1988-02-17
~
-".-'
Q1JEDSBtJRy ZOJlIJlG BOAD 01' APPEALS
Regular Meeting Held: Wednesday, February 17, 1988
Present:
Theodore Turner, Chairman
Charles o. Sicard
Michael Muller
Susan Goetz, Secretary
Daniel S. Griffin
Gustave Behr
R. Case Prime, Counsel
Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer
Absent:
Jeffrey L. Kelley
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Turner at 7:30 p.m.
Mr. Sicard moved APPROVAL of the January 20, 1988 minutes.
Seconded by Mrs. Goetz.
Mr. Turner announced that Use Variance No. 1325, Mobil Oil
Corporation, has been tabled by the applicant until March.
Mr. Turner stated the procedure of the Zoning Board Meeting:
The application will be called by number.
The Secretary will read the application.
Applicant will come forward to review the application.
Public Hearing to be opened/closed.
Correspondence/Reports from the Warren County Planning Board.
Review the application further with the applicant, if necessary.
Approve/Deny/Table application.
OLD BIJSllfESS
AlBA VAIIARCE NO. 1292
Silver Nail Construction
Since there was no one present to represent this project and it has
been on the Agenda for some time, Mr. Prime suggested that maybe it is in
order to take the item off. Mr. Turner said that at this point Area
Variance No. 1292 will be tabled, with a note that the Zoning Department
is to communicate with the applicant and find out if the application is to
be continued. If not, there will be a formal withdrawal.
1
NEW BUSINESS
AREA VARIANCE NO. 1326
Raven Industries
Mrs. Goetz stated that
house, with a setback of 7
of the required 10 feet,
Pilot Knob Road from Route 9L
this was for an addition to the front of the
feet (on the left side property line) in lieu
LR-IA zone. The site is located 1/2 mile on
on the left side along Katskill Bay.
Mr. Harold Raven, Raven Industries, represented the project. In
answer to Hr. Behr, Mr. Raven confirmed that he is not the tenant, but the
contractor and represents George James. As Mrs. Goetz was unsure of the
site location, Mr. Raven said to go down Pilot Knob Road, go along the
waterfront and it is the first group of houses on the left. She asked if
there was a mailbox with the name JAMES. Answer: Go in the private road
and it is the first house on the right, with a porch on the front. He
confirmed that there was a plaque on the front of the house with the
owner's name.
Mr. Raven confirmed to Mr. Behr that the extension is towards the
driveway. The existing house is 7 feet from the property line of the
people next door.. and the extension on the front is getting further and
further away from the property line, due to the angle as shown on the
diagram. Mr. Turner asked about the new addition. Answer: The new
addition will become a porch again. done in red cedar. The existing porch
will become an extension to the living room and bedroom that are inside
the house, and the whole front of the house will be redone. In answer to
Mr. Turner's question regarding the roof line, Mr. Raven said it will
remain the same; however, the roof line will be brought out, a gable made
and an arch put at the entrance.
Public Hearing Opened: no comment
Public Hearing Closed:
Mrs. Goetz read that the Warren County Planning Board approved.
Mr. Griffin moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1326, Raven Indus-
tries. The 12 foot extension is further away from the property line than
the house itself. The practical difficulty is that, to keep the existing
line of the house, the addition has to be at least 7 feet from the pro-
perty line.
Seconded by Mr. Behr.
2
USE VAIIABCE BO. 1327
Glen Gregory
Mrs. Goetz read
mobile homes to be
zone. The site is
VanDusen Road.
that this proposal is for a mobile home park with 11
used for single family, senior citizens, in an L1-1A
located on Luzerne Road, approximately 1,000 east of
Mr. Glenn A. Gregory represented the project and explained the site as
being long and narrow in size. Geographically, given the size and shape,
it cannot be used for any other type of building, commercial or indus-
trial, plus there is a 30 feet right of way for this land. The mobile
home park would consist of 11 units for senior citizens, which would keep
the area in a quiet, residential sort of manner, in a neighborly classifi-
cation. Each one of the lots are larger than required by the Town of
Queensbury. The smallest lot is 6,099 square feet and the largest lot is
7,500 square feet; the town requires only 6,000 square feet. The neighbor-
hood was canvassed and there are 20 signatures in favor of the project -
all people in the vicinity of the proposed mobile home park. There is one
neighbor that would not sign, but said verbally he would not oppose it.
We are trying to get the best use out of this land as possible. He ex-
plained that he will be retiring in a few years, and this will give good
income for Mr. and Mrs. Gregory, who will run the park.
Regarding the Niagara Mohawk Power line from Luzerne Rd. to Sherman
Ave., he explained that this has become a "dump" site for the Town of
Queensbury. It has become uncontrolled in his area, as there are parties,
fires and presently it is a fire hazard. The area is thick with pines and
debris from the fire in 1962, which could catch on fire and burn very
easily. Mr. Gregory felt that this is the best use he and his wife could
determine for the land and keep it quiet and a peaceful neighborhood. Mr.
Behr asked if Mr. Gregory had discussions with Niagara Mohawk. Answer:
No. My lawyer has. Behr: Is there any problem because of the high
power? Answer: There is no problem. In fact, they are willing to give me
the 25 foot area, which will give 55 feet, enough for town requirements.
In answer to Hr. Behr regarding the purchase of the piece of property
owned by LaPoint, Mr. Gregory said it is a possibility, but there are no
plans at this time. If the LaPoint land is ever purchased, it would not
be proposed as part of the park.
Mr. Griffin asked if there were septic tanks for each parcel.
Answer: Yes. Griffin: Noticed that on the drawing they were right on
the line. Answer: Mr. Gregory said that was put in by the engineer. He
was under the assumption there was to be a tank and leach field. I am not
sure what the town requires. I believe it was one 1,000 gallon tank and
two 1,000 dry wells per unit. These would all be situated between units.
Mr. Gregory confirmed to Mr. Griffin that the positioning of the tanks
3
would not be as shown on the drawing. Where the tanks are shown will be a
buffer zone, remain wooded and the debris would be cleaned up, between my
land and VanGuilder. On the backside, the same would apply for the 30
feet between my land and Robert Sanders. In answer to Mr. Griffin regard-
ing water, Mr. Gregory said there would be town ~ater from off Luzerne
Road.
Mr. Prime reminded the Chairman and the Board that if this variance is
granted, it goes back to the Town Board for an application for approval.
They it is sent to the Planning Board for Site Plan review, which would
review all the water, septic, access and location, etc. before it is
approved. Then it would go back to the Town Board for permit. So that
all the issues that have to do with environment, and so forth, would be
addressed by the Planning Board, if this is granted.
Mr. Turner asked if the land had been advertised or if the Gregory's
had tried to sell it for light industrial use. Answer: No. Because I
know that a 50 foot right of way is required, and Niagara Mohawk indicated
to my attorney that they would only approved the granting of the easement
for this project - not for light industrial or any other use. The reason
being that it would protect their property also. Mrs. Goetz asked if this
could be obtained in writing from Niagara Mohawk. Mr. Gregory said that
there is an existing letter (Page 4A). After reading the Niagara Mohawk
letter, Mrs. Goetz said her interpretation was they they did not say it
would be allowed only for this park. After the permit was issued, they
(Niagara Mohawk) would refer it to the Legal Department. Mr. Gregory said
he and his lawyer interpreted the letter as stating that the right of way
would be good for the park only. Mr. Turner said that the Board has
nothing from the department.
In answer to Hr. Behr regarding the fact that it would not be used as
zoned, Mr. Gregory explained the reason being is because there is no 50
foot right of way on the highway. Mr. Muller pointed out that there is 3
1/2 acres, yet there is a portion where there is a house, pool and shed.
Is that understood to be within the 3 1/2 acres? Answer: No. That is
where I live. Muller: So there is 3 1/2 acres of available space and the
proposal is to put 11 mobile residences within the 3 1/2 acres. Answer:
That is correct.
