The URL can be used to link to this page

1990-06-20 QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FffiST REGULAR MEETING JUNE 20TH, 1990 INDEX Area Variance No. 28-1990 Nancy S. and Peter L. Kudan 1. Area Variance No. 24-1990 Capital Area Community 3. Health Plan, Inc. Use Variance No. 41-1990 Barbara Tebeau 9. Area Variance No. 34-1990 Abraham Rudnick 14. Use Variance No. 44-1990 Abraham Rudnick 14. THESE ARE NOT OFFICIALLY ADOPTED MINUTES AND ARE SUBJECT TO BOARD AND STAFF REVISIONS. REVISIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING MONTHS MINUTES (IF ANY) AND WILL STATE SUCH APPROVAL OF SAID MINUTES. --- QUEENSBURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FIRST REGULAR MEETING JUNE 20TH, 1990 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT THEODORE TURNER, CHAIRMAN SUSAN GOETZ, SECRETARY JOYCE EGGLESTON BRUCE CARR CHARLES SICARD MICHAEL SHEA JEFFREY KELLEY DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY-KARLA CORPUS ZONING ADMINISTRATOR-PAT COLLARD ASSISTANT PLANNER-STUART BAKER STENOGRAPHER-MARIA GAGLIARDI MR. TURNER-Before we get started, for anybody that's here to hear Area Variance 40-1990, William F. Davidson, Mr. Davidson has withdrawn the application. CORRECTION OF MINUTES May 16th, 1990: Page 3, where it says Mr. Turner sib where are you going to put the garage, and then, down at the bottom, the last sentence, he could build 900 square feet there and not need a variance, instead of get a variance; Page 5, where Mr. Macri is speaking, where it says the highest part of the ridge, ridge was left off; Page 6, where Mr. Turner is speaking, it might be ~ ft., not 6 ft., long; Page 9, seventh line up, do you own 2 cars; Page 21, fifth sentence up, where Mr. Sicard is speaking, how old is that decision, sib 15 years, not feet; Page 28, Mr. Turner is speaking, seventh sentence up from the bottom, where it says, you could put a, sib service door, not garage door; Page 8, middle of the page, Mr. Turner is speaking, as long as you, sib meet the setback, not need the setback; Page 11, Mrs. Goetz is speaking, was that under Group, is it, sib was that under Ellingsworth; Page 23, towards the top, Mrs. Goetz is speaking, where it says, it just seems like you're mapping out, sib maxing out; Page 6, up near the top, Mrs. Goetz is speaking, are you, sib going, to clean the other stuff up; Page 9, Mr. Sicard is speaking, seven down from the top, sib improvement instead of addition, to the neighborhood MOTION TO APPROVE MAY 16TH, 1990 MINUTES AS CORRECTED, Introduced by Charles Sicard who moved for its adoption, seconded by Susan Goetz: Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE OLD BUSINESS: AREA VARIANCE NO. 28-1990 TYPE II SFR-IA NANCY S. AND PETER L. KUDAN OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 10 PINEWOOD A VENUE FOR AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE; MASTER BEDROOM AND SOME ADDITIONAL CLOSET SPACE ADJOINING THE PRESENT MASTER BEDROOM. REQUESTING RELIEF FROM FRONT YARD SETBACK. TAX MAP NO. 81-3-11 LOT SIZE: 0.50 ACRES SECTION 4.020 H PETER KUDAN, PRESENT MRS. GOETZ-I believe this was tabled so that the applicant's could give us more detailed information as to their request. We were looking for site dimensions of the steps and other stairway information to be shown on a diagram. MR. TURNER-Does everyone have their copies? Mr. Kudan, did you prepare these yourself? MR. KUDAN-Well, I added to the originals, added where they were. They are to scale. MR. TURNER-Does anyone have any questions of Mr. Kudan? I think my question was, was there any alternative to that? Are you going to elaborate on that? 1 MR. KUDAN-Well, as I recall, there were a few things that you had asked us to do. MR. TURNER-Yes, right. MR. KUDAN-And one was to show the stairwell, one was to pinpoint where the septic and drywell was because we kind of guesstimated that, and thirdly, was it possible to come up with an alternative. We didn't come up with an alternative because, basically, as we see it, there just isn't. We did pinpoint the stairwell and I think that's part of the reason as to why there isn't much of an alternative. You have that stairwell and air conditioner on the back side. We also, again, as you had requested, we brought Chris Fuller with us, you can direct building questions, he is our builder and he could probably elaborate better. MR. TURNER-Alright Chris, I guess we'll ask you some questions. Any way of altering the position of the bedroom in the proposed addition, on the house, in relation to the way the house is cut up? What would you have to do cut the..out the back. MR. FULLER-Well, the roof really wasn't the problem as much as the exterior entrance to the basement and the what he said, the air conditioning unit is..out there, and the way he wanted to connect to the existing bedroom, that was the easiest way. MR. TURNER-Does the flow of the stairs flow this way, or this way(referring to map)? MR. FULLER-They go parallel with the back side of the building. MR. TURNER-Yes, if you entered this way, this side? MR. FULLER-You enter the stairway here and go down to the basement. MR. TURNER-Anyone else have any questions for Mr. Fuller? MR. KELLEY-What was that answer about where he enters the stairs? MR. TURNER-You enter the stairs from the patio and go down. MR. FULLER-Mrs. Kudan has pictures of the back. MR. KELLEY-The other thing, in the original drawing, it didn't show that patio. MR. TURNER-No, it didn't. MR. FULLER-That L out in the back is the patio, already there. It made a real easy way to.. MR. SHEA-Mr. Kudan, you're still asking for the same relief on the side setback as the original application? MR. KUDAN-Yes, we are. MR. TURNER-Is that 14 ft. 6 in.? MR. FULLER-Yes. MR. KUDAN-I'll add to that. You said am I asking for the same, yes, that is the optimum. I suppose, if we had to, if it would help our cause, we could give a foot or two in one direction or the other, if it would help, but the basic direction of the building, if it's going to be, it's going to be, if it's not, it's not, that's basically how it has to go. MR. TURNER-See, my idea was that maybe they could cut the...in half. MRS. GOETZ-Is that the only entrance? MR. FULLER-There's the inside.. MRS. GOETZ-So you don't have to have the.. MR. KELLEY-How do they propose to get into this addition? Are they going to knock something out of there? MR. FULLER-Yes, through this closet area, right here. MR. KELLEY-It's going from a three bedroom to a four bedroom? 2 MR. FULLER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-This isn't going to be a part of this? MR. FULLER-No. MR. TURNER-That's his problem. His problem is the shape of the lot and the.. Well, we asked for the alternatives and we got the answers. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED MRS. GOETZ-We have additional input to the public hearing in the way of letters. This one's dated June 8th, This letter's in reference to Peter and Nancy Kudan's request to expand their home towards Sherwood Drive. The Kudan's have been looking forward to the expansion of their home. This expansion will be behind a thick, tall bed of trees. It would not detract or mar the appearance of their home as it sits on their lot. Their home and property has been impeccably maintained in the 10 years we've lived on Sherwood Drive. We're sure the addition would blend in with their already..home. We hope the Zoning Board looks favorably on the Kudan's request. Eileen and Steve Busco Letter from Mrs. Robert K. Simmons, 12 Pinewood A venue, This is to inform you that I have no objection to the addition that Peter Kudan and Nancy Kudan wish to make on their home at Number 10 Pinewood. Letter from Mario and Marie Scarcilleta, 6 Pinewood, My wife and I have been residences of 6 Pinewood Avenue since July of '66 and neighbors to Peter and Nancy Kudan of 10 Pinewood Avenue for 15 years. It is our understanding that the Kudans are seeking a variance to add on to their existing structure. Mr. and Mrs. Kudan have been excellent neighbors and an asset to the neighborhood. Their property is well kept and they take great pride in their home and surroundings and always with consideration for their neighbors. We can see no reason why the Town should not grant them the variance they are seeking. Letter from Mrs. Carol P.C. Vorrel, 26 Lindfield Drive, Several weeks ago, we received notice that, since our property lies within 500 feet of that belonging to Peter and Nancy Kudan, we have a right to be heard regarding their petition for a variance. We had not met the Kudans at that time, but because everything we've previously seen done to, and at, their house had been done with..taste, I called them offering, if need be, to go to bat for them. We have no objections to the proposed addition. Although it will require a variance, we believe that the addition will improve not only the house, but the neighborhood. Now that I've met the Kudans, I'm more convinced that, A. If a modification is to be made to the house, no alternative arrangement is feasible, and B. They should be applauded rather than discouraged for their careful planning. They appear to be a couple capable of being an asset to their community. I hope, therefore, that you will see fit to grant their request for a variance and respectfully petition you to grant it to them. Thank you. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED STAFF INPUT Notes from Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner (attached) MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 28-1990 NANCY S. AND PETER L. KUDAN, Introduced by Joyce Eggleston who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: The applicant is seeking relief of 20 feet on the rear setback to build an addition to this home. The practical difficulty is the unique shape of the lot. There are special circumstances applying to this lot and not applying to other buildings in the neighborhood. To enforce strict application of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of the property. This request is not detrimental to the purpose of the Ordinance or doesn't adversely effect the neighborhood character. There's no neighborhood opposition. Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE AREA VARIANCE NO. 24-1990 TYPE: UNLISTED MR-5 CAPITAL AREA COMMUNITY HEALTH PLAN, INC. OWNER: JOHN NIGRO, NIGRO REAL ESTATE OF ALBANY, NEW YORK 694 UPPER GLEN STREET TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING TWO WALL SIGNS WHEN ONLY ONE WALL SIGN IS ALLOWED. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 99-2-1 LOT SIZE: N/A SECTION 6.103 OF SIGN ORDINANCE BILL GOLDERMAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT 3 MR. TURNER-This was tabled at the request of the applicant. Since there might be new information, I will open up the public hearing after they present their side. MR. GOLDERMAN-Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the Board. My name is Bill Gol~e~man and I'm the attorney for CHP. With me, tonight, is Ms. Anne Wright who is the adminIstrator for CHP. At the last Board meeting that you just stated Bernie McCann an attorney with my office, they request that they you table the matter s~ that we can gather some more information. I'd be happy to be able to..Board stated. We have uncovered some additional information that we'd like to advise you of at this time. Before I begin, I would like to clarify a point on our application. At the back of it, you'll note that when we discuss the two types of signs that we're requesting, we're asking for one sign variance, they listed the same sign. Mr. Chairman, what I have here is some pictures that I'd like to give to the Board that shows, essentially, signs that we're looking at. The building is a corner building in a shopping center and they're both directional signs, informational signs, for people to get to the facility, when you come down both ways on Route 9. So, I just wanted to call that to your attention. The reason we request a sign variance is that the unique cir cumstances of this parcel makes it a hardship not to have that. At the outset, I think it's very important, I'd like to emphasize, that unlike your typical store fronts that are trying to advertise a purpose, we're seeking a sign variance for directional purposes. This is an informational sign. When people come to CHP and, as Ms. Wright can explain afterwards, they're usually coming there not because they want to buy something, but because they're sick and they're ill and it really helps them find out where we are located. To visualize what I mean, I have a sketch drawing of the actual site and if I may also submit this to the Board. I apologize because it's handwritten, here. It's not drawn to scale, but it's pretty accurate. As you'll note,..that picture that we have, the angle of our building is a corner building. It's a corner of the shopping center. So, you really can't see our site coming down Route 9 until you actually come almost perpendicular to the actual site. The reason we need two signs is that, when you're coming from the south, the larger sign that you have as part of the application, it says Community Health Plan, that shows it coming south on Route 9. The smaller sign is the directional sign to where our entrance is on the side of the building. It can be see going north on Route 9. Also, unlike most shopping centers or signs for buildings, we're 100 feet back. So, you really cannot see our sign or our location from the road. There are also, as you can see, multiple entrances on this location and, as I stated earlier, the main reason we're here, it's a medical facility, it's a health care facility and the people, when they're coming here, they're ill and they need to get there. I'd like to point out something else, if I may. When CHP first put up these two signs, they went to the Building Department, had everything approved, and we had, at all times, acted in good faith. We did not realize that we were in violation of any Zoning Ordinance and it came.. two and a half years later after the signs were in place and that brings us to another point that I would like to make. As we examine the Zoning Ordinance, I looked at the wording closely, and the section that the Town's contending that we're violating is Section 6.103 of the Sign Ordinance and if I may read that section to you which says, "One freestanding sign denoting the name of the shopping center shall be permitted for each entrance fronting a different street or highway." And the next sentence is very significant and this is what we uncovered this week, or this past month. It says that, "Each occupant of the shopping center shall be permitted one wall sign on the portion of the exterior wall." Unlike your normal shopping center situation where you just have it laid right across and the signs over the top and people walk in, we're on the corner and the actual sign on the front, you cannot, that's not where our entrance is. It's on the side. So, we're maintaining that we're a corner building on this shopping center and the strict meaning of this Zoning Ordinance seems to me, when I read it, that it would allow one sign on each exterior wall and, since we're a corner of a shopping center, we've got two exterior walls which makes our situation very unique. What I would like to request from the Board, or what we seek, are two separate remedies. The first remedy would be that you permit this Sign Variance, due to the fact that we're a health care facility 100 yards from the street and we have poor visibility and there are hardships that someoo.e may possibly get hurt someday or, as we discussed earlier, it's not your normal shopping center situation that people come there, ~ the second part is to look at the Zoning Ordinance, Sign Ordinance, which we've followed, and put up two signs which the Building Department felt that we were complying with also..two and a half years ago. I'd also like to make two more quick points. There's the Albany Savings Bank, which you can also see on that map, there, has two signs. Now, I understand that that constitutes a freestanding building, but we maintain that, since we have, like, an entrance on the other side of a corner of a shopping center, that we're very analogous to that. More on point though, however, I feel that we should be treated as other shopping centers in the area, which comes to note as Penney's. Penney's has three signs, one on each side of the store. The Sears has five signs all around the store. CVS has two signs, one when you're entering CVS and one in the back, that's just basically advertising that CVS is here. Now, I recognize that Aviation Mall is a large entity in the Town, but we don't believe that CHP should be treated differently than the others that have been permitted to have more than one sign. The other building that we have noted to this..review, is the Convenient Medical Center, that also has two signs on each wall and that also is part of a shopping center attached to the Munroe Muffler.. So, for these reasons, we request that you grant the Sign Variance.If not, we maintain that we comply with the Sign Ordinance anyhow and you can use your interpretative skills to agree 4 to that, ~, the third point is, if you're really looking at that language of Section 6.103, to refer that to the Town Attorney or the Zoning Board Attorney, I don't know the proper procedure here, to ~oo~ into that because I think the strict compliance of that language, we really do comply wIth It and we've made every effort to cooperate with the Town and we've been acting in good faith and ..take up something that we may very well be complying with and we'd appreciate you, maybe, tabling it for one month and just giving the person time just to, possibly, look at it and I'm here to answer any questions. MRS. GOETZ-Before we start this discussion, I want to ask Mr. Sicard if he's employed by this shopping center. Have you ever been or are you presently employed by this shopping center? MR. SICARD-Yes. MRS. GOETZ-Then I really feel that you shouldn't participate in the discussion. I was surprised to see that you did at the other meeting. I wasn't here, but I read the minutes. MR. TURNER-Okay, who wants the first question? MR. SHEA-Mr. Golderman, does this shopping center not have a main sign out near the road where Wheels and some other businesses are advertised on that main marquee? MR. GOLDER MAN-Unfortunately, and I have a picture that does show that, if I may. Yes, Mr. Shea, it does and, as I just..to you that it is.., but as you can, it's really on the length square sign. It's only a small sign that says CHP. Now, our main concern is, once you come into the shopping center which is, actually, that sign's not even near our section of the shopping center. The patient's really don't know where that entrance is to get in and, when you're coming down Route 9, heading up north, you've already passed our part of that shopping center where you see that sign. Unfortunately, that little CHP is not the same thing as the directional that's right next to the door. MR. SHEA-Have you discussed, with the landlord of the shopping center, the ability to change the design of the main marquee sign which the shopping center is entitled to? MR. GOLDERMAN-At this point, Mr. Shea, I'm not really sure that they have. MR. TURNER-The only thing is, that was granted by variance, so that can't be changed without a variance. MR. GOLDERMAN-Well, I'll be back before you again. It's a small sign. This is, like, after, okay, we put up the sign. It's a very neat sign, too. I mean, it's not designed to be ostentatious. It's basically saying, here's our entrance. The front actually has the exit door, so people actually get mixed up and that's why we wanted to show that sign. Now, if we were to take down a sign, and I don't know which sign CHP would take down, you really need that sign that says the CHP Glens Falls Health Center, that's a larger sign coming down from Route 9. You really need that other sign to come back, to see, from going north. You really don't see that until you pass the building. MR. SHEA-Do you know when the variance was granted for this particular sign? MR. GOLDERMAN-I just found out MR. TURNER-About three years ago. MR. SHEA-It would seem to me that a better idea at the time, and it's obviously hindsight, would have been to represent, in a better way, the business tenants of the center rather than the name of the center because I know of very few people that refer to that business location as Glen Square and your intent, obviously, is to give directional ability to the people needing health care coming to CHP. If the landlord of Glen Square were to come before this Board and ask for a variance to change the design of it's main marquee sign, then you would be in compliance and would probably not be before us for a variance because you'd have the road frontage sign, which you're entitled to if you're a shopping center, and a sign on the front of the building which you're entitled to and this would give you greater visibility closer to the road. MR. GOLDERMAN-That would help us, Mr. Shea, I agree. However, our main problem is not.. that the front, us ually, on most shopping centers, it's right across the top you can see the sign. Ours, as soon as you come into the shopping center, it's around the back side that's our entrance. It's a very awkward parcel and it's angled very awkwardly and I don't know if that would solve..problems that we have. When someoo.e's coming in here, and Anne could describe this better, but when they come in here sick and they need a health care facility, they're not always members of CHP that have been there prior to, sometimes they come there for the first time that they're sick and I understand what you're saying, but, right now, 5 that's out of our control. We will bring it up to them, but at the same time we still need that entrance on the side of the building. MR. SHEA-To your knowledge, our there a great number of people that have not been able to get health care because they have not been able to find the building? ANNE WRIGHT MS. WRIGHT-It identifies us. My name is Anne Wright and I'm the Health Center Administrator. That logo on the side of the building does identify us for our patients, where our main entrance is. It also identifies for our patients the handicapped entrances. There is, on our sidewalk, a ramp for our handicapped patients. It identifies for the ambulance who come to the Center from time to time to transfer our patients to the hospital. So, it does give an identification as to where our main entrance is, the logo. MR. CARR-Ms. Wright, I don't understand how..designates that as the entrance. I mean, the main sign says Community Health Plan, that's more elaborate, I don't understand how a logo on the side of a building designates specifically to ambulances, I mean, is that a known symbol or something? MS. WRIGHT-Yes, that is a known symbol to CHP. MR. CARR-Well, I know that the logo..because that..ambulance drivers to go to the logo and..instead of the words. MR. GOLDERMAN-Well, there's a canopy there with the, see, when you go up there and look at the pictures, it does seem like an entrance there. In fact, it's a softer way, instead of having two of those three signs, so you can see it on both sides, it's a softer way, a more tasteful way, of designating, hey, this is our entrance, where each building is a different circumstance and we're right here. I'm not from the Town of Queensbury and today I went up and down looking for the site and it really did help me identify, you know, if I was looking for CHP and I did see it and I did find it. Coming back the other way, if that sign wasn't there, I would have driven past it..but it is identifiable and it's soft. I mean, that's what they're trying to do. It was intended to be done in good taste and like I maintain, also, that original language, when they originally put that up, a sign on an exterior wall. We, unfortunately, have two exterior walls and for the reason which the building is constructed, the front entrance cannot be used for that. So, we're caught in a tough situation. To answer your question about the sign, I can't answer for that. If the Board was thinking about, possibly, turning down our variance, what I would ask is a couple of things, possibly, to refer that one section, that I really think there's something to it. See your Town Attorney and give us a month to contact our landlord to find out what they're position is because I really can't answer that question today, until I get some more information for you. I really don't know. I know, right now, it does not satisfy our needs and, thank God, no one's been hurt, yet, but that's all we need is that one person and, hopefully, it will never happen. Hopefully, I was wrong and..need the sign, but we'd rather be safe than sorry and we don't think we're being very unreasonable with our request. MR. TURNER-Bruce, you weren't on the Board when we granted the variance for that freestanding sign with the reader board on it. The main reason for that was, the angle of the building to Route 9..you can't see anyhow until you get by it. They have a directional sign now that says Glen Square, right where the video store is. Like I said, we granted a reader board and I think, at the time the sign was..50 square feet with the reader board on it, at the proper site.. The Board thought at the time, that they had alleviated the condition and I think it's alleviated, but it's just, the sign that's on the front of the building there, now, it faces towards the video store and I think the logo doesn't really MR. KELLEY-Well, the sign's on the wrong wall. MR. TURNER-It's on the wrong wall. The big sign should be around the other way. MR. KELLEY -Then you'd know where you're going. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY -It's a similar thing to the Mark Plaza thing, in that, the people..can't see the shopping center and we gave them the reader board out on the road to solve that problem. MR. GOLDERMAN-Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, you stated to me that that reader board was granted because there was a hardship and that was before, actually, CHP was in there. MR. TURNER-Right. 6 '---' ---,,' MR. GOLDER MAN-The hardship still exists. For whatever reason, that little sign does not solve the problem. There really is a legitimate concern we have here to get people to come in to that plaza, down through that, because once you turn into the plaza, you might see the main CHP sign in the front, but to show them the proper way to go on the side. I don't know if there's another way of doing it, possibly putting it on the side of the road or, they try to do this as tastefully as possible, but that sign did not alleviate the hardship. MR. SHEA-But you have not demonstrated to us that there is a practical difficulty in design there. Your contention that you need greater visibility because of the amount of setback that the building has from the road and, yet, the Center has been granted a variance that is in compliance with the Sign Ordinance. You have all that you're entitled to and it appears to me that the best solution to the problem, that should satisfy your needs, would be, as Mr. Kelley suggested, move the sign, the wall sign that you now have, to the other side of the building which then clearly denotes where the entrance to your business is and you still have the directional sign out on the road. MR. GOLDER MAN-But with all due respect, Mr. Shea, again, using my personal experience, coming down here today for the first time, when I came south on Route 9, I needed to see that, and this is my first time coming to CHP, I needed to see that sign on that wall, there. If I didn't have these pictures that were sent to me from Mr. McCann, I would not have seen that that's CHP and I would have not been able to get in there. So, if you had used that as a solution, that would solve a problem coming from the south, but the north would be just dangerous or, to come down, you pass and then come back around again. MR. SHEA-I think the solution for people coming from the north would be a better design of the reader board because I think it's poorly designed. It denotes the name of the Square, but it doesn't tell what businesses are there. MR. GOLDERMAN-But that's the other problem. ..Sign Ordinance, we'd probably have to come back before the Board, again, before having it changed. MR. SHEA-I'm not talking about size. I'm talking about the actual design of the sign. It says Glen Square and who really cares if the name is Glen Square. You're trying to give visibility and directional aid to the businesses and the people coming to those businesses. MRS. GOETZ-You really, probably, would help yourself best by re-working that freestanding sign and it's a self imposed hardship because you are using a part of that shopping center in a way that's a little different. There's nothing out of the ordinary about the building itself. It's where CHP chose to place their door, that's the way I look at it and I'm also interested in your comment about Convenient Medical Center and I would, is that possible that that's a violation of the Ordinance? MRS. COLLARD-I checked on that and there were sign permits issued for those signs a couple of years ago. MRS. GOETZ-But that doesn't make it right. MR. TURNER-They're wrong. MRS. COLLARD-They're wrong. MRS. GOETZ-Yes, it could be like the same type of situation. MR. TURNER-Just like these people here. MRS. GOETZ-Thanks for bringing that up. MR. GOLDERMAN-There's also the same thing with Sears and CVS. MRS. GOETZ-That's another thing, when Aviation Mall went in, they had to cut those signs back, so that was just for Aviation Mall. So, you can't really compare that to anything else. MR. GOLDERMAN-That's a Sign Ordinance that we all have to follow and they're being treated differently than we are because they are larger or bigger and they came in MRS. GOETZ-For whatever reason, and maybe it's not fair, but that's why they have it and I think you should know why it is that way. Why it doesn't conform to the Ordinance. MR. CARR-You can't.. the Town because they.. this sign.. MR. GOLDERMAN-Alright, I appreciate that, but, at the same time, we can't, necessarily, be treated arbitrarily or..because we're a smaller establishment. MR. TURNER-Question, that side door, facing where the big sign is on the building, is that just Staff entrance. 7 -- MS. WRIGHT-No, that's an exit door. MR. TURNER-That's an exit door? MS. WRIGHT-Yes. MR. TURNER-On the side, next to Present Company? MS. WRIGHT-Yes, that's an exit door, a fire exit. MRS. GOETZ-Was there some reason why it was designed? MR. TURNER-It was designed with the entrance doors facing Glen Street? MS. WRIGHT-I think it was the design of the inside of the building. To expand it lengthwise would require the entrance door to be on the side, where it is. MRS. GOETZ-I'm surprised they didn't take all of this into consideration when they did the design, but I agree with Mr. Shea that you'd get a lot better use of your signage if you re-worked that freestanding, even though it wouldn't be by variance. MR. GOLDER MAN-If I may, I'd like to, actually, request the Board to give us a month to to communicate with them because I don't know what their position is and, maybe come back to the Board and tell them our problems, of what we can do or can't do or, to share that with you and, at the same time, possibly, look at that, the reading of that specific Zoning Ordinance, give both our sides a month to look into it and then, it's been up there for two and a half years. I don't know why a month would be that much of a difference. MR. CARR-On that interpretation, that's for a freestanding sign..from that Section or... MR. GOLDERMAN-No,..Section dealing with the shopping center. MRS. GOETZ-I think that we should act on the proposal in front of us. I don't think that we're going to gain anything by sending this to our Counsel. MR. GOLDER MAN-Well, it gives us a chance to find an answer to that question, so I can answer it more intelligently to you next month and, at the same time, we have a legitimate question as to how it should be interpreted. MRS. GOETZ-But, you see, you have to come back for a whole separate variance on the freestanding sign anyway. MR. GOLDERMAN-Well, this is not a freestanding sign. MRS. GOETZ-I know, if you were to Nigro, I think he's the one who owns that. MR. TURNER-He's the one who presented the original application for the freestanding sign. MRS. GOETZ-Because I guess the sense of the Board is that this is not going to be approved. I mean, it's already been on our agenda or held over, etc. etc. MR. TURNER-Three months. MRS. GOETZ-Three months, I mean, we've got to think about that type of thing, too and I don't think we're going to hear anything from our Counsel that would change our minds. MS. CORPUS-Actually, as far as my abilities go, I cannot interpret that particular sentence in the Ordinance, that is up to the Zoning Administrator to make that particular interpretation. MR. GOLDERMAN-May I ask what the Zoning Administrator would say? ...speak with Mrs. Collard. MRS. COLLARD-Well, that sentence doesn't say each wall. MR. GOLDERMAN-It says, "the wall" MRS. COLLARD-lIthe wall", not each wall. MR. GOLDERMAN-...exterior wall, we have two exterior walls. MRS. COLLARD-Well, that's my interpretation. It doesn't say each wall. 8 ---./ MR. GOLDERMAN-So, you're saying, right now MR. TURNER-No, she doesn't agree with you. MRS. COLLARD-No. MR. TURNER-Okay, any further questions? None? PUBLIC HEARING OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MR. GOLDER MAN-Mr. Chairman, I was speaking with Ms. Wright, here, and she did indicate that on three previous times in the past, there have been people that have had problems finding that place and they've identified it...So, I just want to clarify, for the record, that that has been the case. CORRESPONDENCE STAFF INPUT Notes from Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner (attached) MRS. GOETZ-Also read Staff Notes from April 18th, 1990 meeting from John S. Goralski (attached) MOTION TO DISAPPROVE SIGN VARIANCE NO. 24-1990 CAPITAL AREA COMMUNITY HEALTH PLAN, INC., Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its adoption, seconded by Michael Shea: There are no special circumstances applying to this plaza which do not apply to plazas or signs in the neighborhood. The applicant is allowed to maintain one wall sign and identity on the freestanding sign. Strict application of the Ordinance would not preclude the applicant of the reasonable use of the land. It would be detrimental to the visual character of the neighborhood. Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE ABSTAINED: Mr. Sicard USE VARIANCE NO. 41-1990 TYPE: UNLISTED BC-IA BARBARA TEBEAU OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 21 WEEKS ROAD TO ADD A NEW MOBILE HOME FOR SOLE RESIDENCE. REQUEST USE VARIANCE FOR NEW 14 FT. BY 74 FT. MOBILE HOME. (WARREN COUNTY PLANNING) TAX MAP NO. 73-1-14.2 LOT SIZE: 12.45 ACRES SECTION 4.020 K JOHN CARUSONE, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT; BARBARA TEBEAU, ALSO PRESENT MR. CARUSONE-Good evening. I'm John Carusone, attorney, and I practice law at 250 Bay Road in Queensbury. I'll try to be very brief since I think the application, in this particular instance, speaks for itself. There were survey maps attached to the application, as I understand it, from which you can see that, although this is Highway Commercial, the Commercial Highway of which the Zoning Law must be referring to is the Northway and there is no access to or from the Northway, as you know, that's a limited access road, clearly, there's no access from it to Mrs. Tebeau's property. Additionally, you can see that there is a limited access from Weeks Road, which I certainly would not designate as a commercial highway, although people may argue that. The difficulty therefore, is that the Zoning Law, when it was changed to Highway Commercial for this property, left the 11 acres which is available in the back, virtually useless. It's kind of ironic to note, as I read the Law, that among the uses that it could be used for would be mobile home sales. Mrs. Tebeau is a single woman after her divorce, recently, who operates the dance center which is there now. It is her proposal to put a mobile home on her' property for her sole residence. It's not as if she's asking this Board to put up a trailer park or something like that. This is solely for her own use and I believe the application indicates that it's temporary in nature. I certainly don't think that I need to get into