Staff Notes Packet ZBA Mtg Wed September 20, 2017 ZBA Meeting
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
Queensbury Zoning Banal of Appeals Agenda
Meeting. Wednesday, September 20, 2017 Time; 7:00- 11 ;00 pm
Queensbury Activities Ceriter- 742 Bay Road
Agenda subject to chon9e and may he found at: www.queensbury.net
Approval of meeting minutes: August Ib and 23,2017
Ati m i n istratiyl<it_ems:
Request to Further Table-
Z-AV-29-2017 Rubert Fulmer
Z-AV-28-2017 Seaton Property IIoldings, LLC(A-1 Tree Works)
OLD BUSINESS:
A lic,mos) .Tames Beaty Area Variance No Z-AV-35-2017
Owners Hars bars,Inc_ SE RA Type U
Agent(s) Jonathan C. Lo r.Esq.BPSR Lot Size 14.59 Acr s
Location 1 168 Sunnyside Road Zoning MDR
Ward No. Ward 1
Tax Id No 294.5-1-50 1 section 179-3-040
Cross Ref S3 7-2017 Prelim&SB 8-2017 Final Warren County Plannin Cute 2017
PublicHmrin Uy 17,2017Tablcdto September20,2017 AdirondackFar1tAgency n1a
Project Description Applicant proposes subdivision of land where existing golf-course bar/and 4-un it apartment complex are located into two
parcels. The apextment complex,Loot I wi U bo 0.30 acres and the golf course,I.ot 2 wil I br 10.56 acres.Rclief requested Frurm rninimuin lot size!
density,bul Wag setbacks,and permeability requirements of the MDR xon ing district Planning Board= SubdivisiDn review is raqu ired for the
creation of the new lots.
Applicant(s) Chris Carie Sign Variance h10 Z-SV-7-2017
Owners Chris Carte SCORA Type LIn€istcd
Agent(s) nla Lot Sixc Acres
Luentian 1067 Stoic Route 9 Toning Cl
Ward No. Ward 2
Tax lid No 296.9-1-5 1 Section Cha ter 140
Cross Ref P- P-25-2017;Z-AV-24-2017 %Rrren County Planning July 2017
Public Hearing July 26,2017 Tabled to September 20,2417 1 Adiru ndack Park A enc rVo
Proj"t Description Applicant proposes to utilize existing a freestanding sign structure for The Wood Carte Tao at 27 sq. ft. Existing sign docs
not meet 15 ft.setbook re uirc=Flt. Relief requested from minimum front yard setback for such sign-
NEW
i n_NEW BUSINESS:
A liran s Michael and Karen LeBlanc Area Variance No Z-AV-55-2017
Owner(s) Michail and Karen LeBlanc sE RA Type U
A ants rda Lot size 2.8 acres
Location 34 Warren Lane Zoning MDR with Mobile Horne
Ward No. Ward 4 Orerla
Tax id No 308,6-1-67 1 Section 179-3040
Crass Ref P-SB-l4-2017 Prel€m.;P-SB I5-2017 Final Warren CountyPlanningn/a
Public Hearin Se tembor 20,2017 Adirondack Park Age neala
Project Description Appli-cant proposes two lot subdivision ofa2_9 acre parcel into 2.57 acres and 0.23 acres(100 ft. by 104 ft.)_ Main lot,
2.57 acres,has an existing home to remain_ New lot,0.23 acres,has an existing garage that wili be removed to place a double-wide mob lie home.
Relief requested from minimum l of size requirements for the newly created lot in the MDR zon ing dimlct and Mobi€c Home Overlay district.
Planning Board. Subdivision Applicatlon for the creation of the additional [or-
Page i of 3
Queensbury Zoning Board of Appe6s Agenda
Meeting: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 Time: 7:00= 11 :00 pm
Oueensbury Activities Center- 742 Boy Rood
Agenda subject to orange and maybe found at: www.clueensbury,net
Applicant(sj Walmart Rea[Estate Business Frust Sign Variance No V-9-2017
Owner(s) Walmart Real Estate Business Trust SE9RA Tylic Unlisted
Agent(s) pb2 Architecture and EngIneering Lut size 333,27 acres
Locn#ion 24 Quaker Ridge Boulevard Zoning C]
Ward No. Ward 2
Tax Id No 303,15-1-25.1 Section ChWer 140 _
Cross Ref 1P-SP-59-2017- 5V 1-2009 WarrenCoun!XPlanning Sm3wrnber 2017 _
Public Hearing Se [ember 20,2017 Adirondack Perk Age cn1a
Project Description Applkant proposes instal lation of an i nternal ly Ht 66.76 sq, k well sign for"PiCk Up"and to include the Wal mart S park.
Relief re nested for si na a in excess of the el[owable limit for wall signs.
Applicant(s) Walmart Real Estate Business Trust Sign Veriance No Z-S -8-2017
Owns s Wal man Real Estate Business Trust SE RA Type Unlisted
Agent(s) pb2 Architecture and En i necd rig Lot Size 17-74 acres
Location 891 State Route 9 Zoning CI
Ward No. Ward 2
Tux Id No 296A7-1-36 I S4010H Chapter 140
Crass Ret P-SP-60-�O17: SV 71-2003 warren Couaty PLanning I September 2017
Pulbl ie Htari n September 20,2017 1 Adirondaelk Park A enc I rVa
Project Description Applicant proposes installation of an internally lit 56-76 sq-ft-wall sign for"Pick Ur'and to Jnuludc the NValmairt Spark.
Relief requested for si9=90 in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Applicant(s) Mike Lewis Arca Vftrionce No Z-AV-58-2017
Owners Derck SwIff SC RA Type II
Agent(s) n1a Lot Slxe 2.39 acres
Location 43 Martell Road Zoning - MDR
Ward No. Ward 1.
Tax Id No 290.14-1-20 Section 179-3-M
Cross Ref PSP-61-2017-P-FWW-5-2017 I Warren CDURty Planning rJa
Pnb1 ie Henri n S tembcr 24 2417 1 Adirondack Pork A ency I rda
project Description Applicant proposes reconstrvaion of the 576 sq. fL home thal was destroyed by fire this year,2017, In addition,applicant
proposes construction of 192 sq,ft,addition to the home. Relif'requcsted from minimum setback requirements for shoreline restrictions to a
wetland- Plann Ing Board' Site Plan Review and Freshwater Wetlands Permit arc requ[red for the disturbance of land within 100 ft,of a regul atcd
wetland.
Applicant(s) Errol Silverberg Use Variance No Z-UV-3-2017
Owner(s) Errol 5ilverbe SE RA Ty2e Il
A en s Delo R.Clothier Lot Size 6-53 acres
Loco#ion 230 Lockhart MGuatain Road(L.Ru Gi11is Subdivision) Zoning RK-5A/LC-1 OA
Ward No. Ward J
Tax Id No 252-1-38.1 Section 174-3-040- 179-5-024
Cross Ref Z-AV-59-2017;P P- -2017 Warren CourtPlanning n/a
Public Ultaring Setember20.2017 AdirondackPark Age nc ALD
Project Description Applicant proposes construction of a 2,344 sq- R addition to the existing 8,400 sq.ft. garage, belief is required as the
construction of the addition to the pri vete garage i s on a parcel%vJ1ere a principal use(single-Family dwol ling)does not exi st- Additional iy,an area
variance is required as the structure is proposed to be in excess of the maximum allowable square footage for a private garage. Planning Board;
Site Plan Review ream red fot the txpansian of a private garage-
SURVEY WAIVER APPROVED
Page 2 of 3
Queensbury ur Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda
Meeting: Wedne.5day, September 20, 2017 Time, 7:00- 11 ;00 pm
Queensbury Activ Pies Center- 742 Beiy Recd
Agerid(� subject to orange and may be found at; www.queens bury,net
A licnn s Errol Silverberg Area Variance No Z-AV-59-2017
Owners Eau[Silverberg SEQRAType E
A en s Dale R.Clothier Lot Size 6.55 acres
Location. 230 Lockhart Mountain Road(L.Rae Gillis Subdivision) Zoning RMA{LC-1 OA
Ward No. Ward I
Tax Id No 252.-1-38.1 I Section 79-3-040, 179-5-(Y20
Cross Ref I Z-UV-3-2017;P-SP- -2017 Warren twoun# Plannh tea
Public Hearin %e ternher20 2017 AdirendackPark A enc I ALD
ProjectDescription Applicant pMoscs construction of 2,304 sq. @.addition to the existing8,400sq,I garage. USO Variance is required as
the construction of the addition to the private garage is on a Parcel where principal use(single-family dwelling)docs not exiSr- Relief recd uircd as
the structure is proposed to be in excess of the maximum allowable sq uare footage for a private garage and to have an accessory without a
principle_ Planning Board; Sito Plan Review required for the expansion of a private garage,
URVEY WAIV ER APPROVED
Any Further husi nets that the Chairman determ ides may be properly brought before the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Final 213A Agenda Version 8.24.2017 CSJLM{sh
Page 3 ON
DRAF-r
Zoning Boned of App cals—Reeord of Resolution
Town of Queensbuiy 742. Bay Road =ensbi�ry,NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Tmm of Qg-ensbUly
Area Variance Resolution To: Table
Applicant Name: Robert Fulmer
File Number: -AV-29-2017
Location: 54 Country Club Road
Tax Map plumber: 296.14-1-49
BA Meeting Date: Weduesday, September 20, 2017
Applicant proposes construction of revised, 924 sq, ft. 3-door detached garage. Revised project
includes removal of 1,500 sq. ft. blacktop pad. Relief requested for a second garage. Planning
Board: Site plan Review and Freshwater Wetlands review required for site work within 100 ft.
of a wetland.