Mr. Gregory further stated that putting in an industrial
way it is zone, he does not feel the neighborhood would want
in there of that nature. It is a quiet neighborhood now and
would "upset the apple cart," with trucks, and so forth.
would stay peaceful and quiet.
setting the
an industry
an industry
This way it
Mr.
there is
possible
curb cut
enough.
Turner felt that the one thing that hurts the application is that
no proof to the Board that a reasonable return on the property is
if it is used as zoned. The only demonstration of that is the
at the street not being wide enough, and that is not demonstrated
According to the Zoning Map, there is a big area there that is
4
,1" ß "
'.·:i.'
"; ,;1\ NIAG~RA MOHAWK P~WER C07~AT'ONI1~ W~SHIN~~ON ~VE, PO BOX 591, ALBANY, NY 12201-0591
)Ji (,,~¡¡1' ; "'í _ G lrJ October 28, 1987
James W. Cooper, Esq.
Law Offices/Richard L. Newell
14 W. Notre Dame Street
Gl~~s Falls, NY 12801
Re: Mr. & Mrs. Glen Gregory
Our File: AR-3B8
Dear Mr. Cooper:
This is to advise that the proposed easement grant to your
clients has been approved subject to certain terms and
condi tions. One sped fi c condi tion of thi s easement grant is that
your clients should obtain and provide us. with proof of the Town
of Queensbury's approval for a mobile home park.
In your letter of August 10, 1987, you referred to the "fact
that Mr. and Mrs. Gregory are not asking Niagara Mohawk for a
favor but are seeking to clarify their record rights to an
easement reserved from Niagara Mohawk in prior title". The type
of easement that Mr. and Mrs~ Gregory are requesting is not the
same as reBerv~d in the deed. The deed reci tea the right ,to cross
and recross the property at two points' 25' in width and the points
to be designated by the party of the second part, which would be
Niagara Mohawk. Niagara Mohawk does not as a general rule allow'
for longitudinal occupancy of its property, but rather to allow
for the direct crossing underneath of its lines for a property
owner to have access from one side of his property to the other.
Upon receipt of the requested :Information relative to the Town
of Queensbury's approval of this mobile home park, I will submit
your client's request to our Legal Department.
Appreciating your continued cooperation and patience :In this
regard, I remain,
Very truly yours,
'-ÁCW~J ~~<ULt/
Karen S. Maxwell
Staff Assistant
Land & Right of Way Dept.
KSM:cas
4A
_.-.-._--_.-, ._--.-
n··_·___·.··_·.·· ,.,
,
; ''''}C'>
,I i. ,¡~ír
zoned
parcel
doubts.
Light
aM
Industrial
utilize the
- somebody could buy your parcel and the adjacent
land. Answer: It is possible, but I have my
Mr. Behr asked if this application could be tabled until such time as
new the new plans come out in about 60 days, and review it then to see if
there is anything in there that might have bearing. Mr. Prime said that
this would be speculating and would not be appropriate at this time.
Public Hearing Opened:
Support:
1) Richard Phillips; Sanders Road
Presented a letter from his mother-tn-law, Olive Green. Confirmed to
Mr. Behr that Hrs. Green's property would back onto the property. On
behalf of the residents who have lived on Sanders Road for a long time, he
wanted to verify that the parties, etc. that were described by Mr. Gregory
are something that they would like to be rid of, and that a mobile home
park for retired people, would not make any noise, etc. and just their
presence there would help. Mr. Phillips said he could not foresee any
business that would want to go into that area, because of its location,
shape and general vicinity which, except for some junk yards, is totally
residential either homes or mobil homes. It is fairly near two major
mobile parks and Mr. Phillips feels a small park like the proposed one
would have an advantage over a larger one, because it would be small and
better kept. The bigger ones have more upkeep. Both Mr. Phillips and his
wife are in favor of the application.
Mrs. Goetz read the letter from Mrs. Green, which is in favor of the
mobile home park (on file).
2) Joanne Hunt; owns property on other side of the pole line
Ms. Hunt confirmed to Hr. Turner that she owns 3 1/3 acres, and her
house in on Luzerne Road. She is not in opposition to the trailer park.
It is a great idea and they need more room for senior citizens. She was
concerned about the statement of "single families." Is that including a
single family like three people, or is it totally for senior citizens?
Answer: It will be a senior citizen park. Single family means that two
different families cannot be in one unit. Would there be children
involved? Answer: No. Mr. Behr asked if the units would be sold or
leased. Answer: Lease the land. They can bring in their own home. Will
there be any stipulation as to the total number of people. Answer: The
normal family of that age group is three (ie: brother or sister and wife
and husband). Mrs. Goetz: Will there be a certain age limit? Answer:
55 years old and over. This would be a stipulation.
Mrs. Hunt asked what would happen to the land after Mr. Gregory dies.
Can the land be changed over from citizens to something else? Answer: As
5
he understands the law, Mr. Gregory said that once it is established as a
senior citizen park, it will stay that way forever. Mrs. Hunt: Even if
you sell the property, it will stay as a senior citizen park. Answer:
Yes. Mr. Behr reminded that Mr. Gregory only has a certain amount of
control over the malicious activity at the power lines. Mr. Gregory said
he had talked to Niagara Mohawk and they would permit him to put a fence
across the power line. providing he submits to Niagara a gate key. The
gates would be on both sides of the property. As an example of the effect
of the fencing, Mr. Gregory said that Mrs. Baird on Corinth Road installed
fencing and the trespassing has been cut down considerably.
Mrs. Goetz and Mr. Griffin questioned Mr. Gregory's statement that the
senior citizens' park would always remain as such. Answer: If this is
granted and the Town approves it, it will have a permit issued as a senior
citizens' park, and it cannot be changed unless the Town itself changes it
on their permit. which is renewed annually. The Town cannot do that
unless it has gone before a public hearing and the Planning Board. He did
admit that it could probably be changed with a lot of legal paperwork.
Mr. Behr asked if that could be a stipulation and Mr. Griffin felt that it
would be unenforceable.
Opposed:
1) Mr. Lee Van Guilder - lives next door.
Mr. VanGuilder
are four trailer
senior citizens 55
VanGuilder presented
(on file).
does not like the property for a mobile home. There
courts around that area and it is enough. As far as
and over, he is 55 and has a child 12 years old. Mr.
a petition of his neighbors against the application
2) Mr. Nicholson - lives across the street
Mr. Nicholson felt that he does not believe in ordinances and that
they never should have come into effect. They town never asked the neigh-
bors for a vote and feels that ordinances are manipulated by the Town. It
is his opinion that the kids who ride on the power lines are the neigh-
bors' kids. Granted there are some who do misbehave. He also feels that
Mr. Gregory does not have the property to make the facilities properly
available. This is strictly his opinion and he is not against him. His
views should be taken into consideration.
Public Hearing Closed:
Mrs. Goetz read a letter from Marion LaPointe, neighbor, indicating
that she has no objections. The Warren County Board approved with
stipulations (see Page 6A).
