Staff Notes Packet Staff Notes
ZBA Meeting - Wednesday, August I , 2017
I Request for Extension of Approval
AV 55-2015 Michael Y.urdig,a
2, William Rourke
Z-AV-38-2017
3. Nancy Lobo,
.Z-AV-47-2017
4. Douglas McCall for Richard Proazo
Z-AV-49-2017
5, Daniel and Timothy Lawler
-AV- -2017
6.1 Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless
City of Glens Falls, Water Tank
Z-AV-54-2017
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meefing. Wednesday. Augiusf 16, 2017 Time. 7,00- 11.00 pm
Queensbury Activifiestenter-742 Bay Road
Agenda subject to change andl mei y be found ot�: www.,queensbuiry.net
°s adv iter
Request for Extension of Approval: Area Variance No,55-2015, Michael Yurdip-Sunset Trail
Approval of meeting minutesJuly 19 and July 26,,20,17
OLD BUSINESS:
Applicant(s) Williara Rourke Area.Variance No Z-AV-39-20,17
Owner(s) William Rourke II
ALent(s) n(a Lot Size 0.29 Acre(s)
Location 21 Jay Road Zoning WR
Ward No. Ward I
Taal Id No 289,10-1-13 I Section 179-13-010; 179-3-040,
C'U'O"'S's"Ref 1]-V-40-2017,RC 143-2017; BP 93-:702Septic Aft. Warren,County Planning n/a
Public Hearing. Jwie 21,21117; August 16,2017 Adirondatit Park Agency n/a
pr,dSt Description Applicant has revised Inatiffials fibir the Proposed construction of a 2,016,sq, ft, residential addition W arl existing 494
sq,ft.camp. The 3 00sq. ft. detached.garage and 60 sq.ft.porch will be removed. Re]iefrequested from minimum permcabifily
requirements and for expansion of a r4o'llconflorming,structure in a CUA. Plan niag,,Board- Site Plan Review required for expansion in a
CEA.
NE'WBUSINPSS
-
_ApLjS.anjWManic Lobo Arca Variance No Z-AV-47-2017
Owner(s) Janet Berdar $W�RA TyRe M;—listcd..............
,Agent(5) nJa Lot$170 OAO Aqrc(s)
Locations26 Fainvoicid DC rive-DIxon,Heights,Phaw 3 Zoning UR-10 Yr 1'982 Zoning
Ward No. and 2 Ordinance;Current:MD:R
TRXr Id No 302,46-1-73 1 Section 179-4-080
,Cross Ref' Subd ivision No.6-85 Riixo q Heights Warren,County Planning 111a
Public Hearing AttLqst 16,20,17 ark Agency ilia
Ptaiect Description Applicant proploses constructio�n Ufa 220 sq.fi.,deck to an existing 1,00,16 sq.ft.home. Relief requesled.from
mini mum setback requ irements,for the TUR-I Q zon ing,district which was the applicable zoning at the fimc the parcel wascreated in the
Dixon Heights,Mase 3,Subdivision,
Applicant(s) Her las McCall ............... Ares Variance No Z-AV-49-2017
Q=Us— Richard Pr;ovenzonaj it
Lot' ze tp.3tw y4 cru s
Location 6,Neighbors Wa:y Zoning WR
Ward No. Ward I
Tax Id No 226,0-1-30 Section 179-3-0140
Cross Ref Warren County Planning August 2017
Public Hearing AU ust 16.2017 Ad irondack Park Agency A1.1)
Applicant proposes rnodifications to the existing residemice which hwludeq;co'nstructicoi ofa 166 sq.ftdeck,on the
second floor over the existing first floGr porch;construction of 48 sq. ft.residential addition to be unseal as;a,utility room,; and construction of
a new 84 sq-ft-entryway. The existing,Ji me is 1,05�2 sq,ft,(Floor Area 2,6893 sq,ft, Relief requested from minimum.shoreline mid
SCINC kreqUireMent& Platlnri�q� Site H�'LqaftviCYLaqUi
J
Page I of 2
IMk
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda,
Meeting: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 Time: 7:00- H DO,pm
Qjeensbury Activili-es Cenfer- 742 Boy Rood
Agenda subject to change and may be founid of. www.queeinsbury.net
...........