The applicant requests relief for a second garage.
The Applicant requests to be Tabled until the October_,2017 ZBA 14leeting.
MOTION TO TABLE AREA VARIANCE -AV-2 -2017 ROBERT FULMF.R, Introduced
by __ — who moved for its adaption, seconded by _
Tabled to the October ineeting agenda with additional application materials to be submitted by
Duly adopted this 20th clay of September, 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of resolution
Town ol'Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12504 (518) 761-5238
Town of(Lambufy
Arca Variance Resolution To: Table
Applicant Marne: Seaton Property Holdings, LLC ( -1 Tree Works)
File Number- Z- V-2.8-2017
Location: 305 and 310 Corinth Road
Tax Map Number: 308.16-1-55, 58 and 61
ZDA Meeting Hate: Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Seaton Property
Holdings, LLC (A-1 Tree Works). Applicant proposes operation of a wood processing facility with a new
15,000 sq ft enclosed pole barn for wood products and to install two 1,200 sq. ft. kiln units on the site. Project
includes merger of lots 308.16-1-55, -5 6, -58 & 61. Project includes continued auto facility for C& 7
automotive. Project includes already in use new storage area, maintaining 4 existing buildings on the merged
properties, additional clearing, installation of a gravel parking area and material storage area(togs, woodchips
etc). Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the firewood processing facility in the CLI
zoning district were 100 ac is required. Planning Board: Site plan and Special use perni t for lighting
manufacturing of wood products for a logging processing company.
The applicant requests to he Tabled until the October_, 2017 ZBA Meeting.
BASED ON TAE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE AREA, VARIANCE Z,- V-28-
2017, Seaton Property Moldings, LL _.fA-1 Tree Works), Introduced by , who moved for its
adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 20th day of September 2017 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development DpOrtnt Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 35-2017
Project AVplicaut: James Beaty (liars Fars, Inc.)
Project Loeatian: 168 Sunnyside Road
PRrcel Histor-y: SB 7-2017 Prelim & SB 5-2017 Final
SEQR Type: Type T1
Meeting Date: September 2.0,2017
Description of Proposed Y'rnject:
Applicant has requested to be tabled to October 18th for a full board.
Applicant proposes subdivision of land where existing golf course bzrl and 4-unit apartment complex arc
located into two parcels. The apartment complex, Lot 1 will be 0.30 acres and the golf course, Lot 2 will be
10.56 acres. Relief requested from minimum lot size 1 density, building setbacks, and permeability requirements
of the MDR zoning district. Planning Board: Subdivision review is required for the creation of the neve lots.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for 2 lot subdivision to reduce one parcel less than the allowed lot size, density,
building setbacks and penneability requirements of the MDR zoning district.
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts-limcnsional requirement MDR zone
The project proposes to create a non-conforming parcel of 030 ac where 2 ac is required on Iot 1, Density
requires 8 ac for a 4 unit complex on lot 1.
Setbacks for lot 1 –4Unit Building east side 17.4 ft. where 25 ft, is required, 4Unit Building south side 13,5 ft
where 30 ft. is required for the rear setback. Garage is 11.3 ft. west side where 25 ft. setback is required; Garage
is 17,9 ft, fmm the south property line where 30 ft. is required for the rear setback. Lot 1 permeability is 2 %
where 50°o is required.
Setbacks for Lot 2 side setback for the deck attached to the 2story garage is to be at 5 ft. where a 25 ft. setback is
required.
Critcrin for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Law:
Ire making a determination, the board shall consider:
1. Whether an undesirable thane.will be produced ire 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 aehieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited roue to location of
the existing buildings on the parcel and the intent to separate the apartment building from the golfcourse,
. "Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief maybe considered substantial relevant to
the code, The relief for lot one includes 1.7 ac for lot size, 7,7 ac for lot density, Setback 4unit side setback
east 7.6 ft. axed gear setback south 16.5 ft_ ; Garage side setback west 13.7 ft. and rear setback south 12A ft.
Lot one permeability relief is 2.4 %. Relief for Lot 2 setback side 20 ft.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental. conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self=created,
IS tuff cammcnts•
The Applicant has revised plans and proposes subdivision of 10.86 acre parcel into two lots—one 0.30 acre
and one 10.56 mcres, The apartment building w.ill be on the 0,30 acre parcel and the golf course and associated
buildings to be on the 10.56 acre parcel. The applicant has updated the plans to retleet the location of a
replacement septic system for lot 1 buildings. There are no changes to the site or buildings on either proposed
parcel.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff gots
Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Town of(ire iFEV-7
Area Variance Resolution To: Table
Appticont Name: lamas Beaty
File Number: Z-AV-35-2017
Location: 168 Sunnyside Road
Tax Map Dumber: 290.5-1-50
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday,September 20, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from James Beaty,
Applicant proposes subdivision of land where existing golf course bar/and 4-unit aparnrrent complex are located
into two parcels_ The apartment complex,Lot I will be 0.30 acres and the golf course, Lot 2 will be 10.56 acres_
Relief requested from minimum lot size 1 density, building setbacks, and peimeabilityrrequirements of the NIDD
zoning district. Plarrrting Board: Subdivision review is required for the creation of the new lots.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for 2 lot subdivision to reduce one parcel lass than the allowed lot size, density,
building setbacks and permeabilityrequirernents of the MDR zoning district,
J79-3-040 Establishment of districts—dimensignal requirement MDR zone
The prjectproposes to create a non-conforming pamal of 0,30 ac where 2 ac is required on lot 1. Density requires 8
aC for a 4 unit complex on lot 1,
Setbacks for lot i —4Unit Building east side 17.4 ft. where 25 ft is required,4[lnit Building south side 13.5 ft.where
30 ft,is required for the rear setback. Garage is 11.3 ft. west side where 25 ft,setback is required; Garage is 17.9 ft,
From the south property line where 30 ft. is required for the rear setback. Lot I permeability is 26%where 50"N is
required.
Setbacks for Lot 2 side setback for the deck attached to the 2story garage is to be at 5 ft, where a 25 ft, setback is
required,
Applicant has requested to be tabled to October 18"'for a full Board.
M OTION TO TABLE AREA AR]ANC Z-AV-35-2017 JAMES BEATY Introduced by who
moved for its adoption,seconded by
Tabled to the October 18,2017 meeting agenda in order to be reviewed by a full Board_
Duly adopted this 2e day of September,2017,by the following vote-
AYES-
NOES-
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Dotes
Sign Variance No.: 7-2017
Project Applicant; Chris Carte
Project Location: 1067 State Route
Pare,el History: P-SP-25-2017; Z-AV-24-2017
SEER Type: Unlisted
Meeting Date: July 26, 2017,September 20, 2017
Description of I? osed Y'rojeet:
Applicant proposes to utilize existing a freestanding sign structure for The Wood Carte Too at 27 sq. ft.
Existing sign does not meet 15 ft. setback requirement. belief requested from minimum front yard setback for
such sign.
Relief Requiredi
The applicant requests relief from the minimum front yard setback for such sign.
Section 140-6 Signs for which permits are required
The applicant proposes to maintain the sign frame and install a new panel where the frame is 8.8 ft. from the
front property line where a 15 ft. setback is required.
Criteria for considering a Sign Variance according to Cha ter 267 of Town Law:
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
1. Whetber ani uadesirable change wiQ be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment
to nearby properties will be created by the granting of this sign variance. Minor impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated as the frame is pre-existing.
. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant cern be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered to install a
compliant sign fraane.
. Whether the requested sign variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered moderate
relevant to the code. The relief requested is 6.2 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 as proposed may have minimal
impact on the environmental conditions of the distdo.
45. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant proposes to maintain an existing sign frame and install a new sign panel. The sign panel is 27 sq,
ft, to advertise the Wood Carte second store. The sign frame was utilized for the previous sign that had been on
site for a number of years. The sign frame is within the Town's sewer easement area and will be subject to any
requirements of the easement if they arise.