all the other aspects of this application since it's in her application. It might be easier, if there are any questions that you have about the application, that I try to answer them. 9 -- MR. TURNER-Alright. MR. CARR-John, I have a question about the temporary use, why three years and what's the intention after three years? MR. CARUSONE-Mrs. Tebeau is presently renting and..financing, she is solely financing the dance center herself. She is the sole mortgagor with respect to that piece of property. The mortgage has seven years to go. At the end of which time, she could use that as security to buy a place to live. The only property she owns is the property that we're here to discuss. MR. CARR-Okay, seven years to go, why is three years the renewal? MR. CARUSONE-Because at the end of three years, perhaps,..knowing, the bank would consider the financing. Frankly, Mrs. Tebeau went to her bank, recently, to get financing and because of the amount of the mortgage remaining on the dance center, she was turned down, but she's very recently divorced and, I don't think I'm speaking out of school, only today she was relieved of being a mortgagor of a principle residence which her ex-husband received. So, perhaps, that may alleviate her problem, but I doubt it. I think that the bank looks at her as a single, divorced woman supporting a dance center and... MR. CARR-When did she purchase the property? MR. CARUSONE-The property was purchased by her and her husband about six years ago. MRS. GOETZ-And now she's the sole owner of the total package where the dance center is? MR. CARUSONE-That is correct. She and her husband recently divorced. MR. TURNER-The dance studio.. MR. CARUSONE-I did not represent Mrs. Tebeau then, but I did try to find that out. I believed the zoning was different then and I don't, frankly, recall what it was then, but under the re-zoning it's been changed to Highway Commercial. MR. TURNER-I'm not sure it got changed.. MR. CARUSONE-I just don't know. MR. TURNER-I can't recall, either. Seems like it was Highway Commercial, or split, or something. MR. CARUSONE-Yes, I think it was split at that time. MRS. TEBEAU-Yes, it was split zoned. MRS. GOETZ-I know we tried to avoid any split zoning with the new Ordinance, to clean it up, not just that area. MR. CARUSONE-It's a very difficult parcel. There's..question about that, at least, in my mind. MR. KELLEY-We're stumbling here with cost and we're saying, what does a 14 by 74 foot mobile home cost and how would that compare to putting an addition on the dance studio? What would be the comparison of costs? MR. CARUSONE-The mobile home would cost about $22,500 and the addition to make the dance studio habitable, I suppose, would be around $80,000. Mr. Fuller who was here just a few moments ago, did up that proposal and one of the concerns he had and I bet Mrs. Tebeau has is whether or not that could be done and still comply with the fire codes. Apparently, she's telling me that it cannot be. We would also drastically change the character of the dance studio for purposes of the future in the event she leaves the community itself. MR. KELLEY-I think the connotation, or whatever, of mobile home has this stigma in everybody's mind. MR. CARUSONE-Well, except that the Zoning Law, as it presently exists, will allow her to sell mobile homes on that property. So, obviously, the consideration in that regard, it seems to me would be that someone thought that that would be an appropriate area to put mobile homes and have a sales office and to attempt to sell them. What she's proposing is that she have one mobile home in which she, a single person,..would live and I don't think I'm misstating the law with respect to what's allowed. 10 MR. SHEA-Mr. Carusone, we were saying that we recognize the unique nature of the current Zoning Law as to how it applies to this particular piece of property and maybe, it appears that you probably could put a mobile home on there and if you put a For Sale sign out in front you would be in compliance. ' MR. CARUSONE-I think she wants to do this quietly, without creating a crises. MR. SICARD-..I don't think there's any limitation on that. I'm looking at the quality of the neighborhood. MR. CARUSONE-I think that the neighbors for whom this is inappropriate is, philosophically, would probably prefer that it be done properly and, if the variance were granted, MRS. GOETZ-This would be a good candidate for re-zoning. MR. TURNER-That's what I said. MR. CARUSONE-That's true, but perhaps something could be done with respect to the applicant, which wouldn't be..to the neighbors, those who are opposed. I understand the emotional and philosophical fear that people have sometimes, when you speak about mobile homes, but the fact of the matter is, you can't go from a general to a particular. I mean, the peculiarity of this particular law is you can sell them there, but you can't live in them. MR. SHEA-Could you elaborate, once again, and maybe in a little greater detail, as to the particulars of the three year situation, whereby, are you asking, at this point, that this be a part of the condition. MR. CARUSONE-As long as she can come back and make her application for renewal at the end of three years. The reason that I suggest it is, because she is recently divorced, at the end of three years, if she maintains her payments on the dance center, the bank would look at her credit differently than it looks at it now. I think when we have a middle aged woman that the banks aren't all eager to loan recently divorced women money and she is running the dance center herself. She's getting no support whatsoever from her ex-husband..and she can't get a loan of any kind..credit..and she hasn't missed a single payment on the dance center. So, she looks at this as a temporary thing. She lived in a very lovely five bedroom home with about 2600 square feet before her divorce occurred and I don't think it's her permanent desire to live in a mobile home..but this particular woman would like to move into her own house. MR. CARR-John, would she be paying cash for the mobile home. I mean, is it a one shot deal or are you financing it? MR. CARUSONE-Financed through the mobile home company. MR. CARR-What are the monthly payments? MR. CARUSONE-About $300, maybe it's a little bit higher. MR. CARR-The apartment you're in..now is how much? MR. CARUSONE-Well, she doesn't pay any rent. Right now she's living with friends. MR. CARR-Has she looked into apartments.. MRS. TEBEAU-Yes, I have. MR. CARUSONE-Yes, she has. MR. TURNER-Okay, anymore questions? PUBLIC HEAIDNG OPENED JOHN TAFT, OPPOSED MR. TAFT-My name is John Taft. I'm President of the Homeowners Association of Kingswood Estates and I'd like to open my remarks by saying that if it is zoned for Highway Commercial and you are allowed to sell mobile homes and you still are not allowed to live in one on the property and I don't think anybody would be selling mobile homes on that Highway Commercial property without easy access to it and according to Mr. Carusone, there is no easy access to it. Now, I'm also voicing my objection as President of the Homeowners Association representing 27 owners of 28 units who object very strenuously about having a mobile home on that property. We feel that it kind of devalues the homes of the homeowners of Kingswood Estates. We realize that there is some sort of a buffer zone, but we don't think it's big enough and in the summer time, you might not be able to see all of the dance studio or the mobile home, but in the winter time you can see everything, when the leaves are down. I know that there are other speakers waiting to speak and I just wanted to say that I strenuously oppose the changing 11 of the zone to .put a mobile home on that property. It's stated as Highway Commercial. It was changed, SIX years ago, to construct and operate a dance studio in a split zone Urban Residential 5 and Hi~hway Commercial 15 property, that was changed, in a hardship case, to put the dance studIO there. Now we're looking at another hardship case to change it back to put a mobile home in. Are we using the hardship rule as a loop hole, that's all we want to know and we just strongly object to it. MR. TURNER-Alright, let me see if anybody's got any questions. Anybody got any questions? N one. Okay. Thank you. MARCIA ANDERSON MRS. ANDERSON-My name is Marcia Anderson. It's true when the leaves are on, we see some of it, when the leaves off we see it all and while I appreciate..I don't want a mobile home in my backyard. I have no objection to a permanent structure..to the building, that's all I have to say. Thank you. ED ROBITI MR. ROBITI-My name is Ed Robiti. I'm on the Board of Directors of the Kingswood Homeowners Association and I have a couple of questions for the Board to consider. At one point, I was under the impression that there was an Ordinance prohibiting mobile home sites from being further developed in the Town of Queensbury. I don't know if that's still true or if that ever was true. We own the property on Queens Way in Kingswood when the original variance was granted to allow the dance center to be established and, at the time, again, as..pointed out, the question of hardship was brought up and considered and the dance center was allowed. I think that Mrs. Tebeau, when she purchased the property, recognized that there were limitations to the property and some..limitations, I don't feel, should be a cause for a change into something that has already existed. She knew, when she bought the property, what the property was, where it went. As I understand, the property also abuts the property owned by the Glen Drive-in Theatre and, from what I understand, that property is being considered for sale. So, that limited access may not exist any longer. I think that the property values for people who own the condominiums in Kingswood would be greatly reduced by the establishment of a mobile home in that area. She would also be faced with septic tank installation, power utility lines would have to be put in and I think that's a further expense. There are plenty of mobile home parks in this area which would gladly take in a mobile home that she could live in and travel back and forth to work as we all do. I understand there is a hardship in terms of her present position, but her present position should not be a detriment to the people surrounding her. I think a hardship of your own making is not a true hardship, it's a matter of convenience. If it's convenient to do this, then she'll do it and I don't think that's a reason for granting this. I think there would be a precedent established by granting a variance that may enable expansion for more than one mobile home, based on hardship again, if, next year she comes back to you and says, well, I need some income from this property, if maybe I can put another mobile home next to mine and rent it out and then I would have that income. As Mr. Carr pointed out, there are many apartments and, certainly, there's a large apartment complex right in front of the dance center, Robert Gardens, which could be investigated. I don't think that this is a viable alternative when it benefits one person and injures the many that surround it. Thank you. JIM DEMPSEY MR. DEMPSEY-My name is Jim Dempsey. I'm manager of Robert Gardens apartment and the owners are, pretty much, opposed to having a mobile home placed adjacent to their property and the feeling I have is that there is a large amount of affordable housing well within walking distance of this dance center studio. They'd be very happy to have her as a tenant. MR. TURNER-Is there anyone else? PUBLIC HEAWNG CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Irma Potvy, I am owner of Condo Number 24 and I absolutely object to having a mobile home in the area. There's an area off Sweet Road for this type of home. I do think if Barbara Tebeau gets to put one up, she would put up more and make it a business. Absolutely, no. Letter from Gloria Karry, As a homeowner and resident in Queensbury, I object and am opposed to a change of zoning to allow the placement of a mobile home in my neighborhood. Such an action would be detrimental to the value of my property. (She's at 16 Queens Way.) Letter from Jane