Loading...
1987-07-15 3~4 QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS .~ Regular Meeting Held: Wednesday, July 15, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. Present: Theodore Turner, Chairman Jeffrey L. Kelley Charles O. Sicard Daniel S. Griffin Susan Goetz, Secretary Michael Muller Gustave Behr Mack A. Dean, Building and Codes Enforcement Officer R. Case Prime, Counsel Susan E. Davidsen, Stenographer, Planning and Zoning Department The meeting was called to order by Chairman Turner at 7:30 p.m. No action was taken on the minutes of June 17, 1987 as they were not completed. Chairman Turner stated that Use Variance No. 1234, Donn E. Gauger has been tabled by consent of the applicant until the September 1987 meeting. Also, Area Variance No. 1258, Gary R. LaVoy; this application has been withdrawn by consent of the applicant. OLD BUSINESS AREA VARIANCE NO. 1235 Keith W. Coe Mrs. Goetz stated that this application had been tabled at the June meeting to give counsel time to review the deed and legality of using the roadway as part of the lots area. Also, there was a need for confirmation of lot size of 30,000 square feet. The applicant was not present at this time. The application will be reviewed when Mr. Coe arrives at the meeting. 1 3)5 AREA VARIANCE NO. ~ I d.WJ. '-" Anne M. Parrott Mrs. Goetz read the application for the use of a seasonal camp as a year round residence on the property situated off of Big Bay Road in a Suburban Residential 30 zone. The application stated that there are 4 residences in the immediate area, all with similar setbacks that were all built prior to the current zoning regulation. The structure was originally built as a seasonal camp and it is felt that it is not economically feasible to occupy as a residential structure. The application stated that the proposed addition would be in virtually the same spot with no expansion of the front setback and only expansion to the side and rear of the building; all setbacks would be maintained. Mrs. Parrott stated that she would like to change the application at this time. To build it as proposed would cost approximately $10,000 which she had not realized at the time when the application was submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department. Now, instead of tearing the old building down, it will be rebuilt and there will be a new addition onto the old existing structure. Mrs. Parrott stated that the width of the deck would be 9 feet. Mrs. Goetz asked if it would be used as a rental unit. Mrs. Parrott said she will be living in the whole structure, year round. Mr. Behr asked where the septic system is located now. Mrs. Parrott said it is back behind the existing structure. Mr. Kelley stated that the applicant is only asking for minimum relief; setback is 29.6 ft,in lieu of the required 30 ft. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval. Mrs. Goetz stated that Warren County approval was based on the original application, not the changes that were made as of this meeting tonight by the applicant. Mr. Behr stated that all dimensions must be shown on the plot plan. Mr. Turner MOVED to TABLE Area Variance No. 1262, Anne M. Parrott. A new application is to be presented with dimensions (floor plan) and setbacks shown from the boundary line. This application is to be resubmitted to the Warren County Planning Board. Second by Mr. Sicard. Passed Unanimously. AREA VARIANCE NO. 1235 2 3)& Keith W. Coe '- The applicant had arrived. Mr. Coe referred to a map that showed setback dimensions, position of septic system, and the right of way. He stated he had talked with Mr. McCormack; there is 4,654 sq. ft. in the area. Mr. Behr asked what size the building would be. Mr. Coe said somewhere between 1,200 and 1,400 sq. ft. Mr. Behr was concerned about Mr. Coe coming in at a later date for another variance. Mr. Coe stated this would only be used as a summer home. The public hearing had been closed at the April 22, 1987 meeting. At the May 20, 1987 meeting, Chairman Turner stated that the Board may consider to entertain any comments from the audience at the next meeting (which is this July 1987 meeting). Mr. Turner asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to comment as to where the location of the perimeters of the building area that is shown on the drawing. Public Comments: Donald Beadleston, neighbor, asked the Board how Mr. Coe could build without showing the dimensions. Mr. Turner stated that he had to build within the perimeter and that if he violates setbacks, he has to come back for a variance. A letter dated July 7, 1987 from Donald E. and Colleen J. Beadleston, Birdsall Road, was read into the record as objecting to Mr. Coe's proposal. The letter also represented the feelings of surrounding homeowners. It expressed concerns in regards to the over-crowded conditions that already exist and the effects on the Lake itself. They expressed concern about conforming to zoning regulations required in regards to septic tank, well, and footage required from neighboring properties. Mr. Behr asked what the rectangle represented on the map. Mr. Coe stated it is the perimeter line drawn for turn around. Surveyors VanDusen and Steves had drawn the perimeter line. Mr. Prime