Approval Resolution Zoning Board of Appeals—Record of Resolution
Town of Queensbury 742 Bay Road Qucensbury, NY 12804 (518) 761-8238
'fvwn of f Ziirr�xhury.
Area Variance Resolution To: Approve
Applicant Name: Paul Shambo 1I
File Number: PZ-0213-2016
Location: 31 Sullivan Road
Tax Map Number: 289.9-1-20
ZBA Meeting Date: Wednesday, August 24,2016
The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Queensbury has received an application from Paul Shambo, II.
Applicant proposes construction of a 3,024 sq. ft. residential addition. Relief requested from minimum setback
and floor area ratio requirements for the WR zoning district.
Relief Required:
The applicant requests the following relief: Relief requested from minimum setback and floor area ratio
requirements for the WR zoning district.
Section 179-3-040 Establishments of District Dimensional requirements.
The applicant proposes a 3024 sq. ft. residential addition that is to be located 27.8 ft. from the front properly
line where a 30 fl. setback is required. The project also includes increasing the floor area of the home where
0.23% is proposed and 22%is the maximum allowed. The current floor area is 2,684 sq. ft. and 3,948 sq. ft. is
proposed total 6,632 sq. i't. (includes a new garage, living space above and a living area connected to the
existing home.)
SEQR Type: 11 —no further review required;
A public hearing was advertised and held on Wednesday,August 24,2016;
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
of NYS Town Law and after discussion and deliberation, we find as follows:
l. There is not an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood nor a detriment to nearby properties
because this project is asking for a very slight increase in the zoning requirements.
2. Feasible alternatives could be considered but it would just take away from the utility, the benefit that the
owner is seeking from the project.
3. The requested variance is not substantial because it's within one percent of the floor area ratio and pretty
close to one percent of the setback requirement.
Page 1 of 2
4. There is not an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
5. The alleged difficulty is self-created but as has been mentioned a lot of other improvements have occurred
on this piece of property.
6. In addition the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting the requested variance would
outweigh (approval)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 FINDINGS, I MAKE,A MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE
PZ-021.3-2016 PAUL SHAMBO, II , Introduced by Harrison Freer, who moved for its adoption, seconded by
Michael McCabe:
Duly adopted this 241h day of August 2016 by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Urrico, Mr. Underwood, Mrs. Hayward,Mr. Freer, Mr. McCabe, Mr. Jackoski
NOES: Mr. Henkel
Page 2 of 2