Loading...
1978-02-15 -2"1 ·1' Official Minutes of the QUEENS BURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS --- held February 15, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. There were present: Kirkham Cornwell, Chairman George Kurosaka Ted Turner Sjoerdje Richardson Charles Sicard Mather Reed Alfred Franco being members of the Board. Guests: George Liapes On a motion by Mr. Sicard, the minutes of the December 2l, 1977, minutes were approved. This was seconded by Mrs. Richardson. Carried. On a motion by Mr. Kurosaka, the minutes of the January l8, 1978, meeting will be approved at the March meeting, due to the length of the minutes. Mr. Turner seconded the motion. Carried. OLD BUSINESS: Variance #520 - R. J. Grasse C-3 Zone Northway Plaza (R6ute 9) (Warren County Planning Board) Mr. Kurosaka disqualified himself on this variance. Ordinance as it refers to maximum square footage for the business it advertises. Also to vary from the sign ordinance by locating the sign above the roof line. Mr. Cornwell stated that this has been the second hearing on this and he asked Mr. Liapes if this had been amended. Mr. Liapes stated that the only amendments to this is the fact that they made the sign alittle small~r. ~~~ Mr. Cornwell stated that the reason the Board was unable to act on "--' Variance # 520 Page2 ?'11 this variance at the last meeting was that there were not enough members present to allow Mr. Grasse a fair hearing. Mr. Platt and Mr. Grasse appeared before the Board. Mr. Platt stated that this is really the fourth time they have come before the Board on this matter. Mr. Platt stated that there has been a problem gètting a quorum. Mr. Cornwell stated that it won,tt be necessary for Mr. Platt to go over all the grounds and show all the displays unless helis asked to or if he has something new to tell the Board. Mr. Platt stated that it is the same argument as before, however, there are some new members of the Board who would not be ab!~~o vote on the variance unless they heard about it. Mr. Cornwell stated that he does want the new members to ask questions and to hear everything Mr~ P:latt. has ,tQ say. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Franco if he was familiar with the sign in question. Mr. Fra~ stated that he was not familiar with the sign in question. Mr. Cornwell stated that this sign is the sign directly south of the Dee's Card Shop sign in the Cale Development part of Montgomery Wards. It is cailed Northway Plaza. The applicant is applying for, well what it amountsto,is the applicant has the sign that is roughly 62 square feet. Mr. Cornwell stated that the earlier discussion was centered on both the size and the position of the sign. Mr. Cornwell stated that at this time the Board is only concerned with whether Mr. Platt can demonstrate the case for putting the sign above the roof line, which is not conforming Page 3 Variance # 520 ~ 98 with the new sign ordinance. Mr. Cornwell stated that the Dee's sign is a pre-existing sign and is above the roof line. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Grasse's present sign is roughly the same size and shape as Dee's. Mr. Cornwell stated that right now Mr. Grasse's sign is mounted in a legal position on the building. Mr. Cornwell stated that the sign is not shown there (indicating on drawing) in a legal position, you can see the green line is down below the roof line, that is where the sign is now. Mr. Platt statedtthat that is where the sign is now and they are requesting a variance to move the sign up 2'. Mr. Franco asked if the sign was in the same position as the orange line in the drawing right now. Mr. Platt stated that it was. Mr. Platt stated that he has located the sign on the sketch on the proposed location, not the actual location. Mr. Reed stated that he was not familiar with the sign and asked if it is the bottom or top of the sign, what are we looking for? Mr. Cornwell stated that the top of the sign is not allowed, in the new sign ordinance, to be above the roof line. The green line in the sketch is above the roof line. Mr. Cornwell stated that what Mr. Grasse is actually åsking"fdr' is to have his sign the same height as the Dee's sign. The Dee's sign would not be permitted under the new ordinance. Mr. Franco asked if the sign is located presently where the ora~ge is on the sketch. Mr. Platt replied no. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt to put a dotted line on the sketch to show where the present sign is located. Variance # 520 Page 4 d.. C¡'1 Mr. Platt stated that he guesses the various shapes and configurations, that he has drawn on the sketch is confusing people. Mr. Platt stated that the blue outline, the big outline here (pointing out on sketch), this was the previous Mr. Walt's sign, this is the area that the previous Mr. Walt's sign took up, which was 5' 9" high by 20' long. The old Mr. Walt's sign encompassed approximately ll5' square feet. Mr. Platt stated that the new Queensbury Sign Ordinance only allows a sign, this small size here (indicating on sketch), the orange outline, and that would be about approximately 30 square feet, alittle bit over 30 square feet. Mr. Platt stated that he was asking for the sign in this green outline(indicat- ing on sketch) which was going to be 62 square feet. Mr. Platt stated that he received a permit and erected the sign on the fascia of the build- ing but it is only, this is the roof line here(indicating on sketch), the law says that you can not raise the sign over the roof line so that it changes the appearance of the roof line. Mr. Platt stated that he did want to mention the reason for this is that on page 10, paragraph l4, refers to the part of the ordinance that he is requesting a variance for. Page lO, paragraph 14 of the Queensbury Sign ordinance states: "Signs which project above any roof ridge line or parapet line shall not be permitted. Signs which change the profile of the building shall not be permitted." Mr. Platt stated that the law is a good one and it was written up by the sign review com- mittee to avoid a situation like this, where a building would have its Page 5 3~ Variance # 520 roof line like this (indicating on sketch) and then sticking a sign up like this (indicating on sketch) so that it sticks up over the edge. Or conversely speaking, if you were looking at the building from this point (indicating on sketch) putting a sign here, something like that (indicating on sketch) and putting the bracing back here (indicating on sketch) which would alter the outline of the roof of the building. Mr. Platt stated that it ~,i~ pretty obvious that we are all in favor of that particular law, that part of the law. Mr. Platt stated that this is one of the worst ways to put up a sign, it is not eye appealing at all and is certainly one of the least desirable methods of hanging a sign. Mr. Platt stated that when the sign ordinance was written, Mrs. Richardson will probably agree with this, the writers of the ordinance put this law in for this particular reason, and it is a good part of the laws. Mr. Platt stated that,however,when it comes to this situation, this isn't that kind of a situation where you have a house that has been made over into a shop or store or little restaurant ,or whatever, this situation here the reason we are asking to raise the sign up 2' above the rid,ge line is for really two reasons. First of all for sight value, so that the sign lines up with Dee's sign here (indicating on sketch) which is also 4' high and is also l8~ wide and is also 72 square feet instead of 62. The second reason is if you remember the location of R. J. G's Hairstylist is, it is in the corner of the shopping plaza, and as the corner comes this way (indicating on sketch) it is Montgomery Wards on this end here Variance # 520 (indicating on sketch) and the beauty shop sign and area doesn't get very good exposure no matter where it is, especially if you are walking up to it, closer to it, this canopy here (indicating on sketch) extends out this way (indicating on sketch) and even if you look up you miss the sign so to speak and because it is located in the corner it is kind of a hard place to see and a difficult place to properly advertise which Page 6 36/ leads us to bring forth to this Board a request to raise the sign just 2' and help Mr. Grasse and his advertising problem. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt if it was his intention to have the sign be seen over the roof of Montgomery Wards when approaching the mall from the south. Mr. Platt stated that he was afraid not. Mr. Cornwell stated that 2' will show about half. Mr. Platt stated over the top. Mr. Sicard stated that you could see the edge of it. Mr.Cornwell stated that from up at Levi's and over by the Montgomery Wards big sign you can see the top of the sign. Mr. Platt stated that you can't see the advertising on the sign. Mr. Platt stated that in effect this was the reason for putting that in the ordinance and here we have an entirely different situation and if the Board addresses itself to page 23 of the sign ordinance concerning the approval of variances it seems to him that there is really more questions the Board faces concerning this variance. Mr. Platt reads from page 23 of the Queensbury Sign Ordinance, "where the variance would otherwise be in general harmony with restrictions established for the area," and he stated that he guesses everybody will agree that it is a shopping Page 7 ~3 0.) Variance # 520 plaza, it has many stores congregated closely together, and they do have many signs down there. Mr. Platt stated that if the Board granted this variance it would be in general harmony with the area. Mr. Platt read from page 23 of the sign ordinance, "and where it shall find that the request made is the minimum variance that will accomplish the necessary objectives intended," and he stated that he does feel that 2' is the best height over the roof line, he is not asking for 8' or 10' to keep in harmony with the other sign adjacent to it here, we are asking to ràise the sign for the minimum amount of 2'. Mr. Platt reads from page 23 of the sign ordinance,"and that the granting of the variance will be in general harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance and with the master plan of the Town of Queensbury, " and Mr. Platt stated that as you look at the other signs in the plaza, as you look at the general area here, he doesn't think he is outsxæ the intent of the ordinance or conflicting with the master plan of the Town of Queensbury. Mr. Platt read from page 23 of the sign ordinance, "and will not be otherwise injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare. " Mr. Platt stated that this is one of his signs that he has crews out everyday putting up and the signs are safe and he doesn't think they are injurious to the public welfare. Mr. Platt stated that as far as being injurious to the neighborhood, you are in an area that there is a number of signs, a lot of people come there, it is a big parking area, and he doesn't think it is injurious to the neighborhood. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt if he has addressed himself to the first Page 8 3 c ð3' Variance # 520 part of the variance, paragraph there, which is an important part, which requires that the variance, strict application of the ordinance would result in substantial difficulty of unnecessary hardship, deprives the owner of the sign reasonable use and that can not be a hardship, it has to be a hardship that is not suffered by all the other people who keep their signs below the parapet. Mr. Cornwell asked how many people there were keeping their signs down, how many of the stores? Mr. Platt stated that he can't really answer the question but he is sure that every- body else does, but he is thinking of Peter Harris and a few other stores. Mr. Cornwell stated that he thinks it is all but 3 or4. Mr. Platt stated that some of the other signs were put up before the ordinance was enacted so they are over the roof line. Mr. Cornwell stated that the majority of the signs are below the roof line. Mr. Platt replied that Mr. Corn- well was correct. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt how he answered that for his client. Mr. Platt stated that Mr. Grasse's place of business is located in the corner and it is very hard to see, as a matter of fact, driTing into the shopping center from down around the corner of Mont- gomery Wards from the entrance off Quaker Road or the entrance off Glen Street, you can't even see Mr. Grasse's business. Mr. Platt stated that if Mr. Grasse's business was located up on the other side of the Big N he wouldn't even consider getting a variance. Mr. Cornwell stated that most of the potential clients approaching from the Glen Streetarêastart out by looking down, so height isn't Page 9 do'-( Variance # 520 really a factor, is it? Mr. Platt stated that he has stated his case and he guesses that he can't really produce any answers for the situation, this is the way we see it and we are just asking for a variance for this ordinance. Mr. Platt stated that he is sure it doesn't make any difference, it is an attractive sign. Mr. Bodenwiser appeared before the Board. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he is the owner of some adjacent pro- perty and he is looking right at the area that they are talking about. Mr. Bodenwiser asked what is going to happen,when the sign ordinance is finally enforced at the end of the time lapse period, with Dee's, are they going to have to conform or go for a variance.or will their sign have to come down. Mr. Cornwell stated that the Dee's sign will have to come down. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that here the Board is suggesting '\ to put up a sign to conform with Dee's Card Shop and if the Board grants a variance to the beauty shop they no longer will have to conform, they have got the variance. Mr. Cornwell stated that Dee's sign will have to come down and the Board hasn't acted on Mr. Grasse's application yet. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Grasse is asking to have his sign up with Dee's as long as he can. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he understood that but what he is considering here is two factors. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that what he is looking at from his own place of business or from the standpoint of hardship on the basis of Dee's Card Shop, is Dee's Card Shop actually going to have to come down, because we are talking about conforming and if Dee's has got to come down at a later date then I am Variance # 520 Page lO 305 assuming that possibly the Board will pass on this, then will this variance if it is allowed, allow Mr. Grasse to keep his sign and have Dee's Card Shop sign come down. Mr. Cornwell stated that this variance if granted would probably have an expiration date of 1986. Mr. Bodenwiser asked if the sign, even though it would be conforming for the néxt 7 years, would have to be changed in 1986. Mr. Cornwell replied yes. Mrs. Richardson stated that the Board has to stipulate that Mr. Grasse will have to conform in 7 years. Mr. Bodenwiser asked if the Board didn't stipulate that Mr. Grasse's sign conform after 7 years, then could his sign stay up. Mrs. Richardson stated that she thought it could. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that then you have the problem with Dee's and çonformity no longer exist. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he looks right at the sign and he makes no objection to Dee.' s or the new sign proposed. The signs effect Mr. Bodenwiser not only as a businessman but also as a person that lives in the town. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that in relation to the corner Mr. Grass's business is located in, in fairness to the business, he thinks it is a hardship. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that even coming down the driveway, if Mr. Grasse put up the orange size sign (indicated on sketch), if you were within 50' of building going in that driveway, the sign is obliterate. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Grasse is not going to be that far down. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he is talking about if the Board makes Mr. Grasse go to that point. Mr. Cornwell stated that low but not that small. Variance # 520 Page II 30~ Mr. Grasse stated that it is the fact that it is as low as it is that it is obliterated by the canopy coming from Wards, which is about RO' out, which is very liable to collapse inasmuch as the water has been falling out of there all winter long. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that in his own personal opinion he does not object to the sign from his standpoint as a citizen but he doesn't think where as the other sign has to come down we are going to loose the con- formity again. Mr. Bodenwiser stated if both the signs had to come down it would be a different story. Mrs. Richardson stated that she thinks in all fairness to the sign committee the drawing Mr. Platt showed, what the sign committee wrote was for that and that (indicating on drawing), the sign committee had both of them on. Mrs. Richardson stated that she didn't think 2' up is going to make that much difference, she still thinks the sign will be obliterated until you get to a certain point in the parking lot. Mrs. Richardson stated that there are only 3 stores in the whole shopping plaza, Singer's, Thom McAn's,and Dee's, that have signs above the roof line. Mrs. Richardson stated that she didn't know totally how ~any stores are in the plaza but that all the other signs are conforming. Mr. Corn- well stated that there are 27 to 30 stores in the plaza. Mr. Turner read,"The Board of Appeals may vary or alter or adapt the strict application of any of the requirements of this ordinance in the case of exceptional physical conditions which applies here; whereby such strict application would result in substantial difficulty or unnecessary Page 12 301 Variance # 520 hardship that would deprive the owner of a sign or reasonable use of the same~' Mr. Cornwell stated that he agrees with that statement but he would like to know from Mr. Platt how much visibility he expects, does he expect the sign to be seen from around Montgomery Ward's, because as it is now as you drive down the center roadway from Route 9 you see the aign then you loose it and you don't see it again until you get about l50 yards from the sign? Mr. Cornwell stated that the sign is very visible in strength at about 90° of arc. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Grasse is going to have to place the sign even higher than 2' if he wants to be seen on the road and the other part of the parking lot. Mr. Turner stated that he didn't think Mr. Grasse wants to have his sign be seen on the other side of the road but that he wants to be in the same prospective as the sign adjacent to him. Mr. Platt stated that Mr. Turner was correct. Mr.. Cornwell stated that not all the signs can be seen from the road. Mr. Turner stated that most of the peoplé enter the plaza from Quaker Road and you can not see that sign, you have to get a third of the way up in front of Neisner's and then go back, it is obliterated, you can't see it, it is obscure. Mr. Reed stated that his only question is being 2' above the roof line and is it going to make a difference. Mr. Reed stated that he didn't think it would. Mr. Platt stated that placing the sign 2' above the roof line is not going to be a great help and Mr. Grasse is in a bad situation. Mr. Platt stated that it would be some help to raise the sign 2' above the Variance # 520 Page l3 '3 OJ roof line. Mr. Reed stated that Mr. Grasse just bought or rented a hole. Mr. Grasse stated that at $775.00 a month he doesn't feel as if he has rented a hole. Mr. Reed stated that he meant as far as the sign goes. Mr. Grasse stated that he has just spent $3,000.00 to decorate so he is not considering it as a hole. Mr. Reed stated that as far as the sign goes it is in a very tough spot. Mr. Grasse agreed with Mr. Reed. Mr. Cornwell asked the audience qf there was anyone in opposition or in favor of this variance. The Warren County Planning Board (November 10,1977) disapproved this variance. Their comment was by approving new signs it is conflicting with the new sign ordinance. The Queensbury Planning Board (November 2, 1977) approved this variance. Mr. Sicard made a motion that Variance # 520 be approved. Mr. Sicard stated that the Board went through this 3 or 4 times, we have had these people up here, we have heard pros and cons on this, and he thinks we are pretty much in agreement that this i! a hardship, inasmuch as; the motion would be carried that it complies with the plan of táking the signs down at the end of the moratorium, whatever time we agree on,and it isn't any higher than the adjacent sign of Dee's. Mr. Cornwell polled the Board. Mrs. Richardson, Mr. Franco, and Mr. Reed voted against'.appl1Qyal of this variance. Mr. Turner and Mr. Sicard voted for approval of this variance. Mr. Cornwell stated that there are 3 nos and ~ yeses and the motion is denied. Mr. Platt thanked the Board for their timEr and ct0l'ls::ideration. Page 14 Variance # 520 30'; Thè Board: RESOLVED: THE BOARD DENIED THIS VARIANCE. Variance # 533 - Texaco, Inc. C-3 Zone Route 9 at Exit 20 Northway (Warren County Planning Board) Mr. Cornwell asked the audience if there was anybody who is appearing on behalf of this application. No one appeared. This variance was tabled last month because no one appeared and Mr. Cornwell stated that he understood that no one appeared at the Planning Board on behalf of this variance. Mrs. Richardson made a motion that Variance # 533 be denied due to the lack of information. Mr. Kurosaka seconded the motion. Carried. The Board: RESOLVED: THE BOARD DENIED THIS VARIANCE FOR NON-APPEARANCE. NEW BUSINESS: Variance # 534 - Ray Supply Inc. C-3 Zone Upper Glen Street (Miller Hill) (Warren County Planning Board) Mr. George Goetz appeared on behalf of this application. Mr. George Goetz introduced Mr. John Goetz, President of Ray Supply. Mr. George Goetz is Vice-President of Ray Supply. Variance # 534 is to place a 50 square feet free standing sign at 0' setback in lieu of the required l5' setback. Location would be 190' from south entrance. Variance # 534 Page l5 ~D Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. George Goetz if he had a display to present to the Board. Mr. Goetz stated that he did have a display to show to the Board. "Practical difficulty" ii the grounds within the framework of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Ordinance for granting the application. In 1969 N~ York State Dept. of Transportation took approximately 1),000 square feet from front of the property for the widening of Route 9. Now existing is 22' of state land from Route 9 to fence bordering park- ing lot at Goetz-Lapham property(Ray Supply parking lot). Mr. Goetz stated that most of the Board is familiar with Ray Supply. Mr. Goetz stated that Ray Supply is now in their 41st year of 5usiness. Mr. Goetz stated that Ray Supply is a local firm and moved from the City of Glens Falls to the Town of Queensbury about 27 years ago. Mr. Goetz stated that at that time Ray Supply was the very first building on Route 9 in that location. Since then you have seen a tremendous development of buildings and signs. Mr. Goetz stated that the reason why Ray Supply has to come here in front of the Board is first of all, you may be familiar with my wife, Susan, who has been here in fromt of the Board several times representing the League of Women VoteFs, and she has harassed us considerably about our current noneonf6rming sign. Our present sign is nonconforming to the new Sign Ordinance that will take effect in 1986. Our present sign is oversized and to high. The Board can also see that the poles are rusting. It is not an attractive sign. Mr. Goetz stated that you also can't see Page 16 311 Variance # 534 the sign as you approach Ray Supply from the north because since the sign was put up there has been a tremendous growth of pine trees between the Ray Supply property and between the residential property north of Ray Supply. Mr. Goetz stated that he thou~ht the Ray Supply sign was going to be a pretty easy sign to conform. Mr. Goetz stated that Ray Supply has plenty of property and there is a lot of room between the front of their store and between Route 9. But in finding this out we found, 'we discovered that àeetback does!"not include ,state property. Mr. Goetz stated the location that they want to put the new Ray Supply sign in is about 25' from Route 9, however, unfortunately that is state property that was taken away from Ray Supply in 1969 when Route 9 was widened. It is because of that purpose that Mr. Goetz has to appear before the Board at all because otherwise the new 'sign is conforming all the way to the new Sign Ordinance. Mr. Goetz stated that to give the Board an idea to what the State did to Ray Supply, this is the property as it appeared in 1969 (showing Board photograph of property). It was very pretty. There were maple trees, beech trees and nice shubbery and Ray Supply maintained the hill which went down to Route 9. Mr. Goetz stated that now of course Ray Supply can't maintain the hill and the State is suppose to do it and they have annihilated the beautyof the land. Mr. Cornwell stated that as he see it Mr. Goetz's only problem that the Board can help him with is to ~tv~ him a setback variance, that is all Page l1 3/2 Variance # 534 you require. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Goetz has sweetened the offer- ing here alittle bit by offering to fix up your other signs and do some beautification which is not required, am I correct? Mr. Goetz stated that Ray Supply went to the Beautification Committee and told the Beautification Committee that they wanted to improve the looks of their building, they wanted it to be a better looking place for the Town of Queensbury and showed them the plans for their new sign and asked them for some recommendations. The Beautification Committee recommended that Ray Supply plant a maple tree or another beech tree or some type of tree like that and they also requested us to put some flowers kind of in the middle of our windows, in the center of the Ray Supply store. Mr. Goetz stated that they have agreed to do these things. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Goetz what his understanding of the duration of any variance that might be grantedcis. Mr. Goetz asked Mr. Cornwell what he meant by that. Mr. Cornwell stated that does Mr. Goetz under- stand that the sign would be subject to review in 1986 or that it would go on for the life of the property or any other duration. Mr. Goetz stated that their hardship is going to go on forever and forever. Mr. Goetz stated that he would like to make a difference between hardships. Mr. Goetz stated that the hardship that the Board saw just before he came in, is what he classifies as a self-imposed hardship. Mr. Goetz stated that when Ray Supply goes to put in a new store in Burlington or Albany, before we even find a location, we find out what are the local ordinances. - Varia,mce # 534 Page IB 313 and we always comply with the local ordinances. Mr. Goetz stated that if they find a location that isn't going to be suitable because of the lack of the sign that is that important at that time, then they don't take the location. Mr. Goetz stated that their hardship is a hardship that they had no control over. Mr. Goetz stated that Ray Supply was there long before anyone èlse was, long before the State decided to widen Route 9. We have to live with this hardship forever and ever. Mr. Goetz stated that Ray Supply is trying to conform but just because of the fact that the State took that land, they can't conform. Mr. Goetz stated that to do this investment¡when Ray Supply is just trying to be the nice gu~ would not be a good business decision to have a stipulation on it. Mr. Cornwell asked if the Board was to rolhthe clock back to where the road was in 19--, whenever the State took the land from Ray Supply, would the proposed location then qualify in all respect to the Sign Ordinance. Mr. Goetz stated that it would propose in all ways; all ways, shapes and forms. Mr. Sicard stated that just for the record, the last statement the Mr. Goetz made concerning the last incident the Board had here, when Mr. Grasse rented the beauty shop down there, the sign was up, the existing sign was up, the original sign was up, and after the lease was signed am so forth, it was my understanding that the previous tenant took the sign down. Mr. Sicard stated that had the Mr. Walt's sign been left up, the sign would have been much btgger than what Mr. Grasse'wanted, but it would Variance #534 Page 19 3/~ have been legal and all Mr. Grasse would have had to done is change the wording on the sign, but the original owner took the sign down whether by night or what it was. This caused the hardship, Mr. Grasse didn't buy the hardship. Mr. Sicard stated that the sign was there and Mr. Grasse just assumed he was going to use it and it is his understanding that the original tenant took the sign down. Mr. Goetz stated that he wasn't trying to knock Mr. Grasse but that he was just trying to use that as an example to clarify that there arè 2 types of hardship. Mr. Kurosaka stated that Ray Supply doesn't have to show hardship, just practical difficulty. Mr. Goetz stated that he is trying to show practical difficulty. Mr. Cornwell stated that he thinks the applicant is showing that practical difficulty was put upon by the State not by himself. Mr. Kurosaka stated that practical difficulty is the shape of his property. Mr. Cornwell stated that the State made it worse. Mr. Kurosaka stated that before the State stepped in, it was a nice piece of property, nice big front yard. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Goetz that when the State stepped in, it cut Ray Supply parking lot in half. Mr. Goetz stated that it took l3 square feet off our parking lot, it took l3,000. square feet from off our land and it lowered the size of our parking lot from around 35 cars to around 26. Mr. Goetz stated that if you put the sign 15' back from the fence, there is a big fence which separates the State land from the Ray Supply land, it would be in the middle of the parking lot and would last for about 5 minutes. Page 20 Variance # 534 3/6 Mr. Reed asked right where the person is standing in this photo. Mr. Goetz replied yes. Mr. Goetz stated that this is where he is stand- ing (indicating on photo) and he should be over here (indicating on photo) because he forgot about, he just marked off l5' from the fence but it actually has to be back further because of the overhang, the sign can't overhang the fence. Mr. Franco asked if the guardrail was the property line. Mr. Goetz stated that the guardrail was the property line. Mr. Kurosaka stated that the State took an awful lot of property when they widened Route 9. Mrs. Richardson asked about how much distance from this light (in- dicating on photo) to the guardrail, about 15'? Mr. Goetz asked from where. Mrs. Richardson pointed out the light she is referring to on photo. Mr. Goetz stated that this light here (indicating on photo) is way down at the other end, that is at the end of the fence and the fence runs from here (indicating on photo) up along. Mr. Goetz stated that there is a post right here (indicating on photo), this middle post which has a big flood light,and that post is coming down. Mrs. Richardson asked Mr. Goetz how far that post was from the guardrail. Mr. Goetz stated that the post is about 7' from the guardrail. Mr. Goetz stated that they are going to put it back about 7' so there will still be a foot between the edge of our sign and the guardrail, there is no way it will go over on State property. Mr. Franco asked where the existing flood light is going to go, is it Page 21 3/& Variance # 514 going to be incorporated with the sign? Mr. Goetz stated that that is right, it will be put on the edge of the sign, right here (indicating on photo). Mr. Franco stated that what Ray Supply is actually doing is removing the post that is there now supporting the flood light. Mr. Goetz stated that that was right and the pole that is holding up the sign is a 24 gu~epaint grip metal, which will be painted a rustic type of color, it will be a rustic type of sign. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Goetz if they are going to put the beams on the sign this time. Mr. Goetz stated that these beams are basically their trade signs. Mr. Kurosaka stated that that was what he means and he ~emembers the beams from the last sign. Mr. Goetz stated that the last sign they came in and the Board wouldn't allow the beams on the sign. Mrs. Richardson stated that she didn't mind the beams as long as they didn't flash. Mr. Goetz stated that the sign will be illuminated but there is not going to be any flashing arrows or anything. Mr. Kurosaka asked if the sign was going to be internally illuminated. Mr. Goetz stated that the sign was going to be internally illuminated. Mr. Reed asked if the sign was going to be plastic. Mr. Goetz stated that it would be a plastic sign. Mr. Goetz stated that they got the idea for this sign through a guide- book that the State-of New York put out where the types of signs that the State felt fit into the Adirondacks. Variance # 534 Page 22 3/7 Mr. Sicard stated that he and Mr. Goetz talked alittle bit about this sign today and he asked Mr. Goetz if he understood him to say that the wording on the small sign on the' bottom was going to change or is it going to remain the same~ Mr. Goetz stated that about 30 days out of the year they may have, and this again will be rustic and blend in with the sign, a sign which might say "Kodak Sale Today" or it might say "Scaners", there will be no prices on it, it will be done in good taste, and it will blend in with the sign. In fact to make this sign blend in correctly, it will cost us about $95.00 each, so we aren't going to have a lot of them. Mr. Cornwell asked if that picture was to scale or is the little sign going to be alittle bigger than that. Mr. Goetz stated that the little sign will be slightly bigger and this will be slightly smaller. Mrs. Richardson asked if the little sign is included in the total square footage, the whole sign. Mr. Goetz stated that it was, there is no way it will go over 50 square feet. Mr. Kurosaka stated that the little sign at the bottom is a temporary sign anyway, is that right, you are only going to take it on and off there a couple times a year or are you going to leave it up? Mr. Liapes stated the whole total sign, part of it would be changeable copy. Mr. Goetz replied that that is right. Mr. Bodenwiser appeared before the Board. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that Ray Supply is his adjacent neighbor andhe has always been impresäed by the way they maintain their property. Mr. Bodenwieer stated th~t he thinks this sign will enhance Ray Supply's property very much and it reflects on what is Variance # 534 Page 23 3/,6 going on down t he line. Mr. Bodenwiser stated the we did this with Pizza Htit and Long John Silver's and we got them to refrain from doing things that we didn't like in there, I am talking about the Town did, and he appreciates this very much and in appearance to what is there at the present time, he is very much in favor. Mr. Cornwell asked the Board if there was a motion for or agåinst this application. Mr. Cornwell stated that as he sees it here, the Board only has to make a motion that setback variance be granted tø the applicant because of the hardship imposed upon them by the Statedof New York,Department of Transportation with the stipulation that this will be not expiredbut'.will be reviewed when all other signs are reviewed in 1986. Warren County Planning Board recommended app'roval·IQf'~Þ~s\:y~ri¡éiE1,ç~. ;'ff'he Queensbury Planning Board approved this variance. They stated that the sign will have to conform at the time that the non-conforming signs,as of August l4, 1986,must conform. The Board recommends approval of this variance. Mr. Cornwell stated that thé sign: conforms. Mr. Gaetz stated that that is improperly written, that is the old one. Mr. Goetz stated that the Queensbury Planning Board did not put the stipulation on, they discussed that fact and said that it was ridiculous to do because Ray Supply is trying to conform and there is no way we can't conform. Mr. Liapes stated that that