stated that it represents an easement that was in the neighbors deeds for turn around. It represents unbuildable area on this particular lot. Mr. Prime stated the application should have a notation on it that the applicant is asking for a variance to permit a lesser frontage than required since this would be a summer residence that does not front on a public road. Mr. Kelley MOVED APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1235, Keith W. Coe based on evidence in the application which conforms to the ordinance as far as the 30,000 square feet. Practical difficulty is in terms of not being on a town road. All neighbors have the same problem - no town road in the immediate area. One-hundred feet of frontage is required for the front; this has 59.5 square feet. This is not detrimental to the ordinance. Several homes are situated in a row that all seem to have similar frontages. Mr. Behr asked Mr. Coe if he was planning on building a deck. Mr. Coe said yes. Mr. Dean remarked that if he was going to build a deck in the future he would still be required to meet setback requirements. Second by Mr. Sicard. 3 3~l Passed. 6 yes (Turner, Sicard, Goetz, Griffin, Behr, Kelley, 1 abstain (Muller). '- NEW BUSINESS AREA VARIANCE NO. 1264 William J. Desbiens Mrs. Goetz read the application to construct a single family residence with a front setback of 29.5 feet in lieu of the required 30 feet on the property situated on Eldridge Road in a Suburban Residential 20 zone. Mr. Turner and the Board Members agreed that there was not a problem with this variance request as the applicant is asking for minimum relief. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval. Mr. Griffin MOVED APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1264, William J. Desbiens. The applicant is asking for a minimum relief of 6 inches. This is an unintentional mistake in the location of the house. Second by Mr. Turner Passed Unanimously. AREA VARIANCE NO. 1265 Montcalm Restaurant Mrs. Goetz read the application to construct a canopy addition (19 ft. by 25 ft. ~ 6 in.) to the front of the preexisting nonconforming restaurant at a 20 ft. front setback in lieu of the required 50 ft. on the property situated on the west side of Lake George Road in a Highway Commerical 15 zone. Mrs. Goetz read an explanation attached to the application. It read as follows: 4 j~<6 "Although this variance seeks to expand a nonconforming use, the actual construction is minimal. There is a slight proposed addition to the existing planter, but this addition -- is away from the road and does not increase the preexisting nonconformance. The canopy which is proposed would extend to 20 feet from the right of way but nearly 30 feet from the traveled portion of Route 9. Included in the right of way is a brick island area owned by the state which acts as a buffer and increases the setback to the roadway itself. The canopy would be constructed of wood, exposed logs, a tongue and groove ceiling and shingles in keeping with the current style of the exterior and would measure approximately 19 ft. by 25 ft. ~ 6 in. As with other canopies in the area it would permit customers to enter and exit their cars without being exposed to the often harsh elements. The variance is minimal because the canopy does not have an enclosure or the same effect of a building setback. There is a practical difficulty because the building is at less than allowable setback at the present time and there are no feasible alternatives to the location of the entrance to the restaurant." Mr. Turner asked Mr. O'Hara, attorney, how much land the state took. Mr. O'Hara stated between 8 and 10 feet; the restaurant was built around 1940 - 1950. Mr. Prime asked if their sign will conform to the Sign Ordinance. Mr. O'Hara said the sign will conform and if the variance is approved, construction of the sign and canopy addition will be in about 3 weeks. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval. Mr. Muller MOVED APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1265, Montcalm Restaurant as practical difficulty is demonstrated by the current location of the building and the buffer at 20 ft. setback. There is no adverse impact on this property or surrounding properties. Second by Mr. Turner. Passed Unanimously. AREA VARIANCE NO. 1266 Yvon Gregoire Mrs. Goetz read the application for a one family home constructed 2 ft. less than the required 30 ft. setback from the road right of way on the property situated at lot 15, Pinion Pine in a Suburban Residential 20 zone. Yvon Gregoire, contractor, stated that this was an honest mistake. He was asking only for minimum relief. 