Loading...
1988-03-16 -' - (JJElHBJRY zamt:; :¡ngo OF APPEALS Regular Meeting Held: Wednesday March 16, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. Present: Theodore Tumer, Chaimlan Charles O. Sicard Jeffrey Kelley SUsan Goetz, Secretary Daniel S. Griffin R. Case P.r;ime, Counsel Lee York, senior Planner Mack Dean, Bni 1 ding and Zoning Codes Administrator Mary Jane F. M:>eller, Stenographer Absent: Gustave Behr The minutes were C'...,ll~ to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mr. Turner. Corrections to the FebruaJ:y 17, 1988 minutes are as follows: Page 4, 3m Paragraph fran bottan: .. .fact that it \<IiOOld not be used.. ¡ should be .. . fact that it could not be used. The voting status was inadvertently anitted fran each application. They are as follows: Area Variance No. 1292 ¡ Area Variance No. l326¡ Use Variance No. l327¡ Area Variance No. 1328 ¡ Use Variance No. 1329 ¡ Use Variance No. 1330/ Area Variance No. 1331 Tabled by Chaimlan Approved Tabled by Applicant Approved Disapproved Approved Passed UnarûJoously Passed UnarûJoously Passed Unan:iIoously Passed UnarûJoously Mr. Sicard ßDVed APPIUVAL of FebruaJ:y 17, 1988 minutes. Seconded by Mrs. Goetz. ow BUSINBSS Mr. Turner announced that Use Variance No. 1327, Glenn Gregory, was Tabled as requested by Mr. Gre~ via his legal attorney, Malcan B. O'Hara, of Bartlett, Pontiff, eta ale 1 AREA VARIAta 1Ð. 1230 - ~ -Iv ..s8 Ferraro Entertai:rment, Inc. d/b/a Skateland of Glens Falls Mrs. Goetz read the request for an extension of Area Variance Approval on March 18, 1987 to construct a water slide and childrens' go-kart track on the property s~tuated on the west side of Route 9, approx;imately 1.4 miles south of I-87, Exit 20, He 15. Note: Cross Ref: Site Plan Review No. 6-87, approved March 17, 1987 by the Planning Boëm:i. Also, requesting the extension of Site Plan approval. Mr. Willian Nealon and Mr. AntOOny Ferraro, President, represented the project. Mrs. Goetz read the March 2, 1988 letter fzan Mr. Ferraro form- ally requesting of the Town of Queensbury Planning and Zoning Boards an extension of the approvals granted in 1987 (Exhibit A). Mr. Pr:iJœ stated that the Planning Board re-approved the Site Plan on March 15, 1988. Mr. Nealon said that the letter accurately states the construction status, and that the slide has been ordered and is due on-site about April 1. They are waiting for final construction drawings sbJwing elevations of various supports and locations of curbs on the site. There are no changes to the location of the slide which is in the westem extrEmity of the existing site. setbacks remain the sane and location of the plunge pool, etc. remain the SéI'Oe. Their need is to enable to obtain a D1; 1 ding pemrl.t, once the materials and final drawings arrive. It is for that reason there is a request to extend the pemdssion to ccmœnce construction for a œasonable period of t:iJœ. Mr. Ferraro told Mr. Sicard that they would need sixty days. Mr. Griffin rooved APPR:WAL TO mcr'END Area Variance No. 1230, Ferraro Entertai:rment, Inc. , for a period of one year based on the original application, and there will be no alterations to the original request. Seconded by Mr. Sicard. Passed UDaniJlDusly USE VARIAta 1Ð. 1325 Mobil Oil Corporation Mrs. Goetz read the proposal is for a car wash, in addition to the existing Gas Station/Mini Mart Service Station, comer of Route 9 and Route 254, PC-lA. The service would. be JJmited to a car wash and would be autanated. 2 Mr. John C. Carusone represented the project and stated that the car wash being proposed is a turnover or bay operation car wash. He explained the types of car washes available: 1) tunnel (large operation where car is caught in a tunnel on chain and pulled through); 2) self-service (put coin in and driver washes the car); and 3) bay operation (insert coin in box, bay door opens, drive car inside and door closes, operation from overhead gives the car a general washing - no waxing, underwashing, etc., light would go on, door open and driver exits). This is a relatively small operation. Hr. Carusone stated that he does not think the zoning in Queensbury provides for a car wash. There are approximately four or five of these in the Albany area, for which a car wash costs $1.99. In a study done in the Albany area, approximately 5% of the people that use the car wash did so solely to have the car washed; while 95% of the people who used the car wash also bought gas or other items stocked in the Mini Mart. It is felt that the car wash is incidental to the gas and the Mini Hart. because of today's self service marketing. The prior gas station on this site did have a bay for car washing. Mr. Ken Dykstra, President of K.D.C. Corp., represents Rieko Manufac- turing which makes the equipment. In addition to the above procedure, Mr. Dykstra said that the building is free-standing, 36 feet long; the cus- tomer stays in the car in the bay while the equipment goes back and forth. It takes approximately 1 1/2 passes to wash and another 1 1/2 passes to rinse and dry the car. The whole process is approximately 2 1/2 minutes in length, depending on the car size. Time in and out of the bay is approximately 3 minutes, or 20 cars/hour. This bay procedure is geared to work off the nucleus that is already on the site (gas and mini-mart customers). The 95% group usually will go to the gas pump, makes purchase in the store, pay for the wash at that point and exit from the site. Part of the staging (or stacking) area would be at the pump islands, because it takes approximately 6 to 7 minutes at the gas pump. In answer to Mr. Turner, the water would be 100% recycled. Mrs. Goetz asked about the signs. Ms. Arlene Barrios, project engineer, stated that contractors were instructed to take signs down that were not in compli- ance: two Peguses disks from the building and one legend at the canopy. Mobile was allowed, having corner property, two wall signs and one free standing. A variance was granted for each Mobile I.D. signs. Mrs. Goetz referred to the Beautification Committee communication which stated that two signs that were to be removed are still in place; the one on the canopy facing Route 9 and a sign near the building. Ms. Barrios said the one on the canopy is allowed, as it is considered a wall sign, and one facing Burger King was removed. The second sign mentioned is the free standing sign that is allowed. Mr. Carusone stated that Mobil felt they were in compliance, until they met with the Warren County Planning Board and were advised of Mr. Eddy's Beautification Committee letter, advising sign non-compliance. Mobil has tried to show good faith and wants to comply. 