Applicant propGses construction of a 1,627 sq. fl.si ngle-faun ily home and associated site work.Project occurs In the RR-3A zone on a 0,99 acre parcel, Rellef requestcd from setback requirements, ...... Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Meefing. Wednesday,, June 29', 2016 Time. 7: '11:00 prn Queensbury Activities Center 742 Bay Road Agenda subject to change,and may be found at: www,.queensb,Lpry.net Appliunt(s) Matthew J.&bistv L.Brennan Area Variance No PIZ-0,162-2016 t`weer Matthew J.&1 risty L,. Brennan JC RA Type 11 Agent(sraffia Lomat Size 6"53'Z S— �LDcation 593 Moon Hill Road-Ward I Zoning RR-3A. and No. S fim— 179-5-020 SS Ref BP 2,014492 Seplic AK Warren County Nouning June 200 Pu W H to ri tig June 29,2016 Adirond,ack Park Agency I 311a Project Desci-iption Applicant prqposes q;onstruction of a 24 1 diameter abovc-Sround swiniming pool with dock where the existing parcel Ims two frootages;Route 149 and Moon Hill Road. Relief requested from restriction for placement ol"a pool in as front Lord,._, Ariy further business that the Chairman determines may be properly brought before flip Zoning Board O(Appeals, Final'Versio.n.- 5,27.2016 CIVLA/sh Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.: PZA161-2016 Project AplilficRnt- John Dennett Pa Location. 20 Jay Road West,Glen Lake roi Parcel History- RP 90-76Res. Alt., SEQR Type: Type 11 Meeting Date- June 29,2016 Description of Proposed Applic,"t proposes to rernove a, 240 sq. ft. +/- single stake dock and construct a,498 sq. ft. U-shaped dock. Relief RcquLircdJJ The applicant requests the t"ollowing reliefRelief request from minimum allowable property line setbacks. "flue Town regulation on this matter states that the dock must,meet a,20-foot setback front an extension of the property line into the lake. Section 179-5-060,Docks, boathouses, moorings— Waterfront Residential Zone,'W The applicant proposes,the new u shaped dock will be located, 1 ft from the south piojection and 14 R from the north projection where a 20 ft setback is required. Criteria, for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 26'7 of T In making:a determination, the board shall consider: 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will 'be created by the granting, of this area variance. Minor impacts to the .neighborhood may be anticipated. The aPplican.t is replacing a stake dock with a u shaped dock, 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can, be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the configuration of the parcel along the shoreline where the projected 20 ft crosses at 12 ,1"t from the shore. 3., Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relie�f requested is 1.9 It on the south and 6 ft on the north side, 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical ON environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area.. 5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. The applicant has provided plans that show the location of the existing and proposed dock with.the setback projections required.. The plans also show the dock elevation and crib locations. The applicant has indicated the dock wou,ld, be similar to neighboring docks. The plans she the neighboring u-shaped dock. Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution 'Town. of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Qu,eensbury, NY 12804 (5,18) 761-8238 'I'min Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/Disapprove Applicant:Name: John Dennett File Number. PZ-0161- 01 Location: 20 Jany Road West—Glen Lake Tax Map Niirubcr; 289.10-1-23 ZBA Meeting Date. Wednesday,June 29,2016 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queonsbory has reovivod an application kom John Dennett. Applicant proposes to remove a 240, sq. ft. +/- single stake dock and construct a 49S sq. ft. U-shaped dock. Relief request from minimuni allowable property line setbacks. The Town regiflation on this matter states that the dock must meet a 20-foot setback from an extension of the property line into the lake. SEEK 1ype If—.no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and he Id on Wed rtesalaw�,.tune g%2016; Upon review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-090(A) of the Queensbury 'f'own Code and Chapter 2,67 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberatiloil, we find as fbilows: 111""R ]JIF STAI`17 1. `There an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties becaus 2- Feasible alternatives are........................_and have:be:" considored by the Board,ggrtpp,. n included to,rninirnize gj!