5 3~cr '- Mr. Dean stated that the reason for this problem was due to new road construction along with the construction of a new building. Mr. Dean said there are over .200 building permits issued for this year (1987) so far; there is a lot of work and Building Department personnel are not liscensed surveyors. The mistake is an honest mistake by the constractor. Public Hearing Opened: no comment Public Hearing Closed. Mr. Sicard MOVED APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1266, Yvon Gregoire. Practical difficulty is that this was an honest mistake by the contractor in placing the building on the lot. This is minimum relief of 2 feet. Second by Mr. Kelley. Passed. Unanimously. USE VARIANCE NO. 1267 Wilson S. Mathias Mrs. Goetz read the application for proposed professional offices (law offices) on the property situated at 525 Bay Road in an Urban Residential 5 zone. The application stated there is increased traffic on Bay Road which has rendered the property unsaleable as a residence. Mrs. Goetz read a statement from Loren and Joan Blackburn, owners of the property at 525 Bay Road. They would like to sell their property to Mr. Mathias and the letter explains their hardship and unique situation. This statement is appended to the minutes; see next following pages. Mr. Mathias stated that if granted this variance for the use requested, it would have less of an impact upon the neighborhood than what use is actually permitted in this zone; a duplex by site plan review. Mr. Mathias stated that the proposed used would be consistent with what is going on in the immediate area such as that of the Hiland Park Planned Unit Development which will be located in back of Adirondack Community College. Board Members were concerned about the parking situation. Mr. Behr asked how many persons would be employeed by him. Mr. Mathias stated that there would be an assistant to him and four additional people. Mr. Mathias said the garage would not be altered. There is parking for 2 cars in the garage. Mrs. Goetz expressed her concern about blacktop coverage on the lot. Mrs. Goetz said she would still like to see the building remain looking like a house. Mr. Mathias stated that he has no proposals for additions; maybe to the back of the house in the future. 6 p : UWN ~~:_u~~ì:;.~~_~~f-_ D~~d ~ lri.\ fi,¡ t JUL 1 J 1987 ¿;"""Blackburn ý¡1-ðè- <#-/ z. (p 1 -..... Enterprises ¡¡,.i,~¡.~NING &. ZCNIì:'4(:; 1'.:'r:?ARTMENT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This letter will serve to both introduce me and to outline what for us has become a most disturbing situation. My name is Loren Blackburn. I reside with my Wife Joan, in the Town of Queensbury at 525 Bay Road, two doors south of Haviland Road. We have lived at this address for twenty years and while doing so, raised four children, three of which are grown and gone with one college student remaining.I'm' now semi-retired and act as marketing services consultant for a local industrial concern and I'm also actively involved as a painter. Now as to the problem. Last year, my wife and I decided to sell our beautiful 2400 square foot house and try to find siomething smaller, more compact and easier to maintain, etc. For approximately one and a half years now, we've tried in vain to sell this property on a purely residential basis. We've had a great number of people view the house and grounds and the majority have been most impressed. However, all parties have been reluctant to buy because of the extremely high traffic count, according to real estate agents reporting back. As difficult as it is for us to accept this, in all fairness I cannot argue with their reasoning. The traffic here has in- creased dramatically in recent years due to the extensive development that has occurred in the upper Bay Road area. Beside this, we are positive that if the current proposed development plans presently being considered for this area are put into play, it will in no way improve our position. I sincerely believe we are now in a valid hardship situation. For us to sell this property as purely residential will be next to impossible. Then again, we have a moral problem here to address. In all honesty, it would be wrong and most unfair for us to sell and pass this problem on to an unsuspecting party unfamiliar with this area. We feel that this property is ideally suited for a low profile, low traffic professional enterprise. It would best house or provide office space for a doctor, lawyer, real estate office, etc. With this in mind we respectfully request that all responsible or involvŒd review boards grant us the clearance to do this. Blackburn Enterprises. 525 Bay Road. Glens Falls. New York 12801 (518).793-9705 bA '-- Blackburn Enterprises i uw... Ut- Uul;.;i:;.\i~bUH þ\ œyr T~\~f\W¡~~ ¡-~ · ,JJEt~~~L~ ..:J Je in t ~\"l t:,~~ .e·· '~ì;~¡ ~ ! )¡~L::) J U L 1) 1987 (,.. "¿.ANNING .?..: ;ZON¡:'·!( nr:~JAHl"Mt:H'¡'" As one who has always been deeply involved in both promoting and supporting the community as a whole, I hope you will be inclined to help me in kind and consider this request in the best possible light. I thank you. Sincerely, ~ /? ~ ~.