Derby Strauss, (She's at 21 Queens Way) Please add my name to those who object to the addition of a new mobile home to be placed at 21 Weeks Road. My daughter 12 -- and son-in-law, Susan and Frank Juareno of Ridgefield, Connecticut were contacted by me and asked me to write this letter objecting to the addition. They are the owners of Number 21 Queens Way. Letter from May and Albert Voight, 15 Queens Way, We wish to object to the placement of a mobile home at 21 Weeks Road in a Highway Commercial One Acre zone. We consider it to be substandard housing for our area. We're proud of our property and don't want this to happen. Letter from Eleanor McCurty, 25 Queens Way, I object to this request. It is detrimental to our settlement, Kingswood. The size, alone, of the structure is certainly no small addition and it will be tacked on causing no disturbance. We have worked hard through the years towards keeping Kingswood a home of natural beauty, a good place to live. This addition will not help. Letter from Mary Gray, 2 Queens Way, As a homeowner in Kingswood, I would like to state my objection to Mrs. Tebeau's request for a variance to locate a mobile home on here property at 21 Weeks Road. Placing a mobile home in an area presently occupied only by permanent structures changes the character of the neighborhood. It sets a precedent which makes future variances, such as this, easier to obtain. It is also my understanding that a variance goes with the land and, therefore, there is no effective way to ensure that it does not pass to any succeeding owners. Letter from Willie Folks, 20 Queens Way, As a resident of the Kingswood area, I strongly object to the re-zoning of the Tebeau property. We have a good and beautiful residential area in Kingswood and do not want substandard housing brought into the area. We have no need for more traffic and noise which would surely occur if the zoning of that property is changed. MRS. GOETZ-And this is Mr. Taft. You've already spoken, okay. MR. TU RN ER- He's already spoken. Letter from John Hennigen, 3 Queens Way. MRS. GOETZ-You don't want me to read the whole thing. The whole gist of it is the same. MR. TURNER-The gist is the same. MRS. GOETZ-I'll just say who else. Wilber Hewitt, these are all letters against, Elsie Poor, 14 Queens Way, in objection; Donald Creal objects and Mr. Robiti has spoke already; John McDermit in objection; and G.A. Karry, I've already read hers, but I think she was writing as the Secretary of the Kingswood Homeowners Association, in opposition and she went into detail about the Homeowners Association voting against this; and Franklin, I'm not sure what it is, but that's in opposition, 11 Queens Way STAFF INPUT Notes from John S. Goralski, Planner (attached) MRS. GOETZ-And this went before the Warren County Planning Board and they said they didn't have a majority vote, either affirmative or negative, therefore no action was taken and no recommendation given. MR. KELLEY-I have a question for Mr. Carusone. My question was, is it fair to assume, from what you've told us, that the dance studio is yielding a reasonable return? MR. CARUSONE-The dance studio is. MOTION TO DISAPPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 41-1990 BARBARA TEBEAU, Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Theodore Turner: The property is being used as zoned and there is no particular hardship to the present business on the lot. It is yielding a reasonable return. The proposal is for a Use Variance which has difficult standards of proof. It would be detrimental to the Zoning Ordinance to allow a mobile home in this area. It would be detrimental to the neighborhood. There is a large amount of opposition from the neighbors who have investment in townhouses surrounding and they feel it would devalue their property. There are other alternatives for housing in the Glens Falls and Queensbury area. Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE 13 -- NEW BUSINESS: AREA VAJlUANCE NO. 34-1990 TYPE: UNLISTED ABRAHAM JiUDNICK PC-IA QUEENSBURY GARDENS, INc. OWNEB: SAME AS ABOVE 15 FOSTER AVENUE, INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 9 AND FOSTER A VENUE, APPROX. 600 FT., LAST BUILDING ON JlUGHT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,536 SQ. FT. GARAGE FOR STORAGE OF COMMERCIAL TRUCKS AND LAWN CARE EQUIPMENT. REQUESTING RELIEF FROM MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE GARAGE AREA. TAX MAP NO. 102-1-18 LOT SIZE: ±0.85 ACRES SECTION 2.020(105) ABRA HAM RUDNICK, PRESENT MR. TURNER-Who wants the first question? MR. SICARD-Abe, is that stuff outside now, those lawn mowers and trucks, are you storing that outside now. You'll be able to get that inside, is that what you're saying, your lawn equipment and all that stuff? With the new garage you'll be able to get that inside? MR. RUDNICK-Inside, too. MR. BAKER-Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, as a procedural matter, you may wish to go over the Use Variance first, and then go on to the Area Variance. MR. TURNER-Alright, let's take the Use, one first. It's the same application, except it's just.. USE VAJlUANCE NO. 44-1990 TYPE: UNLISTED PC-I A ABRAHAM JiUDNICK QUEENSBURY GARDENS, INCa OWNER: SAME AS ABOVE 15 FOSTER A VENUE TO CONSTRUCT A 1,536 SQ. FT. GARAGE TO BOUSE MORE THAN ONE COMMERCIAL VEmCLE. TAX MAP NO. 102-1-18 LOT SIZE: 127 FT. by 290 FT. SECTION 2.020 MRS. GOETZ-It looks like all the answers are the same(referring to application). MR. TURNER-The only difference is that the Use Variance is required because he's going to house more than one commercial vehicle. MRS. COLLARD-And it's not permitted in the Plaza Commercial Zone. MR. TURNER-Right. MRS. GOETZ-There's a house there. There's a house and then a garage behind. MR. RUDNICK-Right. MRS. GOETZ-Is someone living in the house? MR. RUDNICK-It's the office. MRS. GOETZ-That's your office for the whole apartment complex? MR. RUDNICK-Right. MR. SHEA-Mr. Rudnick, is there currently a building on the grounds where Queensbury Gardens is that is of any nature that could be used for this purpose? MR. RUDNICK-That old garage. MR. SHEA-No, other than at 15 Foster Avenue? MR. RUDNICK-No. MRS. GOETZ-Has something changed, recently? Did you get a bigger machine, or, why did it change suddenly? MR. RUDNICK-The same, we keep them outside, in the yard, all over, you know. We put the plow in, but it's a job, take the plow and put it on the truck and take it off and store it again, and you can't get..it's a double garage, but it's a very small door. It's about..and it's hard to get a truck and a plow in there. MRS. GOETZ-Plus, it was built to be a house garage and not a MR. RUDNICK-A two car garage is a house garage, too short. MRS. GOETZ-You mentioned the recent storm. Would you have to be repairing the garage anyway. Is that part of it? 14 -- MR. RUDNICK-Well, you've got to repair it. If I keep it, it's no good. The slate roof is all broken up. It's really good for nothing the garage.. MR. TURNER-Have you got the map? MRS. GOETZ-The Zoning Map? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Abe, I'll ask you a question. The building's 32 by 48, right? MR. RUDNICK-Right. MR. KELLEY-Okay, how high would this be? MR. RUDNICK-Well, the door, it's got to be at least 10 feet. MR. KELLEY -It's an eight foot high door? MR. RUDNICK-Eight foot high door. MR. KELLEY-And you're going to put two doors? MR. RUDNICK-Two doors, hopefully, two, 10 by 8 and 10 by 8. MR. KELLEY-You wanted to store more than one commercial vehicle, right? MR. TURNER-Yes, one more. He's allowed to store one. MR. KELLEY-Alright, and what are the two vehicles you want to store? MR. RUDNICK-I've got two plows, two pickups with plows. MR. KELLEY-Two pickups with plows? MR. RUDNICK-Two pickups, we've got two gardens tractors and about three or four lawn mowers, five or six wheel barrels, weed eaters, we've got all kinds of stuff. We keep them all over in the store, around the house, outside, all over. MR. KELLEY-So, in other words, the use of this garage is going to be specifically for the Queensbury Gardens? MR. RUDNICK-Yes. MR. KELLEY-You're not going to have plumbing and heating stuff in it? MR. RUDNICK-....refrigerator or stove, anything we need to serve this place, you know. MR. KELLEY-Yes. MR. RUDNICK-..we have no place to keep it. Right now I keep it in the store. Sooner or later I'll probably quit, so that'll be the place to.. PUBLIC HEABlNG OPENED NO COMMENT PUBLIC HEABlNG CLOSED CORRESPONDENCE STAFF INPUT Notes from Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner (attached) MR. TURNER-Are you satisfied with the, you can have a public parking garage in the Plaza Commercial. MR. KELLEY-Right, that's what I was just looking at. The uses that are permitted there certainly doesn't seem out of character. 15 - MRS. GOETZ-It seems like the specific practical difficulty would be a residential size garage in a Plaza Commercial Zone and what is the usually size, you told me already tonight, the size of a residential garage, 900 some square feet? MR. KELLEY-Twenty-four by Twenty-four. MR. TURNER-That's what's permitted. MRS. GOETZ-Permitted as a residential. MR. KELLEY-How many, I guess you'd call them apartments, are in that complex? MR. RUDNICK-Twenty-nine. MR. TU RN ER-Did you say 29? MR. RUDNICK-Twenty-nine. MR. KELLEY-I guess the way I would look at is, if you've got a 29 apartment complex and they certainly are nice looking and have done a good job in the area, it seems like you ought to have a place where you could store materials and equipment to maintain those apartments and I don't think a 24 by 24 garage is quite going to do it. So, I think what he's asking for seems to be reasonable. I guess, maybe, if there was a question, say, is 32 by 48 too big or not enough or, you might criticize that, but I think he certainly the need to have some kind of a storage to maintain his property. I guess my other thought was, this is a Plaza Commercial Zone and we can allow a public parking garage, he certainly would have less impact than that. MR. TURNER-Yes, and where the apartments are it's MR-5. It's MR-5 where the apartments are and it's Plaza Commercial right where the end of Foster Avenue, it's like about 50 to 75 feet from the line to where the house is. MR. KELLEY-So, if he wanted to put a storage facility in an MR-5, he'd have to get a variance over there, too. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY -It would seem to make more sense to put it in this zone than in the MR-5. MR. TURNER-Yes, but when Mr. Rudnick was here before, or another time, this was a split zone..Plaza Commercial ran right through some of his property. Remember, Radio Tower or something they were going to put in there? MR. RUDNICK-Yes, that was MR. TURNER-That was up to the.. MR. RUDNICK-Mr. Nigro. MR. TURNER-Right, but I'm not sure whether that was in a Plaza Commercial. We might have changed that around. MR. KELLEY-Well, that's the way it was because I sold Abe the piece of property and the piece, he was in an MR-5, I think, to start with, and I was in the other zone because MR. TURNER-He was in a UR-5, 10 or something like that. MR. KELLEY-Alright, and the piece that I had was in the Plaza Commercial and then it got re-zoned so that the piece that I had became, whatever the zone is now. MR. TURNER-Yes, there was a piece of it in there. Any other questions? Alright, motion's in order. MR. KELLEY-Did you want a motion. MR. TURNER-I was just going to say, let's go down through the questions, here. Do you feel there's any extraordinary circumstances applying to the property which does not apply to other properties in the zone? MR. SHEA-Yes, they're not being used to service an apartment complex. MR. TURNER-Yes, but this is Plaza Commercial. MR. KELLEY-Well, I think, Ted, the other thing is there's a beauty parlor across the street? 