3 Mrs. Goetz asked about the car wash procedure, specifically in regards to a malfunction. Mr. Dykstra said it is monitored from inside the store via video camera, and that the entire system would shut down and the doors would open. Approximately 1000 of these systems are installed/year. Ms. Barrios answered Mr. Turner's question regarding size, that the bay is about 35 feet long and 14 feet outside (11 feet inside), and is a brush operation, two driers on top, travels on a gantry. Mr. Dennis O'Malley, Griner Engineering Inc. in Albany, explained the research of existing facilities in the Albany area: Central Ave. and Route 155; Wolf Road and Sand Creek Rd.; and Albany Shaker Road and Osborne Road. They physically watched these stations during the peak hours. They found that the people who used the car wash are essentially the people who were going there for the primary purpose of getting gas and/or a Mini Mart purchase. Secondary was the car wash. For every 100 people using the store, 15 may use the car wash. Only one or two used the car wash and made no other purchase. Mr. O'Malley felt that the traffic at Wolf Road and Sand Creek Road had traffic at least equal to Aviation Road and prob- ably higher. Central Avenue has traffic of about 45,000 cars/day. There were rarely more than two people at a bay; one in the wash and one waiting to get in. Mr. Kelley questioned making a left turn on Aviation Road. Mr. O'Malley felt that was a valid concern; however, if a driver had ~hat concern, they would most likely opt not to make the turn. Mr. Griffin asked about the 100% recycling. The answer was that there are no plans to tie into a sewer. There is 0 discharge. Mr. Dykstra explained that the car can be washed with approximately 20 gallons of water. Of that 16 gallons of water was already in the reclaim system (two 1500 gallon tanks) and is recycled; 4 gallons of clean water is used to rinse the car. The salt is never removed out of the water. Basically, a car is being washed with dirty water and rinsed with clean water. Mr. Griffin is concerned about the neighboring septic tanks and their malfunc- tions. Mr. Turner requested to know the demonstration of hardship. Mr. Carusone explained it was twofold: 1) the prior service station had a car wash; 2) and the anomolie in the law that there is no zoning law in Queensbury. Hr. Turner felt it is more of a convenience than a hardship. Mack Dean, Building and Codes Department. said it would seem that perhaps the Board should question as to whether or not the applicant should be applying for a variance. There is provision in Plaza Commercial lA, under the Zoning Schedule under Site Plan Review Type 2, #2, which addresses the fact that any facility which is an accessory use requires Site Plan review in a Plaza Commercial Zone. He questioned whether or not the Site Plan review would be required if this is considered to be acces- sory or incidental pertinent to an existing facility or whether it 4 could be cónsidered as self-sustaining type of use, where it could stand on its own as a business. However, Hr. Prime feels Mobil is here because it is an increase in use on a sub-standard lot and that basically requires a variance. He agrees with Mr. Dean in that if the Board finds that there is grounds for a Variance, then it probably should go to the Planning Board for Site Plan Review to address the issue of the use of the pro- perty. In answer to Mr. Kelley, Ms. Berrios said the size of the lot is 19,772 square feet, or about one-half acre. Previously, the service station was full service and had three bays. Mr. Dean offered the services of the Building Department regarding the sign problem. Public Bearing Opened: no comment. Public Bearinl Closed Mrs. Goetz stated "Traffic congestion on over-development on a Carusone questioned the was not a majority. has to be considered a that the Warren County Planning Board disapproved. the property as well as that of the intersection, parcel with another principle use added." Mr. 4:2 vote and that it was not a disapproval. There However, Mr. Prime felt that for these purposes it negative vote. The Beautification Committee letter was read (Exhibit B). A discussion took place among the Board about the traffic and the concern for safety and hazards. Mr. Sicard mentioned that there is a possibility of another traffic lane is going to be put in to alleviate traffic at the corner. However, it was felt that this is heresay and cannot be taken into consideration for the subject application. Mr. Dykstra requested that the Board keep in mind concerning like facilities that they are a product of something that is there and is built by and for people who live here. It is not new traffic, it is traffic that is in the system. It should not be thought of from a virgin point of view and that it will generate a certain percentage of cars that would not be there, but studies have indicated that that would be a small percent- age. Mr. Prime asked if the same would be said of a resort community. Answer: The people coming in during the summer months have an impact on all facilities in the area. They will be here and will be new traffic in the area, but they will also be a component that the volumes on Aviation and Route 9 will also go up proportionally, may be 20% higher. Mr. Kelley moved DISAPPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1325, Mobil Oil Corporation, that the traffic is the main concern. The use variance test has not been met due to the fact that no hardship has been shown. It was testified that business was showing profit, and could function without the 5 -.