��Opd baye bee ,Ip Mg OR are a ppwL 3. The requested variance is/ is not SObstantial Incog'se 4. There is/is not an adverse;impact on the physical or enrvirownental conditions in the neighborhood Or disaricO 5. The alleged difficulty is I is not self-created because 6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from, granting the mqtmsted variaoeo would beouh�hy_jdj jcn1aI the re-,%alting detriment to the health,%afty and welfare oftho neigl4borhood or omnaunlity; 7. The Board also finds that,the variance request ander considerationis the minimum necessary; 8. -flie Board also proposes the following conditions: a) b) c) ,Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution, 13ASE D ON"1"l-ll 8 OVE FIN'D[Ng&i NAM_Q_M-T Q) LYRIJ RE&YAMOM PZ-0161-2016, John . A M,. Dennett, Introduced by—s who moved for its adoption,seeonded by Duly adopted this 20 day of June 2016 by the following vote; AYE& NOLS, T' own ofQueensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Variance No.; PZ-0150-2016 Project Applicant: Jeff Greenwood for McKinney's Automotive Project Location: 70 Connecticut Avenue Parcel History: -254-2016; 111'2012-064 Sign; BP 2011-608 C/O and otber permit files SEQR Type: Type II Meeting Date: June 29, 2016 Description of Proposed Applicant proposes to replace a 24 ft. by 31 ft. roof and raise it ft. to match adjoining service bay. The exi sting bay is 10 ft. 9 in. and will be raised to match adj oining bay to 1ft. 9 in. for replacement of an existing auto-lift. LOW Required- The applicant requests,the following relief. Relief requested for,setbacks. Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts dimensional requirements,—'Neighborhood Residential-NR The new roof is to be constructed to be consistent with the existing structure that is 9w8 ft from the front property line where a 20 ft setback is required. Criteria Poi-considering an Area Vario ace according ng to Chapter 2,67 of To In malcing a detennination, the board shall consider: 'I. Whether an undesirable change will be, produced in the: character,of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. The roof addition is proposed to match the adjoining garage 2. Whether the benefit sought 'by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than, an area vaol-ianee. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the location of the existing building 3. WWether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested is 10.2 ft. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or enviroomental. conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have mimmal impact, on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area. The plans show the new roof line height to match the existing adjoining garage space. 5, 'Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may,be considered self-created. Staff comments:1 The applicant propose to replace a 24X 3 1 sq ft roof over an existing garage where the existing roof is I O ft 9 in . The plans show the new roof to be 13 ft 9 in.and will match.the adjoining service bay rocifline. The plans show the existing building with the new roof will maintain the existing setback of 9ft in. Zoning Board of Appeals —Recard of Resolution Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbiiry, NY 12804 18) 761-8238 Area Variance Reqiolmttion Tot Approve/ Disapprove Applicant.Name,, Jeff Greenwood for Mckinney's Autornotive File Nuinber- PZ-0I,, Q-2016 Location: 70 Connecticut Avenue Tax Mali,Number: 309.9-1-80 Z13A Meeting Date: Wednesday,June 29,2016 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of'Queensbury has received an application from Jeff Greenwood for McKinmey's Automotive. Applicant proposes to replace a 24 ft. by 31 ft. roof and raise it 3 ft. to nizteh adjoining service bay. Tile existing bay is 10 ft. 9 in. and will, be raised to match adjoining bay to 13 ft, 9 in. for replacentent of an existing auto-lift. Relief requested for setbacks. SEQR Type If —no,further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held tan,%doofty"Jiang 29 ,201 Upoti review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Soction 179-14-080(A) of the Queenshory, Town Code and Chapter 267 of N.Y S 'rown. Law and after discussion and. deliberation, we find as follows; Pl-'11011413 DRA)"I" BY' STAl- 1. There, is 1 is, not an undesirable change in the character of the neigjiborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties, beeausc 1 Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, We reasonable !wRyq�90jJlgjmded to min[mize ................. tt2jLq(jaqst OR j!Eq nok-pjjqsLblg. 3, The rcquesUd variance ,9 is not substantial because 4. Thure.ky an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district'? 