Zoning Board of Appeals —Record of Resolution
!'own of Queensbury 7112 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12904 {518}761-8238
lui,'r�r,F(�utrr�s��}ury
Sign Variance Resolution To: Approve 1 Disapprove cz�-- 'C- 4 g
Applicant dame: Chris Carte
File Number: Z-S -7-2017
Location: 1067 State Route 9
Tax Map dumber: 296.9-1-5
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The Zoning Board ofAppcals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Chris Carte
for a variance from Chapter 140 of the Sign Cade of The Town of Queensbury. Applicant proposes to
utilize existing a freestanding sign structure for The Wood Carte Too at 27 sq. 11. Existing sign does not
meet 15 1t_ setback requirement. Relief requested from minimum front yard setback for such sign.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief from the minimum front yard setback for such sign.
Section 140-6 Signs four which permits are required
The applicant proposes to inaintain the sign frame and install a new panel where the frame is 8,8 ft. from
the front property line where a 15 ft. setback is required.
SEAR Type: Unlisted I Resolution /Action Required for S E Q R I
Motion regarding Sign Variance SV-7-2017, Chris Carte based upon the information and the
analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant, this Board finds that
this will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. S o we give it a Nega(ive
Declaration, Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Daly adopted 20t" day of September 2017, by the fallowing vote,
AYE'S:
NOES:
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, July 26, 2017 and on Wednesday, September
0, 2017
Upon review of the application materials, infonnation supplied during the public herring, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-080(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and
Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
I. 1 i11 an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhoA or%,,i11 a detri mrnt to the
nearby properties be created by the granting of the requested sign variance? INSERT RESPONSE
. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, fusible for the applicant to
pursue, other than an sign variance's INSERT RESPONSE
3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? INSERT RESPONSE
4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions
in the neighborhood or district? INSERT RESPONSE
5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? INSERT RESPONSF
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested vari ante
would out ei h f would be outweighed bv_the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of
the neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above finding `f s I make a MOTION TO APPROVE 1 DE Sign VaHance SV-7-2017
Chris Carte, Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following:
A. <nsert conditions/comments>;
B. The variance approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval; you may request an
extension of approval bcfore the one (1) year time ftaine expires;
C. If the property is located within the Adirondaek Park, the approved variance is subject to n-,view by
the Adirondack Park Agency (APA). The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the
PA's review is completed;
D. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance must be submitted to the, Community
Developrtwmt Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building & codes
personnel'
E. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final
plans;
F. Upon approval of the application; review and approval of final plans by the Community Development
Department the applicant can apply for a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review,
approval, or permit from the Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency, Lake GeoTge
Park Commission or other State agency or department.
Duly adopted this 200 day of September 2017, by the following vote;
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Motes
Area Variance No.: $5-2017
Project Applicant. Michael & Karen LeBlanc
Project Location: 34 Warren Lane
Parcel History: P- B-14-2017 Prelim.; P- 13 15-2017 Final
SEQR Type: Type 11
Meeting Date: September 20,2017
Deseription of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of a 2.8 acre parcel into 2.57 acres and 0.23 acres (100 ft, by 100 ft.),
Main lot, 2.57 acres, has zn existing home to remain. New lot, 0,23 acres, has an existing garage that will be
removed to place a double-wide mobile home. Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the
newly created lot is the MDR zoning district and Mobile Home Overlay distilct. Planning Board; Subdivision
Application for the creation of the additional lot,
Relief Requiredi
179-3-040 Establishment of Distilcts-dimensional requirement MDR zone
The applicant requests the following relief: Relief requested from minimtirn lot size requirements to created a
0.23 acre lot in the MDR zoning district and Mobile Home Over]ay district. The MDR zone requires 2 acres if
site is not connected to sewer and water. The site only has municipal water.
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 he 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 pursue, other than an area variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited as the
existing parcel is an odd configuration at 2.8 ac,
. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The request for relief may be considered substantial
relevant to the code. The relief requested is 1.77 ac
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. The applicant has shown a compliant
septic system can be installed on the site along with the placement c a mobile home.
5. 'Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created,
staff comments;
The applicant proposes to subdivide a 2,8 ac parcel into two parcels. One lot is to be 2.57 ac and to maintain ars
existing home and a wooded/garden area. The second lot is to be .2 3 ac and a garage building is to be removed
then a mobile home with a septic can be installed on the lot. The applicant has also indicated a replacement
septic system cern be installed on the 2.57 ac parcel through an easement. The applicant has indicated the new lot
is for their daughter and the home and lot size is similar to some of the neighboring properties.
Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-82.38
fir4,�� ofC�iceush�ry
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve/ Disapprove
Applicant Namc: Michael and Karen LeBlanc
]E♦+'ile Number- -A -55-2017
Location: 34 Warmn Lane
Tax Map Number- 308.6-1-67
BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, September 20,2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbu y has received an app Iicatian from Michael. and wren
Applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of 2.8 acre parcel into 2.57 acres and 0.23 acres (100 ft. by 100 ft.).
Main lot 2.57 acres, has an existing home to remain, New lot, 0.23 acres, has an existing garage that will be
removed to plane a double-wide mobile home. Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements for the
newly created lot in the MDR zoning district and Mobile Home Overlay district. Planning Board: Subdivision
Application for the creation of the additional lot.
Relief Required:
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts--diniensional requirement NOR zone
The applicant requests the following relief: Relief requested from minimum lot size requirements to created a
0.23 acre lot in the MDR zoning district and Mobile Home Overlay district. The MDR zone requires 2 acres if
site is not connected to sewer and water. The site only has municipal water.
SEER Type 11 —no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, September 20, 2417;
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 Cade and Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after
discussion and deliberation,we find as follows:
PI-R TI IE DRAFT pfdO IDE D RY STAR'
1. There is_1_is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby propertfes
because
2. Feasible alternatives are and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been included
to minimi7x the request DR are not possible.
3. The requested variance is f is not substantial because
4. There is l is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district?
S. Is the alleged difficulty is l is not self-created because
. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant frorn granting the requested variance would outweigh
Wproval ! wpuld be outweighed by (denial) the resulting detriment to the lien Ith, safety and weIfare 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)
e) Adherence to the items outlined in the fol Iokw-up letter sent with this resoIutiorl.
LASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS. I MA K E A MOTION TO APPROVE/ DENY AREA VARIANC E
NO. ,AV-5 -2017, Michael & Karen LeBlanc, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 20 day of 9 epternber 2017 by the following vote,
AYES:
NOES;
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Sign Variance No.: 9-2017
Project A,pplicapt: Walmart Real Estate Basinegs Trust
Project Location: 2.4 Quaker Midge Boulevard
Parcel History: P- P- 9-2017; SV 1-2009
SEi R Type: Unlisted
Meeting Date. September 2.0,2017
Dcription of Proposed Prajec#:
Applicant proposes installation of an internally lit 66,76 sq. ff, wall sign for "Fick Up"and to include the
Walmart Spark. Relief requested for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Relief Re€luired:
The applicant requests relief for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Section 140 Signs –number of si ons.
The applicant proposes a sixth sign where only one wall sign is allow-ed. The original praject for the Wmlmart
More received a sign variance for the five signs existing, (SV 1-2009-3118!2009)
Criteria for considering a Sign 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 properties will be created by the granting of this sign variance. Minor impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated due to the location of the building from public road.
. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, other than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited as the
applicant has received a sign variance pt'eviously for the number of signs currently on the building.
. Whether the requested sign variance is substantial. The reIief requested may be considered substantial
relevant to the code. The relief requested is to have 6 signs on the site.
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 as proposed may bave minimal
impact on the environmental conditions of the district.
5. Whether Me alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created,
Staff commentai
The applicant has indicated Walmart proposes a new calor scheme for the entire facade of the store. The new
colors axe blue and grey. The main signage would remain white as well as the new signage "Pick Up" The area
that is designated as pick up will be paintad with an orange fagade color. The burst are to be a yellow color.
Warren County Planning Department epi?-[FK1
Project Review and Referral Form
Reviewed by Department on September 15, 2017
Project Name: Walmart
Owner: Walmart
1D Number QBY-I7-SV-09
County ProjecK. Sep-17-09
Current Zoning: C I
Community: Oueensb ury
Project Description;
Applicant proposes instaIlalion of an iniernROY lit 66.75 sf wall sigrn far"pick up" and to include the Walwart Spark_ Relief
reguesied for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Site Location:
24 Quaker Ridge Blvd
Tax Map Numbers}.
303.15-1-25.1
Staff`Notes:
The issues here appearto be of a local nature involving local issues without any significant impactson County properties
or resources. Staff recommends no county impact based onthe information submitted according to the suggested review
criteria of CVYSGeneral Municipal Law Section 234 applied to the proposed project.