--- /t:l? ~ ~~Blackburn ·~i1 '-- Blackburn Enterprises, 525 Bay Road. Glens Falls, New York 12801 (518) J93-9705 013 ~?o '....... Mrs. Goetz expressed her concern regarding the upkeep of the building and having too many vehicles in view from the road. She said that the next door yard is a mess; there are a lot of vehicles on the property. Mrs. Goetz said she doesn't want this establishment to be mess also. Mrs. Blackburn stated that approximately 6 cars could be parked at an angle in the front driveway without detracting from the front of the house. Mr. Mathias said parking would be available to the right of the house. He said that a survey is being conducted for the parking situation. Mr. Turner asked about the use of the garage; the house is 2,400 sq. ft. Mr. Mathias said the upstairs garage portion would be used by his abstract company. Mr. Turner asked what Mr. Mathias intentions were in the future; the use of the property such as realtors. He asked Mr. Mathias how intense is the use of the property going to become. Mr. Mathias stated he had no anticipations of any large expansion of the office. Mr. Kelley asked where else he had looked in the area for office space. Mr. Mathias stated he really hadn't looked anywhere else. The hardship is more on the owners part, not his. Mr. Mathias said he forsees big changes in the Bay Road area. He reiterated that using this house for office space would have less of an impact than if used as zoned; a duplex with site plan review. Mr. Griffin asked how long the house has been on the market. Mr. Blackburn stated for more than a year and a half. He said proposed buyers didn't like the traffic situation on Bay Road. Mr. Turner asked the Blackburns if they had gone through a realtor to try to sell the house or tried to sell the house themselves. Mr. Blackburn stated they had gone through a realtor. Mr. Turner asked if parking could go in back of the house. Mr. Mathias said he would consider it if that's what has to be done for approval but stated he had not originally intended to do this since he would have to pave it. Paving out back would be expensive. Mr. Dean expressed his concern in regards to reserving enough property if failure of the septic sytem were to result in the future. \Nt( Lynn Potenza, ~ Real Estate, stated that she represents the buyer of the property. She had shown this house as a single family residence but because of the traffic situation on Bay Road, people expressed strong feelings that they would rather consider other areas with no traffic problems. Mr. Mathias stated that if the house was used as a duplex, a potential buyer would get the same contract price as offered to him. Mr. Muller asked if the garage has separate facilities. Ms. Potenza said no, you get to the upstairs part of the garage through the den entrance. Mr. Behr asked about the trees in front of the house; would they remain as is? Mr. Blackburn said that if the driveway was to be expanded on the left side, one apple tree may have to come down. Public Hearing Opened: Bill Britton, adjoining property owner, stated he was in favor of this proposal. Traffic is a great problem on Bay Road. There have been many 7 ?'( "- accidents at the intersection of Bay and Haviland Road due increased traffic flow and development on Bay Road. Dave Stanton, adjoining property owner, stated he had no objections to the proposal except that his backyard would be directly next to the rear parking lot plan proposed to be situated in the back of the office. Mr. Stanton stated he would like to have in the motion, if approved, with the condition that Mr. Mathias put some kind of natural screening between them so he wouldn't have to look at parked cars all day long. Mr. Mathias said he would agree to the condition at his expense. Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval. Mr. Muller MOVED APPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1267, Wilson S. Mathias with CONDITIONS. The applicant and the owners of the property have demonstrated a hardship on the property. There is increased traffic; making it difficult to sell for a residence. They have demonstrated that the lot is unique; 3 lone pieces of residential property surrounded by the college and town offices. Development on Bay Road is being made into a mix of duplexes, offices, professional offices. Minimal type of relief if used as residence combined with professional office would be allowable with site plan review. The condition is that any expansion of parking must be in the back. Some type of natural screening will be arranged with neighbor, Mr. Stanton. Existing parking can be used. Second by Mr. Behr. Passed Unanimously. AREA VARIANCE NO. 1268 Rev. L. R. Larson Mrs. Goetz read the application for construction of a single family dwelling (1,200 sq. ft) on the property situated on lots 9 and 10, West Mt. Road and Bronk Drive (15,000 sq. ft.) in a Suburban Residential 20 zone. Mr. Tellier introduced himself as he represented Rev. Larson. He said this is in an approved subdivision. There is a building on lot 10 and they now want to build on lot 9. Mr. Turner asked how a building permit was issued for lot 10 without a variance. Mr. Dean stated that a building permit for lot 10 was issued based on the fact that these were adjoining lots with the same ownership. This is per Article 8.010 and 8.011 of the Zoning Ordinance. Public Hearing Opened: Leon Steves, neigboring property owner, opposed to the project. 8 ?~ ).