-' addition of a car wash. This particular lot is less than one-half of the required zoning. Seconded by Mr. Griffin. Passed IJnaai.ously USE VAlIAlCE NO. 1288 Elaina's Beauty Boutique Mrs. Goetz read the proposal to renovate a single family dwelling and garage, 51 Aviation Road, UR-5 zone. The garage will be two floors; upstairs office, beauty boutique downstairs. Ms. Bissell informed to Mr. Turner that she did not want to address the application at this meeting, but instead to offer information. She told Mr. Prime that she would like to keep the application before the Board, and referred to a letter sent in January from Susan Decker, legal assistant to R. McMillen (Exhibit B). Last week legal proceedings were started notifying the neighbors in the subdivision in which the house is located as to what is being done. Everyone who has signed a petition was served with papers, advising them that a legal action has been started in front of a judge to attempt to overturn that part of the deed restriction. Mr. Prime asked Ms. Bissell about the timing of the application. An- swer: Hs. Decker hoped a couple of months. Mr. Malcolm O'Hara, Bartlett Pontiff, said he understands the situa- tion that there may be a great amount of default among the defendents who were served and have no interest, but have not permanently signed off. In the event that there is some neighborhood association that bands together, there might be some litigation. He asked the Board to bear with the appli- cant. Mr. Muller moved to TABLE Use Variance No. 1288, Elaina's Beauty Boutique, until the June 1988 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, with the understanding that the applicant will be present at that time and be ready to report on or proceed with the application. Seconded by Hr. Turner. Passed Uaaa1.ously Hr. Hack Dean requested that Hs. Bissell check with the Building Department in May, to insure insertion on the June agenda. 6 NOTICE or APPEAL NO. 1-1988 John W. Caffrey Mr. Turner stated that this is an appeal of Building Permit No. 87-827 of Atlantic Refining and Marketing Corporation by Meadow Run Development Corporation and Highway Hosts, Inc. The appeal of a canopy that had been erected over its gasoline pumps at 52 Aviation Road, which was less than 80 feet from the Aviation Road right of way. Restrictions, covenants and conditions contained in a 1965 agreement and a 1978 stipulation have been violated. Mr. Malcolm O'Hara represented the project. Mr. Turner mentioned to him that Atlantic Refining and Marketing Corporation has not been notified by the Building Department of this action. Mr. Prime advised the Board that the application should be Tabled so that all parties can be put on notice and a date set for the appeal to be heard, and all parties could be represented. Then there can be a formal hearing. Mr. Turner moved to TABLE Appeal No. 1-1988, John W. Caffrey, until all parties have been put on notice and a date set for the appeal. Seconded by Mr. Griffin. Passed Vaaaiaously AIEA VAllIANCE NO. 1332 Chris St. Andrew Mr. Turner said this is for an addition of 18 feet x 68 feet onto an existing home located on Fuller Road, LC-I0A. Mr. Chris St. Andrew represented the project, who verified to the Board that it is 65 feet from the property line to the front of the build- ing, and 33 feet at the side. The land is zoned ten acres because it sits on the base of a mountain. There has to be relief on the side setback and the dimensions of the garage. The septic system is adjacent to the pool. In answer to Mr. Kelley, Mr. St. Andrew said he bought the house and that someone else positioned the house in the present location. Public Hearin¡ Openedz no co..ent. Public Bear!.. closed. 7 There was no correspondence. Mr. Griffin moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1332, Chris St. Andrew, because the application has demonstrated practical difficulty in that the size of the lot and positioning of the house necessitates this request. There will be a 33 foot side setback variance on the east. Seconded by Mrs. Goetz. Passed unanimously. IJSE VAiIARCE NO. 1333 Hadaline Drellos Mrs. Goetz read that the applicant wishes to change the nonconforming use to a one-man engine repair shop located on the north side of Luzerne Road, SR-20. The applicant seeks to lessen the non-conforming, pre- existing use from the current commercial use. The new use would be a one-man shop not unlike home occupation. The applicant wishes to enhance the neighborhood by removing the more offensive commercial use. Mr. Malcolm O'Hara, Esq. represented the project, who stated that basically it is a pre-existing, non-conforming use in a residential zone. They want to keep with the goals of the ordinance and cut back the non- conforming use down to something that is less offensive and out of step with the Zoning Ordinance use schedule for that particular neighborhood. The former business had commercial vehicles coming in and out, which was very obvious to the neighborhood. The new activity would be much less obvious. The activity is well-screened and well-set back from the road. Mr. O'Hara responded to Mr. Turner that the non-conforming, pre-exist- ing use had been gone since March 11. The owner is seeking to limit the variance to a one-man repair shop. The shop will repair small engines, cars, lawn movers, snow blowers, etc. Hrs. Drellos confirmed that there would be no large engines, shafts, lathes, drill presses, etc. The area for repair will be behind the fence and will not be visible to the neighborhood, it will be less intrusive that what is there now, and there will be no more heavy equipment traffic. In addition, there will be no signs. Mr. Muller asked about more than one car being there at a time. Answer: There will be one man, and the man who is going to do the work is the one who lives on the premises. Mr. Muller further asked clarification of the situation as being the person who will occupay the trailer as a tenant, is also the tenant in the back operating a motor repair shop. Mrs. Drellos answered: She lives on the premises with her fiancee, who 8 '- will operate the business out back. The garage itself sets back approxi- mately 350 feet fran the road, about 150 feet fran the feet fran the fence. Mr. O'Hara felt this situation gives the Board an opportunity to l:imit non-confo:r:mance, and it would bring it IOOre into oarpliance with the neighborOOod. Mrs. Drellos remarked that, because she goes to Florida in the winter, this would not be a year-round business, in operation maybe fran March to December . Public Hearing opened: DO u;.anaant Public Hearing Closed No correspondence. Mr. Sicard rooved APPRJVAL of Use Variance No. 1333, Madaline Drellos, and that it be l:imited to one man engine repair shop. It will be limited to a one-year exper:iment and will be reviewed at the em of one year. The haJ:àship is that it is a pre-existing, non-confo:cning use. The variance will expire with any change of ownership of the property. Seconded by Mrs. Goetz. Passed tJnaDimwJly USE VARIAII:E m. 1334 John !b:mey d/b/a SUper saver Rent-A-car Mrs. Goetz J:ead the proposal to autaoobile leasing