6
WARREN COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
~_...--~
Warren County Municipal Center
Lake George, New York 12845
T clcµhonc 518· 761·6410
DAT[: February 10, 1988
TO: Queensbury Planning &
Zoning Office
Town Office Building
Bay & Haviland Roads
Queensbury, NY 12801
Gentlemen/Ladies:
At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the 10th~_
day of February 1988. the above application for a Use Variance to allow
RE: V1327
Glenn Gregory
Luzerne Rd., E. of Van Dusen Rd.
a mobile home park with 11 mobile homes to be used for single family
homes, (senior citizens only).
was reviewed. and the following action was taken. Recommendation to:
()() Approve
Disapproval
) Modify with Conditions
Rèturn
Comment:
1ì??Ùé'J,lj 5/ßTeð /71#:/ ÒgCKS, "jj)j)/T/ó/v$, ¿=./C. /Þ./ðtlt.D ONLJ ߣ
/JLLt>w.êÒ /15 ¡).Ô2 S/-./7Á1J/1/è¡)J 0/= f-OWN o""~ Qily, ""'~-';:;Q "'"'
IÁltI~1 5,j-/}.Nf)/;/UJ~ ,¡CoIl .s£~&?¿/fs Æ ¡Le., V.IO¡¡¿p /3é tzséù? 7#L'Y ,5"40(./t..!J
;3/2 ò£/ßi¿,E¡J ?/hol2 7-ú /1,/J¡'p/¿>OI.J4-(
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is the policy of the Warren County Planning Board to follow the
procedures of the New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-M,
with regard to Municipal Zoning actions that are referred to and reported
thereon. The following are procedural requirements that must be adhered
to:
1.) The Warren County Planning Board shall report its recommendations
to the referring municipal agency. accompanied by a full statcmCI\t
for such actions. If no action is taken within thirty (30) days
or agreed upon time, the municipal agency may act without such
report.
2.) If the recommendation is for disapproval of the proposal, or
modification thereof. the municipal agency shall not act contrary
to such action except by a vote of a majority plus one of all the
members thereof and after the adoption of à resolution fully
setting forth the reasons for such contrary actions.
3.) Within seven (7) days after the· final action by the municipal
agency having jurisdiction on the recommendations. modifications
or disapproval of a referred matter, such municipality agency
shall file a report with the Warren Count Planr¡;¡¿ing oard on
the necessary form.
>
Vincent Sp",.r, Vice Chairman OR ('~.~_._~
6A
Mr. Turner stated that, according to the Ordinance, a mobile home park
has to be 100 feet from a public right-of-way; and the setbacks are
minimum front 20 feet; minimum side 10 feet; minimum rear 15 feet.
Mr. Nicholson pointed out that years ago it was different in that
area, but now there are mostly homes. Because an ordinance was passed
that it was a residential area (ie: Pinewood, Stefany Lane), that is the
way the Town wants it. Mr. Turner reminded Mr. Nicholson that it is zoned
light industrial and the criteria has to be met for the Use Variance and,
if it is not met, then there will be no approval. Mrs. Goetz stated that
it was not the Zoning Board that passed the ordinance. In addition, the
zoning in the Town is being reconsidered and that the paper should be
watched for any hearing. Mr. Nicholson: No one will be able to do
anything about it. Mrs. Goetz expressed dismay at that statement. Mr.
Nicholson: It is true. Money is going to buy this whole town. The two
big money deals that are going up on both sides of the town, it is going
to happen. It shouldn't, but it will - unfortunately.
Mr. Gregory asked the Board if he has to sell his land to make a
reasonable gain. Answer by Mr. Turner: You have to prove that it cannot
be used as zoned. Gregory: It has to be sold as zoned. In other words,
proof has to be shown that there was an attempt to sell the land. If it
could not be sold, then there is proof. Who sets the price? Answer: You
do. Hr. Behr stated that it does not mean that the land gets put on the
market today and in 30 days say the land cannot be sold. That is not
sufficient proof. Gregory: I realize that.
Mr. Turner asked Mr. Gregory if he would like to table the application
and have the opportunity to provide the Board with proof that the property
cannot be used as zoned. Answer: Yes. One question: Can the proof be
obtained from an appraiser or realtor, or do I have to effectively put it
on the market and sell it? Turner: The land has to actually has to be
put on the market. Gregory: For how long, 60 days? Mr. Prime said that
advice should be obtained on how to prove hardship. There are several
ways to do it. Take time and take it off the agenda at this point and
find a method to do it.
Mr. Glenn Gregory, applicant, TABLED Use Variance No. 1327, so that
proof of hardship can be presented to the Board.
AREA VAIIARCE NO. 1328
The Tirehouse Warehouse, Inc.
Mrs. Goetz read the proposal for the construction of a new building
(5,000 square feet), zoned HC-15. The addition would result in the expan-
sion of the tire business. Variance is for the front setbacks and is
located at 15 Boulevard.
7
Mr. Jeffrey T. Canale represented the project, who stated that he has
prepared a supplemental application for the new plot map, as was approved
by the Warren County Planning Board. The original plot plan that was
submitted with the application requested a front setback variance from the
Boulevard Road for the new storage bUilding. It would have required a
variance of approximately 6 feet on the east side; 20 feet on the west
side. The concern that was raised at the Warren County Planning Board was
the roadway. There was a suggestion and it was passed that the building
be moved back 10 feet from the roadway, as originally proposed. This
would require a variance not only on the front of the property, but on the
back, as it would be within 41 feet of the ,back property, an industrial
zone owned by Ciba Geigy, which is about 600 feet from the property line
to the River Road.
There was some confusion as to whether or not the Tirehouse Warehouse
property went back to River Road. Mr. Canale explained that, where the
178 foot back property line is located on the plot map, it is about 600
feet to the River Road. The whole property that is owned by Ciba Geigy is
vacant. The required footage, to alleviate the practical difficulty of
the use of the land and the hardship on the business, is 40 feet wide. If
the building were to be constructed without a variance, it would be 20
feet wide on the easterly side. It is half the space that is actually to
be needed for the growth of the business. There is a real problem with
the old tires, which were being put out back and create an eyesore. The
purpose of the building, the amount of the old tires, and other equipment
that needs to be stored require that size bUilding. It improves the
quality of the neighborhood and removes the tires from outside the
bUilding.
Mrs. Goetz remarked about the magnitude of the office. She questioned
about the office being regional headquarters. Hr. John McCall, owner.
said that there are four other stores in the tri-city area. The main
office in Glens Falls is for the other stores. Hrs. Goetz also asked
about parking. McCall: The parking will be behind the building, which is
not being done now. Mr. Behr wanted to know about tire changing in the
building. Answer: Yes. It is retail also. Mr. Griffin: The offices
will remain in the original building, and the tires will be changed in the
new building? Answer: Yes. There will be four bays and the rest is stor-
age no office. The office is about 20 feet away, and the height of the
new building is 16 feet.
Justin Charles, contractor of American BUilders, said the structure is
in two separate heights: four service bays, 40 feet in depth x 40 feet
wide; eaves at that point will be 12 feet. There will be a step up to a
16 foot eave at another 3,400 square feet of storage space. The way the
building is laid out, there will be two bays into which the cars will
pull, and also two bays will be situated as one drives through the build-
ing at the exit. The plan is for car circulation. The same is true for
bringing and exiting of stock. There will be no exiting doors at the rear
of the storage area. There will be a common door between the tire
8
WARREN COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD
Warren County Municipal Center
Lake George, New York 12845
Telephone 518·761,6410
TO:
DATE: February 10, 1988
Queensbury Planning &
Zoning Office
Town Office Building
Bay & Haviland Roads
Queensbury, NY 12801
RE: V1328
The Tire Warehouse
15 Boulevard
Gentlemen/Ladies:
At a meeting of the Warren County Planning Board, held on the
10th.
--
day of February 1988 . the above application for an Area Variance to
expand tire business by constructing an additional 5000 sq. ft. storage
and tire change building.
was reviewed, and the following action was taken. Recommendation to:
) Approve
) Disapproval (X) Modify with Conditions
R<~turn
Comment:
"BL)), S/-/OúL D BE /7)ðv¿ò ð/7Ck /jT t.£/lS7 /0" TO /3L.:"
!3IJCK rtl£1//£¿ rKo.f14. H16#wnJ
I/VILi mß.£f IA/lfll 73.E/jfAfIÞIC¡j}¡o/IJ COPlI'1. //11 #I1IU'¡';
_ __ _ _ ___ -= _ !.-~!! ~_L!)_ _t~~~':!_ '?!~_ #.!!:~~_ (./y~~!~~!:,__ ~~~ Z1/j~~~ }!fi~ _(¡~ _ _ _ _ _ __
It is the policy of the Warren County Planning Board to follow the
procedures of the New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-M,
with regard to Municipal Zoning actions that are referred to and reported
thereon. The following are procedural requirements that must be adhered
to:
1.) The Warren County Planning Board shall report its recommendations
to the referring municipal agency, accompanied by a full statement
for such actions. If no action is taken within thirty (30) days
or agreed upon time, the municipal agency may act without such
report.