Lodi actions to ditte(if any):
County Planning]Department:
N01
Local Action;/Final Disposition:
911 5J2017
Warren County Planning Department Date Signed Local Ot't dal Dates.Signed
YLEASF RLTURN THFS FORM TO THE WARREN COUny PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS OF H•INAF,ACTION
Zoning Bon rd of AppeoIs—Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 tray Dead Queensbwy, Y 12804 (51$) 761-8238
Sign Varialacc Resolution To. Approve! Disapprove
Applicant Marne: Walmart Real Estate Business Trust
File Number- Z- V-9-2017
Location: 24 Quaker Ridge Boulevard
Tax Map Number. 303.15-1-25.1
BA Meeting Date. Wednesday, September 2.0, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Walwairt
Deal Estate Business 'frust for a variance from Chapter 140 of the Sign Code of The Town of
Queensbury. Applicant proposes installation of an internally lit 66.76 sq. ft. 'wall sign for"Fick Up" and
to include the Walmart Spark, Relief requested for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wail signs.
Section 140 Sins–number of signs.
The applicant proposes a sixth sign where only one wall sign is allowed. The original project for the
Waltmrt store received a sign variance for the five signs existing. (S 1-2009-311812009)
SEAR Type; Unlisted [ Resolution 1 Action Required for SEQRJ
Motion regarding Sign Variance -S -9-2017 Walmart Real Estate Business Trust, based upon the
information and the analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant, this
Board finds that this will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. So we give It a
Negative Declaration,Introduced by who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 20th day of September 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
DOES
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, September 20, 2017;
Upon review of the application materials, infornnation, supplied during the public hearing, and upon
consideration of the criteria specified in Section 179-14-00(A) of the Queensbury Town Code and
Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
1. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or will a detriment to the
nearby properties be created by the granting of the requested sign variance? INSERT RESPONSE
2. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to
pursue, other than an sign variance? INSERT RE,SPONSE
3, Is the requested sign variance substantia!? INSERT RFSPONSE
4. WiII the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions
in. the neighborhood or district? INSERT RESPONSE
5. Is the alleged difficulty self=created? T SF.RT RESPONSE
G. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance
would outweip,h/ would be outwei ethe resulting detriment to the health, saCety and welfare of
the neighborhood or community;
7- The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessary;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE 1 DENY Sign Variance
SV-9-2017, Walmart Real Estate Business 'Frust for the Walmart location of 24 Quaker Ridge
Boulevard, Introduced by , who moved for its adaption, seconded by
As per the resolution prepared by staff Mth the following:
A. <insert conditions / comments>;
B. The variance approval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval; you may request an
extension of approval before the one (1) year time frame expires;
C. if the propwy is located within the Adirondack Park, the approved variance is subject to review b
the Adirondack Park Agency (APA), The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the
APA's review is completed;
D. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance must be submitted to the Community
Development Department before any further review by the Zoning Administrator or Building & codes
personnel'
E. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final
plans;
F. Upon approval of the application; review and approval of final plans by the Community Developmemt
Depanment tht. applicant can apply Cor a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review,
approval, or permit from the Town Planning Board and/or the Adirondack Park Agency, Lake George
Park Commission or other State agency or department,
Duly adopted this 20'11 day of September 2017, by the following vote;
AYES:
NOFS:
Sown of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Sign 'Vari anec No.: -2017
Pro jeet Applicant: WaImarl Real Esta te Business`frust
Project Location: $91 State Route 9
Pill-cc] History: P- P-64-2{117; SV 71-2003
SE R.Type: Unlisted
Meeting Date: September 20,2017
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes installation of an internally lit 66.76 sq. ft. wall sign for "Pick Up" and to include the
almart Spark. Relief requested for signage ire excess of the allowable limit foi-walI signs.
Relief Requiredi
The applicant requests relief for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Section 144 Signs--number of signs.
The applicant proposes a 12th sign at the front of the building where only one wall sign is allowed. The
Walmarl store curreut structure received a sign variance allowing 11 signs. (SV 71-2003), Seven Signs for the
auto arca and five signs at the front.
Criteria for considering a Sign Varia ace according to Cha ter 267 of Town Law:
In making a determination, the board shall consider:
1. Whether ars 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 sign variance. Minor impacts to the
neighborhood may be anticipated due to the location of the building from public road.
. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can he achieved by some method, feasible for the
applicant to pursue, outer than a sign variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited as the
applicant has received a sign variance previously for the number of signs currently on the building.
. Whether the requested sign variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial
relevant to the code, The relief requested is to have 12 signs on the site.
4. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physioal or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The project as proposed [nay have minimal
impact on the environmental conditions of the distriol.
v. Whetter the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created.
Staff comments:
The applicant has indicated Walmart proposes a new color scheme, for the entire fa ade of the store. The new
colors are blue and grey. The ricin sigr[age would rernain white as well as the new signage '`Pick Up". The area
that is designated as pick up will be painted with an orange facade color, The burst are to be a yellow color.
ep17-!tl
Warren County Planning Department
Project Review and Referral Form
Reviewed by Department on September 15, 21117
Project Name: Walmarli
Owner: Walmarl
ID Number: QB -17- V-08
County ProjecM ep17-10
Current Zoning: Cl
Community: Queenshury
Project Description:
Applicant proposes installation of an internal[y lit 86.76 sf wall sign for"pick up" and to include the Walmarl Spark, Relief
requested for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs.
Site Location:
891 Slate Rt 9
Tax Map Number(s):
296,17-1-36
Staff Notes:
The issues here appearto be d a local nature involving local issues without any significant impactson County properties
or resources_ Staff recommends no county impact based onthe informatlork submitted according to the suggested revle
criteria of NYS(3eneral Municipal Law Rection 239 applied to the proposed project.
Local actions to date (if any)-
County Planning Department-
NCI
epartment:N I
Local Action:{r+inal Disposition:
9115/2017
�4Zz
Warren County Planning Department Date Signed Local Official Date Signed
PI F 6SE RETURN THIS GOWN]TO TRE VVA RREN. COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT�i'i MHN 10 DAYS OP FINAL ACTION
Zoning Board of Appeals—Record ofRcsolu#ion
Town of Qtpccnsbury 742 Bay Road QueensNiy,NY 12804 (518} 761-8238
Town of{�rrtin.sburY
DR4 It
Sign Variance Resolution To: Approve, 1 Disapprove
,applicant Name: Walmart Deal Estate Business 'frust
File Number: -S -8-2017
Location: 891 State route
Tax Map Number: 296.17-1-36
BA Meeting Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Tows. of Queensbury has received an application frorn Walmart Deal
Estate Business Trust for a variance from Chapter 140 of the Sign Code of The Town of Queensbury.
Applicant proposes installation of an internally lit 66.76 sq. ft, wall sign for"Pick Up" and to include the
Walmart Spark. belief requested for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs,
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief for signage in excess of the allowable limit for wall signs_
Section 140 Signs --munber ol'si gLis.
The applicant proposes a 12th sign at the front of the building where only one wall sign is allowed. The
Walmart store current structure received a sign variance allowing 11 sign. (SV 71-2003). Seven Signs
for the auto area and foe sig
ns at the front.
SEAR Type. Unlisted [ )Resolution I Action. Required for SE RI
Motion regarding Sign, Variance L-SST-8-2017 Walmart Kcal Estate Business 'frust based upon the
information and the analysis of the above supporting documentation provided by the applicant, this
Board finds that this will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact. So we give it a
Negative Declaration, Introduce€i by _ who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adopted this 20'11 day o F September 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
A public hearing was advertisod and held on Wednesday, September 20, 2017;
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 Codc and
Chapter 267 of NYS Town Law quid after discussion. and deliberation, we find as follows:
1. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or will a detriment to the
nearby properties be created by the granting of the requested sign variance? INSERT RESP
2.. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to
pursue, other than a sign variance? INSERT RESPONSF,
3. Is the requested sign variance substantial? INSERT RESPONSE
4. Will the proposed sign variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions
in the neighborhood or district? INSERT RESPONSE
S. Is the alleged difficulty self-created' INSERT RESPONSE
G. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance
would outweigh f would be outweighed b the resulting detriment to the health, safety and welfare of
the neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minimum necessatry;
Based on the above findings I make a MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY Sign Variance - V-8-2Q 17,
almart Real Estate Business Trust for the Walm art located at 891 State route 3, Introduced by
, who moved for its adoption, seconded by _— —
As per the resolution prepared by staff with the following.-
A, <insert conditions ! cotnments :
B. The variance appwval is valid for one (1) year from the date of approval; you may request an
extension of approval before the one (1) year time frame expires;
. If the property is located within the Adirondack Path, the approved variance is subject to review by
the Adirondack Park Agency (APA). The applicant is cautioned against taking any action until the
APA's review is completed;
D. Final approved plans in compliance with an approved variance inust be submitted to the Community
Development Department before any further review by the 'Coning Administrator or Building & codes
personnel'
E. Subsequent issuance of further permits, including sign permits are dependent on receipt of these final
plans;
F. Upon approval of the application; review and approval of final plans by the Community Development
Department the applicant can apply for a sign permit unless the proposed project requires review,
approval, or permit from the Town Planning Bowd and/or the Adirondack Park Agency, Lake George
Park Commission or other State agency or department.