—L9LLIVISL.- Area Variance �No Z-AV-52-2017
owner($) Daniel and TimothylRwIer _§K9YA Type 11
Agent(s), n1a 1,01 Size 0.77 Acre(s)
Location 19 Reardon Road Extension Zoning WR
Ward No. W"d I
Tax td[�do 1 2IK7-1-363 I Section M-1-040
Cross Ref I PV-54-2017;Current,AS'I'291-200 Deck Warren County Planning Na
Public Hearing I August 16,2017 Adirondack Park Agency n/a
Pro 1"tUescriplin Appl 1cant proposes coil&Irucdon of 288 sq. ft.open duck with 80 slq.ft.stairs on die lakeside of the residence-
E'Asfing home:is 1,101 sq. ft.(Floor Area 1,5 80 sq. ft.). Relief requested from minimum shoreline setback.requirements. Planning Board
Site Plan Review required for e.xpansion of anonconforruuinEI!,ELctLg
in a CEA.
AeRlicant(s) COW Pannership id/b/a Verizon Wireless Area,Varia nee No Z-AV,34-2017
Owiner(s) city of Gllens l"allsTy"_MRA it
Agent(s) David C�, BBrennan, ng,You &Sommer,LLC—' .Lot Size IM acres
Location City of Glens FaRs Water r rank 9 PR-42A
War4l No. (Aviation Mail Road L-_
Tax Ed No 302.9-1-43 Section 179-5-1,30, 1.79-3-040
Cross Ref PZ-O,178-201,6; SP FZZ?F-I 16;BP 65013 yr. 1980, Warren County Planning, August 2017
chlorine room
Publi
dui ust 16,2017 �Adi�,o�jdnck Park Agency rda
ProjettDeseription Applicatiitpro poses,modification to previous Zoning Board approval foTconstruclion ofan I I ft,6 in, by 16 k
equipment building far antennae col location project,on the City ol'Glens Falls Water Tank. Projec:t includes insta I lation of 12 panel.
antennas and skew ork, IW ief requested from minimum propic
Any further business that the Chairman determines,may be properly brought before the Zoning Board of'appeals,
Final Version: 7.27.2017 CBILMY�h
Page 2 of 2
owl' Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution
Town of a nslanry 74 ' day 1 oad Quneen buury, 12804 (518) 761-8238
Tinvii r. (Zeyv aiAnor),
,Areaari nResolution To- approve the request for a 2-year extension
pplicant Namet Michael Yurdig,a
He Number. AV 55-201,5
Location: 12 Sunset'Trail (fickle Hili Acres Subdivision)
Tax Map Number: 266.1-2-62
ZBA Meeting Date. Wed., August hast 1 , 017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury leas received a letter of'teques,t for a 2-year extension
of approval dated Thursday, June 1. , lel from, Michael Yunrdiga for construction of .a 1,360 sq. ' . single;.
f"a ily dwelling:including porch/deck. Th initial ZBA approval date was Wednesday, October 28, 2015.
BASE ) ON THE, E FINDINGS, 1 MAKE A MOTION T l"1 "F- 'I H. REQUEST FOR A -
EAR EXTENSION P L FOR AREA VARIANCE -2015, Micbacl Yurdiga, Introduced
by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
For a period of 2-years.
Duly adopted this ')Os day of August,2,017 by the following,vote:
,AYES:
:lel : :
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 38-2017
Project Applicant: William Rourke
Project Loeation. 21, Jay Road /WR-Waterfront Residential /Word I
Meeting ate: August 16, 20,17
Description of Proposed
Applicant has revised materials for the proposed construction of a 2,016 sq, ft, midential addition to, an
existing 494 sq. ft. camp. I'lic 300 sq. ft, detached garage and 60 sq. ft. porch will be removed. efief
requested from minimum permeability requirements and for expansion of a nonconforming st-nicture in a
CEA. Planning Board: Site Plan Review require!d for expansion in a CEA..