2.) If the recommendation is for disapproval of the proposal, or
modification thereof, the municipal agency shall not act contrary
to such action except by a vote of a majority plus one of all the
members thereof and after the adoption of a resolution fully
setting forth the reasons for such contrary actions.
3.) Within seven (7) days after the· final action by the municipal
agency having jurisdiction on the recommendations, modifications
or disapproval of a referred matter, such municipality agency
shall file a report with the Warren County Planning Board on
the necessary form.
OR
VillCl'l1l Spitzer. Vice Chairman
9A
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION
Robert L. Eddy, Chairman
17 Owen Avenue
Queensbury, N. Y. 12801
Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary
8 Queensbury Avenue
Queensbury, N. Y. 12801
To r (x) Wal"ren County Planning Board Date r 2/8/88
( ) Queensbury Town Planning Board
(x) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals
(x) APplicant
..
variance :fI: 1328
The Tire Warehouse
15 Boulevard
We have reviewed the
( ) Other - and have
( ) Approval
Res
request for J (X) Variance, ( ) Site Plan Review.,
the following recommendationsr
( X) Disapproval
This application has been disapproved by our Committee as data for
landscaping, screening and plantings for the above applicant for a Site
Plan Review or Variance has not been submitted or is incomplete.
Would you please, therefore, refer the applicant to our Committee
for approval of its plans prior to granting the application pending
before your Board or before construction permit has been granted.
You and the Building Department will be notified just as soon as
plan~ have been approved by us.
,.
Respectfully Submitted,
~ i: (Dll
Robert L. Eddy .
Chairman
The committee is concerned about the disposition of old
tires which have been allowed to acumulate in the past, as
well 'as with landscaping plans.
:,,:
9B
change area and
functional bay,
outside.
the
very
storage area. At this point and time, there is one
limited storage on-site requiring renting on the
New product will come to the front of the building via a 14 foot
larger door. There is also tire distribution from this point. Mr.
Charles verified to Mr. Griffin that there would be ample places for cars
and trucks. Mr. Sicard expressed concern about the disposition of the old
tires. Answer: The old tires will be stored inside and picked up twice a
week.
Mr. Canale presented a letter from Floyd Helmans stating no objection.
Public Hearing Opened: no comment
Public Hearing Closed.
Hrs. Goetz stated that the Warren County Planning Board modified the
conditions (see Page 9A). Beautification Committee disapproved (see Page
9B), basically because of tire storage. Mr. Canale stated that there was
some confusion prior to going before the County Planning Board as to the
date of the Beautification Committee meeting. Therefore, the applicant
was not able to present themselves and address the issue of tire storage,
and would have explained that all the tires are going to be removed from
outside and stored in the Storage Room. The Beautification Committee was
contacted and a meeting has been rescheduled for March 7. Submitted to
the Committee was a letter, landscaping application and plot plan (copies
on file).
Mr. Griffin moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1328. The applicant
has demonstrated that the practical difficulty is size of the lot. The
variance is for a 40 foot setback on the north side and 41 foot setback on
the rear and south sides. Also, there is a stipulation that the applicant
abide by the recommendations of the Beautification Committee.
Seconded by Mr. Sicard.
USE VAlIANCE NO. 1329
Joseph G. Regan
Mrs. Goetz read that the purpose of this is to use the single family
residence for professional offices SFR-I0, at 637 Glen Street.
Mr. Donald M. Matusik represented the project. He amended the peti-
tion by stating that Question No.3. "Is there an adverse effect on
neighborhood character?" should be answered as "No." The owners of the
9
~"
premises are James Shovah and the agent. Mr. Matusik mentioned that he
was tardy to the Warren County Planning Board and did not have an opportun-
ity to clarify his application. Referring to the Zoning Ordinance requi~
sites, he felt the neighborhood is of a virtually complete business-like
nature. There is only one home between Garrison Road and Windsor Drive,
which would be affected by an inappropriate use of the property. The
front of the house is 18 feet until one would reach Glen Street. The key
to the whole application is the uniqueness of the house and the lot size
and irregularity. Mr. Matusik said he spent several nights in the home
attempting to sleep there, but was unable to do this because of the
traffic noise. The house is beautiful and sets itself up ideally for a
professional office.
The type of office space that is being referred to is a "low-density
office" occupancy, with a maximum of three to five cars per day (including
a shared receptionist). The parking area that is in mind would be from
the southeast corner of the house up to and including one space in front
of the garage, providing for five spaces in a west/east direction, plus
one space in the current driveway. There are no planned modifications to
the exterior of the building and a few minor doorways to be changed in the
interior. In answer to Mr. Behr regarding the parking, Mr. Matusik said
that the parking will not come further than the one driveway space. The
number of spaces will be more than adequate, as there will be one vehicle
there everyday and two to four other vehicles, at a maximum. There will
not be a great deal of in and out, which means hardly any interruption,
not only to the neighborhood, but to the only structure which will have
any impact. There is no nearby structure fronting on Glen Street, which
has the similar problem; ie: triangular lot or 18 feet from the road edge.
As far as the question of that portion of hardship relative to the
yield of reasonable return used for the current allowable purposes, cer-
tain things have been mentioned which are applicable relative to the
almost veritable prohibition of the premises as a single family home. In
answer to Mr. Behr's question regarding the attempt to sell the home, Mr.
Matusik said there were multiple months and years in attempts to sell the
premises as a house and eventually the price became depleted. It was also
established that the outside of the home had been renovated within the
last two years. Mr. Turner asked how long he had owned house. Answer:
Since December of last year. Turner: Was it occupied as a residence?
Answer: Yes. Mrs. Goetz: You and James Shovah bought it together?
Answer: Yes. Mr. Behr: You bought it mainly to live there? Answer:
Absolutely. When it was purchased, we had no thought of turning it over
into offices. We had no idea what the inherent problems of the house
would be. Therefore, there would be no necessity to inquire as to the
current zoning, which we subsequently found out was SFR~10. When Mr.
Muller stated that town residents have said that the purchase was intended
for commercial purposes, Mr. Matusik said that someone is living there
currently. That may have come up after we had found out that it is not
suitable for a residence.
10
'--
Mrs. Goetz asked about the three uses for the bUilding. The initial
and primary use is twofold. 1) It would be as a financial/planning
entity, which involves two persons. These two persons are approximately
80% to 90% in the field and would share a receptionist. 2) Title insur-
ance company, of which Mr. Matusik is proprietor. That would include
field persons and a part-time secretary, who would be in the office on the
average of an 8 to 10 hour week. 3) Investment development entity, which
at this point is speculative. The building sets itself up for one office
downstairs together with a shared receptionist. Mr. Matusik emphasized
again that this is a low-density operation. The upstairs, which he be-
lieves has six occupyable rooms, office-wise, and two which are so small
that they are only good for storage, would house two entities. In review
of the parking situation: 1 car - title insurance entity; 1 car - shared
receptionist; 2 cars at the most pension/investments (Mr. Regan's
entity). Mr. Behr asked how many entities there would be in which Mr.
Matusik would have control/interest. Answer: Of the three that were
mentioned, he would have an interest in, if not control of, two. Mrs.
Goetz: Are they year round? Answer: Mr. Regan is involved in a similar
operation in Florida. The business would be year round, but the occupancy
would be infrequent. It is an out-in-the-field, contact-type situation.