Duly adopted this 0`h day of September 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Area Variance No.: 8-2017
Project Applicant: Mike Levis
Project Locatiao: 43 Martell road
Parcel History- P-SP-61-2017; P-FWW-5-2017
SEER Type: Type 11
Meeting Date: September 2.0,2017
Description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes reconstruction of the 576 sq. _ bome that was destroyed by fire this year, 2417. In addition,
applicant proposes construction of a 192 sq. ft. addition to the home. Relief requested from minitnum setback
requirements for shoreline restrictions to a wetland. Planning Board: Site Plan Review and Freshwater
Wetlands Permit are required for the disturbance of lard within 100 ft. of a regulated wetland.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests from minimum setback requirements for shoreline restrictions to a wetland.
179-3-440 Establishment of Districts--dimensional requirement RR 5A zoneJshoreline setback
The proposed home is to be 69.9 ft to the front wetland delination, 41.4 ft to the west, 48.1 ft to the north, and
3 S.0 ft to the east where a 75 ft setback is required.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 267 of Town Lam:
In making a determination, 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 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 pursue, other than art area variance. Feasible alternatives may be limited due to the lot
oonfiguration and the delineation of the wetland on the site—surrounding the previous horse site.
. Whether the requested area variance is substantial. The relief may be considered moderate relevant to
the code. The relief requested is 5.1 ft. to the front, 33.6 ft to the west, 26.9 to the north and 37 ft to the east.
4. 'Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated.
S. Whether the alleged difficulty was self created. The difficulty may be considered self created.
Staff coxnrncnts:
The applicant proposes to rebuild an existing 576 sq ft home that was destroyed by fire in 2017. The project
also includes the addition of a 192 sq ft area to the front of the home. The applicant has indicated a previous
addition on the rear of the home would not be rebuilt as it was not permitted in favor of constructing a new front
addition.
oil Zoning Board of Appeals — Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Qty nsbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
Town of(Laulsbury
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve I Disapprove P
DR411,
Applicant Name: Mike Lewis for Derek Swift
File Plumber: Z-AV-58-2017
Location: 43 Martell Road
Tax Map Number: 290.14-1-20
IBA Meeting Date; Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Mike Lewis for
Derek Swift. Applicant proposes reconstruction of the 576 sq. it. home that was destroyed by fire this year,
2017. In addition, applicant proposes construction of a 192 sq. ft. addition to the home. Relief requested from
minimum setback requirements for shoreline restrictions to a wetland. Planning Board: Site Plan review and
Freshwater Wetlands Permit are required for the disturbance of land within 100 ft. ofaregulated wetland.
Relief required:
The applicant requests from minimum setback requirements for shoreline restrictions to a wetland.
179-3-040 Establishment of Districts dimensional requirement RR 5A zonefshorchne setback
The proposed home is to be 69.9 ft to the front wetland delination, 41.4 ft to the west, 48.1 ft to the north, and
38,0 ft to the east where a 75 ft setback is required.
SEQR Type II—uo further review required;
A, public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, September 20, 2017;
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 Co do and Chapter 267
of NY$ Towyn Lave and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
PFR This' DRAFT PROVIDED B Y STAFF
1. There is 1 is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby
prop-Crties because
. Feasible aIternatives are _ and have been considered by the Board, are reasonable and have been
included to minimize the re uest OR are not possible.
3. The requested variance is 1 is not substantial because
4. There is f is 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
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh. approval) / would be outweighed b denial the resulting detriment to the health, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood or community;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the minirnum necessary;
& The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a)
b)
0 Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sant with this resolution,
BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARIANCE -
AV-58-2.017 Dike Lewis for Derek Swift, Introduced by , who moved for its adoption, sewnded by
Duly adopted this p°s day of September 2017 by the following vote:
AYES,
NOES'
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff (Votes
Use Variance No.: 3-2017
Project Applicant: Errol Silverberg
Project Location: 230 Lockhnrt Mountain Toad
Parcel History: Z-AV-.59-2017; P-SP-62-2017
SSE R Type: Type 11
Meeting hale: September 20, 2017
Deseription of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes construction of a 2,304 sq. ft. addition to the existing 8,400 sq, ft gavage_ Relief is required
as the construction of the addition to the private garage is on a parcel where a principal use (single-family
dwelling) does not exist. Additionally, an area variance is required as the structure is proposed to be in excess
of the maximum allowable square footage for a private garage. Planning Board. Site Plan Revie A required for
the expansion of a private garage.
SURVEY WAIVER APPROVED
Relief Required:
Section 171-5-020 Accessory Structure -Garage
The applicant proposes a 10,704 sq. ft. garage where 8440 sq. ft. is existing and 2,344 sq, ft. is the addition_
Garages are lirnited to 2,204 sq. ft. Gzrages are also considered accessary structures and may not be constructed
without a principal structure,
Criteria fnr considering a Use Variance according to Chapter 257 of Town Ln':
In making a determination, the board shall cansider:
1. Whether the applienat cannot realize a reasonable Murn, provided that return is substantial as
demonstrated by competent financial evidence. The applicant has indicated the property was purchase in
2008 for $200,000 and an additional $50,004 spent to clean property, $60,000 to rehabilitate the building and
property then $20,040 for pavement. The iuvestwent total is about $330,400 to date where the property and
building arca assessed at $388,004. The applicant has explained that the building and property use was
originally used as a farm in 1961. The applicant has indicated the building would not be compliant for residence
or eozrxzn=ia] usage due to code requirements. The applicant has also indicated the develop ent. of the
property for residential use would cost about $650,000 and the current improvements would cost about
150,000.
The,project site was previously granted a Use Variance {UV79-1995) for the operation of trailer manufacturing
business—utilizing the site and building for the operation. The applicant has not provided information that the
previous use variance cannot be supported on the site and realize a reasonable return.
2. Whether the alleged hardship relating to the property in question is unique, and does not apply to it
substantial portion of the district or neighborhood. The applicant has explained was the use from a
commercial chicken farm, there to an auto repair shop and to a trailer manufacturer to the current use as a private
garage.
The project as presented does not indicate the site has been marketed or evaluated for the allowed uses In the
RR-A zone.
3. That the requested Use Varianee, if granted will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The applicant has indicated the use is currently and will remain a low-key use and have no impact on the
surrounding neighborhood. The applicant has indicated a boat storage use is a permitted use in the zone under a
.special use permit and would be more intense for the area including movement of boats on a seasonal basis
winter storage and spring/summer pick up.
The applicant has identified one allowed use in the zone through special use permit but has not identified others
such as a single family dwelling where it would be similar to the existing neighborhood.
4. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. The difficulty may be considered self-created. The
applicant indicated they purchased the property as current trailer manufacture was relocating with the intent to
use the site for storage of cars. The Code requires a principle use to be on site before an accessory use. The
applicant had purchased and utilized the property without a compliance request—the applicant would have been
notified the proposed use would have required a use variance.
staff Comments•
The applicant proposes a 2,304 sq. fl. single story addition to aux existing 8,440 sq. ft. private garage. Project is
in RR-5 zone that does not list private garage as an allowed use. The garage is to be used for storage of classic
cars a private collection. The plans show the location of the addition and elevations. The board may request
additional inforrrration in regards to reasonable financial return related to the allowed uses in the zone.
Zoning Board of Appeals
omrnunity Development Department Staff Notes
ani ng Board of Appeals—Record of Resolatlon
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury,NY 12804 (518) 761-823 8
'FowlF dQ-LromI15bIIry
Use Variance Resolution To: Approve/ Disapprove
Applicant Name- Errol Silverberg
File Number- -IJV-3-2417
Location: 230 Lockhart Mountain Road
Tax Map Number. 252..-1-38.1
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application froze. Errol
Silverberg for a variance of Section(s) 179-3-044 and 179-5-02.0 of the Zoning Code of The Town of
Queensbury.
Applicant proposes construction of a 2,304 sq, 0. addition to the existing 8,444 sq. ft. garage. Relief is
required as the construction, of the addition to the private garage is on a parcel where a principaI use
(single family dwelling) does not exist. Additionally, an area vaziance is required as the structure is
proposed to be in excess of the maximum allowable square footage for a private garage. Planning Board:
Site Plan Review required for the expansion of a private garage.
SURVEY WAIVER APPROVED
Relief Required:
Section 179-5-020 Accessory Structure - Garage
The applicant proposes a 14,704 sq. ft. garage where 8,400 sq. ft, is existing and 2,304 sq. ft. is the
addition. Garages are limited to 2,240 sq. ft. Garages are also considered accessory structures and may
not be constructed without a principal structure.
The four (4) criteria usually associated with a Use Varianoe are:
L That the proposed improvernent is a public necessity in that it is required to render safe and
adequate service. It is our finding that:
2. That there are compelling reasons, economic and otherwise, for permitting the variance. It is our
finding that:
3.) Where the intrusion or burden an the community is minimal, the showing required by the utility
should be correspondingly reduced. It is oar finding that:
Based upon our findings move, we hereby determine that the applicant L HAS ] [ IFAS NOT J
demonstrated that the applicable zoning regulations and restrictions have caused unnecessary hardship.