Relief Reg uired:
The applicant requests relief from permeability and ffor e:xpans,ion of a nonconlbrming structure in a CEA
in the Waterfront Zone
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts-dimensional, teguireinents- WR zone
"I'he Proposed addition, and the existing building allow for 700/o of the site to be permeable where 75% is
required.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Raw—
In making a determination, the board shall consider-
L Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties ill be treated by the granting of this area variance. Minor to, no
impactsto the neighborhood may be anticipated.
2. Whether the: benefit sought by the applicant can be: achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than aur r area variance., Feasible altematives may be limited due to,
orientation of the existing building o�n the parcel and,parcel shape.
3. Whether the requested. area variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered
minimal relevant to the code. he.relief requested is 5% in, excess,for the permability.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or imp�act on the physical, or
environmental cooditions, in the neighborhood or district. The project may be consideredto 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-oreated.
staff comments:[
the applicant proposcs,to remove an ex isti n,g detaobed garage (3 00 sq ft),and porch,area.(60 sq ft) of ail
existing 494 sq ft camp. Theproject includes the construction of 2,016 sq ft single story addition,with,a
craWl space for mechanicals. The:addition will have an attached garage. 'ave trenches will be installed
for the new addition to assist with stormwater management f the site. 'The existing hedges and plantings
at the shoreline are to remain.
MeetingffisjgrcPB.- PBR 6/20/17, 'Tabled 6/2 7/17; ZBA- Tabled 6/2 1�17, 8/1 /1'
-
Zoning Board of Appeals,
Community Developmenf Deparfmenit Sfciff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals—.Record, of Desolation
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 18 761-8238
Area,Variance Resolution To: Approve/:Disapprove
Applicant Name: William.Rourke
Dile Haber: Z-AV-3 8-21117
Location- 21 Jay load
Tangy,Mali Number: 289.10-1-13
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2017
The:Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from William, Rourke.
Applicant has revised materials for the proposed construction of a 2,016 sig. ft. residential addition to an existing
494 sq. ft. camp 'T'he 300 sq. ft. detached garage and 60 sq. f1. parch will be removed. Relief requested from.
minimum permeability requirements andfor expansion ofa nonconforming structure in a CEA. Planning
Board: Site flan Review required for expansion in a CEA.
Section 179-3-440 establishment of'districts-dimensional re uirernents W erne
The proposed addition and the eau:ist ng;building allow for 711% of the site to be permeable where 75% is
required..
SPQR Type 11 --no further review required,
.A►public hearing,was advertised an'nd held on Wednesday, June 21, 2017'.and Wednesday, August 1 �,2017,
Upon, review of the application materials, inf nrnation supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A)of the Queensbuty,Town Code and Chapter,267
of NYS, Town Lave and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows.
PE "II"111; 13Y STAFF
1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood not 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 Dossible,
. The requested variance is/ is not.substantial because
4. 'There is 1 is not, an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district?
Page: 1 of
5. Is the alleged difficulty is/ is not self-created because
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from gr.anting, the requested variance would
2MO3Kjg1j_Lapprural -/ Eould butweighed by (denial the resulting detrimhe h
ent to tin In safety and
_ e o
welfare of the neighborhood or community';
T The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board, also proposes the following conditions,:
a)
b) .
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE F1N'DMSI,MAKE-A MOTION TO APPROVE /DENY AREA VAR-IANQ
Z-AV-38-2017, William Rourke, Introduced by_, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 16"day of A4gust 2017 by the following vote:
AYM
NOES.
Page 2 of 2
Town of Glueeinsbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Developmant Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No,.- 47-21017
Project Applicant: Nancy Lobo
Project Location, 26 Fair-wood Drive (Dixon Hts.) /UR-10 yr. 1982 Zoning Ordinance, Current
MD,R/Ward 2
Meeting Date: August 116, 2017
Description of Propos f'rnj rt
Applicant proposes construction of a 220 sq. ft. deck to an existing 1,006 sq. ft. home. Relief requested
from minimum setback requirements for the UR 7 10 zoning district which was the applicable zoning at the
time the parcel.was created in the Dixon Heights, Phase 3 Subdivision.
Relief Required.
The applicant request relief for minimum setback requirements, for the 11JR-10 2,,)oning district for Dixon
Heights, Phase 3 Subdivision.