Mr. Behr: The reason these questions are being asked is because a lot
of this is speculation on Mr. Matusik's part, as to how many people are
going to be involved. Answer: There have been many inquiries regarding
this application; however, no one has been encouraged in order to make
sure it stays as a low-density operation. Behr: Regarding the develop-
ment company, it would be difficµlt to say how many people would be
involved. Answer: Matusik ~aid he is part of the entity (at least 50%)
and speaks with confidence. He referred again to the premises on Gar-
rison/Windsor. It is the only surrounding structure which is not of a
commercial business nature. Mr. Behr was not sure whether the initial
interest in the building was to primarily live in, or whether there were
long-ranged plans for commercialism. Answer: When we bought the prem-
ises, we felt it would make an excellent home, because it is a beautiful
building. We bought it in December 1987 and had been attempting to buy it
for the second half of the year. Given other circumstances, the non-
irregularity of the lot and any other location in non-proximity of Glen
Street. it would make a fantastic house. In answer to Mr. Prime, the lot
is approximately 6,000 square feet. Mrs. Goetz: You have an office a
little ways down Glen Street, so you were familiar with what Glen Street
was like. Answer: I have gone by the house many times; however, in my
present office which is more than 18 feet away from Glen Street, I hear
nothing.
Mr. Turner spoke about the house on Garrison/Windsor, which was the
Bascom House, had a request in for a Use Variance for professional offices
and it was turned down. Mr. Matusik said he was aware of that and pointed
out that the house has over 200 feet of depth on a highly residential
road. The majority of the useable frontage of the house in question is on
11
Glen Street. Mr. Turner: Have you tried to rent the property? Answer:
Yes. We have called several leads and the premises has been looked at by
a couple of people, Mr. Shovah has spoken to some people about it, and I
have talked to some real estate people. The interest dwindles immediately
upon walking in the front door, because Glen Street is literally in "the
back pocket." Regarding the widening of Glen Street, Mr. Matusik said
there will be some inherent taking away of a certain amount of footage
towards each sidewalk. In answer to Mr. Behr regarding the principle
entrance, the side door would not be used as there will be no major struc-
tural changes and that entrance is into the kitchen. Mr. Prime: Will the
parking area be paved? Answer: The safest and most esthetically sound
would be to pave as opposed to stone. Prime: Can you meet the perme-
ability requirements? Answer: I believe so. Hr. Shovah has looked at
that.
Mr. Turner: What is the useable square footage? Answer: Approxim-
ately 1,800 square feet useable floor space. Mr. Prime: Regarding park-
ing spaces, you need one parking space/l00 square feet. 1800 feet - 18
parking spaces. Answer: Mr. Shovah had a plan to remove the garage. Mr.
Turner: How long did you advertise? Answer: We contacted several brok-
ers, four people to whom the house was shown over a period of approxi-
mately 45 days, some of which was before the closing. Mr. Turner: If
down the road, you turn it over to someone else, then things change.
Answer: As a typical variance, it would run with the land and they could
fall back on the residential use, or the non-conforaing use that was
sought to be varied and approved. Mr. Muller asked for a description of
the house. Answer: Mr. Matusik classified it as a four-bedroom house.
There are a total of six rooms upstairs, two of which are very small.
Bathrooms: one up and one down. Kitchen: Yes.
Mrs. Goetz stated her problems with the house were a serious encroach-
ment on residential and the problem of parking. The variance goes with
the land. Answer: The essential character of the neighborhood will not
be changed. A conversation ensued with Mr. Behr regarding the use of the
premises and Mr. Behr's feeling that this is a self-created hardship. Mr.
Matusik said that if a viable alternative had presented itself, he would
not have entered this application. Mr. Behr felt that the residence can
be used as zoned, when Mr. Matusik said it is presently being occupied by
Mr. Shovah. Answered: No. Mr. Shovah is there as a convenience to us
and a convenience to himself. He is building his own home at present.
Hrs. Goetz said she is more concerned about the type of entity that could
go in there, if the proposed ones were not there. Answer: Again Mr.
Matusik emphasized light-density, professional space. His interpretation
is that the ingress/egress into the building, both foot power and motor
power (autos, etc.) is a light-density situation. Mrs. Goetz again ques-
tioned: Because the variance goes with the land, what would happen if it
was sold and a higher density business was put in? That is the reason the
doctor's office was not permitted next door. Answer: He did not have a
good answer; however, would abide by any conditions that would be set.
12
Mr. Muller expressed concerned about the application standing on its
own. In summary, the house was purchased in mid-December 1987; there was
an intention to submit the application earlier, but the deadline was
missed. After Mr. Shovah's occupancy for several weeks and Matusik's for
three evenings, they felt there was no question that the building was a
nonresidential situation. Mr. Turner: It might take longer than three/-
four evenings to get used to the traffic. Mr. Matusik again tried to
confirm what the hardship is on this piece of property and no other that
is similarly zoned. After two/three weeks of ownership, it was decided
that this residence has a hardship and that it can never be used for which
it is zoned. Mr. Muller felt he would feel better about the application,
if there had been a long history of troubled opportunities to use this
piece of property as zoned. Nothing has been said about that. We agree
it is a high-traffic area. Mr. Muller did not feel that a "For Sale" sign
had been up for a period of years. The Board has heard nothing about the
dollars and cents proof. If Mrs. Locke had been asking a large amount of
money for the property because she felt it was qualified, but no one else
did, then that would tell why it did not sell. If you and Mr. Shovah paid
a commercial value for the property, that also would tell something. Mr.
Matusik agreed. Mr. Muller further analyzed the pieces of property with
which a comparison is being made, and felt that it is bounded on all of
its sides by similar uses (residential). Not across the road where there
is commercial. Mr. Matusik disagreed, as he felt the homes on Glenwood
have virtually no bearing on what will be done. After some discussion
regarding the surrounding homes, Hr. Muller emphasized that the point he
was making is that there are non-commercial, non-professional, consistent
uses with the zone right in the area. Mr. Matusik disagreed again stating
that his position is that the proposed site is surrounded by commercial
uses. Mr. Muller: Regarding parking, the parking schedule requires 17 or
18 spaces, and that there are six spaces accounted for without a customer
in the bUilding.
Mr. Matusik introduced Mr. Larry Reynolds, real estate broker and
appraiser, who was retained to do an appraisal and review on the property
(see Pages 13 A - D). Mr. Reynolds explained that the value of a property
can be determined by its use, for whatever it is zoned, and that his inter-
est in this property was to try to write a valuation of the house as a
residence. This is done by either a market approach, reconstruction cost
approach or capitalization approach. The market approach is the most pre-
ferable and accepted way. With older homes, the reconstruction cost
rarely works. Primarily what is looked for is the condition of the house;
ie: physical deterioration, physical or functional obsolescence, anything
that would be curable or incurable. The main thought about the house,
which is about 65 to 75 years old, is that the character of the neighbor-
hood was different then than it is now. Any adjustment that would have to
be made on the initial valuation price of the house, would have to con-
sider the location, economic obsolescence, which is incurable and cannot
be changed. This house has been negatively affected by conditions that
were out of anybody's control, including the zoning. From a broker's
standpoint, this is a house on a corner lot next to a busy highway. In
13
APPRAISAL FOR PROPERTY ßELONGING TO:
Donald M. Matusik
611 Glen Street
Glens Falls, New York
TOWN OF QUEENSßURY
COUNTY OF WARREN 55.:
STATE OF NEW YORK
LAURENCE M. REYNOLDS, BEING DULY SWORN, S^YS:
That he resides at 2 Prospect Street, Lake George, New
York; That he is a licensed Real Estate Broker, License
118/+3790; That he is associated with an owner of Dialllond
Point Associates whose place of business is located at
Lake Shore Drive, Diamond Point, New York; That he has
been actively engaged in the real estate profession for
over ten years; That he has appraised property for all
purposes throughout Eastern New York State, more particu-
larly Warren, Washington, and Schenectady Counties.
The subject property is located in the Town of
Queensbury, Warren County, fronting on the East side of
Upper Glen Street (NYS Route 9).
The property is improved by a two-story single
family residence wi th detached or1(~-car garage.
13A
.C·
, .
-~',.~-.. . ,~......,.......,'~'
~.
ALL THOSE TRACTS OR PARCELS OF LAND, situate, lying and being
in the Town of Queensbury, County of Warren, State of Ne.w York
bounded and described as follows:
ALL of the lands and premises lying between Upper Glen Street,
Windsor Dr i ve, G lenwood Avenue a nd lands of [(ngue, hr> ing La ts
#1, #27, the south one-half of #26, the west one-quarter of
the north one half of #26 and part of Lot #25, all lying be-
tween the Plank Road (now Upper Glen Street), the Road to the
Brick Yard (now Glenwood Avenue), and Avenue (now Windsor Drive),
aU as sho\vn on 'vlap made by Hiram Philo, Nay 1, 18<)9 and fiJ(~d
L n Old F i 1 C' Pia n Boo k No.2, p age .l4 L~ i [1' t Iw \~ ¿¡ r r e n Co U 11 t Y C L (\ r k ' s
Office.
BEING part of the premises described in a deed to lIe.len [vI.
Bascom from J. Seward Titus and H. Guy TitLls by deed dated
Noveluber 22, 1943, recorded in the Warren County Clerk's Office
Nov(~llIber 2Lf, 19¿fJ, in Book 226 of Deeds at page 327 and also a
deed from Ruth Titus and Edith Titus Russell to Helene N. Bascom
dated November 24, 1943 and recorded in the W.Jrren County Clerk's
Office December 2, 1<)43 in Book 226 of Deeds at page 378, and
being all of the premises conveyed by Fred J. Hovey, Lnc. and
Carolinc II. Pierce to Helene M. Bascom by deed dat(~d ~Iay 2, /950
and recorded in the \'¡arren County Clerk's Office [Vlay b, 1l))0 in
Book 287 of Deeds at Page 238.
J':XCEPT LNG AND JŒSEnVING TIŒREFRON all tha t cer ta in piece and
[)LH-cel of l.1nd conveyed by the party of the first part to Wi.lliam
P. Cates by deed dated May 17, 1982 and recorded August 24, 1982
in the Warren County Clerk's Office in Book 640 of Ueeds at page
333 .Re f ere nce to \vhich deed is here by made for a maC(' pa r t.lcu-
lar description of said exception.
J3~[NC a part of the premises conveyed by Frederick G. Bascom to
Betsy Nias Hasmussen by deed elated November 22, 1977 nnd rec.orded
in the \-Jarren County Clerk's Office on November ?2, 1977 in noük
GiG of Deeds at page 159.
13B
The ¿'_~ling is of frame construction with horizontally ..-Allied vinyl siding,
spt all a stone foundation. Thel:'e is approximately 2200 squ<1t."e feet of
finished living space. 1he age of the structure í.s over 60 years.
'the roof lS of slate. WindO\vs are double-hung type with alum i mUll combin-
a tion s tonus and screens.
'the first floor has a kitchen, laundry room, dining room, living room and
bedroom. 'the second floor has five (5) bedrooms and a full bath.
The kitchen has wall-hung wood cabinets, laminate type counter tops and
stainless steel sink. 'nle floor is covered with sheet vinyl and the walls
and ceilings are of gypSLUTI board.
'[he"! living room, dining room and bedroom have harchvood floors and gypsum
board walls émd ceilings.
'lhe stairway to the second floor is of wood and open in design.
1h0 second floor bnthroom has vinyl sheet flooring, a cast tul> with
fiberglass tub surround.
Floors on the second level are of hardwood, walls and ceilings are of
gypsum fJOard.
There is a closed stairway returning to the kitchen area.
lhere is a full attic with bonded cellulose insulation in the floors.
lhere 1S a full baselllent with a concrete floor.
Domestic hot water is heated by a 52 gallon gas-fired hot water heater.
Central heat is supplied by a gas forced air furnace.
t-1unicipal services include streetlights, nntural gas, city water and
city sewer.
'lhe primtll:"Y factor affecting the valuation of the subject property as
a single family residence is economic obsolescence, defined by the
State Board of Equalization and Assessment as "Always incurable and
an external influence which detracts from the value of a site and hence
the structure which is affixed to the site. A prime example would be
a residential property which is adjacent to a large industrial facility."
13C
I
I'
Doubth___ the character of surrounding properties was dif, ~ ent \...hen the
structure \VlIS originally built.
However, since the structure's construction,
:, Clen Strpct, particularly in the Town of Queensbury, has changed to primariLy
eO/lllflt~rcial uses.
The mœt recent traffic count (1985) by the State D(~partrnent of Transportation
shO\vs an annual average daily count of 19,LIOO vehicles passing by the frollt
of the structure.
COlUncrcial uses (see attached map) are located within 100 feet to the north,
east and west of the property.
Conveyances of portions of the property over the years as indicated by older
maps ml:! deeds hé:lv(! ler't the dw~ll Lng en an irregulary shaped p<lrcel. 'l'he
above-mentioned facts must be considered negative factors for residentiaJ.
VLI)uatioll purposes anri more than satisfy, in the opinion of deponcnt, the
paLéuneters defining economic obsolescence.
Of the streets intersecting Glen Street in the City of Glens Falls and the
r, 1'O\.;n of Queensbury in the vicinity of the subject property, fifU~en (15) of
r
the 11 intersections have had one-time single [(UniJy residences located 011
í
i. the corner converted to professional offices.
The pattern of properties of this type a::; undesircable o\YI1er-occupied resi-
"
I
ucnces is to be rented as a one-frullily at a base rate because ot its location.
, ,
I As the return is marginal at best after maintenance and taxes, the structure
inevitably deteriorates.
Tlw conversion of these comparable properties to slilall profcHsionaJ offices
ì; is probably the only reason that the structural and architechund, inte?r.ity
of the original buildings have been retained.
! :
A capi t'llization npproach to the value of the subject propert ,IS a rentaL
would indicate a valuation of approximately .1;52,000. ^ market approach to
I value is difficult as there arc no comparable sales of single félCilUy resi-
dences located on corner lots on Glen StLC'et though the same E;tructuœ in a
, residential neighborhood could be valued at between $30,000 - ~;100,OOO.
I,
I
13D
1985, the DOT survey showed an average daily count of 19,400.
Regarding the intersections into Glen Street, there are a lot of older
homes which have been converted into small offices, which is not unique to
Glens Falls or to corner properties. Invariably, if it is less than
desireable as an owner/occupied residence, which is true now than when it
was built, what happens is that when it is rented to someone and it is not
particularly desireable to stay there a long term with change of condi-
tions, it also ends up being at the entry level or base rate from a
standpoint of being able to rent it. You can always rent a single family
as a single family. When you talk about reasonable rate of return, it
implies that by ownership of the house you ought to, by living in it and
enjoying it or renting, be able to provide for at least the maintenance of
the property, if not an outstanding return. The pattern over the years,
with this family's record, is that out of the 15 or 16 intersections
looked at in the area, there we~e all but two that were converted into
some type of offices. The only reason the houses are maintained as well
as they are is because the businesses that have gone in, without exten-
sively altering the characteristics of the neighborhood, have retained the
individuality of the bUilding to their benefit.
There is a great deal of diminishing utility with this particular
property, by the fact of the specific location. The main entrance of the
house is on Glen Street and not on Windsor Drive, which is the kitchen
entrance. Mr. Reynolds made a definite point that this residence is not
even remotely prime residential property, and that the utility of the
house is the function of the house itself and not who owns it. That house
cannot be considered comparable to any house even 50 feet away in the
neighborhood. The only thing that is similar to the houses down the block
on Windsor is that they are zoned the same. Again, the main factor used
here is what is defined as economic obsolescence which is, by nature,
incurable. Mr. Muller asked that, when arriving at a valuation of this
particular piece of property, no similar sales were found? Answser: Yes.
Putting a value on this was difficult. Muller: In comparison of this
piece of property, did you take into account its close proximity to the
residential uses that are of some value? Do they enhance the value?
Answer: As a residence? If they are the only reason to the value of the
residence. The fact that the house next door and the ones to the north
are there. When I am in the house, I can see the house next door, then I
see JoJo's and Cole and Price Chopper and Friendly's and Sunoco. That is
all. With the possible exception of the upstairs, you might be able to
see through the trees.
Mr. Muller also referred to the portion of Mr. Reynolds' report
regarding the capitalization approach, which would indicate a valuation of
approximately $52,000. Hr. Reynolds: Capitalization is where an accept-
able rate of return is taken and it is worked backwards. Normally it is
used for multi-family or commercial. I was using for rent somewhere about
$400 per month. Taxes are about $1200 to $1300 per month.
14
Mr. Matusik confirmed that the taxes assessed for the two lots run
about $31,700. In answer to Mr. Behr's comment regarding the altering of
the character of the neighborhood, Mr. Matusik feels that the essential
character, which includes all structures, will not be changed. Mr. Prime
stated that the ordinance provides for a buffer of 50 feet between a
residential use and a commercial use. That cannot be done here. He asked
Mr. Matusik if that alone would alter the character of the neighborhood.
Answer: Mr. Matusik asked Mr. Prime if this should be changed to an Area
Variance. Answer by Mr. Prime: No. But you cannot meet the criteria of
the ordinance in any respect by making this commercial. And, if it is
made commercial, it does alter the character of the neighborhood because a
commercial spot is being put in a residential zone that does not mee the
setback and buffers. Matusik: This depends on the interpretation.
Public Hearing Opened:
For: no comment
Opposed:
1) Herbert Wetherby - 4 Garrison Road
Lives in between Windsor and Garrison, across from the subject pro-
perty. Mrs. Goetz read a letter submitted by those opposed to the
application (on file). Mr. Wetherby confirmed that the subject land is
part of the Hovey Land. He further stated that, upon deed transfer, Mr.
Hovey stated that the land was to be used strictly for residential, not
commercial. Documents of proof were presented to the Board. Further
conversation regarding this topic took place at the dais. Mr. Wetherby
expressed concern about the children that play in the Windsor Drive area,
and it is no place for a commercial parking lot.
2) Elizabeth Wright - 11 Windsor Drive
Mrs. Wright explained that the reason she bought her house in that
location 2 1/2 years ago was because of the quiet, residential location.
She feels that the Town of Queensbury is fostering the neighborhood to
remain as such, because there is a planned park on Glenwood Avenue, single
family homes on Glenwood and Windsor Drives. Windsor Drive would be
greatly affected by having a business on the corner, as it is difficult
presently to exit from Windsor onto Glen Street. She feels it would start
a "domino" effect and requests the Board not to grant the variance.
3) John Beebe - 2 Ft. Amherst Road
Mr. Beebe also is concerned about the "domino" theory. He does not
feel the house is obsolete and, if the subject house becomes commercial,
then the house next door becomes obsolete, and so on down Glen Street.
Mr. Beebe is the third house in the "domino" theory. Mr. Beebe said he
bought his house with his eyes opened, but feels Mr. Matusik bought the
subject house with his eyes closed, until the closing. Mr. Beebe also
15
spoke about buffering between commercial properties. He strongly feels
that the house was meant to be a residence and that eventually a buyer
will come along, who will use it as such.
4) Douglas Armstrong - 7 Windsor Drive
He purchased the house November 17, 1987 because the people on the
street are something very special and regards the area as a "utopia." He
strongly feels that Mr. Matusik had no intention of using the house as
residential. Mr. Armstrong asked how much furniture is in the house now
as when purchased. Answer: The same amount, quite a bit. Mr. Matusik
corrected Mr. Armstrong by commenting that he never had any intention of
moving into the house. Mr. Armstrong, however, still feels Mr. Matusik
never had any intention of using the home as residential, and that an
attorney who deals in real estate would know what the situation was that
he was getting into, when he bought the property. Mr. Armstrong also
stated how dangerous Windsor Drive is for traffic, especially during the
snow season, and felt that Mr. Matusik cannot guarantee five cars per
day. Mr. Armstrong paid $72,000 for his house, which is 15,000 square
feet and asked Mr. Matusik how much the subject house cost. Answer: That
is not pertinent to the record. Mr. Armstrong: It is pertinent to the
record because Mr. Matusik is saying that the house is obsolete now as a
residential. Mr. Armstrong feels that the agent paid more for the subject
house than the Armstrong's paid for property that supposedly is a nicer
piece of property. Mr. Armstrong feels that not being residential will
hurt the property, and feels that $109,000 is the price. Mr. Matusik
rebutted that the more he paid the more reasonable rate of return he is
entitled to. Mr. Armstrong also stated that he was disappointed that a man
of the court made some statements that Armstrong feels are totally inac-
curate.
5) Lisa Armstrong - Windsor Drive
Lisa is 15 1/2 years old and expressed concern about the safety
of her little sister and other children playing on Windsor Drive.
6) Mary Ann Beebe - 2 Ft. Amherst Drive
The neighborhood is characterized as residential and not commercial.
The map that was provided with the application is slightly unobjective, in
that it shows very little of the surrounding residential neighborhood.
Most of the impact will be on the residential areas, and not the com-
mercial entities across Glen Street. It will hurt them as far as privacy
and neighborhood character goes, but it will hurt the value of properties.
Mrs. Beebe also asked about the purchase price, because she feels that is
the only way a hardship can be assessed. She also stated that, when Mr.
Matusik purchased a residence further south on Glen Street, he said that
there would only be one business situated in at that location, but shortly
thereafter there were four. It is difficult to know how extensive the
proposed businesses are going to be.
16
Mrs. Beebe verified that the children do use the street and they need
protection. She also differed with Mr. Reynolds regarding professional
offices located in homes on Glen Street. There are some different zones,
and the areas that do have offices are virtually an office/house, which is
required. The primary use of those homes has to be for residential pur-
poses. Farther south on Glen Street there is a different zone, which has
changed the character of the neighborhood.
Mrs. Beebe presented a letter from Tupper Limbert, 17 Garrison Road,
who stated opposition to the variance (on file).
7) Joyce Thompson - 12 Garrison Road
Expressed opposition to any changes in the single family zoning law,
and is concerned about the traffic on Windsor Drive and Garrison Road.
Construction of new homes in the area are completed in good taste and have
improved that character of the neighborhoods. There also has been improve-
ment in the commercial buildings. She feels that cars for the proposed
commercial venture will park in areas other than the assigned driveway.
Mr. Matusik thanked the Board and those in the audience for their time
and comments. He did confirm that the purchase price on the building was
$109,000, with closing costs as $3,500. Mr. Matusik spoke about the home-
work that was done before he purchased the property. He felt that it was
a good purchase and that, if they could not find a suitable tenant, there
would be no difficulty in transferring it as a single family home. In
disagreement with the audience, he feels that he has met the three-prong
test for this residence. Regarding the crowding of Windsor Drive, he said
the parking spaces would be recessed from the street. He agreed that he
does own offices on Glen Street, but mentioned to Mrs. Beebe that his var-
iance does allow more than one office. He stated that he would not invade
the privacy of the children on Windsor Drive. Referring to counsel's
statement regarding setback, Mr. Matusik said he would like to work with
counsel in that area. He feels that he has done nothing to create the
circumstances, but t~at the circumstances were created by attrition,
erosion, etc.
Mr. Armstrong stated that he is a licensed real estate agent and, at
the time this house was purchased, there were two other properties very
close in proximity, that were on the market for $75,000 each. It is
inconceivable to him that someone would pay $109,000, which was the asking
price, unless they were thinking in terms of commercial value to that
property.
Public Hearing Closed:
Mrs. Goetz read a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Spring, 8 Windsor
Drive, objecting to the variance (on file).
17
Warren County Planning Board disapproved and the Queensbury Committee'
for Community Beautification disapproved (see Page 18 A). Not only was
the Committee concerned about landscaping plans, but was interested in the
parking solution at the location.
Mr. Muller reviewed the deed and does not believe there is a restric-
tion that the subject area is limited to residential use. Each piece of
property is different, so he does not want everything to be based on what
happened in 1982. He agrees with the Beebe's regarding the "domino"
effect. What is across the street is Plaza Commercial use. Other
variances have been approved in that area because we (the Board) are
shifting a little bit of Commercial Use within the Plaza Commercial. The
subject building has been a private residence for 65 to 75 years, and is a
very familiar site within the Queensbury/Glens Falls area. Windsor Drive
is not a street that non-residents use and, in fact, is a collection of
pot holes. The applicant is considering changing the traffic pattern, in
order to accommodate the required 18 parkings spaces, or a portion thereof
if approved. The' land is 1/7th of an acre, with the facade facing Gìen
Street, which is the buffer with commercial usages across Glen Street, and
it is also used as a buffer in terms of the residential uses on Windsor
Drive. Glenwood is moving up with its improved environment, the Wetherby
residence is zoned residential and is restricted residential by its deed.
There has to be a buffer of 50 feet, not necessarily a planting, but with
this application that could never be.
Mr. Muller did not agree with Mr. Matusik that this variance would
have no impact on the neighbors. It has no impact on Cole Muffler (that
is why they are not here), no impact on Inside Edge, no impact on Fire-
stone, no impact on Sunoco. Everybody on whom the variance has impact is
here. The fact that it is a neatly-shaped piece of property, it is
uniquely-situated piece of property (Plaza Commercial across the street
and on a state highway) are reasons why variances are approved. Some
reasons why variances are denied are that the applicant cannot get a buf-
fer, cannot get adequate parking, diminish residential uses to the left
and to the right, diminish the use of Windsor Drive as residential.
Mr. Mueller moved DISAPPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1329, Joseph G.
Regan, because of the adverse affect upon the neighborhood. There are
variances from the ordinance that are monumental. This is approximately
1/7th of an acre, and the parking requirements entail a tight situation.
There would be a serious deleterious impact on Windsor Drive. Economic
hardship is sold as zoned. There has been testimony that it was purchased
for $109,000, in December of 1987, with the clear knowledge of the present
zoning.
Seconded by Mr. Turner.
18
TOWN OF QUEENS BURY
COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION
Robert L. Eddy, Chairman
17 Owen Avenue
Queensbury, N. Y. 12801
Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary
8 Queensbury Avenue
Queensbury, N. Y. 12801
To. (x) Warren County Planning Board Date. 2/8/88
( ) Queensbury Town Planning Board
(x) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals
(x) APpli cant
"
Re. Variance #1329
Joseph G. Regan
Corner Glenwood Avenue & uppef ßlep
We have reviewed the request rorslx Varlance, ( ) Site
( ) Other - and have the following recommendations.
( ) Approval (x) Disapproval
Plan Review.,
This application has been disapproved by our Committee as data for
landscaping, screening and plantings for the above applicant for a Site
Flan Review or Variance has not been submitted or is incomplete.
Would you please, therefore, refer the applicant to our Committee
for approval of its plans prior to granting the application pending
before your Board or before construction permit has been granted.
You and the Building Department will be notified just as soon as
plan~ have been approved by us.
.
Respectfully Submitted,
(""/1J/~f// ¿: vi~7L.
-- -
- ' (í
Robert L. Eddy
Chairman
Not only was the committee concerned about landscaping plans
but was interested in parking solution at this busy location.
:.,
18A
IJSE VAllIARCE NO. 1330
AlBA VAl.IA1CE NO. 1331
Lawrence and Pauline Durkee
Mrs. Goetz stated that this proposal is for a single family residen-
tial dwelling, NC-IA, located on the east side of Route 9L (Ridge Road),
approximately 170 feet north of County Road No. 39 (East Sunnyside Road).
Paul M. Wasserman represented the applicants and stated that the
property has been on the market for over a year and has not been able to
sell. There is a buyer, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, who wish to make use of the
property as residential. It is an open, empty lot and a home would be
built on it. In addition, there is genuine hardship as a result that, if
there were a failure to grant the variance, the Durkees would not be able
to meet certain financial obligations.
Mr.
venture
Bardin's
Merrill,
Wasserman confirmed
on either part of
Store (across the
neighbor.
to Mr. Behr that there is no commercial
the property. Mr. Hartin Lemery, owner of
street), has no objections, nor does Mr. Dean
Jean Jones of Jean's Realty, offered information regarding the pro-
perty. The Durkee's listed the property with Ms. Jones in August 1986.
It was and still is a hardship. In August 1981, Ms. Jones sold to Dean
Merrill the property which is the boundry on the north side of the subject
property. Selling and marketing the property was never quoted as being in
a lA zone, because it does not show that on the current zoning map. The
Durkee's backyard is what is now being sold. In answer to Mr. Prime, this
is not a subdivision.
Ms. Jones confirmed to Mr. Griffin that the ingress and egress would
be off Ridge Road. When talking about a Use Variance, Mr. Wasserman said
that it would be much safer to use the property for residential rather
than commercial/residential purposes. The elevation is about 12 feet or
higher. He also stated that it would be extremely hard to see a structure
from the road. Mr. Turner asked if Mr. Durkee could have an egress on
Sunnyside Road. He said he could ask Mr. Durkee that question and get
back to the Board. At that point, Mrs. Goetz asked and Mr. Behr suggested
that the variance be tabled, pending the answer to the egress question.
Mr. Griffin differed and felt that there was no problem with an
entrance on Ridge Road. Ms. Jones said that Hr. Durkee owns 17 feet on
Oneida Corners Road that he does not wish to convey. Mr. Wasserman said
that the way the property is shown on the map is the way the owners would
like to have it sold. In addition, Mr. Wasserman said that what is being
requested is a use that is substantially less hazardous than if the land
were to be used as zoned.
19
Mr. Turner felt that the zoning on the application should be Neighbor-
hood Commercial _10 not Neighborhood Commercial lA. Mr. Wasserman and Ms.
Jones said that one of the problems from the outset has been determining
exactly how the parcel is zoned. It was not correct on the tax map, and
an inquiry had to be made after the sale was consummated. Ms. Jones ex-
plained the difficulty and confusion in getting the correct zoning from
the Building and Zoning Department. Mr. Behr requested a refund of
$50.00, since the applicants were incorrectly charged for two variances;
however, the policy of the Building and Zoning Department is not to refund
monies paid for applications.
Mr. Griffin said he felt the application met all the requirements of a
Use Variance. In answer to Mr. Turner, Mr. Wasserman said it had not been
advertised as NC-1A, but as property for sale.
Public Hearing Opened: no comment
Public Hearing Closed.
Mrs. Goetz said that Warren County Planning Board approved.
Mr. Griffin APPROVED Use Variance 1330. The approval is based on the
following. 1) One of the questions for a use variance: Is there a reason-
able return if used as zone? Answer: There would be no reasonable return.
The property was on the market for over a year with no sale. 2) Unique-
ness: It is totally surrounded by residential. 3) Neighborhood Charac-
ter: This use will not change the neighborhood character. An additional
comment noted that Area Variance 1331 was not required, as the zoning was
Neighborhood Commercial 10,000, not Neighborhood Commercial lA.
Seconded by Mr. Sicard.
Chairman Turner adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m.
~
. ~
Tnedore Turner.
~
Chairman
Minutes typed by Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer
20