[ (Note., use thefollowingonly when approving a use variance.) The Board finds that the variance under
consideration is the minimum necessary and adequate to address the unnecessary hardship proven by the
applicant and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health,
safety and welfare of the community. ]
Based upon all of the above, I move that this Board [ Approve ] [ Deny ] Use Variance -UV-;-2017,
Erroi Silverberg with the following conditions:
Duly adopted this 20 day of September 2017, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Z-Use Variance No. -2017 Errol Silverberg
Reference past Zorlon Board meeting minutes for the parcel
230 Lockhart Fountain Road.
Meeting Minutes- November 14, 1990 Use Variance No. 8 2-19 90 L. Rae Gillis
Meeting Minutes; October 25, 1991 Use Variance No. 79-1995 William Bunting
l♦R, I(ELLErYuell, I mean, if you gust looked at it, lag}caily, you`d put it where he's putting it.
MR. TURNER-Yes, right, just plain logic. Is rfpht. 0My. I'll open the public hearing on this ane. �+
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
IE MMMEJTf -f. �
Pp6LTC HEA1t1NG CLOSED
CORRESPORDENCE
warren County Planning Board returned saying "10D Guunty Impact'
NR. TURNER-Okay. Notion's in order,
IETTON TO APJM VE ARIEA VARIANCE NO. 90-19M WAML DOERS FVMA 0UEE oURY X ppQilyE CENTER,
introduced by Niehael Shea wino moved for its adoption" seconded by Susan Goetz:
The practical difffculty has been demonstrated, fff n the unique shape and $ire aP the lot, special
conditions apply to this lut that do not apply to athers in the neighborhood. The relief sought is
minimal in that the front yard setbatk would be 31 feet. Therefore, grantiDg 19 feet of variance an
frent yard setback. Further, that the granting of thfs variance Wkld not 6e fateriiTly detrIm@ntal
to the purpose of this OrMdfnbnce, and, further, that Public facilities would mot be adversely effected.
Duly adopted tris 14th day of November, 1990, by tha following rate:
AYES; Mrs. Goetz. Mr. Sicard, Hr, Shea, W. Kelley, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Turner
NOES: NONE
ABSENT,. Por. Carr
USE YARLUM NO. 92-1990 TYPE: UWSTEII Rlt--g L. W GILL[$ OVWi SAX ERST SIDE, LOCKHAR[
NDUNTJIT)l IRM M L!ASE SPXE IN SMALLER REMAINING STRUCTURE Fl]R USE AS LIMY INMSTlp[, ONE TE1YIIf[
GUILD$ 610 HOilSES, 711E O111ETt BUILDS IOAT TRAZLETi.9. TAX MP NO. 23�1-29.1r LOT SIZE: 13.74 ACHES
SECTION 14,020 C
SCOTT HATX, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT
MRS, OOETE-This was tabled. last nmeth, so that the applicant had time to get further information.
STAFF INPUT
Nates from Lee A. York, Sen14r Planner (attached)
MR. TURNER-Yau read them, the last time (referring to Staff Noter).
NRS. G4ETZ-1es, but ere they new 4nesT
MR. GORALSKI-Ma. 1 gust wanted you t4 be aware, you've gat nates, last time, If you'd like to read
them, again, you can. You dant have to,
M.R. zIJRBER-what new information do YDU have for 057
Mi. HATZ-I have some. here. [ apologize for not hetng able to gat It to you loaner. My mama 4s Scott
Hatz and I'm here on baitalf of Nr. Gillis, again. Mr. 61111s is also here to emswer any quastfens
you may have. E55entially, we wrtre trying to gather fliDr, tfft to show that Nr. Gillis could not
have a reasomabte return on the property, if used Pursuant to the Zoning, as ft applfas, now. You
have acme information Tri frmrt of you which, assemtially. states that, as y*ridential proparty, Witho-ut
the buildings, it would be worth, approinately, $42,004. 'Me coat to #alma darn the buildfngs wauld
he "2,004, Teaving a $10,000 reture. The cost, for residential purposes, with the buildings existing,
ie approximately $1U.0O1), again. There is a good deal of infomztien on the commercial aspects of
the property, if o9ed pursuant to the site Plan Review booing use$. Most of thew are deemed to be
inappropriate, conversion, renovation casts, especially for the large huildfng which is, due to its
make-up, 1t 15 a.tructurally sound, as Hilltop Construction and Nocard Beatty both indicate, but the
make-4p of the interiar of the building is such that 1t prohibits almost any use, whatsoever. The
smaller building might be ibTle t4 be used for a few purposes, Hilltop Caestructlon indicates that
the cast to renovate It, for those purposes, such as a greemhause or sinner use, would be exteocive.
In fact, for a greenhouse, it „could be more then the cast to build and bring in a new greenhouse.
So, based upon dolt informrtfam, it's aur opinion that he can't get a reasonable return if used or
sold to be used far those purposes. Additionally, he is able to get a reasonable return, at the Present
6 FxA�+7 `y-5 fffJ+
(Queensbury ZEA Matting 10125195)
existing five foot beck, they are in essence actually mnv� ng back { �
further from the lake, which wi11 benefit tha applicant, And not
be a detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the
community - Again, by limiting tha hei0t to 30 feet , and
limiting the expansion to 5S0 feet, we will not ba creating an
undesirable change in the naighboYhood, or a detriment to any
nearby properties. This appears to be the minimum relief { f ,
necessary to achieve the aPPlicant 's desire to increase their I
living Spaoe. There does not appear to be any other feasible
methods to ncoomp,lrish thio. This relief may appear to be
substantial , percentage wiser but here again , we are dealing with
an exisGin!;; structure, and the applicant is reducing tho setback
from the lake by the removal of the deck. As I indicated. this
would be the minimum relief necessary and adequate to protect the
tharaoter of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare
of the community,
Duly ndoptod this 25th day of October , 1915, by the following
vote:
AYES: Mr . Green, MT - Ford, Mr . Thomas, ter- Garvin
NOE$' NONE
ABSTAINED: Mr , Karpeles
ABSENT- MY . Mentor
USE VARIANCE No. 79-1195 TYPE: UNLISTED RR-5A CEA WILLIAM
EUNTTNG OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE LOCKHART MT. ROAD, BEHIND GILLIS
FARM APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CON57RUCT r1 11 FT. 8Y 30 FT , ADDITION
TO THE NORTH SIDE OF AN EEX1371NG 80A7 TRAILER MANUFACTURING
BUILDING, ALLOWED By USE VARIANCE NO. 82-1990 . SECTION 174-79
STATE$ THAT ANY NONCOt4FORMING USE MAY 8E INCREASED ONLY 8Y
VARIANCE GRANTED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, (WARREN COUNTY
PLANNING) 10/11195 TAX MAP NO, 23-1-29.1 LOT SIZE: 6.164
ACRES SECTION 179--79
WILLIAM BVNTZNG, PRG5ENT
MR. THOMAS"At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board,
held on the 11th day of October , 11195, the above application for
a Use Variance to construct a 20' x 17 ' addition to existing
buildinO. was reviewed, and tha following action wau taken.
Recommendation to: Return Commants: Removed from Agenda by
Town on October 10. -1995. " Signed by C. Powel South,
Chairperson.
MR. CARVIN-Why was it removed, Sue, from the Warren COurntY?
EN'S. CIPPERLY-Secauee it Wasn"t a Warren County , by eoaident this
month the secretary sant all the applications up to WarTen
County, and there were two of them in there, we had one last week
that was removed, also. There wexe rwo of them that didp't need
to be sent . So we withdrew them. Lockhart Kountain Rood isiti"t
County , and this property isn't within 50O feet of the lake or
Route 9L .
MR- CARVIN-Okay. is there anything significant that you'd care
to add to your aPllicotion Does the Board understand what the
applicant is requesting?
KR_ GREEK-I 've ,just gat one quemtion on the application, at least
on the Short ForMr It says 20 by 14 . On our notes here it says
30 by 17.
MR. BUNTxNG-Yes. We decided, x think after the original thing,
that 20 feet waanPt even really worth Putting up, aei 30 would be
- 6 -
(Oueensbur-y ZdA Meeting 10/2-5/95)
more feasible to us -
MP
s _MPR CARVIN-WhBt did we advertise
MR. THOMAS-The advertisement went out at 17 by 30.
Mit. GREEN-1 think it was just on the Short Form that it was 24 .
M5. CIPPERLY--That does need to be reviewed. because this zs an
Unlisted Rction.
MR, CARVIN-What Section are wo seeking relief of, sue, do You
know right off hand?
MR. THOMAS-179-7?.
MR. CARVIN-Okay. Thank You Okay. Any questi4ris of tha
applicant? Sua , do we have a copy of the cvlginal use vaTience?
ra there any stipulations that You know of , in that use VaTianoe?