- Walt Wicks, adjacent property owner said that he opposed. '- Warren County Planning Board recommended approval. Mr. Muller MOVED to TABLE Area Variance No. 1268, Rev. L. R. Larson to see what other written proofs are available as to building permit information and variance number 802. Second by Mr. Griffin. The public hearing was left opened as this application was tabled. Passed Unanimously. AREA VARIANCE NO. 1269 Ann C. Murphy Mrs. Goetz read the application to tear down an old structure (summer camp) and replace with a newly constructed single family year round residence. The new structure would be built in a different location on the property with nonconforming setbacks on the property situated on a private road off of Big Bay Road in a Suburban Residential 30 zone. The application stated that what is existing now is currently a little more than a shack. The applicant hopes to put up a far more attractive structure. The application also stated that the land area is small. Ms. Murphy would like to put up a small house, 2 story, 18 ft. by 21 ft., with 1 bedroom. Public Hearing Opened: Linda Lansberg, adjoing property owner, expressed concerns regarding the location of the septic system and the parking situation; it's a very small piece of property. Mrs. Brayton, neighbor, expressed much of the same concerns as Ms. Lansberg. Deeded right of way was also discussed for this property. Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval Mr. Muller MOVED APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS of Area Variance No. 1269, Ann C. Murphy. The applicant has demonstrated sufficient detail to prove practical difficulty. The property is not on a public highway. There will be relief from the fact that it isn't on a public highway. The variance will be to demolish the preexisting building 9 713 '-- and construct something new. There is a deeded right of way. It is an extrememly small prexisiting lot. The applicant needs relief from 800 sq. ft. of the building. The actual building space will be 500 sq. ft. This lot is unique because of the drop off which means the applicant has to build a smaller house than allowed. The setback would be allowed because of the slope and this is the practical difficulty. Minimum relief of a 10 ft. setback is on one corner and there will be a 20 ft. relief on the other corner. Parking is available south of the proposed structure as well as northeast of it and with also; the location between the septic system. Second by Mr. Turner. Passed Unanimously. AREA VARIANCE NO. 1271 William A. Perry Mrs. Goetz read the application to construct an addition with porch with less than the required setbacks on the property situated at 6 Queensway in an Urban Residential 5 zone. Mrs. Goetz read an attached letter from the Board of Directors Kingswood Homeowners Association. The letter read as follows: "This is to advise that as one of the owners in the same building as William R. Perry, I have no objection whatsoever to his building an addition in the back of his condominium at 6 Queensway. Mrs. Goetz read the minutes from the Board of Directors of the Kingswood Homeowners Association April 28, 1987. The minutes stated as follows: "Bill Perry presented his plans for adding a room to his unit at the back. He reported that he had spoken with the owners on both sides, the Creals and Linda Robitaille, and that they had no objection. In view of this, the Board voted to approve the additions. II Richard Hajeck, agent for Mr. Perry, stated there is at least 30 ft. between Building B and the next building down, (E). He said Mr. Perry had spoken to the neighbors to let them know about his proposed plan. Mr. Turner asked if the addition infringes on the septic system. Mr. Hajeck said yes, but added that he had spoken to the Department of Health. They said that if their septic system is above grade, they shouln't have any difficulty with it. Mr. Hajeck said he presented this problem to Mack Dean, Building and Codes Enforcement Officer. Mr. Dean told him that he didn't see any problems with it. Mr. Hajeck said Mr. Kane, Warren County Planning Board, didn't forsee any problems either. Public Hearing Opened: no comments. There was written correspondance from Dean and Margaret Creal; a letter dated May 16, 1987. This letter is appended to the minutes. See next following page. Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval. 10 Mr~ VytR /J1/ \.- Saturday, May 16, 1987 Dear Bill, Since our discussion, this morning, of the possible oonstruct1on ot an additional small room at the rear of vour condom1n1mum, next to ours, we have been giving fresh oonsideration to your new suggestion that such a room might be built off your dining room, rather than the living room. It begins to seem that this may represent a compromise which we could find aoceptable. If your builder could entirely remove your present deok (and its partial root) then switch the sliding glass door now in the living room and the double window now in the dining room, would it not be feasible to oon- struct the proposed, small room oft the dining room as yo~ yourself, did oont~plate? Although we would prefer no extra building, this arrangement we would find much easier to live with. It would seem, from your viewpoint, that a room off the dining room would be better located, and might eventu- ally become a pleasant den Qr television room. Please believe that we are truly anxious to to come to some agreement, that we look forward to having you and Bonnie as close neighbors. ~k~ .