16 -- MR. RUDNICK-Yes. MR. KELLEY-Okay, and the rest of them are just residential residences. MR. TURNER-And those residences that are in the Plaza Commercial. MR. KELLEY-Right, so they're the ones that aren't taking advantage of their zone. MR. TURNER-Do you feel that he has shown that a reasonable return is not possible if used as zoned? MR. KELLEY-Well, I think, I was just looking at that because I was trying to figure out how I was going to make a motion, and I guess my comment would be that I think his proposed use is a lesser use than what the zone allows. MR. RUDNICK-I have a letter, here, from a neighbor. Would you like to see it? MRS. GOETZ-Yes. MR. TURNER-If you want, we can read it into the record. MRS. GOETZ-Do you want me to read it right now? MR. TURNER-I think we better, since it was presented. MRS. GOETZ-Okay, these are from Ray Winn, Jr., He is a true gentleman and does everything in good taste. I favor his construction. Please grant this request. He is doing a good job. Thanks, Ray Winn, Jr. MR. TURNER-The argument is that it's a lesser use? MR. KELLEY - Yes. MR. TURNER-It's a lesser use in the sense it's not a public parking garage. MR. KELLEY-Right and I think that it just would have less of an impact than, maybe, some of the permitted uses, really. MRS. GOETZ-I just wrote down what you just said. MR. KELLEY-Does it sound logical? MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-What have you got, Susan? MRS. GOETZ-Well, that you would be making a motion to approve Variance No. 44-1990, as its proposed use is a lesser use than what the zone allows, it would have less of an impact on other allowable uses. MR. KELLEY-Less of an impact, than other allowed uses in the zone. How does that sound? MR. TU RN ER-Alright, now he's just talking about a garage. In the future, if he decides he wants to sell the property, alright, and it's in the Plaza Commercial, he could sell that piece of property, with the garage, to use..usable as a professional office which is allowed in a Plaza Commercial zone. MOTION TO APPROVE USE VARIANCE NO. 44-1990 ABRABAM RUDNICK, Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: The approval would be because the proposed use is a lesser use than what the zone allows. It would have less of an impact than other allowable uses in the zone. Some of the information persuading us that this would be favorable is that the building would house maintenance equipment for 29 apartments adjoining the property. The applicant is entitled to have a storage facility to house equipment necessary to maintain his property. The apartment complex is zoned MR-5. This zone doesn't allow for an oversized garage either. Based on this fact, the Plaza Commercial one acre zone is more appropriate for the 32 by 48 foot garage. This would not be detrimental to the Zoning Ordinance or to other property in the immediate area. This building would be used to house more than one commercial vehicle and the Short EAF shows no negative impact. 17 -- Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. TURNER-How do you feel about letting this variance run forever? MR. CARR-Are you afraid that that they can use the garage for anything? MR. TURNER-Yes..put a hammer on it, after the fact. MR. KELLEY-I don't know that they have a problem with that because, let's say if you put a commercial greenhouse. You could convert that garage to a greenhouse and if somebody were to build a greenhouse it certainly would be that size. MR. TURNER-Yes. MR. KELLEY-I guess I'm looking at it saying, alright, lets say you had a daycare center. You could convert the garage to a daycare center. They wouldn't have a problem with that. With a residence in front of it, or something. MRS. COLLARD-Any use or change of use in there would require site plan review. MR. TURNER-Right. MR. KELLEY-I don't have a problem with it. MR. TURNER-Alright. (Continued with Area Variance No. 34-1990) MRS. GOETZ-Didn't I already read it(the application). I read it. MR. TURNER-Yes, you read it. Maximum allowable garage area and I think we have addressed all the other. MR. KELLEY-Do you want me to just make another motion? MR. TURNER-Yes, just make another motion. MOTION TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE NO. 34-1990 ABRAHAM RUDNICK, Introduced by Jeffrey Kelley who moved for its adoption, seconded by Charles Sicard: The applicant's requested a garage which would be 1532 feet in lieu of the 900 square feet allowed in the Ordinance. This is a reasonable request since this particular garage will be used to house more than one commercial vehicle and necessary equipment to maintain the 29 unit apartment complex adjacent. It won't be detrimental to the Zoning Ordinance. It's a reasonable request. The minimum variance to meet his needs. A minimum variance for the reasonable use of the building and the Short EAF Form shows no negative impact. Public facilities will not be adversely effected. Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE MR. TURNER-Before we go, we've got a letter here from Mr. Stewart in reference to the Queensbury Factory Outlet. Sue, do you want to read it. MRS. GOETZ-This letter is dated June 18th, from Mr. Stewart of Bartlett/Pontiff/Stewart/Rhodes/Judge, As you may recall, this firm represented the Queensbury Factory Outlet Center in connection with its Area Variance for proposed expansion of the shopping center which expansion incorporated the relocation of the Glen Street entrance and the erection of a traffic light at that new entrance. The ownership and control has been in vigorous and continuous litigation which resulted in a situation where no one had the authority to either commence the work authorized by the variance..or to sell the shopping center to a purchaser who would commence such activity. As the result of this impact, I appeared before your Board in June of '89 and requested an extension of the Area Variance which was granted and which extension continues through September 28th, 1990. The impasse created by the litigation continued through the balance of '89 and Spring of '90. I can now report, however, that Mr. Saul Birnbaum has entered into 18 - a bona fide contract of sale of the shopping center to a responsible purchaser and that under the terms of the contract, the purchaser is subject to the agreement to install the traffic light which agreement was entered into between Mr. Birnbaum and the Grand Union Company and specifically agrees to go forward with that installation. This contract was formally approved by order of the Circuits Court of the County of Munroe, State of New York, by a decision which became effective at 5 p.m. on May 21st, '90. I would further advise that the court appointed receiver of the shopping center has entered into a written agreement with a contractor for the installation of the traffic light. Although the impasse now seems to have broken so that the expansion, traffic light, etc. can now proceed, it is not possible to perform the work by September 28th, which marks the expiration of the current Area Variance approval and I, therefore, respectfully request a further extension of said Area Variance approval for a period of six months and request that the Planning Board review this request at its June meeting in view of the time limitation involved. Any courtesy that the Board can extend in this matter would be greatly appreciated. MRS. GOETZ-I didn't see the Variance Number on in that letter. MR. BAKER-I believe it was referenced at the beginning of the letter. MRS. GOETZ-Okay. MR. TURNER-What's the Board's pleasure. MR. CARR-Extend it. MRS. GOETZ-I think we should extend it. MR. TURNER-Extend it, okay. MR. KELLEy-It helps them get it straightened out. MOTION TO EXTEND AREA VARIANCE NO. 14-90 QUEENSBURY FACTORY OUTLET FOR A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS, Introduced by Susan Goetz who moved for its adoption, seconded by Bruce Carr: It presently would expire September 28th, 1990, so it would be a six month extension beyond that date. Duly adopted this 20th day of June, 1990, by the following vote: A YES: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mr. Sicard, Mrs. Goetz, Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: NONE On motion meeting was adjourned. RESPECTFULL Y SUBMITTED, Theodore Turner, Chairman 19 - ~ - F \ L E -1~ 0 ? '1 TOWN OF QUEENSBURY plAnning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: By: June 14. 1990 Stuart G. Baker X Area Variance Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Subdi~on: _Sketch, Prelimina_ - -I' Site Plan Review _ Petition for a Change of Zone Freshwater Wetlands Permit Final Other: Application Number: Area Variance No. 28-1990 Applicant's Name: Nancy and Peter Kudan Meeting Date: June 20, 1990 *****.*.*................................................................................... This application was tabled by the Board in April information. The applicants have submitted a new site plan with of the septic tank shown. The rear stairway to the cellar scales ft. by 4 ft. for further the location out to be 22 I have attached my original notes from the April meeting. SB/pw ..,1& Vþs, - --' TOWN OF QUEENSBURY F J l E COpy PlJlnning Department -NOTE TO FILE- Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Auiltant Planner Date: April 19, 1990 By: Stuart Baker -L Area VariaJace Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Other: ~ Site PIaa Reriew - Petition for a Change of Zcme - Freshwater Wet.1aDd8 Permit Sketch. Pre1iJII. - mary, FiDal Application Number: Area Variance 28-1990 Applicant's Name: Nancy S. and Peter L. Kudan MeetiDg Date: April 25, 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicants are requesting relief from the rear setback requirement in order to build a 12 ft. by 20 ft. addition to their house. The house is situated that any reasonably sized expansion of the master bedroom would require a setback variance. The Board should determine if the owners currently have reasonable use of the property and building. Practical difficulty caused by the requirements of the Ordinance should be demonst'rated by the applicant in terms of economic injury. The variance requested would not appear to be detrimental to the purpose of the Ordinance, or adversely affect the character of the neighborhood. The only feasible alternative would be to place the addition on the front of the house, but such an alternative would most likely increase the visual impact of the' addition on the neighborhood. SB/pw - ~ - F I Lf COpy TOWN OF QUEENSBURY pt;!lnning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: June 18, 1990 By: Stuart G. Baker Area Variance Use Variance -X Sign Variance == Interpretation SubdiYision: _ Sketch. _ Preliminary, Site Plan Review _ Petition for a Change of Zone Freshwater Wet1ands Permit Final Other: Application Number: Sign Variance No. 24-1990 Applicant's Name: Capital Area Community Health Plan. Inc. Meeting Date: June 20. 1990 ............................................................................................ The Board tabled this application last month, at the applicant's request. The minutes from the April 18, 1990 ZBA meeting, as well as the original staff notes, are attached for your review. SGB/pw - -- - '-- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Planning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: April 18, 1990 By: John S. Goralski Area Variance Use Variance -X Sign Variance == Interpretation Subdivision: Sketch, _ Preliminary, Site Plan Review == Petition for a Change of Zone Freshwater Wetlands Permit Final Other: Application Number: Sign Variance No. 24-1990 Applicant's Name: Capital Area Community Health Plan. Inc. Meeting Date: April 18. 1990 ............................................................................................ I have reviewed this application with respect to the conditions listed on page 2 of the application. 1. It does not appear that this property is different from other businesses in this plaza, nor is this plaza different from other plazas. 2. The applicant is allowed to maintain one sign. Strict application of the Ordinance would not preclude the applicant from having a sign. Simply being on the corner of the building is not a reason to grant a variance. 