MS. CIPPERL.Y-No. I did review it. It was JVSt fOr that OTiginal
building there. This is just an addition to that. The reason it
needs a Use VaTianoe is because it 's an expansicn of a
nonconforming Use for that zone, which is Rural Residential Five
Acre . In my review of it, in going out to the site, the
addltion'a goinV to be on the north side. it didn't seem like it
would be visible from the road. we haven't had any comment from
neighbors .
41R. GARVIN-Okay- It looked like there was two buildings out
there, about similar stTuvture?
MR . 9UNITZNG-The one next door , y69 . That one was, that was
Ori�;xnaliy four stories high. Thsy had _to remove the top three
floors of. that bui].dl.ng- That belongs to MT . Gillis.
Ms- CIPPEPLY-That was a OhLoicen farm that used to be a four story
chicken coop.
MFS. SUNT'ING-When he Bold the upper 10 acre lots , it wag in the
contract when he sold it to the guy that the tOP throe floors of
that building would be taken off , because it was quite large.
MR. Cr4RVIN-Okay, What specifically i5 the now addition going to
be used for?
MR_ BUNTING-Basically storage- The building was ( last wards)
when we purchased the spray booth. What wa figurad out, .in
putting this spraybooth inside the bLkilding, it was going to take
up so much space inside that we would need scrnv Placa to store
oux Giros and whoeis and our invenCory.
MR, CgRVIN-ao You have a sprayboOth CufrantZy2
MR. S4JNTINa-Yes, but it's not assembled. Zt's in a Pile, I
wasn't goring to put it up until , I 'ro not using a spraybo❑th at
the time, but I paint every night, aieht, nine, ton o'clock at
night, �mtting home. ,fust can'G paint during the day when guys
are working.
MP_ CARV+N-This is not a now occupation, or a new facet of Your
business?
MR. DUN71NG-5avan years I believe I 've been In this. going on
seven Years, doing the same thing I 've been doing.
MR, CARVIM-Okay- So You currently do have a spray area?
g
(Queensbury Z8A Meeting 10/25/95)
MR. BUNTING-Area, five inch sheet rock area, fire code sheet
rook.
MR. CARVIN-A1; right. Any +questions, gentlemen? Okay. I 'll
open u¢ the Public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
NOELLE; GRANGER
MRS. GRANGER-I hava a question. I 'm not apposed to the
applioation. My nsma is Noelle raranger , and we live on the
propo rtY a.djar-ant to MT . Bunting, and certainly the request is a
Talat,ivGly small one , I guess aur- concorn is that the upper
barn. which is the former. poultry farm, which was, the three
Upper floors were demolished, aaems to be golnu to be used for
boat storage or aamething to do with the boat business as well .
It seem to be, anyway, and I guess with addition to it,- we're
just wondering haw large the business is going to become. I
didn't know if Mr' , Otlnting could of'FeT any information about
that.
FSR- DUNTINO-The building that we have is gust a size that would
hold about the production that we hava now, and my future plans
are, if the business 9Tows in the next five like it has in the
;+asst five, I 'd like to lake move into an industrial park area and
move the business off the mountain, but for right now, I 'm .lust a
poor- kid trying to do it. So. I 'd like to build a house there
some day and ,lust live up theca actually -
MR. CARVIN-Okay. Ave both Ghaae struckures?
MR. BUNTING-The second poultry barn, the seoond building is not.
Qn my property. I have nothino to do with that asnymoi-e , and the
boat business in there. that's Flay Gillis ' son wQYUriv UP there.
MR. CARVIN-Okay . So we have two separate and distinct bu8Lnosses
up there?
MR, 8UNTING-Yes.
h}R. CARVIN-ORaY- because I saw the two busldings there and I
wasn't sure if they were the some.
F4R, BUKTXNG-Fight. I have nothing to do with what 's going on
over there .
MR- GRRVZN-Okay.
MRS, i3RANGER-AS a matter of fact , we were con#used, too. Go thaC
answers tl3a3t question.
MS. CIPPERLY- #hen that was a poultry barn, Was that used for boat,
storage?
MR. BUN71NQ-Tbo building that I'm in? The ather ons? YiMffi,
1hers'a always beer boats In thel'o, and Eddy Gillis, he buys
boats cheap that have been damaged or whatever and he flxas them
up on his own and sells them , aaiaally it 's like a hobby
business. It'e not really a full blown, hanging a nail up and a
sign.
MR - CARVIN-okay. I guess You're more of a manufacturing
business?
MR- 8UNTING-Yes .
MR. Co�RVIN-Gkay , and the other buildinri i-- quite literally
10 -
(Queensbury ?Bre tiseting 14125195)
storage?
MR. BUNTIJIG-Tk's a hobby , lice on the side. It's nak his full
tirna businoss-
MR - CARVIN-Okay
-
tiRS . GRq?4i+ iER-That was my question. Thanks. Thank yDU.
SSR. CARVIN-Sure . Any public commernt at all? Any correspondence,
Chr is?
MR. THOMAS-No carrespondonce.
M12 - CAPVIN-•Okay- No public comment? All right. Saein�; none,
hoaring none. I 'll close the public hearing-
PUBLIC WA€tING CLOSED
MR. CARVIN-Okay. Gentlemen, Your thoughts?
MR . THQMAF,-I 'm still trying to figure out if the addition Is
going to be higher than the existing building or not.
MR. 3UNTING-No. It's going to fallow the roof line. i put a 16
foot door in tho center of the building , as you can see there.
That roof line will fellow, the ridge will go right across the
back of the bwtlding- it will be the same heighL at that. and no
higher . So it would be like a "T" on the back of the building-
MR- THOMAS-That's the only thing I had.
MR, GARVIN-Any problem's with it. Chris?
Mfg. THOMAS-No, none v;hataoever .
MR . FORD-Cary you tell us about the Painting oReratlon now,
because you obviously are staring whakevgr You're going to be
staring in this new enclnsad area_
MR. BUN71NG-My paints are sterod in a Paint storage cabinet.
Mfg. FORD-Right. but you're going to use this expansion for
storage PurPeses, right?
MR. BUNTING-Yes.
MR . FORD-So that you can coYrskruot a special painting area?
MR. BQNTING-Ygs.
N.R. FORD-But you already have a special painting aree.
MR . BUNTING-Yes , but I purchased the spray booth. a legitimate
factory store bought spray bocLh-
MR . CARVIN-And how is that going to be vented-?
N.R. BUNTINGx-It'll be vented through the fan that comes with it
and the duct work and the filters . This is a legitimate printing
facility. It's an OSHq approved spray booth.
MS - GIPPFRL_Y-Y0s . Tho C'11 all have to be inspected #y the Fire
Marshal and the Building Inspectors also,
MR . FORD-Now are you going to aisnply rernovo your cur,xank. spraying
Querxnsbury ZEA Meeting 10125195)
MR, BUNTING-No. My Currant spraying area will', become what we
would tall a rigging area where the boat trailer gets the wheels
put on, Oe lights put on, the winch, the Jack , There'd be a
finish area . what we'd like to do now is bring the steel on the
road end of the building, where we 're storing all our whaels and
tires and stuff, and bring the steal in that end, and the
finished trailer woLild go out the other end. Right now we waste
so much time moving stuff back and forth ,end trying to work
around in there.
MR. KARPELES-I dQn 't have any problem with this. It looks like
he's got a lot of Land, and I don't see whore it's going to
bother anybody. It's a long Way away from anybody , and it looks
like a pratty ctuiet business. I have no trouble with it.
MR _ GRrHSN-My only original thought wan I thought the upper barn
was part of your property also, but since it 's not, I don't have
any concern at all . My orioina,l thought was , gee, you've got all
this space, you know}, what do you need another little space dawn
hare, but if that's not available to you, then I don't have any
problem at ail _ That was my only original thought. I don't have
any PToblem with the structure itsalf.
MFS_ CARVTN-Okay . Will this have any impact on Your business ,t-
all , as far as monetary , if you 6idn't get thi.r�
MF - BUNTING-•Instead of wors€in0 15 hour days, Y 'd ba working B or
9 hOLIT d8Ys. It would make things run a lot smoother . It'll be
an asset to us.
tiR-. GARVIN-Okay.
MR. KARPELES-I ,just have a question about this Paint SPray.ino.
You say that tFa, you can't spray during ,tfla day now' because the
fumes bother the people that work there'.
MR. SUNTING-The room that we apray in, it was at the end where
the cffici� is at, plus the doom opening and closing during the
day . with the fan on, okay. You couldn't get a good product out ,
You 'd have so much dirt in the fenders. These are LIPPer end
trailers, They've gat custom made. They've got to look nice .
So when averythirio's still at niOht , T paint at night.
MR_ KARPELES-So you 'll be able to paint in the day time when you
get this, with a legitimate spray booth, as You call it.
MR. BUNTING-Yes. I Can qo home ea7'ly. We don't paint every day,
either , but it will still be much better . Ira the business time
of the year , in the $Pring, wapve got to paint every day.