5. The alleged difficulty n l et sell'-rmwod h�_qqj& 6, in addition the Board firids that the boactlit to the applicam from granting, the requested variance would outWpigh, p-(4d) / wMWL'bv�S'La gigh.0 hy,kO,,q Jq[)the resulting dotri m(nt to the health, safety and welfare fare of the neighborhood or oorrim Un ity, 7- The Board also finds that the variance request tinder consideration is the minimum necessary; 8, The 13,aard also proposes the following conditions- a) b) ....................... c) Adherence to the iteirts outfined in,the follow-up letter sent with,this resolution. Greenwood for MoKinney's.Automotive Introduced by Who moved for its adoption, 5-euoridod by ugly adoptod th i s 2 0'day of June 2016 by the followingvote, AYES, NOES-, Town of Queensbury Zoning Board, of Appeals Community Development Department Staff Notes Area Vitriance No,.: PZ-0152-2016 Project Applicant; Jeff& Kari Benway Project Location- 13 Fawn Lane—Sherman Pines,Phase 3 Parcel History. 'BOTH-237-2016 pool; BP 20,0"88 Res,. Alt.; BP 2000-055 Of) SEAR Type: Type 11 Meeting,Date. June 29, 2016 pescription of Proposed PrcrjectM Applicant proposes construction of a 14 ft. by 28 ft. inground swimming pool with a patio surrounding the pool. I-Refief Required: The applicant requests the following reliel", Relief reqtiested from the minimtorn rear yard setback, requiremellts for pool location. Section 179-5-020 accessory structures -Pools, — Moderate Density Residential MDR—SR 20 The applicant proposes a 14 ft x 28 ft pool in the rear yard - 2.5 ft from the west side to the property line and 2 ft from the east side to the property line where 1.0 ft is,required. Criteria for considering an Area Variance aecording to Chapter 267 of Town Law: In making a determination, the board shall consider- 11. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. Neighboring properties,have pools, 2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the location of the existing home and the proposed, location of the pool. Alternative may include reduction of the pool size. 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested pray be considered moderate relevant to the code. The relief requested is 7.5 ft on the west side and 8 ft on the east side. 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or cinviroomental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions, of the area. The plans show the location of the pool mad the existing house. 5. 'Whether the alleged diff iculty was self-created, The difficulty may be considered self-created. Staff comments: The applicant proposes to, put a 14X28 sq ft in-ground,pool in the rear yard where the setback is less than 10 ft. Theapplicant has indicated the teat of the property abuts,Homeowners association.land. Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of'Ryes olution Town of Queensbury 7421 a Road Queensbury, NY 12 4 ( 18) 761-8238 limn (ift; �.iradaaar7 Area Va ria nee Resolution To: alp provo/Disapprove Applicant Name: Jeffrey& Kari Ben ay, File Number: PZ-015 -2116 Location; 13 Fawn Lane-Sherman Pines,Phase 3 Tax Map Number; 304.18-1-68 ZBA Meeting,Dates Wednesday,June 29,2016 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from -Jeffrey & Karl Renes ay. Applicant proposes construction of'a 14 ft., by 28 ft. in round swimming pool with a patio surrouFtding the pool. Relief requested from the minimum rear yard setback 1`0411WOMeRts fOT POOI location. SEQR Type 11-no further review required; A Pub I it hearing was advertised and he]d on,Wedn escial,Tune 29,2,016; Upon reviow of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in $00ion, 179-'14-080(A) of tbe Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS, Town Law and, after, discussion and deliberation,we find,as follows: PEAkTI IE DRA!"I' MOVIDED, 13Y S17AR' 1. There is / is not, an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhoodnor a. detriment to nearby properties Ways 1 Feasible alternatives gtg___and,have been considered by the Board,are reasonable and have been included to rninirnize, tltk,Leqpp* OR grgti to,bj, ,L- 3. The requested variance substantial ht-co"Ec 4. Them is/is notar adverse impaet on the physical Or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? Sr. The alleged difficulty is) is riot self crLe eatc4 S_qM 6. In addition. the Board finds that the benofit to the applicant from grwiting the r0400ste'd VaTianceYnrlPld-'P'u�r? Ch (amroval) I would be autw6ghed byeniaLl the resultiog detriment to the health, aTidr wotfarofe the neighborhood or community; _(Ag� 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary„ 8. The Board also proposes the following condition&: a) b) c) Adherimee to the items outlined in,the follow-up,letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON' T148 