Section 179-3- 0, establis,lunent of di stricts-drimensional requirements UR I O/MDR zone
The 220 sq ft deck and the steps to be located 3.4,ft from.the rear,property fine where a 10 ft,setback is
required.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of To
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
L Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby propertieswill be created by the granting of this area variance. Minor to,no
impacts to, the: neighborhood may be anticipated. The applicant Inas received approval ftom the Home
Owners Association for the construction of the deck.
2. Wbether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved, by some method, feasible for the
applicant to, pursue, other than an area varia noe. Feasible alternatives may be available to
construct a smaller deck as an existing 64 sq ft is removed for the proposed construction of 19 .1 ft
wide deck. Real property records indicates many have maintained the 64 sq ft deck and a few have
decks,that are at least at 200,sq ft
3. Whether the requested st-eavariance is substantial. The relief may be considered su,bstantial
relevant to the code. Relief is requested for 6.6 ft for the:distance.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effec!t or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in, the neighborhood ordistriet. The project umay be considered to have
minimal impact on the physical or,the environmental conditions of the area.
5. Whother the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered Self-created.
staff corntne2id
The applicant proposes the removal of a 64 sq ft deck to construct a 220 sq ft deck and, steps to be located
3.4 ft ftonithe rear property line. The project plans show thelocation. of the deck and sketch of the deck
appearance. The applican�t has included the approval from the bomeowners association for approval of a
"'deck install".
Zoning Board of' Appea[sl
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning board of Appeals-Record of Resolution
Towyn ofQueensbury 742 Bay load Queensbury,NY 12804 (518)761-82,38
Town of Qlwambaql
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve /Disapprove
Applicant nt Na e: Nancy Lobo
File Number: -47- 017
Location: 26 pairwood Drive- Dixon Heights, Pbase
Tax Map Number.- 302.46-1-73
ZBA Meeting Date: 'Wednesday,, ,august 1 , 2017
The Zoning Board, of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Nancy Lobo.
Applicant proposes construction of a 220 sq. ft. deck to an, existing 1,006 sq. f1. horne. Reiief'requaested from
minimum setback requirements for the UR710 zoning district which was the applicable zoning at the time the
parcel was created in the Dixon orn heights, Phase 3 Subdivision.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts-dirrnernsio nal re uireumernts 1 R1,0/ DR zone
The 2220 sub ft deck and the ,steps to be located 3,.4 ft from the rear property lime where a. 10 ft setback is required.
ply Type1 'nlisted,
public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, August 16, 2017;
Upon. review of the application materials, information supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in'Section 'l 7 -14- ,) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows.
l'1"1 . "1'1111, 1 q d FT 111R :)VIDE1.) BY S"FA F
1. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor, a detriment to nearby
properties because
. Feasible alternatives, are and have been.considered by the Board,rd, are reason.able and have been,
included to mirnirrui w the reguucst OR are not possible.
3. The requested variance is is not substantial because
4. There is / is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental erntal conditio s in the neighborhood or
district?
. is the alleged difficulty is /is not self-created, because
Pae 1 of 2
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
onut yLeiX,h uprova.1),/ would be ouat ei hcd In Beni ,l' the resulting detriment to the health,, raft y and
welfare of the neighborhood r community;
T The Bard also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the folio wing conditions:
a)
b)
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO, APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE Z-
Av-47-2017,NanU Lobo, Introduced by_,, who moot rd for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 16" day of August 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Page 2 of
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appealls
Community Dvvalopmerut (Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No... 49-2017
Project Applicarnt- Douglas McCall
Project Location: to Neighbors hbors 'may / W —Waterfront Residential/ Ward 1.
Meeting Date: August 161, 2017
Description of Proposed) P'rojeet*
Applicant proposes modifications to the existing residence which includes construction of a 165 sq. ft.
deck on.the second floor over the existing first floor porch. and a 27.33 sq ft "0 floor beds on't porch area;
construction of 49 sq. ft. residential addition to be used as a utility room; and construction of a new 83.3
sq. ft. entryway with a 3 sq ft front porch. 'The existing home is 1,052 sq. ft. (Floor,area 2,6893 1 '9.3 sq. ft.).