MR. FORD-While, I was looking at the site and the expansion, I
couldn't help but see your product, and it ie, it's good quality,
MR. CARVIN-Okay. I Covered everybody. I don't have a Problem
With it .
MOTION TO APPROVE 115E VARIANCE NO, 79-1995 W1S 616t$ QUNTING,
Tntrnduced by Fred Carvin who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Chris Thomas;
rho applicant proposes to construct a 17 by 30 addition to an
existing building whose height will not exceed the ourront roof
line of the existing building, and in order for the applicant to
proceed with this project , he needs relief 'From Section 17 9 79,
which indicates that nonconfvrmino uses can only be increased by
variance . This use, the original use of this Property was
pranted by Use Variance No . 82-1990, allowing the applicant to
manufacture boat trailers. I believe the applicant Kao
- 12 -
(Queensbury ZBA Meetinu 10/25/95)
demonstrated that a reasonable return cannot ba achieved due to
the current sot up of his spray booth operation. which limits his
hours of doino business, arc; does have an impact ori the quality
control and number of units that he can manufacture- By allowing
this addition, it would allow him to construct a higher qualitY
spraybooth, conforming with all the environmental conaerns that
might be assooiated with a spraaybooth. It would allow him to
operate a sinoothar operation. This situation is unique because
this use is allowed by variance. By the granting of this rail of,
we will not be altorine the essential character of the
r,eij�hborhood, and again, this hardship has bean self-created, but
again mitigated by the fact that the use has been granted by
vartanca, and oortainly this would be the minimum variance
necessary and adequate to address the unnecessary hardship proven
by Cha applicant, and at the same time praser-ve and Protect the
character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare
of the community. A rsvigwr of the Short Environmental Assessment
Form indicatas a negative declaration.
Duly adopted this 25th day of October , 7995, by the following
vote'
AYES: Mr, Karpales, Mr . Ford, Mr . Thomas, Mr . Green. Mr . Carvin
NOES: NONE
A65ENT Mr . Mentor
USE VARIANCE NO. 90-1995 TYPE= UNLISTED LI-1A GLENS FAILS
XFNNt�L CLU9 01JNFR: PAUL AND SALLY BRANDT rQRINTH ROAD, 2 MILES
EAST FROM EXIT 18 APPLICANT PROPOSES 70 LEASE A BUILDING IN A
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE FOR U$E " A KENNEL CLUB TRAINING AND
EDUCATIONAL CENTER. SECTION 179-26 DOES NOT ALLOW THIS USE, SO A
USE VARIANCE IS REQUIRED. (WARREN COUNTY PLANN7 NG) 10/11/95
TAX MAP NO. 126-1-60, 61 , 62 LOT SIZE: 2.04, b.83. 1 .97 ACRES
SECTION 171;�-26
MARK LEVACK p gEPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRE$ENT
MR . THOMAS-'At a meeting of the Warren Gou,nty Plannin8 Board,
held ars the 11th day of October 1.995, the above application for :
a Use Varlanoe to operate a kennel club with educational and
training courses , was reviewed and the foiLDwir,g action was
taROTe , Recommendation to: Return Comments: No action could be
taken since a majority vote could not be aahir--ved- " Signed by C.
Powel South, Chairperson.
MR. GA€2VIN-Do you want to read this letter in . To Whom It May
Conoarn, or will oo read that later?
MR . THOMAS-Which letter is that?
MR. CARVIN-That 's from Cathy Cloutier . I 've got it dated
$apternber 27th. It 's part of the application.
MR. THOMAS-There it is . A latter elated September 27 , 1995 , "To
Whom -It May. Concern: We are the Glens Fails Kennel Club, and we
have been in existence for 25 years as a not for profit
or0anization. iJe are currently attempting to become a Tax Exempt
organization . We are currently located on Bluebird Road, a
re�i,di rntial area in south Glens Falls, and have been there for
four (4) years. Before that u+a ware looatsd at St. 3oseph School
in Fort Edward. We are trying to find a permanant borne as our
present Location is too small and the demand for our service has
outgrown our current space. Berlowr you will find a list of what
our or!;anixation does and what our goals are. 1 ) we train and
educate both the public and their does throuoh Low cost training
classes discounted for senior Citizens and for those who really
13
Town of Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeols
Community Dev lopmeni Department Staff bates
Area Variaucc No— 59-2017
Projcct Applicant: Errol Silverberg
Project Location. 2-30 Lockhart Mon Road
Parcel History: Z-U -3-2017; P-SP- 2-2017
SEAR Type: Type 11
Meeting Date: September 20,2017
description of Proposed Project:
Applicant proposes construction of a 2,304 sq. ift. addition to the existing 5,400 sq. ft, garage. Use Variance is
required as the construction of the addition to the private garage is on a parcel where principal use (singie-
farmily dwelling) does not exist, Relief required as the structure is proposed to be in excess of the maximum
allowable square footage for a private garage and to have an, accessory wiibout a principle. Planning Board:
Site Plan Review required for the expansion of a private garage.
SURVEY WAIVER APPROVED
Relief ReqUireCi:
The applicant requests relief from an addition to a private garage i1R excess of the maximum all o�Yzble square
footage and for construction of an accessory structure without a principle.
Section 1.79-5-020 Accessory Structure -Garage
The appIicant proposes a 10.704 sq ft garage where 8400 sq ft is existing and 2,304 sq ft is the addition.
Garages are limited to 2,200 sq ft. Garages are also considered accessory structures and may not be constructed
without a principal structure.
Criteria for considering an Area Variance according to Chapter 2617 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 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 same method, feasible for the
applicant to PtrrsuC, other than an arca variance. Feasible alternatives may be considered limited as the
project is an addition to an existing private garage that is currently used for storage of classic cars. The
applicant has indicated the storage of the classic cars is the proposed use in the private garage.
. Whether the requested arca variance is substantial. The relief requested may be considered substantial
in regards to the code. Relief requested is 8,504 sq ft in excess.
d. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact ori the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Minor to no impact to the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood may be anticipated. The applicant has indicated the
stonnwater is managed on site by an underground storage area with overflow into an underground gravel
trench. The storage of stormwater is recycled for water usage on the site. The buildings have pea stone cave
trench areas.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was seI#'-created. The difficulty may be considered self created as the
applicant purchased the property as is that had a use variance for the manufacturing of trailers.
Staff cornments
The applicant proposes the construction of a 2,304 sq. ft. single story addition to an existing 8,400 sq. ft, private
garage. The garage exceeds the size allowed ,for private garage. The applicant has indicated the garage is used
for the storage of classic cars and will remain the same with the addition. The planus show the location of the
addition and elevations.
Zoning Board of Appeals
Community Development Department Staff Notes
Zoning Board of Appeals— record sof Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Queensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-5238
'Twji uFC c irr�raary
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve 1 Disapprove
Applicant Name; Errol Silverberg
File Number: -AV-59-2017
Location: 230 Lockhart Mountain Road
Tax Map Number: 252.-1-38.1
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2017
The ,Zoning Board of Appeals of the Tows, of Queensbury has received an application from Errol Silverberg.
Applicant proposes construction of a 2,304 sq. ft. addition to the existing 8,400 sq. ft. garage. Use Variance is
required as the construction of the addition to the private garage is on a parcel %vhere principal use (single-
family dwelling) does not exist. Relief required as the structure is proposed to be in excess of the maximum
allowable square rootage for a private garage and to have an accessory without a principle. Planning Board:
Site Plan Review required for the expansion of a private garage.
SURVEY WAIVER APPROVED
Relief Required:
The applicant requests relief from an addition to a private garage in excess of the maximum allowable square
footage and for const euetivn of an accessory structure without a principle,
Section 179-5-020 Accessory-structure -Garse
The applicant proposes a 10,704 sq ft garage where 8400 sq ft is existing and 2,304 sq #f is the addition.
Garages are limited to 2,200 sq ft. Garages are also considered accessory structures and may not be constructed
without a principal structure.
SEAR Type II—no further review required;
public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday, September 20, 2017;
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 Code and Chapter 267
ofNYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
PFIt TI-IF DRAFT PROVIDED BY STAFF
1. There is 1 is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor 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 re uest OR are not possible.
3. The requested variance is 1 is not substantial because
4. There is ! is. not an adverse impact on the physical or enviionmental oon.difions in the neighborhood or
district?
5. Is the alleged difficult is 1 is not self-created because
. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh aniproval) J would be outweighed by {denial) the resulting detr Hent. to the health, safety and
welfare of the neighborhood or cornmiinity;
7. The Board also finds that the variance request under consideration is the rninimum necessary;
S. The Board also proposes the following conditions:
a)
b) r
c) Adherence to the items outlined in the follow-up letter sent with this resolution,
BASED ON TIDE ABOVE FINDINGS I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE / DENY AREA VARJAN E
-A - 9-2017, Errol Silverberg, Introduced b , who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Duly adapted this 0"i day of September 2017 by the following vote.-
AYES:
ote:AYES:
NOES: