1985-09-18
31
Regular monthly meeting of the Town of Queensbury Zoning Board
of Appeals held Wednesday, September 18, 1985 at 7:30 P.M.
Present: Mr. Behr, Mr. Griffin, Mrs. Goetz, Mr. Sicard, Mr.
Muller and newly appointed member Mr. Kelley
Absent: Charman Turner
In the absence of Mr. Turner, Mr. Sicard acted as Chairman.
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Sicard with the first
matter to be taken care of the approval of the minutes of the
August meeting.
Motion by Mr. Muller, seconded by Mrs. Goetz, all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the August 1985 meeting are hereby
approved subject to two corrections made on the original minutes
by the secretary of the Board.
Approved.
OLD BUSINESS:
VARIANCE NO. 1009 - Arthur J. Buckley
Attorney Robert Stewart representing Mr. & Mrs. Locke immediate
neighbors to one side came forward and mentioned that he felt that
the existing problems have now been solved. He said that the
engineer they spoke with suggested a few conditions. One being
that the two ditches come out and join onto Hillman Road. Another
being that the ditch have a constant 4% grade to Lake George and
that it have a 15% grade on the Locke side. He added that this
information was given to Mr. Schachner, attorney for the Buckleys,
and he seems to have no objections.
Mr. Schachner added that what Mr. Stewart said is correct. He
also added that. t,here would be no adverse affect on the neighbor-
hood character, on public facilities and that there seems to be
no feasible alternative and a practical difficulty has been
demonstrated.
Motion by Mr. Muller, seconded by Mr. Behr,all voting affirmatively,
it was
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. 1009 be apDroved for an area variance
the applicant has demonstrated a practical difficulty with the
narrow lot. The swale ditch be placed as nown on plans and also
connecting with Hillman Road. The proposed swale maintain
constant 4% grade along the side and the side where the Locke
residence is not to exceed a 15% grade when the building is
completed.
Approved.
INTERPRETATION NO. 30 - Interpretation of accessory use structures
(fences) within 50 ft. of .shoreline of Lake George by Guy
Middleton, Seelye Road, Warner Bay, Lake George, NY.
10
Page 2
Zoning Board
September, 1985
Attorney Robert Stewart was present representing Mr. & Mrs.
Robert Middleton. Mr. Stewart made reference to APA and their
restrictions on fencing. He said that this fence is 7 ft. high
and is a solid fence. He then showed photos of the fence to the
Board. He added that the fence blocks ·off view of the lake and
lake breezes.
Attorney Michael O'Conner was present representing Mr. Kaidas.
He mentioned that if this particular fence is considered a
structure then no one in the entire town will be able to fence
in his land. He said that Mr. Kaidas asked the Town and Mr. Dean
said it was OK. He then asked the APA and they had no problems.
He added that on the average the fence is only 6 ft. high.
Chairman Sicard suggested that this be forwarded to the Board
Attorney for his interpretation and Mrs. Goetz supported the
suggestion.
Public Hearing Opened.
Charles Adamson, Assembly Point spoke on the aesthetic value
this would have on this particular area.
Mr. O'Connor once again said to consider what affect this will
have upon the total town zoning ordinance.
Public Hearing closed.
Motion by Mr. Muller, seconded by Mr. Griffin, all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT Interpretation No. 30 be tabled for the purpose
of consulting with the Zoning Board Attorney regarding questions
involved.
Approved.
VARIANCE NO. 1017 - John G. Norton - to subdivide 1/69 acres for
two single family dwellings in Lakeshore Residential 1 Acre Zone.
Mr. Norton was represented by Attorney Michael O'Connor.
Mr. O'Connor stressed before beginning that this application is not for
docks only for what is shown on the plans before the Board. This is
a request to create two (2) nonconforming lots, this is a new
application with one (1) lot on the lake with the house to the middle
of the lot and garage to the rear and septic to the rear. Lot
number two (2) will have deeded rights to use the lake. He referred
the letter from Attorney Prime and the two existing dwellings and
the commercial use now on the property.
Mr. Behr questioned the closing of the road to certain people. Mr.
O'Connor said they have discussed this with the attorney for Mrs.
Heidorf.
Mr. Griffin asked if the proposed garage was for storage or for
if/
Page 3
Zoning Board
September, 1985
living space and Mr. O'Connor answered just storage and possibility
the storage of a boat or two.
Mr. O'Connor introduced Raymond Buckley a licensed Professional
Engineer. He said that he had examined the present structures
and didn't feel that the buildings were salvagable.
Attorney Bernice McPhillips, representing Mary Heidorf, said she
has meet with Mr. O'Connor and she feels that an agreement can be
reached and has no objection to the plans as submitted.
Attorney Austin Hoffman representing Dr. & Mrs. Kane and two other
residents of the area the names I did not hear. Mr. Hoffman
spoke about no hardship being proved, he made reference to the
dock issue. He submitted items to the Board for review, a map
showing the area and a survey of the area. He again made reference
to the dock issue and Attorney O'Connor interjected that there
was no application for docks and did not think this should be made
an issue at this time.
1-1r. O'Connor asked Mr. Buckley if the septic would be able to
comply and Mr. Buckley answered there would be no problem with it
complying.
A letter from Berton & Jacqueline Kennedy was read in opposition.
Mrs. Stutz, a neighbor presented a petition.
Lillian Paris concerned about her water
Charles Adamson questioned when the test holes were done. He
also questioned the easement allowing people to use the lake from
behind.
Attorney Hoffman again spoke about a self-created hardship. There
has been no practical difficulty shown.
Mrs. Davies said that she felt the property in the area would
increase in value with this plan.
Public Hearing Closed.
Warren County Planning Board approved.
Mr. Kelley mentioned that this would be an improvement over what
is presently there. The question before us is would this be
detrimental to the ordinance.
Motion by Mr. Kelley, seconded by Mr. Muller, it was
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. 1017 be approved. In lieu of what is
pre existing, this would be an improvement over what is there now.
It is not materially detrimental and the docks are not an issue
at this time. The practical difficulty is lot with three buildings
and from testimony they can renovate two of three existing buildings
but ilit is not feasible.
t¡~
Page 4
Zoning Board
Yes - Mr. Sicard, Mr. Muller and Mr. Kelley
No - Mr. Behr, Mr. Griffin and Mrs. Goetz
Variance denied.
VARIANCE NO. 1018 - Present Company-Upper Glen Street
Alan Cobb, represented Landmark Signs. He stated that basically
this is a problem after the fact. He explained the problem with
the sign and the possible misinformation from the building depart-
ment. He proposed that the variance be granted until the point
where all the other signs in the town are in compliance. In the
meantime if they have a store it would comply with, they would
remove it.
Mr. Griffin asked if this was one of their larger signs and he
said it was.
Public Hearing opened and closed.
Warren County Planning Board approved.
Motion by Mr. Behr, seconded by Mr. Griffin, all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. 1018 be approved due to the unfortunate
circumstances beyond the control of all parties, a temporary
variance is granted to last no longer than the August, 1986
compliance date with the understanding that should there be a use
found prior to that time a sign that conforms to the code would be
installed.
Approved.
VARIANCE NO. 1019 - Robert Buruchian - to construct garage/storage
area addition to north side of building at less than required
setback.
Public Hearing opened
Sally Chenier - concerned about traffic in and out.
Public Hearing closed.
Warren County Planning Board approved.
Motion by Mr. Muller, seconded by Mr. Sicard, all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. 1019 be approved. They have shown
practical difficulty in the sloping mountainous area which pro-
hibits construction anywhere else. This have a condition that it be
on the north end.
Approved.
Page 5
Zoning Board
D.,¢
4/10'
1-1
VARIANCE NO. 1020 - Joan M. Kubricky - to create 2 lots of 12
acres and 16 acres for residential use by family members. Lots
will not meet 42 acre required lot size in Land Conservation
42 Acre Zone.
Andrew McCormack represented the Kubricky family.
General question by all members was is this in the APA?
Mr. Dean answered that it was.
Mr. Griffin asked if the APA has to review and Mr. Dean said
they did.
Public Hearing opened and closed.
Warren C~ty Planning Board
Motion by Mr. Behr, seconded
affirmatively, it was
approved.
by Mr. Muller, all voting
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. l020 be approved. Having observed
and found the land cannot be used as zoned but can be used as
planned and would not be detrimental to the area. This would
probably be an improvement to the area. The breaking this
up into two parcels would be subject to APA approval. The
practical difficulty is the location of the property. Adjacent
properties all are about I acre.
Approved.
VARIANCE NO. 1021 - Harry E. Blackmon - construct garage at
15 ft. setbac k from rear lot line in lieu of required 20 ft.
in Lakeshore Residential I Acre Zone. Assembly Point.
Mr. Blackmon represented himself. He said this is the best spot
for this because it won't show.
Public Hearing Opened and closed.
Warren County Planning Board approved.
Motion by Mr. Griffin, seconded by Mr. Sicard, all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. 1021 be approved. The practical
difficulty is that he has to remove trees and to move it out
further would destroy the view of neighbors. This is a reasonable
request.
Approved.
11
VARIANCE NO. 1022 - Marcel J. Demers - to construct automobile
service and repair building with 15 ft. side setback in lieu
of required 30 ft. Plaze Commercial Zone.
Mr. Sicard asked if there were any changes from the last time
he was before the Board.
Mr. Demers said yes, it is smaller.
Public hearing opened and closed.
Warren County Planning Board approved.
Mr. Muller noted that the practical difficulty is the triangular
shape of the lot for a rectantular building.
Motion by Mr. Muller, seconded by Mr. Kelley, all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT Variance No. 1022 be approved. The practical
difficulty is the t~iangular shape of the property for the building
planned and this is less than what was approved previously.
Motion by Mr. Behr, seconded by Mr. Muller all voting
affirmatively, it was
RESOLVED THAT THE MEETING ADJOURN.....
~~
~hairman ~