ANKh_F N jN.pL.,g.5,j e j_P . .... _,NQ _Ng. H-01,52-2016, y A,F R1 ,,EA MA A, E Jeffrey&Ka�ri Beriway, Introdw;ed who moved for its adoption,seconded by Duly adopted this 29"h day of Jutie 2016 by the followirig,vow, AYES: NOES: T' own of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals CommunIty Development Department Staff Notes Area Varkince No.. AV PZ-0151-2016 Project Applicant: Joel Monroe PIVject Location- 55 Ellswortli Lane Par el History: n/El kSE'QR Type: TypeII Meeting Date: June 29,2016 of ProEased Projecti. Applicant proposes construction of a, 1,627 sq. ft. single-family home and associated site work. Project occurs in the RR-3A zone on a 0,99 acre parcel. Rcflefll uired.: The applicant requests the following relief. Relief requested from setback requirements, Section, 179-3-040 establislunrent of districts dirnensiongl,Lecluirements. Rural Itesidential Three Acre 1 -3A The ,proposcd home is to be located 65,1 ft from, the north setback and 59.7 ft south setba6k,where a 75 ft setback is req The:i ear setback is proposed to be 68.1 ft where a I OOR setback is required. Criteria for considering on, Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town ILAW. 'In making a determination, the board shall eonsider- I I. Whether an undesirable change will. be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area, variance. Minor impacts to 'the neighborhood may. be anticipated. Currently a vacant parcel. 2. Whether the benefit sought by the: applicant can be achieved by Some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area varianee. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to,the existing lot size of 0.833 acre per the survey in the RR3A zone. 3. Whether the requested area varianeer is substantial. The relief`requested may be considered moderate relevant to the: code. The relief req guested for the north setback is 9.,9 ft, on the south setback is 15.3 ft and the rear setback relief is 31.9 fi. 4. Whether the Proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to, have minimal impact on the physical or the envirOnmental conditions of the area. The applicant proposes a,single family hone and associated, site work.. 51. Whether the alleged difficulty was, self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. staff eommentsj 'rhe applicant proposes the construction of a 1,627 sq. ft. single-family home and associated site work. The plans show the location of the new horne, proposed drivewaytbe septic system location, floor plan and a front elevation. Zoning Board of Appea ls —Record of ResolltflOnr Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238 Tarr-aa cd(tuccasbury Area Variance Resolution To: Approve I Disapprove Applicant Narne, Joel Monroe File Number; PZ-01, 1- 4016 Location. 5501sworth Lane Tax Map Number: 265,00-1-6 ZDA.Mecting Date.- Wednesday,June 29,20 t 6 The Zoning Board of.Appeals of the Town of Queensbary has received an application from Joel Monrov. Applicant proposes construction of a 1,627 sq. ft.single-family hoine and associated site work,Project occurs in the RR-3A zone on a 0.99 acre parcel. Relief requested froin setback requirements. SEQR Type___—no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and hold on Upon 'review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queen5bury Town Code and, Chapter 267 of'NYS Tow�n Law and after discussion and deliberation,we find as follows- l; 11IF'RTHE' DRAVI' l"ROVID111E B Y STA I. There is I is not an, undesirable change in the character of the neighboThoud roar a detriment to nearby properties because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included to minimize the request OR are not possible, 3. rhe requested variance is I is not substantial because 4. There is/ is n ot an adverse 1 rnpact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neigjiborliood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty is/ is not self-created because_ 6. In addition the Board finds that, the benefit to the applicant fToin granting the requested variance jyyquld outW_gJ,&.h (approval) wwrould be uoutwwrei ,hed by dermal l the resulting detriment to the health,safety and welfare ofthe neighborhood or community; 7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimurn necessary; 8. The Board also proposes the following conditions. c) Adherence to the itei�ns outlined in.the follow-up letter sent with this resolution. BASED ON T14E ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE-A MOTION TO APPROVE/ DENY AREA VARIANCE NO. PZ-01 5 1-201 6 Joel Monroe, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption,seconded by Duly adopted this 20 day of June 2016 by the following vote. AYES: NOES: Town; of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Communify Development Department ,staff Notes Arca Varionet No.: PZ-4)162-20,16 Project Applicant: Mattliew J. & Kristy L. Brennan Project Loeation- 593 Moon.Hill Road Parcel flistory: B1'2014-492 Septic Alt, SE QR Type: Type It meeting Date: June 29,,20,16 Description of Proposed Project;. Applicant proposes construction ofa.24 ft. diameter above-ground swinuning pool with deck where the existing parcel has two tiontages; Route 149 and Moon Hill Road. delict It �tr�e�dj The applicant requests the following relief. Relief requested from restriction for placement of a pool in, a front yard. Section. 179-5-020 acce The applicant proposes to install a 24 diameter above ground pool in a front yard, where there pat-eel is bordered by two roads in effect having two fronts, Pools are only allowed, in rear yards. Criteria for col"sidering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town 'Law: In inaking a deterinination,the board shall consider- 1. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighbortood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this area variante. Minor impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated. Ne'ghborin properties have pools. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by, sonve method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance,. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to, the parcel, configuration having two fronts, 3. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial relevant,to the code, The refief requested is location of a poolin. the fiont yard, 4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical Or environmental conditions in, the neighborhood or district. The project may be considered to have minimal impact on the physical or the environmental conditions of the area. The plans show the location of the pool attlie rear of existing horne. S. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered not self-created. Staff corttrnentsj- The applicant proposes to install a 24 ft diameter above ground pool to the North side of their home. The plans show the location ofthe pool and the parcel having two ftontages. The applicant has also shown,the location of the septic systern, well and the existing tree line on the property. Zoning Board of Appeals,—Record of Resolution Townd Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensburp,N''Y 12804 (518) 761-8238 Town (if Qyv(vishury Area Variance Resolution To: Approve I Disapprove Applicant Name; Matthew Jr.&Kristy L. Brennan File Number: PZ-0 162-2016 Location: 593 Moon Hill Road Tax Mal)Number: 278.19-1-4 ZBA.Mecti jig,Date: Wednesday,June 29, 2016 The Zoning Bmrd of Appeals of the Town of Queensbary has reeoiv-ed an application from Mattliew I & Kristy L. Brennan,. Applicant proposes construction of a 24 ft. diameter above-ground swimming pool witb deck where the existing parcel has (wo frontages; Route 149 and Moon Hill Road. Relief requested from restriction for placement of a pool in a front yard. SF-Qk Type_-no further review required; A public hearing was advertised and held on Upon review of the application materials, information supplied. during the public hearing, and upon consideration of the Criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) ofr the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after disoussion and deliberation,we find as follows: PER THL"' D.'RAT"I' PROVIDED BYSIAFF I, There, jtjjLM an undosirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties, because 2. Feasible alternatives are and have:been considered b the Board,Lg_iq Inc]Li '4_19 almia- y A -njj the request OR are not possible. 3. The requested,variance is I is gruntsubstantial because 4. There is/is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? 5. The alleged difficulty i,�/ is,not,self-created beg4ggg...............................................- 6. in addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would outweigh (approval) i Koglq be------ ......, gigbod by,(denial)the resulting detriment to the health,safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community; 7, The Board also Ends that the:variangce request under consideration is the minimum; necessary; 8, The Board also proposes.the fo I lowing eondftions,' b) c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent witIl this resolution. 0, p OL( A.Rg VARIANCE N L2_29' BASED, ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO A—PERD, 5,112 �.... Matthew J. &Kri5jy L. Brennan, Introduced by_, who moved for its adoptiori,seconded by Duly adopted this 29"' day of'.lune 2016 by the following vote; AYES: NOES'