~ lOA '- Mr. Griffin MOVED APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1271, William A. Perry. Practical difficulty is demonstrated as the zero setback is due to the condo situation. There are other condos with additions in this complex. Second by Mr. Turner Passed Unanimously. USE VARIANCE NO. 1274 A AREA VARIANCE NO. 1274 B Curtis Lumber Co. Mrs. Goetz read the application to construct a retail building materials store and storage on the prop,~~t~ pituated at 10 Western Avenue in an Urban Residential 10 zone. The applicant has~(tjs"é' \7ariance to locate a retail building materials store and storage on a 230 ft. by 180 ft. lot in a UR-10 zone that currently is used as a retail building materials and millwork facility. The applicant has an Area Variance to locate a retail building materials store and storage activity with a 5 ft. setback on the sides and rear of the proposed 104 ft. by 24 ft. storage building in lieu of the required 10 ft. Jon Hallgren introduced himself and stated that Kathy Griffin from the Warrensburg Store is here to help answer some questions. Mr. Turner addressed the parking situation. If this building is going to be used for retail sales there will undoubtly be an increase traffic flow in the area. Mr. Hallgren stated that they weren't going to have a lot of materials available for retail sales but would like to have this service along with contract sales. Mr. Hallgren said that generally when contractors come to pick up their materials, they park next to the materials, pick them up and leave. In a sense, they come and go very quickly. Retail sales at this location would serve those who may be "short" in the number of items they actually needed for construction at their site. And maybe someone may just need 2 boards, bag of nails, etc. There was much discussion regarding whether or not a retail sales operation is feasible at this location. Board Members expressed great concern regarding over use of this piece of property. There could be an adverse effect upon the neighborhood. The street is narrow and there isn't much room for parking for retail customers. Board Members said they could consider this variance to be approved if the business were operated for contract sales only. Mr. Hallgren said this store couldn't stock as much merchandise as the Warrensbury store; there isn't enough room. But he reiterated that they would like to have this service available for small retail sales. Mr. Turner stated that Curtis Lumber has good reputation; once people know where your located and that you're opened for retail sales, you've automatically generated a potential problem that may not have been meant initially. Board Members expressed their feeling that a major problem like this one can be avoided if the lumber yard is used for contract sales only. '--- 11 331 , t 335 Mr. Hallgren agreed they didn't want to hurt Curtis Lumber Co. reputation. They "- can't stock as much as they would like and people would in a sense "get mad" if what is advertised in the flyers is not in stock at this store. There continued to be much discussion on the previous use of this property as a lumberyard. Parking continued to be discussed at length; whether or not a retail store would be possible at this location along with contract sales. Public Hearing Opened: A representative from Daggot Vending said they do not oppose to the project; they welcome the business in the area. Public Hearing Closed. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval of Use Variance No. 1274A, modified with conditions. The building on the north property line is to be removed and the access on Holden Avenue be used for emergency vehicles only. Warren County Planning Board recommended approval of Area Variance No. 1274B without comment. Mr. Kelley MOVED APPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1274A, Curtis Lumber Co. with STIPULATIONS. Curtis Lumber Company ageed to amend this application for use variance request with stipulations: 1.) Contractor sales only; no retail sales. 2.) No advertising of this location in Curtis Lumber flyers for retail sales. 3.) Hours of business will be from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday only. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is a hardship because it was purchased as a place where lumber sales look place. Preservation of property right on expanded basis. Cannot be used as zoned; no reasonable return. This is not detrimental to surrounding area; other commercial endeavors are in the area. No neighbors opposing. This meets the 4 use variance criteria. Second by Muller. Passed 5 yes (Turner, Goetz, Griffin, Muller, Kelley), 1 DO (Behr), 1 absent (Sicard). Mr. Muller MOVED APPROV AL of Area Variance No. 1274B, Curtis Lumber Co. Practical difficulty is the prexisting size of the property which has certain restraints. Proposed building cannot meet setbacks. Preexisting building is in poor condition at a zero setback; will be removed. New building in southwest corner will be 10 ft. from the southern line and 24 ft. variance from the Holden Avenue side. Extraordinary amount of relief granted only because it imposes northern property line. Second by Kelley. Passed 4 yes (Turner, Griffin, Muller, Kelley), 2 no (Goetz, Behr), 1 absent (Sicard). The meeting was adjourned at 12:20 a.m. fI¿:ÇJ~Þ( \ '-" Minutes prepared by Susan E. Davidsen, Planning and Zoning Department 12