3. Although this proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare, it does promote the proliferation of signs which could be considered detrimental to the visual character of the neighborhood. JSG/sed MR. CARR-Can I just reference that? MRS. COLLARD-Yes. DW BDSlDSSa SIGB VAJUARCB MO. 24-1990 TYPla IJIILISTBD g-S CAPI'UL ADA cœHDRITY IDW.TH PLAR, IRC. ownl.a JOB NIGRO, NIGRO UAL BSDTH or ALBABY, DW YOR 694 UPPlI. GLIB STl.DT TO MAIITAlB T8B IXISTlNG NO WALL SIGNS WHlB OILY OD WALL 51GB IS ALLOWED. (WAl.UB CODRTY PLAIIIIIfG) TAX MAP MO. 99-2-1 LOT SIZla NIA SECTION 6.103 Or'SIGR OI.DIRAHCE LEWIS BERGMAN, REPRESENTING APPLICANT, PRESENT MRS. EGGLESTON-This is a letter from Lewis A. Bergman to Ms. Patricia Collard, Zoning Administrator, Dated January 31st, 1990 (on file) MR. TURNER-Who's representing the applicant? MR. BERGMAN-Hi, my name is Lewis Bergman. I'm representing CHP. I'm the author of the app licat ion that you read. In the interest, I guess, of, since you did such a nice job, it' s not really necessary for me to repeat all of what I did say. Basically, in other words, the reasons why we did want to have the signs, were made pretty, that we do think it's in the interest of patient safety, coming in either direction and the reasons why we have the signs there now or have had the signs there since December of '87, and are coming before you now, is because we really had no idea that we were in any kind of violation at all. As a matter of fact, when Pat Collard called me up to say, did we have a variance for this, I said, well, if we were supposed to have one, I' m sure we did because that's generally how we do business and Pat checked her records and couldn I t find one and then. .back to mine and went back to the architect, he cited this thing, or this Sect ion 12.071, essent ially, which is what he went by, in terms of criteria for issuance of a building permit, which lead him to believe and us to believe that, basically, with the issuance of the building permit, it was already determined by the people who did issue the building permit, that the signs did comply with the sign ordinance. MR. TURNER-But it doesn't because, obviously, that's why you're here tonight, but it says complies with provisions of the sign ordinance. Somebody overlooked it on the print. When you submitted the print, somebody overlooked that sign on the print. MR. BERGMAN-Yes, we had no idea that.. MR. TURNER-Yes, but are you aWare that, and, evidently you're not, but sometime ago and I think it was probably..to you moving in there, we granted Nigro Real Estate a freestanding sign out by the road? MR. BERGMAN-No, I had no knowledge. MR. TURNER-The yellow sign, right above Carvel Ice Cream, right out by the road? MR. BBRGMAN-No, I had no knowledge of that. MR. TURNER-In doing so, we said that the peop Ie that were in that e.tablishment, there, could put their name on that reader board that's under that .ign becau.e of that distance from the road and the fact that you I re at an angle to the main road, not being able to see it. MR. BBRGMAN-I do know which sign you're talking about, in other vord., 1£ you think of the visibility of what's there nov.., there is a difference. No, CHP vas not aware of that. MR. TURNER-Bvidently, he never told you, because this came before you went in. MR. BBRGMAN-A. I .aid, we, certainly were not aware of it, of cour.e, ignorance is never a reason for not knowing, but we actually thought ve vere in cOllpl1anc. and I add, even looking at it nov, vith this available, I think we really v.re in compliance and should not be p.naliz.d for p.rhap.... 6 MR. TURNER-Well, one freestanding on the wall. that's a sign and shoH ing ¡: laza and a shOH ing ¡: laza is only allowed the rest of the signs, that he's established...sign MR. SICARD-How about the Ordinance, Ted, pertaining to establishment's like this, being on a corner? MR. TURNER-He's got to front two streets. MR. SICARD-This is an unusual situation, coming from the south. I'm pretty familiar with it and they wouldn't be going down,..the Ordinance says it's only allowed one sign regardless of how many ingress or egress there is, pertaining to the location. I think that, coming from the south, you don't get a chance to see that sign on the south. I think it's a rather unusual set up there because it has so many ingresses and there is, I think there's four or five and most of them located, coming from the south, you wouldn't know what was in there unt il you got to the front of the building and then it's too late, you've gone by the side entrance. So, they're not using the front entrance of CHP, they're using the side entrance which is, again, their prerogative to change, however, this is the way it is and I think if you've all, probably, been up through there, froll! the south, froll! the video. .and noticed that that front sign is just, practically, useless. I saw that, it was in the Ordinance, that was something new and it just recently went in, about having only one sign regardless of how many entrances on the main road. MR. TURNER-Yes, no, that's always been there. MR. SICARD-That's always been that way. Here I s a part icular case, there's very few like this, shopping centers in our area, this many entrances is unique. MR. TURNER-That's why we granted them the variance, the relief for the freestanding sign out by the road and the relief under the name of the plaza, to insert the names of the establishments. MR. SICARD-As I say, this is fine, Ted, but, coming from the south, it's a quarter of a mile, at least, before you get to it, before that sign. MR. TURNER-You can't see it from the south until you turn into the video, into the driveway next to the video. MR. SICARD-That's right. It I S a very unusual situation and I think it's different than, perhaps, across the street, or any of the others. You go up the road, and it's the same, ident ical thing. A lot of these signs, coming from the north, are not visible and that single sign out there, I fail to agree with whoever wrote the Sign Ordinance because, you're cOming from the south, you're at least a quarter of a mile from where that front sign is in the front. If you're going to CHP, whether you're a patient or selling books or regardless of it, you're going to be right up on top of it and all this sign comprised of was just simply three ini tials, CHP and if somebody has an ap pointment , they know what CHP means. It remOves the traffic from the main entrance, if you wi11,..so there's an entrance north and south of the bank and north and south of the video store, there's plenty of ingress and egress there, in that part icular area, but you don't know where you're going. That's why I'm, sort of, leaning, toward it, myself. MI.. CAIUl-I have a problem with a couple of things, land lord should allow you space on that sign, everybody's problem. one, if that's true, that the which would, I think, solve MI.. BIIlGHAH-We do have space on that sign. I think on the sign in front. the one in front, you're saying, the one that your.. MI.. CAIUl-Right. MI.. BERGMAN-I think our name is on that. MI.. TUINIR-Is it? Then, you've got three signs. MI.. CAIUl-But I've got a problem because, the patients are not the s.e a. the cu.tomer....Blockbu.ter u.ed that .ame exact item about the .afety and the entrance and we denied them and I ju.t don't, my feelinl i.. I don't know how we can approve CHP'.. unfortunately. and I'm afraid we're goinl to let Blockbu.ter back here in about a week and they're goinl to .ay the same exact araum-nt. 7 r MR. BERGMAN- But, essent ially, my argument is really two fo Id. Number One is the angle of the building, which you SO rightly pointed out, is such that, you know, it's just angled in a funny way that, you know, if the signs were missing from one of the sides, you wouldn't see it, that's, you know, and all the safety arguments that go along with it and the second argument is I really do think that, you know, this document that I cited is really grounds to believe that we did act correctly. MR. TURNER-You acted in good faith, no doubt about it, but somebody didn't pick it up, that's all. MR. CARR-Yes, and, unfortunately, the way it's writ ten even if the pub lic servant makes a mistake, the applicant really can't.. MR. TURNER-I also might point out that there's a directional sign at the entrance to the, by the video store. MR. SICARD-There aren't any names on it. MR. TURNER-No, but it says that there's a plaza there. You know, it's yellow and black. MR. BERGMAN-Well, at least you're all familiar with that area. MRS. EGGLESTON-I've got to admit that, I don't go up to the plaza very often, so, on my way here tonight, I was going to do this site review. I had read all of the periphenalia, that I was going to look at the building and, I don't know, I went up and down Glen Street three times and didn't find it, so, I don't know what the answer is, but it is difficult, because all it says is 694 Glen Street. So, I went up and down, but there aren't really signs that you can see, on Glen Street. MR. BERGMAN-It's tough. It's real tough and as you also mentioned, sir, that we're really in the back or side of the shopping center, too. Now, one might argue that we could have made our front entrance along where Fay's and Wheel's are and all that other stuff, but, in terms of the layout of the building, it couldn't have worked for us. MR. SICARD-I think there was something in there, also, on the applicant, from what I read in the application, about the Beautification Committee. Now, if you've been through there in the summertime, I think it's probably the one shopping center that bends over for fresh flowers. There's fresh flowers in the front and there's fresh flowers on the side and it's kept that way all summer and.. the fact that he's talking about plastic flowers in his report and I didn't see any plastic flowers there and I'm sure, that within a very short time, if you go through there, you I re going to see there's fresh beds of flowers on both sides of the door and flowers all along the front. PUBLIC IIIA&DG anD» BO~'.( PUBLIC IIIA&DG CLOSBD COIDSI'ODDCB Warren County Planning Board disapproved. Queensbury Committee for Community Beautification disapproved. S'UJ'I' lD'ft Note. from John S. Goralski, Planner (attached) Imnœ 1'0 DD1' SIGII VART&~ BO. 24-1990 CAPITAL ADA ~..Lft BULB l'UII. ~, Introduced by Joyce Eggleaton who moved for ita adoption, .econded by Bruce Carra Strict application of the Ordinance would not deprive the applicant of tbe ability to advertise hia location. 8 Duly adopted this 18th day of April, 1990, by the following vote: AYES: Mrs. Eggleston, Mr. Carr, Mr. Turner NOES: Mr. Sicard ABSENT: Mr. Kelley, Mr. Shea, Mrs. Goetz MR. TURNER-No vote. MS. CORPUS-No vote. No action. MR. CARR-What does that mean? MR. TURNER-That means we have another motion. MS. CORPUS-You could have another motion or this could be tabled, motion to table. MRS. EGGLESTON-I just want to mention to Charlie, I should have put it in my motion. He hasn't proven that it would be detrimental to his business if he only had one sign. MR. SICARD-It's probably true, but I still think that this Sign Ordinance needs a little changing, along with a lot of other things. MRS. EGGLESTON-Well, they're doing that. They're coming out with that, in another couple of months. MR. SICARD-I don't think we should penalize these applicant's because the Sign Ordinance is wrong. .. .go along until the Sign Ordinance is changed and table it and come back in again, that's fine, that's the way I feel. MR. TURNER-We can table him, we've got 45 days to act. We could table it until next meeting and hear it when we have enough here to vote on it. MR. SICARD-I think there are situations, such as this one, that the Sign Ordinance underwriters ought to take a little look at. If you ride up there, from the south, you just cannot see it and maybe it applies to the rest of the stores up there. Maybe, instead of just having that ingreu sign on the bank lawn, that should be changed with a mortar board with small letter mortar board, where people will know, that also is an ingress to the shopping center and maybe this applies to other shopping centers in the same way. (TAPE TURNED) Montegomery Wards and Sears Roebuck and Albany. .they're miles away from the main street, but you come in the back of the store and I'm sure you'll see signs back there that say Sears Roebuck, Montegomery Ward and Albany and they're only on one street. MRS. EGGLESTON-But going under the rules that we now have, and having set a precedent, like Bruce said with Blockbu.ter across the way, where we denied and it was a similar circumstance. MR. SICARD-Well, you probably denied it on the rules, but that doesn't nece..arily make it right. MS. CORPUS-Mr. Sicard, if I might interject. Mr.. Eggle.ton'. correct. Legally, we can only go by what's currently in the Ordinance. MR. SICARD-I understand that. MS. CORPUS-And that, as a ba.is for either an approval or denial, it has to .it right a. the Ordinanc. .tands right now. MR. SICARD-We've had this happen b.fore, wh.r., later on, we chang. the rul... It'. like playing poker, if you don't win the fir.t time, you chang. the rule.. MR. TURNER-I tend to agree with you in some .en.e, Charlie. but we did grant them quite a bit of relief by l.tting them have their name. out by the road. You knov. you can put .ign. up allover tbe plac. and a lot of p.opl.. th.y don't .v.n r.ad it wh.n they go by. MR. SICARD-You can't r.ad it at th. .pe.d. th.y I r. trav.lina at. that I. why I think w. need mortar board. In tbat particular, dovn ther., th.y'r. cOlllng dovn SS and 60 and coming up th. .... way. How much do you .... at that .p..d'l So. 9 that's a reason to believe that there should be signs on every entrance, or at least at both ends, on both ends of the ~laza. We have the same thing up to Ames where they're back that far, but we increased the size of the signs. There's only one entrance to that, that's a little different story up there and a lot of these other plazas where there's only one entrance, that would apply, I guess. If you take this instance, there's four or five entrances, from both sides of the Grand Union, all the way down, both sides of Carvel, there I s even mOre than five entrances, if you want to count, that's my feeling. MR. CARR-Ted, I'd like to make a motion to table this. Can we table it until next week? MS. CORPUS-it's up to the Board whether you want to table it until next week or not. MR. CARR-Why don't we table it until next week. MRS. EGGLESTON-Will we have a full quorum next week? MR. TURNER-I don't know where we stand with the members, that's all. MR. SICARD-I think that they would go along with waiting until the next month's meeting. I don't think that's a problem. It's been up there for two years, now. MR. TURNER-And we've got 45 days. MRS. COLLARD-Is the hearing closed on it, though, the public hearing? MR. TURNER-Yes. MRS. COLLARD-No public hearing next month? MR. TURNER-No public hearing. We'll review the information we've had tonight and then vote on it. IIOTIOII 1'0 TABU SIGII VAI.UIICI 110. 24-1990 DIC., Introduced by Bruce Carr who moved Egglestonl Tabled for one month. CUIUL ADA cœMJIfITr IllALD PLAII. for its adoption, seconded by Joyce Duly adopted this 18th day of April, 1990, by the following votel AYES. Hr. Sicard, Hrs. Eggleston, Hr. Carr, Hr. Turner NOES I NON! ABSENT I Hr. Kelley, Hr. Shea, Hrs. Goetz DSB VARIAIICB 110. 25-1990 TlPBI DlILISDD Sn-lA SDPBD 11UT'l'œ onul SDPIID C. AIID LOU IUTTOII SOO'lII SIDB or CIOIIII lOAD. APPIOZ. 650 fT. SOU1BIfBS'r or II'DISBC'fIOII or CIOBIB lOAD AIID I.IDGI£ lOAD 1'0 ALLOIf 'rill: COII'rUIDBD PAØIIG AllD/oa S1'OUGB or VDICLlS AIID BQDlPIIIII'r DSD I. APPLICAn'S IDSIDSSI BUrroB DPLOSIVB SUPPLY. DIC. AIID BUTTOII DDIPUSBS. DIC. tiX HAP BO. 59-]-14.1 LO'r SIDI 1.68 ACRlS SBcrIOI 9.014. 9.010 WILSON MATHIAS, AGENT FOR APPLICANT, PRESENT MaS. EGGLESTON-There's a letter from Wihon Mathias, to Hr. Turner, Chairman, Queen.bury Zoning Board of Appeal., dated March 5, 1990 (on file) HR. MATHIAS-Hy name 11 Wil.on Mathi... I'm an attorney. I have office. at 525 Bay Road. I'm here on behalf of the Britton'.. I'd like to .tart off by saying that I w1lh that I hadn't written the letter on Marcb 5th, whicb. a. you can .ee in the packet, my request was denied and probably wa. a good reason it was denied because wbat's actually out On tbat .ite i. critically taportant to tbis application. Usually I kid engineer. and .urveyors that tbey never let attorney's to become involved in the.e applications until it's tt.a for aa Article 78 and .0 I bope tbat nO One will be offended by .y drawing and renderia¡ of tbe property. The perimeter outline 11 based On tbe survey of tbe property tbat va. prepared and I don't tbink tbere are aay dhputes, in te1'1U of setbacks of tbe buildinl' I bope that the member. of this Board have actually loae and taken a look at this site to see what's out there becau.e, certainly, ia .y opinion, we've lot a to 10 ,. ~ - r iLL L U! TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Planning Department "NOTE TO FILE· Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: June 15, 1990 By: Lee A. York x Area Variance Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Subdi'rision: Sketch, _ Preliminary, Site Plan Review Petition for a Change of Zone - Freshwater Wetlanda Permit Final Other: Application Number: Area Variance No. 40-1990 Applicant's Name: William Davidson Meeting Date: June 20. 1990 ............................................................................................ Mr. Davidson has submitted revised plans for his variance request. The Zoning Administrator measured the boathouse and has also submitted a letter regarding her findings. The new plans and the Zoning Administrators letter are not in conformance. The applicant has requested an area variance. I have attached the staff notes from last month which refer to the tests which must be met for this variance to be granted. LAYlpw . ,,. - '...-/ TOWN OF QUEENSBURY F Il E (Opy Pl:1nning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: May 23, 1990 By: John S. Goralski X Area Variance Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Other: SubdiYision: _ Sketch. _ Preliminary, Site Plan Reflew - Petition for a Change of Zone - Freshwater Wetlanda Permit FiDal Application Number: Area Variance No. 40-1990 Applicant's Name: William F. Davidson MeetiDg Date: Mav 23, 1990 ............................................................................................ The Zoning Ordinance states that an Area Variance may be granted only if all of the circumstances listed in Section 10.040 are found to exist. The applicant indicates on the application that there are no special conditions applying to this property. Furthermore, it appears that the applicant cWTently enjoys reasonable use of the property. There are two dwelling units, a garage, and a dock on this property. This condition is legal, however, it is significantly more than would be allowable under the CWTent Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of the Shoreline Regulations is to promote the goal of protecting the visual amenities of our lakes as stated in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Granting of this request would appear to be in opposition of this goal. JSG/sed - -- - ---./ TOWN OF QUEENSBURY ...~. ~UI:I:~~D,- Bay at Haviland Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-9725--J~pRWr~1 ~ · ~ JUN141990~ ~: VARIANCE NO. IiO--qql) a. PLANNING a ZONINC DEPARTMENT F I L E COpy To: Zoning Board of Appeals From: Patricia M. Collard, Zoning Administrat:;t~ RE Area Variance, Wm. Davidson Date: June 14, 1990 On Wednesday,June 6, 1990, Whitney Russell and I met with Mr. Davidson and Mr. Kroetz at the boathouse in question. Using the mean low water mark the measurements were as follows: south side of boathouse - 30' to existing overhang of 3' north side of boathouse - 29' to existing overhang of 3' Considering the south side measurement of 33' (total), Mr. Davidson said he will reduce the proposed deck from 10 ft. in width to 7 ft., i.e., 40 ft. "HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY. . . A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE" SETTLED 1763 ... .. - -- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Pl:lnning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: June 20, 1990 By: John S. Goralski Area Variance X Use Variance - Sign Variance - Interpretation Subdi9'Ï.$ion: Sketch. Preüm' - mary. Site Plan Review _ Petition for a Change of Zone Freshwater Wetlands Permit Final Other: Application Number: Use Variance No. 41-1990 Applicant's Name: Barbara Tebeau Meeting Date: June 20, 1990 ............................................................................................ As per Article 10 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Board must find that there are special circumstances applying to this lot, and not applying generally to lots in the neighborhood. A special circumstance does exist in that this is the only lot in the areas which is zoned Highway Commercial, but does not have frontage on Route 9. The existing Dance Studio is a conforming use. No evidence has been presented to prove that the property is not yielding a reasonable return. It appears that the applicant has the same property rights as owners of other property in the same district. It would appear that the placement of a mobile home in this neighborhood may be detrimental to other properties in the area. Perhaps a variance to construct a permanent residential structure would be minimal relief necessary if a specific unnecessary hardship is found to exist. JSGlsed - ~, - --I- 1.. j.. f-n~v ~.', r l TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Planning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: By: June 20, 1990 Stuart G. Baker X Area Variance - Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Subdivision: Sk.etch, _ Preliminary, Site Plan Review - Petition for a Change of Zone - Freshwater Wetlands Permit Final Other: Application Number: Area Variance No. 34-1990 Applicant's Name: Abraham Rudnkk, Queensburv Gardens. Inc. Meeting Date: June 20, 1990 ............................................................................................ The applicant is requesting an Area Variance to build a garage greater than 900 sq. ft. I have reviewed the application in accordance with Article 10 of the Ordinance, and have the following comments: 1) The Board must determine if there are special circumstances applying to the land or buildings, and if these conditions are such that reasonable use would not be possible without the granting of this Variance. 2) Practical difficulty caused by the strict application of the dimensional requirements of the Ordinance should be shown by the applicant. 3) The applicant should show: a) That the variance requested would not be detrimental to the purpose of the Ordinance or neighboring properties in this district, and b) That the Variance is the minimal necessary to alleviate a specific unnecessary hardship. SGB/sed --- .. ..' - F I L E COpy -- TOWN OF QUEENSBURY Planning Department "NOTE TO FILE" Mrs. Lee A. York, Senior Planner Mr. John S. Goralski, Planner Mr. Stuart G. Baker, Assistant Planner Date: June 20, 1990 Stuart G. Baker By: --.X Area Variance Use Variance - Sign Variance == Interpretation Subdi"rision: Sketch. _ Preliminary. Site Plan Review _ Petition for a Change of Zone Freshwater Wetlands Permit Final Other: Application Number: Use Variance No. 44-1990 Applicant's Name: Abraham Rudnick, Queensbury Gardens, Inc. Meeting Date: June 20, 1990 ***********************************************.*.****..*.**........*..*.*******.*.**.****.* The applicant would like to construct a 1,536 sq. ft. garage to house more than one commercial vehicle and maintenance equipment in a Plaza Commercial zone. I have reviewed this application according to Article 10 of the Ordinance, and have the following comments: 1) There does not appear to be any extraordinary circumstances applying to this property which does not apply to other properties in this zone. 2) The applicant has not shown that this property cannot yield a reasonable return if used for any of the allowable uses in a Plaza Commercial zone. 3) The applicant should show that this Variance is necessary for the preservation of a property right possessed by other owners in this zone who do not have similar variances. 4) The Board should consider the following points: a. Whether the Variance requested will be detrimental to the purpose of the Ordinance, or to properties is this zoning district, and b. If the Variance requested is the minimal variance necessary to alleviate the specific practical difficulty found by the Board. JSGlsed