and rental, 269 Bay Road, Ll-lA. There will be no structural changes to the building (foDDer Take-out Deli SbJppe for Shananagan' s Deli SbJppe). This will not be used for autaoobile sales. This rental ocmpany deals with Insurance :replace- ment vehicles, Body S1x>ps and Dealerships. There was no :representative for the application. Mr. Turner rooved to TABLE Use Variance No. 1334, John M:>oney, for one meeting due to the non-appeai:ance of the applicant. Seconded by Mr. Muller Passed tJnaDimwJly 9 USE VAllIARCE NO. 1335 ... ~ IJI,J sa Dr. and Mrs. Douglas Petroski Mrs. Goetz read the application for an expansion of a Use (Ref: Use Variance No. 1043 granted approval on November 21, 1985), located at the corner of Everts and Homer Avenues, LI-IA. The proposal is for pre-school gymnastics and Day Care. Mr. Robert LaPann represented the project, along with Mrs. Petroski. The Petroski's own the property, it is on the south corner. The site consists of 1.3 acres, with a modern building on the easterly part of the property. The vacant land for the proposed second building is on the western part of the property. The property is now zoned light industrial one acre, and adjoins the highway commercial property that is to the north. The variance request is made so that the building can be built and the new building can be used for expansion of gymnastics activity and also for a day care center. The present use of the property is extremely valu- able to the people in the area. It is used for gymnastics, heavily attended, well kept, does have vacant land adjoining to the west. The vacant land is not attractive for most of the uses in the light industrial zone. There is no area for expansion. It is a hardship to the Petroski's because, even if a use were available as light industrial, the use would reduce the value of their present building where they run the gymnastics academy. The building would be constructed according to the drawings presented to the Board. It matches generally in appearance to the existing build- ing. The building that is shown in the middle is not proposed at this time, but would be Phase III and would house administrative offices, locker rooms, etc. The grounds would be well landscaped. Mrs. Petroski is preparing the landscaping plans for the next meeting of the Beautifi- cation Committee. If the variance is approved at this meeting, she would be willing to abide by any modifications set by the Beautification Commit- tee. The facility would accommodate from 40 to 50 people in the Day Care center, would be a day time use, from 7:30 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. for child- ren to come and be cared for. Day Care centers today are in great demand and severely understaffed. The use should not be objectionable to neigh- bors, there is no heavy truck traffic, nothing hazardous, no late evening activities, not noisy. Whatever goes in has to be approved by the Depart- ment of Social Services. The neighborhood is in transition, as there are several single family homes in the area. Additionally there is a chiropractic clinic, WBZA radio station, Silverstein, Loftus and Ross accounting firm, Queensbury Motors. Mrs. Petroski and Mr. LaPann have spoken to the neighbors and 10 everyone has approved. The contract meets a need and relieves the burden of a vacant lot. Mrs. Goetz asked about day care in the facility at present. Answer: There is day camp, which is not required to be licensed by New York State, contrary to a day care facility. Mrs. Petroski feels the two are very similar in regards to activities. There are pre-school children there now. The facility is open 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and the day camp is run from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.; however, the children can come anywhere be- tween 7:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. The gymnastics classes are between 2:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. Mrs. Petroski answered to Mr. Turner that day care employees are licensed with the state. Mr. Kelley asked about the number of employees, because he is con- cerned about the parking aspect. Answer: 3 full time, 5 part time. In Phase II, it will depend upon how many children are enrolled. New York State requires 7 children to one teacher. The maximum capacity is 50 children, which would mean 7 employees. Not all teachers will be there at the same time, because of working different hours; maybe 10 employees at anyone time, if that. There will also be a new parking lot added. There is a total of 60 parkings spaces that is shown. The business is more of a "drop off, pick up" situation. Mrs. parking however, for that approved 1) lot Motors. Petroski referred to weekend parking. During the week the one lot is never used. The problem on the weekend is home meets; Queensbury Motors has consented to the use of their parking lot purpose without remuneration. All parents have to be in an parking lot, before the meet starts or the meet will not start: in front of the building, 2) lot further down, or 3) Queensbury New York State requires fenced in playgrounds. Mr. Griffin asked about expanding the parking lot to the side. Mrs. Petroski said yes; however, one of the things she has been waiting for is to see where the sewers are going to go, on which side, and how that will effect what she has, before ripping up land. She confirmed to Mr. Muller that Phase II is a gymnasium on bottom floor and classrooms on the upper floor. The building will be the same height as the first building. There is temporary landscaping where Phase III is to go. Public Hearing Opeaed: Mark Brilling: Has two young, pre-school children and approves of the services at this center. 11 Public Hearinl Closed: Mr. Muller moved APPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1335, Dr. and Mrs. Douglas Petroski, as the hardship that existed on the first application is a continuing one. It is reasonable to expect expansion of its present use. It does not detract from the neighborhood and would be unlikely that it would have a reasonable return, if used for light industrial for which it is zoned. Seconded by Mr. Turner. Passed Unaniao..ly. USB VAlIANCE NO. 1336 Bayron Sales Mrs. Goetz read this proposal to be for heavy equipment sales, County Line Road, LI-IA. At present the land is vacant (abandoned farm land). Mr. Ron Chartrand represented the project and read a statement (Exhibit D). He has owned the property since March 1987, and did know that it was zoned light industrial. He said that under the classifica- tion, wholesale business is permitted there. No buildings would be constructed. There is a septic system, so the area has to be kept clear. The barn was there. Mr. Muller requested confirmation regarding property area. Answer: There is 200 feet of road front; goes 200 feet deep on one side toward the town line; there is a 200 foot line that goes at an angle. The farm house is part of the land; however, we own all the land around this area in every direction. The north edge of the farm house connects to the line. Actually we own about 1500 to 1800 feet beyond the eastern marker, which gets into Kingsbury. The Tax Map No. is 109.-5-3 for Queensbury, which consists of 11.39 acres. There was more definition at the dais. Mr. Corp., dual. Chartrand confirmed that he is president of Airron Industrial and the entity is a corporation and business owned by an indivi- Mr. Muller expressed concern that Mr. Chartrand is proposing to use this oddly shaped piece of property for which he seeks a variance, leaving everything else as zoned. Answer: Yes. However, he felt that this would not change the zoning, with the use permitted. However, Mr. Prime indi- cated that essentially the question is what he wants to use the property for and how much land he wants to devote to that use. Hr. Chartrand stated that the land is isolated because of the east/west runway of the 12 ~ airport, the location of the house, and because of the septic tank system which is in place. He questioned as to what he was to do with the land if he cannot do something that does not qualify for the LI-1A classfication for which it is zone? He pointed out that the LI-IA classification allows a wholesale business. Mack Dean felt that the definition was being taken out of context. That is under new Rule 2, warehousing for enclosed stor- age of goods, materials and warehouse wholesale businessess. Evidently the concept and intent was of an enclosed goods wholesale in a building primarily, as opposed to other zones where heavy equipment, sales and display are under a Site Plan Review. Heavy equipment sales are in a Highway Commercial zone. Mr. Huller reviewed that the Board wanted to establish that the pro- perty is entitled to a Use Variance. There are some larger land holdings, with a smaller piece in which the owner is interested in using for a par- ticular use. Within the smaller piece, is the farm house included? Answer: Not according to that sketch. The designated property goes from County Line Road to the east edge of the house; then 200 feet northeast to a yellow stake inserted into the ground; 200 feet west to another yellow stake at the County Line Road; and then 200 feet on the front. The reason that this piece of land was selected is because it cannot be used for the designated use that is permitted in the LI-1A use designation. Muller: If that is so, Mr. Chartrand needs to be able to prove to the Board that he cannot use that particular piece of property as zoned, that circum- stances are unique and that he has made effort~; ie: using it for light industrial use, sell for light industrial use, etc. Chartrand: He did not feel this could be done because of the septic tank being in jeopardy; and, because of the airport easement, which the Planning Board would have to approve and there are low airplanes flying very low, a detriment to industry. He also stated that there are not actually 11 acres, because of the airport ground easement. No buildings can be built there. Mr. Chartrand did not know how much land was in the subject piece of property in Queensbury, after the easement was deducted. Mr. Chartrand explained to the Board that the reason he is requesting this particular use for this piece of land is to improve the rest of the land, which is very expensive. There is a lot of black clay. To summarize, Mr. Muller said that 1) there is an irregularly shaped lot, 2) that it must be one acre, 3) there must be appropriate setbacks from the house (lot line cannot be by the edge of the house), 4) there must be proof to the Board regarding the three questions on the Zoning Board application, Page 2. Hr. Chartrand stated that his neighbor, Mr. Fisher, is in favor of the request. He did mention that Kingsbury allows heavy equipment sales (this was amended in March 1987) to conform with other businesses that are presently in the Warren/Washington Industrial Park, which is part of Queensbury. Again Mr. Chartrand said that he is asking to improve land in Queensbury by being permitted to sell equipment that he can use to accomplish this feat and also be able to have an opportunity to sell it and use the profits to continue to groom the land, 13 -' get it to drain , and get some industry in the area, and improve the base of Queensbury's tax rate, etc. Mr. Muller asked again if Hr. Chartrand can demonstrate to the Board how a reasonable return on the property is not possible to use as zoned. Answer: Because of the east/west right of way, because of location of the house, because of the septic tank location. There is not that much land to the north of the house that would be in compliance with the LI-1A uses. In addition, the previous owners would not sell the smaller portion of the land separately. He had to buy the entire piece; however, he only wanted the upper part of the parcel. Mr. Chartrand also stated that there is a possibility that he could waiver his application and go to Kingsbury and set up his business. In defense of Mr. Muller's review, Mr. Turner stated that an owner cannot cut a piece of property and say that it is not suitable. It is necessary to come in with dollars and cents aspects of this particular property that it cannot be used as zoned; ie: put the land up for sale for a period of time through a broker. Stating directly to the point, Mr. Prime suggested that a broker be brought in to testify that the property cannot be used as zoned. After additional discussion regarding proof, Mr. Chartrand advised that he was withdrawing his application and that he would go to Kingsbury. When Mr. Mueller suggested counsel, he said that a lawyer and/or a realtor would be too expensive. Mr. Chartrand then said the Board could Table the application, if desired, since perhaps he was too hasty in withdrawing. This would give him time to get his thoughts together and get a broker. He felt the zoning requirements were entirely too complicated, and that other areas have code books that specifically designate, define and pinpoint the exact intent of what the use permits. Mack Dean felt this was a point that is well taken. Mr. Huller made a motion to TABLE Use Variance No. 1336, Bayron Sales, until April 1988 at the request of the applicant. Seconded by Mr. Sicard. Passed V..nimoasly. ADA VAllIAlICB NO. 1337 Ernest A. Butler Mrs. Goetz read the application for a proposed addition of an attached garage to provide sheltered parking located at 6 Fort Amherst Road, SFR-I0. The request is for a two-foot setback, in lieu of the l5-foot requirement. 