Relief"requested from minimum shoreline and setback requirements.. Planning Bard: Site Plan Inview
required
Relief Required:
The applicant request relief from.minimum shoreline and setback requirements.
Section 179-3-010 establishment of districts-dimensional uuirernents- WR zone
The applicant proposes an open deck above the first floor that does not rneet the 5th ft setback; requirem.ent
where 47 ft is proposed. In addition„ there is sq ft utility room proposed where 20 ft is required and it
is to be legated l 5.9 flk frothe south property line.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 2617 of Town Law:
In making,,a determination, the board shall consider-
11.
o nsider11. 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 to no
impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be thieved by, some M,ethoad, feasible for the
applicant to pursue,, other than an area variance. feasible alternatives may be considered limited
due to the lineation of the existing home,and site access for the proposed utility room.
. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The requested relief may be considered
minimal. relevant tc the code. The relief requested for the utility room addition is 4Hl ft and the open
deck is 3 ft.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the phsieal 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 has
indicted there has current septic system (alteration in 1992) sized for, a four bedroom where the
interior renovations lArill reduce the bedroorns to three.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered. self-created.
staff cornme
The applicant proposes,alterations to an existing home to include an open deck off the inaster bedroorn on
the second floor, a smaller deck on the second floor frOMr another bedroom, a utility room addition and an
entryway addition. The elevations and floor plans show the details, of the alterations.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff' Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 'Bay Road Queensbury, 1211 (518) 761-8238
Towxv"
Area Variance l esolution '1['o: Approve/ Disapprove
Applicant Naurue Douglas McCall for Richard Provenzano
File Number- - ,'' -4 -, 017
Location: 6 Neighbors Way
Tax Map Number: 226.15-1-3
ZHA Meeting fate. Wednesday, August 16, 2017
The Zoning Board of.Appeals of the T'o+ ra of'Queensbury, has received an application from Douglas McCall
all
for Richard Proven anow Applicant proposes modifications to the existing, residence which includes
construction of a 1 sq. ll® deck on the second floor over the existing Burst floor porch; construction of 4 8 sq. ft.
residential addition to be used as a utility room; and construction of a neva 84 sq,.. ft. entryway. The existing
house is 1,052 sq. ft. (Floor ,area 2,689.3 sq. fl. . belief requested from minimum shoreline and setback
requirements. P'`lantung,Board: Site Placa Review required.
Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts-dimensional r irements- WR.zine
The applicant proposes an opera deck above the first floor that does not meet the 50 fl setback requirement.
where 47 ft is proposed. Ira addition,there is 48 sq fl utility room proposed where'20 f3 is required and it
is to be located 15.9 ft from the south property line.
SEER Type Il T no further review required;
public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, August 16, 017.
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 Queensbury Town Coale and Chapter 267
of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we farad as follows:.
1'1;1 'l I)R l"J"' PRO VIDE) BYSTAFF'
1.. There is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
properties because
. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered, by the Board, are reasonable and have been.
included tv minirni „e the regues'tOR are not possible.
The requested variance is� is not substantial because
4. 'There ys / vs not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district"
5. Is the alleged difficulty is/is not self-created because
Page: I of 2
6. In addition. the Board finds that the benefit to, the, applicant ftom granting the requested variance would
outweiglh jgpprovat) / would be outweighe by (denial the resulting detriment to the ht-a.fth, saf6,ty and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds,that the variance request under,consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes,the following conditions,
,a)
b)
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the toll -up letter sent with this resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE, A MOTION TO APPROVE I DENY AREA VARIANCE Z-
A,V-49-2017,, Dougja,s Mcll for, Richard Provenzano., Introduced b g who mo�ved for its adoption,
seconded by
Duly adopted.this 16' day of August 2017 by the folloAring vote:
AYES:
N -
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variante No.; 5 -2017
Project Applicant: Daniel & Timothy Lawler
Project Location: 19 Reardon Road Ext. / WR—Waterfront Residential /Ward I
Meeting Date- August f, 1,20,17
Description of Proposed Piro,ject:
Applicant proposes construction of 288 sq, ft, open deck with. &0 siq. taw stairs on the lakeside of the
residence. Existing home is 1,1010 sq. ft. (Floor Area 1,580 sq, ft.). Relief requested from minimum
shoreline setback requirements. Planning Board.: Site Plan Review required for expa�nsioin of a
noncon,forming,structure in a, CEA.