was his error. Mr. Cornwell stated that the sign is conforming already. Mr. Goetz stated that the Board is going to be beseiged at that Page 24 Variance # 534 3 11 time by all kinds of people coming in for a review. Mr. Kurosaka stated that it won't be a review, you know what it is going to be, they'll be non-conforming signs and the Board is going to have to conduct hearings on everyone of them. Mr. Goetz stated that is why the Queensbury Planning Board decided not to put that in, they thought they would be causing them- selves a hardship. Mr. Kurosaka stated that he didn't think the Board should put a stipu- lation on this variance. Mr. Kurosaka stated that this sign conforms in everywa:y except setback. Mr. Cornwell stated that on this particular situation where it is a geographical impossibility to change it, it is rather academic. Mr. Cornwell stated that they are not going to put him out of business in 1986. Mr. Kurosaka stated that if the Board is going to be talking about truly non-conforming as to size and shape and everything else, then we' are talking a~different ball game and that is when we should be stipulating. Mrs. Richardson stated that sh~ would like to commend Ray Supply for conforming 8 years before they have to. Mr. Kurosaka stated that he thought it was a very, very fine sign and that the previous sign wasn't that bad either. Mrs. Rièhardson made a motion to approve Variance # 534 for minimum reasonable use of property. Mr. Cornwell stated that he thinks the Board has to put in there that practical difficulty has been shown by the de.onstration of the bJ:::€ Variance # 534 Page 25 3~û l3,000. square feet having been appropriated by the State. Mr. Cornwell stated that he thinks it is important to put in the real reason that they are having problems. Mr. Franco seconded the motion. Carried. ., Mr. Goetz thanked the Board for their support and confidence and he assured them that they would do their best to uphold their plans. The Board: RESOLVED: THE BOARD GRANTED THIS VARIANCE. PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR HIGHWAY PURPOSES. MINIMUM REASONABLE USE OF PROPERTY. Special Permit #70 - Marty Mesick C-2 and C-3 Zones Aviation Road (Warren County Planning Board) Mr. Turner read the application for Special Useperm±t #70. Mr. Marty Mesick appeared before the Board. Mr. Cornwell stated that this property is in a C-2 and C-3 Zone, he believes the line goes through the middle, is that correct? Mr. Mesick stated that the line does gOi,through: the middle. Mr. CQrnwell stated that the automobile reparr shop is for special permüted usage in that area so the Board has to determine several questions. Special Use THE BOARD FINDS: 1. The use is one specifically enumerated in the district. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Mesick dQe~nft have to tell the Board that. 2. Such use will not be prejudicial to the character of the area. Mr. Cornwell stated that some members of the Board might have questions to ask Mr. Mesick about the character of his operation. Special Permit # 70 Mr. Kurosaka asked if this was the old town barn. Page 26 3:</ Mr. Mesick stated that it was. Mr. Kurosaka stated that Mr. Mesick would not be doing very much different than what the Town was doing. Mr. Mesick stated that the only thing different would be that there would be no trucks out- side. 3. The Board determines that there is appropriate provision for access facilities adequate for the estimated traffic from public streets and/or highways and that there are pedestrian walkways so as to insure public safety and to avoid traffic congestion. Mr. Cornwell stated that the Board would like to hear ali ttle bit more about Mr~, Me$if::k's pláns bnrthis,because ac~.~s~torAi±ation Road he doesn't believe is the Board's paraview, is it? Mr. Cornwell stated that access to Aviation Road is something that you would have to get a permit from the Department of Transportation to make a cut. Mr. Mesick stated that he believed that there was a penníttfor a cut on Aviation Road requested by Aviation Diner, they are asking for a right-of-way on that land. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Mesick if he was going to share it with Aviation Diner. Mr. Mesick stated that he doubted it, he wouldn't have any use for it, he is not going to have lOa vehicles going in and out of there everyday. 4. That there are full adequate parking areas and off-street loading spaces, in conformity with the proposed parking requirements of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Queensbury and all other related ordinances. Mr. Cornwell stated that he doesn't think this really applies. Special Permit # 70 5. That suitable planting Page 27 ~'1 ~2 Dr screening has been required as follows: Mr. Cornwell stated that there is no mention of that in here but some members of the Board may ask Mr. Mesick some questions about the screen- ing that is already there and whether he is going to disturb any of it. Mr. Kurosaka stated that it is an existing faèility and asked Mr. Mesick if he was going to have a short term lease. Mr. Mesick stated that he was going to have a short term lease. Mr. Cornwell asked how long is the lease. Mr. Mesick stated that the lease is for 6 months with an 8 month option. Mr. Reed asked what the activities were in each of the buildings. Mr. Mesick stated nothing at the moment. Mr. Reed asked Mr. Mesick what the activities will be. Mr. Mesick stated that the large building toward the new Aviation Road will not be used, the smaller building toward the old Aviation Road will be used. Mr. Turner asked Mr. Mesick if his entrance in will be from the old Aviation Road. Mr. Mesick stated that his entrance would be in from the old Aviation Road. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Mesick if he had any need for coming in from the side road. Mr. Mesick stated no, there is no call for it. Mrs. Richardson asked Mr. Mesick if that was the only entrance and exit they would use, old Aviation Road. Mr. Mesick replied yes. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Mesick's previous application to the Planning Board suggested that he might want to go on to',new AviatidnRQad, have you withdrawn on that? ~r. Mesick stated that if they do cut the right- Special Permit # 70 Page 2g 3~3 of-way through that lot we can also use that but at the moment we are going to have to use the old Aviation Road entrance. Mrs. Richardson stated that she doesn't understand, if who cuts and where is the cut, right-or-way? Mrs. Richardson stated that she strongly disapproves of that. Mr. Mesick stated that he guesses that the Aviation Diner is going to cut a right-of-way through there. Mrs. Richardson stated that the Aviation Diner has an exit-entrance where the light is. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Mesick if that what he is saying is that he would be using the Aviation Diner's cut. Mr. Mesick stated that their cut would be on the property that he is going to lease. Mrs. Richardson asked if the Aviation Diner is asking for another cut. Mr. Mesick stated that he believes so, that is what he understands. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Mesick if he was going to apply for a cut himself. Mr. Mesick stated that he didn't believe so, he is not going to be in there long enough. Mr. Franco stated that the property owner has to apply for the cut, not the leasee. Mrs. Richardson stated that she thinks it is a legitimate concern, it is on curve, it is a high speed, even though it is a curve, and you have thE~ light at Aviation Diner, and she would hate to see a cut just $JC~~h beyond the light. Mr.~n~~ stated that he doesn't think there would be another cut, the State wouldn't allow it. Mrs. Richardson stated that she doesn't assume things like that. Mr. Mesick stated that his shop was not going to be like Aviation Mall , one or ~o cars going in a day. Mrs. Richardson stated that even one or Page 29 Special Permit # 70 .3.2 Lf two is to dangerous for the traffic that is 'coming and going. Mrs. Richardson stated that she would strongly recommend that if Mr. Mes±~k is thinking of a cut that he ask Aviation Diner to use their exit where the light is, use a common entrance-exit. Mrs. Richardson asked Mr. Mesick if he adjoins the parking lot of Aviation Diner. Mr~ Mesick replied yes. Mrs. Richardson stated that Aviation Diner has an exit-entrance by a traffic light and she thinks it is the only safe entrance-exit into Aviation Diner and Mr~ Mesick's property. Mr. Cornwell stated that he doesn't think this matter concerns the Board here. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Mesick would have to get per- mission from the D.O. T. and they would be more concerned with the traffic light than this Board would. Mr. Kurosaka stated that the D.O.T. is more concerned about traffic safety than the Board will ever be. Mr. Cornwell stated that the Board might be concerned with what would happen with the slight screen of new trees that have been planted along there, does anybody know if they were put down by the Beautification Committee? Mr. Mesick stated that the trees are not on his property, they are on the other property line. Mr. Liapes stated that the trees were planted by the old gentleman that owned the property there for years. Mr. Cornwell stated the new trees, right along Aviation Road. Mr. Kurosaka stated that he had about 3 calls from neighbors and as far as he could tell they had no objections, they just wanted to know where it was, what was going on, and what buildings were effected. Page 30 8Decial Permit # 70 3~~ Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Mesick specifically states here this is for automobile service and repair, is it true that it is more specifical- ly body shop work? Mr. Mesick stated that it would be for botb,body shop and mechanical. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Mesick if everything would be done inside and would there be storage outdoors. Mr. Mesick stated that there would be no junk cars on the outside, these cars would be kept inside and he is not going to be doing any work on the outside. Mr. Cornwell stated that there is a tendency in some body shops to branch out and have alittle bit of a resvoir of sheet metal. Mr. Mesick stated that Mr. Cornwell is right, Mr. Me§ièk'8 father is a perfect example, he has a junkyard~. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Mesick is then aware of the Town of Queensbury's re- quirements for fencing junky(n~ds,·o!l'·aþplt±tlg"'f6r:a.. jµnkya:rrd 'permit if he:'were¿tb keep ears outdoors'. Mr. Reed asked Mr. Mesick where the signs would be, it is an awful long way from the road to even see a sign. Mr. Cornwell stated that the signs are conforming. Mr. Mesick asked Mr. Reed if he has seen the build- ing. Mr. Mesick stated that there are doors in the front of the building, the doors face Route 9 and you can put a conforming sign right over the doors, and you can see it from Route 9. Mr. Sicard asked if the signs are conforming. Mr. Mesick stated that the sign is going to conform, there is just going to be one sign on the front of the building. Warren County Planning B.8&rd recommended approval of this S~ecîal;':permit. The Town of Queensbury Planning Board recommended approval of this ~.'di;al "',permi t. Page 31 Special Permit # 70 3~ Mrs. Richardson asked Mr. Mesick that when he says signs, does he mean one freestanding and one wall. Mr. Liapes stated conforming signs. Mrs. Richardson stated that she knows but is wondering what exactly Mr. Mesick is going to put up. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Mesick is allow- ed anything that he wants as long as it conforms. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Mesick if he was going to have any gasoline sales here. Mr. Mesick replied no. Mr. Mesick stated that there is an old gasoline tank there but they are going to take it out this spring. Mr. Bodenwiser, Fire Marshall, stated that he sent a letter to the Town Board and to the Planning Board in regards to the tank underground, the owner of that property talked to me the other day and he says that if Mr. Mesick rents the building, that he will take the tanks out. Mr. Bodenwiser stated he would like it if it could possibly be brought into the wording of Special Permit # 70 and the Board accepts this special permit, that he would like to have a stipulation on these tanks. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that there is an agreement with the owner's attorney and the Town's attorney that because of the weather and what not, there is a 90 day extention beginning December 5th, based on the fact that the place was not being used at the present time and if and when they decided whether they are going to tear the buildings down and put something up, they will conform, he has this letter from Mr. O'Connor, Mr. O'Connor, Mr. Bren- nan and he wrote this agreement. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he just wants to make sure the owner is going to do what he says he is going to do. Special Permit # 70 Page 32 .3 .;L 7 Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he ,as Fire Marshall,has to grant Mr. Mesick a permit. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that a paint shop is based upon a gallon or more of paint a day. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that in a bOdy and fender shop, if you know much about it, he knows alittle about it only from his education, to use a gallon of paint you have to paint from g o'clock in the morning until midnight. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that it takes very little paint to paint a car and he doubts very much that they are going to paint that much. Mr. Cornwell stated that he doesn't believe, the enforcement of taking out the tank is a matter of enforcing any applicable fire regulations, and that this Board is only concerned here is granting a permit for a Permitted Special Use in a C-2 and C-3 zone. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that he thought it just should go on the record, the Board's consideration of variances or special use permits are based upon facts, and there have been some problems with other places stemming from this issue. Mr. Cornwell stated that he expects that before Mr. Mesick starts operating Mr. Bodenwiser will have to issue him á permit and before Mr. Mesick sta.rts his operation he will h~ve to pay the rent and that Mr. Mesick won't pay the rent to the owner unless he takes the tanks out so that Mr. Mesick can get his permit. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that that isn't the way it has worked in a couple instances but that he hopes that Mr. Cornwell is right. Mr. Bodenwiser stated that Mr. Mesick did work in another shop in town where they had violacions and he just wants to present the fact that they cleaned them up and took them away and th h e s op was left in Special Permit # 70 Page 33 ~~ presentable condition when they left that shop. Mr. Turner made a motion to grant Special UsePt!rmit # 70, to operate an automotive and repait shop in a C-2 and C-3 Zone. Mr. Sicard seconded the motion. Carried. The Board: RESOLVED: l. THE USE IS ONE SPECIFICALLY ENUMERATED IN THE DISTRICT. 2. SUCH USE WILL NOT BE PREJUDICIAL TO THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. 3. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT THERE IS APPROPRIATE PROVISION FOR ACCESS FACILITIES ADEQUATE FOR THE ESTIMATED TRAFFIC FROM PUBLIC STREETS AND/OR HIGHWAYS AND THAT THERE ARE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS SO AS TO INSURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND TO AVOID TRAFFIC CONGESTION. 4. THAT THERE ARE FULL ADEQUATE PARKING AREAS AND OFF=STREET LOADING SPACES, IN CONFÐRMITY WITH THE PROPOSED PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF QUEENSBURY AND ALL OTHER RELATED ORDINANCES. 5. THAT SUCH USE IS OF THE SAME GENERAL CHARACTER AS, OR WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO, THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT. Variance # 535 - Carswell Truck Center Inc. Carswell Motors and Tire Inc. 685 and 6~1 Upper Glen Street (Warren County Planning Board) C-2 Zone Mr. Kurosaka made a motion to table this variance. Mrs. Richardson seconded the motion. Carried. The Board: RESOLVED: TABLED. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 P.M. -?r/¿~~d; rptJ/~/~~{7 ,y -, I 9~- ? if -~~' / / C:.eA~~Cé/{ Gk· d;<",-é7~ ~ " 'r, f _______0____ Ak~L(~;J~l 7/f./AJ''K JLLydV¿~ N' A /l1{ . . , æ., i:;' · , ~~ ;;.. ""'.. , 1,1 " tD t\ '\ ' n ' ¡, ' , 1 l1'tv~~ 04í . , (, '/ Ii?' ~d~/7<'~ !2'¡J, c?Ui'j!L~ nlL_ ({'^-\. I,' ,I , ,- ;)) [71 .'-- , (,_:.::k.V<:V'cv"-_'t-u~ , " ,;J? JJh~ ~ê; , /ç?" ~S7~¿~ tØK ' /' ," - .-Q l ')',~ It r.. ....' c:......~ ':~ - ~ - ~--- --- .::$ '\'1£ 4 ~ \ S<-tb--.~" ~cQ aiU~,~t?~ 7 ç , ,5YLV.4.J /IVÆ:t- -~- - ~---...- ~~- - - ------~ .."-- ~-- -----~ --~ ---'--- -- ---,.-....,--~- --. , #j..¿)Æt,~~ ---¡ ~~~t;(L4Qµ~ .--;;,,- .. A. ~"4~~v \ ~f1~F·~ Minutes of the public hearing of the QUiENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS held February l5, 1978 at 7:30 P. M. There were peesent:, Kirkham Cornwell, Chairman Theodore Turner, Secretary George Kurosaka, Jr. Charles Sicard Sjoerdje Richardson Alfred Franco A. Mather Reed .., " being members of the Board. Motion by Sicard to approve minutes of December 21, 1977 meeting. Motion seconded by Richardson and carried. Motion by Kurosaka to table approval of minutes of January l8, 1978 meeting to give members time to read them. Motion seconded by Turner and ( carried. ~ OLD BUSINESS: Variance #520. R. J. Grasse - to vary from the sign ordinance on the property situated at Northway Plaza, Route 9 - C-3 Zone. George Kurosaka disqualified himself on this variance. Robert Platt from Signs of Progress was present with Mr. Grasse. The sign has been amended to a smaller conforming size. This is the fourth time this Variance has been before the Board. The only request before the Board at this meeting is to place top of sign 2 ft. above roof line. Board discussed hardship. The Board feels 2 ft. above roof line would not be much help in this location. Motion by Sicard that Variance #520 be approved. Motion seconded by Turner. Vote was Richardson, Franco and Reed against motion. Sicard and Turner for motion. Motion denied. -1.- The Board: RESOLVED: Variance #520 denied. .. Page 2 Variance #533. Texaco. Inc. (Littlefield & Boqdan. Attorneys) - ;1, to place a free-standing sign less than 15 ft. from front property line in a C-3 Zone on the property situated at Route 9, Exit 20 of Northway. Motion by Richardson that Board deny Variance #523 as no one has appeared for 2 meetings and due to lock of information. Motion seconded by Kurosaka and carried by unanimous decision of the Board. The Board: RESOLVED: Variance #533 denied as no one has appeared for 2 meetings and due to lack of information. NEW BUSINESS: Variance #534. Ray Supply Inc. - to place a 50 sq. ft. free- standing sign at zero ft. setback in lieu of the required 15 ft. in a C-3 Zone on the property situated at Upper Glen St. (Miller Hill). George Goetz, Vice-President and John Goetz, President of Ray Supply Inc. were present. George Goetz discussed this variance with the Board. He stated that 13,000 sq. ft. was taken by the State from front of property for widening of Route 9 in 1969. Now existing is 22 ft. of State land from Route 9 to fence bordering parking lot at Goetz-Lapham property (Ray Supply parking lot). The present sign is nonêonforming as it is oversize and too high. Present sign can not be seen from the north due to growth of pine trees. Proposed sign will be conforming excep~ for setback. Applicant has met with the Queensbury Beautification Committee and has offered to improve property by planting trees and flowers. Applicant stated that hardship was not self imposed as Ray Supply has been in this location for 27 years, and the State took l3,000 sq. ft. for widening of Route 9. Warren County Planning Board and Queensbury Planning Board recommended approval of this Variance. '- ........ Page 3 The Board: -~II- RESOLVED: Application for Variance #534 be approved as minimum reasonable use of property and as practical difficulty has been shown by the demonstration of 13,000 sq. ft. having been appropriated by the State. Motion to approve Variance #534 made by Richardson and seconded by Franco. Motion carried by unanimous decision of the Board. Special Permit #70. Martv Mesick - to operate an Automobile Service and Repair Shop in C-2 and C-3 Zones on the property situated at Aviation Road. Marty Mesick was present on this application. He stated that entrance to this repair shop will be from Old Aviation Road. He stated that body shop and mechanical repair work will be done in the building with no junk cars or work outside of the building. Conforming signs allowed. Applicant stated that there will be a sign on building over doors. Boards recommended approval. The Board: RESOLVED: Application for Special Permit 70 b~granted. Queensbury and Warren County Planning THE BOARD FINDS: 1, The use is one specifically enumerated in the district. 2. Such use will not be prejudicial to the character of the area. 3. The Board determines that there is appropriate provision for access facilities adequate for the estimated traffic from public streets and/or highways and that there are pedestrian walkways so as to insure public safety and to avoid traffic congestion. 4. That there are full adequate parking areas and off-street loading spaces, in conformity with the proposed parking requirements of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Queensbury and all other related ordinances. ~.. Page 4 That such use is of the same gener~l character as, or will not be injurious to, the surrounding neighborhood or district. Motion to grant this Special Use Permit made by Turner and 5. seconded by Sicard. Motion carried. Meeting ad~ourned 9:30 P. M. Dated Signed ~~ ~.;. !