14 Mr. Mark Brilling, who represented the project, stated that the old garage was converted into a family room. The driveway that is there now is the original driveway. The pool had to be located where it is because of underground power lines and other lines running through the yard. Mr. Butler has owned the property for 14 - 15 years. The reason for the gar- age is so that the house can be sold, because interested buyers would not buy without the garage. Hr. Brilling advised Mr. Griffin that he had signed slips from the neighbors on all sides and there were no objections. Mrs. Goetz informed the Board that the other side of the street is Glens Falls and was concerned that those residents would not have been informed; however, Mr. Brilling said that signatures were obtained from most of them. Mr. Butler also owns property across the street. Mrs. Goetz noted for the record that the Town of Queensbury probably, because they do not have the tax maps for the city, would notify the mayor and it is up to the discretion of the mayor to notify the people living in Glens Falls. Mr. Brilling said that the people in Glens Falls were not notified by the mayor; however, the agent did do so - residents within at least a 500 foot circle. In answer to Mr. Turner, the exterior of the proposed extension is 10' 8" x 28' 6", the same length of the e?tisting bUilding. Roof lines and slate will match the existing structure, all architecture will match. The size will be tight, but a large car will be able to fit. After reviewing the signatures which were secured by Mr. Brilling, Mrs. Goetz wanted to make note that not all the signatures were within 500 feet. Mr. Brilling affirmed that some were outside but, if the residents were within the block on Fort Amherst and Garrison, the signatures are there. Mrs. Goetz mentioned that her feelings are that this is a self- imposed hardship, because the owners chose to abaudon the original garage and make it into a family room. Mr. Brill1ng mentioned that it was very difficult to get in and out of the original garage; snow had to be removed from the site because the area was needed for turning the car around; there were some impracticalities, ie; the doors were narrow. The garage was converted in 1973. Public Jleariq Opened: no comment. Public Beariq Closed. Mrs. Goetz stated that the Warren County Planning Board modified with condition with the stipulation that the adjoining property owner approves. (Mrs. Margaret Cornwell). Mrs. Cornwell was present at the meeting and mentioned a telephone conversation she had with Mr. Butler, at which time she felt he was most unpleasant. Mrs. Cornwell read to the Board her response to Mr. Butler which stated that she would approve of the project, so that the garage could be added and the house could be sold quickly. Mr. Brilling said the property was on city sewers and that the pitch of the roof will be towards the driveway. 15 Mr. Kelley moved APPROVAL of Area Variance No. 1337, Ernest A. Butler, because of testimony that 1) the house in the neighborhood would warrant a garage for resale purposes; 2) there are no surrounding neighbors that are in opposition; and 3) there appears to be ample distance between this proposed garage and the home next door. The practical difficulty is that the design of the house lends itself to having a garage in this particular position, and the garage cannot be made smaller. Seconded by Mr. Sicard. Passed Votes: 4 Yes (Kelley, Muller, Sicard, Turner) 2 No (Goetz, Griffin) The following items took place after the public meeting. IJSE VAlIAlCE NO. 1329 Joseph G. Regan, SFR-I0 Zone, 637 Glen Street. Reference: Minutes of February 17, 1988, Page 18, Hotion by Mr. Muller (Paragraph 14). Correspondence was received from Donald A. Matusik specifically re- questing of the Boa~d in writing, pointing out and directing its attention to the disapproval resolution, and that the record indicates no testimony or substantiation of clear knowledge of present zoning. Mr. Muller acknowledged that statement to be true. Therefore, Hr. Muller moved MODIFICATION of the motion of Use Variance No. 1329, Joseph G. Regan as follows: Strike from the motion the last sentence which reads as follows: "There has been testimony that it was purchased for $109,000, in December of 1987, with the clear knowledge of the present zoning." Insert into the motion the following, which will be the last sentence: "The applicant demonstrated through his testimony and through our observation of the site, that 1) it was pur- chased for $109,000 in December of 1987; and 2) he purchased it from the then current owner as a single family residence, and that it is a single family residence, and that on both sides of that single family residence there are single fam- ily residences." 16 '- Seconded by Mr. Turner. Passed U.aniaou8ly Hr. Muller stated that the sense of his motion was that the applicant was knowledgeable of the zoning ordinance, just as any other party. It is a matter of public record. It is no secret that he is an attorney at law, and that he was buying it for himself. Mr. Muller felt that the context of the presentation changed several times, specifically in regards to the ownership and who was maintaining residence. Important in the testimony was the area in which Mr. Matusik stated that he purchased the property in December, had intended to submit an application in January (which was filed in December), but did net have it in on time and that is why he was at the February hearing; in addition to the fact that Mr. Matusik had lived in the house, and discovered six weeks after the purchase that it was net habitable for a single family residence. Mr. Muller felt that, if he was confused in his motion, it was because of the applicant's presenta- tion, and that he staRds firm that Mr. Matusik knew or should have known of the zoning, and that the applicant did not at any time present that he clearly knew of the zoning and seemed to ignore it. TABLmG 01 APPLICATIOJlS Lee York, applications be the following: Sr. Planner, established. has requested that a procedure for Tabling The Zoning Board of Appeals is submitting 1) If an applicant wishes the application to be TABLED, a request will be submitted in writing to the Board with information substantiat- ing why the Board should take the action. If there is sufficient reason, the application will be Tabled by the Board. 2) If an application is on the Agenda for review and appropriate representation is present, the Board may have the option to Table the application if it deems necessary due to unusual circumstances; ie: not enough information, etc. 3) An applicant or representative not present at the designated review meeting or has not submitted a request to the Board to table the application, will automatically have to re-apply. The Board has suggested that a statement be put on the bottom of the application form with respect to the policy regarding non-refundable monies. Hrs. into a Goetz MOVED that the above-mentioned three items be incorporated Procedure for TABLING Applications. In addition, a statement be 17 '- put on the bottom of the application form with respect to the policy regarding non-refundable monies. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. ~f]~ Theodore Turner, Chairman Minutes typed by Mary Jane F. Moeller, Stenographer 18 Q1JEDSBftY Z'.IIG lOAD OF APPBALS .A1mIJ)D RESOLUTION TQ THE DBDay 18, 1988 mnns IJSE VAllIAlfCE RO. 1329. JOSEPH G. REGAN Reference: Page 18, Paragraph 14 of the above-mentioned minutes: Mr. Muller moved MODIFICATION of the motion of Use Variance No. 1329, Joseph G. Regan as follows: Strike from the motion the last sentence which reads as follows: "There has been testimony that it was purchased for $109,000, in December of 1987, with the clear knowledge of the present zoning." Insert into the motion the following, which will be the last sentence: "The applicant demonstrated through his testimony and through our observation of the site, that 1) it was pur- chased for $109,000 in December of 1987; and 2) he purchased it from the then current owaer as a single family residence, and that it is a single family residence, and that on both sides of that single family residence there are single fam- ily residences." Seconded by Mr. Turner. Passed laani.o..ly The motion for Variance No. 1329, Joseph G. Regan, reads as follows after modification: "Mr. Mueller moved DISAPPROVAL of Use Variance No. 1329, Joseph G. Regan, because of the adverse affect upon the neighborhood. There are varfances 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. The applicant demon- strated through his testimony and through our observation of the site, that 1) it was purchased for $109,000 in December; and 2) he purchased it from the then current owner as a single family residence, and that it is a single family residence, and that on both sides of that single family residence there are single family residences." ~@~ ~- Theodore Turner, Chairman . . ',-,,", - ,; '~'",' ~~: )":.~-;1'·T;;~','" 'l¡~,'i~ ,~., '''l',~¡, _ ,,"'''í' - '",..··i·''.''' .,.._':""...,...."-.-_--~.., '-- ,:AT£LII'fJ} ... ..,- Lake George Rd. A.D. 5, Box 2 Glens Fallg, N.Y. 12801 (510)792-8989 1109 Lincoln Ave. Lockport, N.Y. 14094 (716)433-5605 March 2, 1988 Thruway Mall Harlem Rd. & Walden Ave. Cheektowaga, N.Y. 14225 (716)892-0075 ~DO~~~EEN~B,__URY $~UW r: I.:;,: ~19ß~' PLANN'N~~G DEPARTMENT ' Ms. Susan Davidson Planning Department Town of Queensbury Bay & Haviland Roads Glens Falls, New York tf>- ~~ rrc- ~ I) ()J'- µ CJ . 1¡3C 12801 Re: Ferraro Entertainments, Inc./Skateland of, Glens Falls Area Variance No. 1230 Site Plan Review File No. 6-87 Dear Ms. Davidson: In pursuance of our telephone conversation of Monday, February 29th, please accept this letter as formal request of the Planning Board of the Town of Queensbury and the Zoning Board of the Town of Queensbury to extend the . approvals heretofore granted to Ferraro Entertainments, owner of Skateland of Glens Falls, to develop a waterslide facility on the Skateland property to be located at the rear (western end) of the Skateland parcel. This approval was granted by the Zoning Bqard On March 18, 1987. In the intervening months, since the approval of this application, this site has been cleared and made generally ready to receive the slide to be built by Aqua World of DesMoines, Iowa. The slide itself has been ordered from the manufacturer, having been so in November, 1987. The construction drawings for the slide are expected momentarily and delivery of the slide has been promised by its manufacturer at the end of March, when the site would be susceptible to construction of this type of facility. It is anticipated that the construction process will require approximately 8 weeks to complete.' . . We are aware that, the variance and site plan review process generally afford an applicant a I-year period within which to initiate construction of the proposed improvement. Owing to complications which arose in Cheektowaga, New York in connection with the development of a new roller skating EXHIBIT A '. . . , . facility for that site, it was not possible to devote the corporation I s resources or personnel in' the intensive manner required to supervise this construction program during the Summer and Fall of 1987. This was, in addition, complicated by the availability of scheduling from our supplier. Aqua World, of slides during this period of year coming from the manufacturers. As noted, the slide has since been ordered and is scheduled for delivery to our site in the Town of Queensbury at the end of March when, weather permitting. the construction will be completed in approximately 8 weeks. It should be further noted that no modifications are anticipated or have been sought from the manufacturer that vary in any matèrial way from the design proposed and approved by the town in the Spring of last year. We would respectfully request that, for the reasons above stated, an extension of time be granted to Ferraro Entertainment to commence the actual construction of the improvement at the Skateland facility on Route 9 in the Town of Queensbury. As noted, the site has been cleared and leveled and fill brought to the site to improve the grade where required. The site is now ready to accept the superstructure and footings of the waterslide which is scheduled