Relief Required-
The: applicant request relieffrom minimum shoreline setback requirements.
,Section 179-3-040 establishment of districts-dunensional reqLdrements- WR zone
The applicant proposes 288 sq ft open deck addition with 80 sq ft stair area where the addition is to be
located at 60 ft where the setback due to the adjoining average home setback is, 102.51 ft, from the
shoreline.
Criteria,for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law:
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 propertieswill be created by the granting,of this area variance. Minor to, no
impacts to the neighborhood urea; be anticipated.
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 Inc considered limited
as the two adjoining hornes are setback further than the applicant's home.
1 'Whether the requested area variance is, substantial. The relief" requested may be Considered
moderate relevant to,the code. The relief requested is 415 ft.
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 bile considered to, have
minimal impact on the p,hysical or the environmental conditions of the area,.
5. Whether the, alleged difficulty was self-created., The difficulty may be considered self-created,
The applicant proposes a 288 sq ft open deck with 80 sup ft stair area addition to an existing horne. The
plans ,show the location of the addition and elevation,view of the deck. The applicant has, included a
photo showing the home from the shoreline.
Zoning Board of Appeals—Rewrd of Resolution
Town of'Queensbury 742BayRoad Queensbury,ISI Y 12804 (518) 761-8238
Tblvn Of(zueens Ury
Area Variance Resolution To: Ap
� prove / Disapprove
Applicant Name-, Daniel and Timothy Lawler
File Number. Z- ,V-52-2017
Location: 19 .1 eardon Road Extension
Tax Mali Number; 2893-1-36-1
ZBA
esti ng Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2017
The ning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received, an application from Daniel and
Timothy Lawler. Applicant proposes construction of 288 sq. f , open deck with 80 sqw ft, stairs on the lakeside
of the residence. Existing home is 1,100 sq� ft, (Floor Area 1, 80 sq. ft. . Relief requested from minimuni
shoreline setback requirements. Planning Boar& Site Plan Review required for expansion of a nonconforming
structure in a CEA.,
Sectio�n '179-3-040 establishmentof djstricts-dirnenjjgnd-Ee u�irezrucnts- uue
'The applicant proposes 28,8 sq ft open deck addition with 80 sq stair area where the addition is to, be located at
60 fl,where the setback duce to the adjoining average home: setback, is 1012-5 ft., from the shoreline,
SEAR Type 11 —tura further review required;
A public hearing was advertised. and,held on Wednesday, August 1 , 2017;
Upon review of the application materials,, information supplied during, the: public hearing, and upon
considexation. ofthe criteria specified in Section 17 -14-0 ) of the Queensbury Town Code and Chapter 267
of'NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we Find as follows-.
na"r!IE DRAFr 1-)1 . "IDE BY S17A.FF
1. There is, � is not an undesirable change in the chat-acter of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
propeiiiies because,
2, Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have bee
included to ininirnizo the reg mest OR.gLM!RRMjbjL-
3, The requested variance is/ isnot substantial because
4, There is, / is, not an. adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or
district?
51. Is the alleged difficulty is / is,not self-created, because
Page 1, of 2
6. In addition thard finds that the benefit t �e applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh u) / would beoutweigLhed by (denial) the resulting detriment to the health., sat`ety and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7. 'The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the rninimum necessary;
& The Soard also iproposes the following conditions:
a),
b)
c) Adherence to the items, outlined in the follow-up letter s,ent withthis, resolution.