for delivery to our facility on Route 9 at the end of March. Accordingly, the favorable action by the Queensbury Planning Board and the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals is respectfully requested to enable our facility to carry forward with these improvements as soon as the construction season and materials del~very permit. Sincerely yours, 1f4~o- AN~ON~ J. FERRARO, President Ferraro Entertainments, Inc. AJ~'/bmc EXHIBIT A TOWN OF QUEENSBURY COMM~~TEE FOR COMMUNITY BEAUTIFICATION Robert L. Eddy, Chairman 17 Owen Avenue "Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 To. (X) Warren County Planning Board ( ) Queensbury Town Planning Board (X) Queensbury Town Zoning Board of Appeals (X) Applicant Mrs. Arthur J. Seney, Secretary 8 Queensbury Avenue Queensbury, N. Y. 12801 Date. 2/8/88 Res Use variance #1325 Mobil Oil Corp. Route 9 and 254 We have reviewed the request for. (X) Variance, ( ) Site Plan Review, ( ) Other - and have the following recommendations. ( ) Approval ( ) Disapproval One of the finest gas station plantings in Queensbury was destroyed when the current building was being erected. The plantings agreed upon at that time have not been checked to see if comforms to agreements, but more importantly at this time is the fact that signs are not as stipulated by the Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals. Two signs that were to be removed are still in place:- the one on the canopy facing Route 9 and the "ladder" sign near the entrance to the building. Approval of this variance should hinge upon the non- conforming signs being removed first. In addition to the above landscaping, screening and planting provisions, the Committee wishes to go on record that it does not approves 1. Non-conforming signs, 2. Plastic or artificial trees, shrubs or flowers. In approving the above (or attached plans), the Committee has the expressed or implied agreement of the applicant to replace immediately dead trees, shrubs or plants, and to give proper maintenance to all plantings. All 'rubbish containers or dumpsters shall be screened, all plantings shall be mulched and trees shall be retained or planted, as agreed. ~jfUIÁ~~U¿: ~ted, ~~/EddY. ~~an Þ YIf-//j J T ð -- RICHARD.J. BARTLETT PAUL E. PONTi,,. ROBERT S. STEWART ALAN R. RHODES H. WAYNE .JUDGE ROBERT S. McMILLEN PHILIP C. MciNTIRE MARK A. LEBOWITZ .J. LAWRENCE PALTROWITZ MALCOLM B. O'HARA PATRICIA E. WATKINS .JOHN W. CA,.,.RY GARY C. HOBBS MARK E. CERASANO BARTLETT, PONTIFF, STEWART, RHODES Be JUDGE, P. C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW ONE WASHINGTON STREET AL,.RED D. CLARK P. O. Box 380 1180.-18... GLENS FALLS, NEW YORK 12801-0380 H. GLEN CA,.,.RY fl828-187.' III'B'782-2117 ALEXANDER P. RO.ERTSON COUNSEL. RU. January 19, 1988 Planning and Zoning Department Queensbury Office Building Bay Road at Haviland Glens Falls, New York 12801 Attn: Susan Davidson RE: Area Variance #1288 - 51 Aviation Road Elaina's Beauty Boutique Dear Ms. Davidson: Please be advised that our client, Elaina Bissell, is still awaiting judicial determination of her action concerning the real property known 'as 51 Aviation Road. Please adjourn the above-referenced matter until further notice from this office or from Elaina Bissell. Thank you for your time and consideratiòn. SED/gbd Sincerely, ~ (~A-- i ( y(!--' 'J Susan'E. Decker, Legal Assistant ., '. F Y.~/0/ T C!- .... J.,..¡ '--- ,~ ~ ~ March 16, 1988 To Whom It May Concern; I am Ronald Chartrand, President of Airron and owner of Bayron Sales. Bayron Sales has a recorded business certificate with the Warren County Clerks Office dated April 16, -1976. In the past I have sold several pieces of equipment in the airport area. The profits from the sale of this equipment was used to offset the expense of draining, grading and/or excavating the land to·be able to have access over the land at all, times. By having the use of equipment sales I would be able to use the equipment that would be for sale to excavate the land for 365 days a year access. Our Kingsbury neighbors bordering us on the East and in the Warren- Washington County Industrial Park allows in their Industrial Zone heavy equipment sales. The entire area is industrial so there would be, in my view, no adverse effeci on the neighborhood. The land that I am requesting use for'equipment sales is isolated so as not to permit for LI-1A uses as set forth in permitted uses. Land abuts Warren County Airport East-West runway R.O.W. The house to the south along with it's septic systems and drainage fields doesn't allow for a building to b~ placed on this land~ Therefore, because of this, the land is useless for Ll-1A use. This l~nd has been abandoned farmland £ormany years. When it was used for farm land .it still contained very large rocks and clay seil, along with being wet and low to the road grade. The cost to make this land fully useable is extremely high. Presently, th~ land is covered with trees that make it look like a jungle. I would remove ail trees and grade lot to drain and to look a~tended. , By removing the 35~ tb 40' high trees this woUld be a plus to the Warren County Airport East-West Runway approaches.. Sincerely, , Ronald Chartrand President ~ .> , RC/sp EXHIBIT D ~ ~' v ~ - ....--- Donald M. Matusik ATTORNEY AT LAW 611 Glen Street. Glens Falls, New York 12801 518-793-6604 February 29, 1988 Theodore Turner, Chairman Queensbury Zoning Board of Appeals R.D. #1, Meadowbrook Road Queensbury, New York 12801 Re: Use Variance No. 1329 637 Glen Street Dear Ted: .- ®~üw~fu1 ~ L11\ ~19B8 W PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' I enclose for your reference copy of Notice of Disapproval of Use Variance 1329. I call your attention to the last sentence in the disapproval resolution. The record clearly indicates no testimony or substantiation of clear knowledge of present zoning. The only testimony given was my own indicating that we did not inquire as to the zoning until after the purchase, which is, in fact, the case. No one, of course, could come forward to indicate otherwise. Since this memorandum of disapproval may very well appear in the Court record at an Appellate Level, I would ask that 'this sentence be immediately struck and decision modified accordingly. Please let me hear from you personally if my request will not be complied with. ve~~Z£ DoN~ MATUSIK DMM/bp Enclosure cc Susan Goetz, Secretary Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Queensbury EX/-I-/6/7 .../ I:'