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A murm TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANQE Z-
. '-512-2417
.AV-512-2017 Daniel and Timoth 7 Lawler, Introduced by who moms ed for its adoption, seconded by
Duly ad,opted this 16th day August 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
NO E S19
Page 2 of 2
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff INoties
Area Variance No.. 54-2017
Project Applicant: Cellco Partnership d./b/a Verizon Wireless
Project Location: City of GF Water Tank, Aviation Mall Road /PR-42A--Parkland Recreation-
42 Acres/ Ward 2
.Meeting Date; August 16, 2017
lllcscription of Proposed Project
Applicant proposes unnotdifueatiern to previous Zoning Board approval for construction of an 1 i ft. 6 in. by
16 fl, equipment building for antennae collocation project on the City of Glens FallsWater Tan 'Project
includes installation of 12 panel antennas and site work. Relief requested from minimum property line
setbacks fuer flit Parkland PR-4 zoning district.
Relief Requrita ed
The applicant request relief from minimum property lime setbacks for the Parkland (PR-42) zoning
district,
Section, 179-3-040 establishment of, istriets-dirrnensionai re uuirenn tints- P -42 zone
The
proposed 184 sq ft equipment building is to be located 25 ft from the front property line where a 100
ft setback is required.
Criteria for considering an, Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of T'nrwrn lea ..
In making a determination, the board shall.consider:
1Whether 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 to no
impacts to the neighborhood may be anticipated.
. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method,,, (feasible for the
applicant to punrnsu e, other than an area variance. 7easible alternatives are linrnited due to the size
of the parcel not L53 ac and the location of the existing water-towers.
. Whether the requested area, vari;arnce is snubstanantial, "'line relief may be considered substantial
relevant to the code, belief requested is 75 ft,.
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 onthe:physical or the environmental conditions,ns ref the area.
S. Whether the alleged diffiennity was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff'c:ornnrrneruts.
The applicant proposes a modification efthe location of tine proposed equipment stied for the Verizon
antenna equipment for better access for maintenance. The previous approval, was f r a 28 ft setback and
the proposed is fau: a 25 ft setback. The plans show the 2016 approval and the proposed 2017 location of
the equipment slued.
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Tray Road, Queensbury,NY 1280 18) 761-8238
Area, Variance Resolution To Approve i Disapprove
e
Applicant Name, Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizo.rrn Wireless
File Number: Z-AV-54-2017
'4-2017
Location: City of glens Falls Water Tank .Aviation Mail, Road
Tax Map Number: 302.9-1-43
ZB'A Meeting,Chute Wednesday,, ,un unst 16, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Celleo Partnership
d/b/a Verizon Wireless. Applicant proposes modification to previous Zoning Board ,appro al fear construction
of an 11 f1. 6 in,. by 16 ft. equipment building,for antennae collocation project on the City of Glens Falls Water
Tank. Project includes installation of 12 panel antennas and sitework., Relief requested, from minimum,property
lira setbacks for the Parkland(PTS- zoning district.
Section 179-3-04°O establishment ofdistriets,dimera i u l uuiaremrets- PR-42 zone
The proposed 184 sq ft equipment building is to be located from,the front property line where a 100 ft.
setback is required.
SEQR Type 11--no funrther review required,
public beanng was advertised and held,on Wednesday, August 16, 201"
Upon review of the application materials, Worunuatioun supplied during the public hearing,, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Smtion 179-1.4-080(A) of'the Queensbiury'Town Cole and Chapter 267
of NYS "T"own Law and after discussion,and deliberation, we fiend as follows.
tl�1:1 l`1tltl 1.11 1°`"tl tl�N t tlL J l:u BY
1. 'there is / is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a. detriment to nearby
properties because
. 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. The requested variance is /is not substantial because
., "there is / is not an adverse impact on, the physical or enviromrncntal conditions in the rnei �borhood or
district"
° is the alleged difficulty is/ is not self-created because
Purge 1 of
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the: requested variance would
outweigh (appLroval) / would be �oULw
by denial) the resulting detriment to the health, safety and
wel,flare of the neighborhood or conununity;
7. The Boa,rd also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
8. The Board also proposes the following,conditions:
a)
b)
e) Adherence to the items,outlined in the follow-up letter sent with,this resolution..
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE Z-
AV-54-201,7 -Cel.Ico Partnership,, d/b/a Vora zori.-Wireless, Introduced by who mom d e , for its adoption,
seconded by
Duty adopted this l day of August 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
'NOES:
.Page 2 of